Check out this letter that was sent to this guy

[1919_4_ME]

Have you guys ever recieved anything like this?

http://shoot1919a4.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1696

[1064chubbs]

never. But are you sure this is legitimate I have been to a couple of gun shops with open magwell OLL rifles minus pistol grip.

[five.five-six]

HMMM I see Mr. Joe Gunguy listed as a defendant but not under any of the complaints... I wonder what Mr. Gunguy's bail wasset at.. I am guessing remand as I have not seen him in days

[SemiAutoSam]

SO now the DOJ calls them the Bottom Receiver.

Interesting new terminology.

I must have missed the memo. When did the DOJ open the registration period for registration for Off List Lowers ? as it claims below "These Lowers have been Legally bought and registered."

http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/4936/arlowerwarningrl3.jpg

http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/5880/arlowerwarning2zl1.jpg

http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/3207/arlowerwarning3lr1.jpg
Here's the PITCH Join our little group and we will let you know when we think your breaking the law. Or at least the DOJ's wishful thinking.
http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/8913/arlowerwarning4re9.jpg

[bwiese]

This is the Modesto case.

The defendant is perhaps unwisely getting legal counsel from those that wish to make this a bigger scene than regulatory 'submarine law' matter and what appears to be an illegal bug/wiretap.

There's been lots of atmospherics about suing for "second amendment rights", etc. - in spite of Silviera and Kasler. This has all the makings of another Silviera.

I do wish Mr Lake well, he suffered thru a lot with DOJ/Iggy. I just think he's riding on the wrong horse.

I do think it's disingenuous of the sponsors to imply that all OLL receivers are problematic, as opposed to fixed mag issues.

[five.five-six]

so who is Mr. Joe Gunguy? is he incarcerated?

[SemiAutoSam]

The way I understand it Mr Joe Gunguy is a hypothetical put yourself in this place.


so who is Mr. Joe Gunguy? is he incarcerated?

[G17GUY]

Who is the madison society?

[Scarecrow Repair]

Google says ... http://www.madison-society.org/

[LAK Supply]

Anybody remember the thread I started a while back?

http://64.151.69.37/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=53692&highlight=oll+case


Same case referred to in this letter.

I haven't brought any new information to light for various reasons, but I guess the cat's out of the bag now.........

[artherd]

Hrm, a rather poorly worded request for money from an unknown entity. ("bought and registered?" Under what theroey of law exactly?) Borderline fear-mongering, vauge promises of 'action' to come.

I am not impressed, and I really really want to be impressed.

[hoffmang]

Gents,

Mr. Lake's case is interesting and potentially something to support here. However, do any of you think that this sort of letter is the way you get folks here to help?

I think not.

Mr. Lake deserves our help, but those who would wrap themselves in Mr. Lakes effort are not who we want to help.

-Gene

[LAK Supply]

Gene is right about Dave. Great guy and willing to see it through. He wants to get a court decision so the DOJ cannot keep running around the state and harrassing people.

This would NOT be another Silviera however! There is no desire to challenge the issue in any CA court. Once the charges are dropped here legal council wants to go to DC for a protective order/injunction against the DOJ so they cannot continue their thuggery. Some of the attorneys that have already been consulted and appear to be supportive are Kilmer, Kates, and Levy (yes, the Levy from Parker).

This could get intersting despite the fact that the local Madison Society appears to have some sort of issues from nearly 10 years ago. I'm not sure what these issues are, but I hear they exist.

[hoffmang]

Gents,

I keep in touch with Gura (Levy's lawyer) and Kilmer. There is some value for all of us here, but Bill W. and I are both uncomfortable with the marketing that some others are perusing on this case.

-Gene

[bwiese]

This would NOT be another Silviera however! There is no desire to challenge the issue in any CA court. Once the charges are dropped here legal council wants to go to DC for a protective order/injunction against the DOJ so they cannot continue their thuggery. Some of the attorneys that have already been consulted and appear to be supportive are Kilmer, Kates, and Levy (yes, the Levy from Parker).

While there may be some support here, the bottom line is that there is a fairly high bar to go beyond basic case dismissal. You notice they're not taking this on contingency, either.

And this really isn't a Federal case first & foremost. Overassertion of CA regulatory authority and submarine law can and shoud be initially dealt with in CA courts - and will have to be, first, before anything else is attempted.

Fixed magazine cases, especially with the DSA CaliFAL approval letter for its fixed mag configuration, are eminently winnable. A few losses or declined prosecutions will put this BS to rest. We already have one going all the way right now - unexpectedly - in the Blackwater case, being handled by the lawyers who have been deeply involved in CA AW laws & regulatory issues w/DOJ.

I worry that this could 'jam the works' for other CA AW-related cases in the near future.

Admittedly, Dave Lake's case is (apparently) a perfect case. No wife-beatings, drugs, machineguns, etc. Just a cool dude following the law and regulations as written, backed by a phone book-high stack of documents.
All the more reason why things look favorable without all the handwaving.

The emails from MS have sold this as a giant RKBA issue, and RKBA really doesn't yet exist in CA - incorporation, and all that which has been gone over here before. Emails from the MS also are trying to say all OLL owners are at risk - implying even owners of bare OLL receivers or gripless receivers are.

Mr Lake may have been targeted by bored DOJ staff in an out-in-the-sticks area where they felt he might not have good representation, and that's why it happened there.

But adding drama to it by outside agitational forces, who are supplying somewhat incorrect or slanted information, and who are not really well-tied-in to the gunrights community is just not helpful. I just hope Dave Lake's fundamental case is not put at risk with all the proposed atmospherics.

[luvtolean]

The last thread on this case sounded bad, now that I see this it sounds worse.

It definitely sounds like a case of a good guy, listening to advice from the wrong crowd. You don't "go all the way" on such matters unless you have to.

But adding drama to it by outside agitational forces, who are supplying somewhat incorrect or slanted information, and who are not really well-tied-in to the gunrights community is just not helpful. I just hope Dave Lake's fundamental case is not put at risk with all the proposed atmospherics.

Exactly.

This document frankly disgusts me.

[WokMaster1]

So what can we do to put this case right back on track without all the fear-mongering, etc? Can his attorney be talked to to tell the MS crew to simmer down?

[bwiese]

So what can we do to put this case right back on track without all the fear-mongering, etc? Can his attorney be talked to to tell the MS crew to simmer down?

I really don't know.

I'm hoping the atmospherics dissipate before the actual criminal case(s) and that those are defended against with the proper attention to detail. Subsequent misguided Don Quixote-like 'tilting at windmills' attempts, if those were to occur, should not even be attempted til later.

[tenpercentfirearms]

I just wrote a letter to these guys.

virgilmc@earthlink.net

I read with great concern your letter for solicitation regarding David Lake and AR15 lower receivers. Not knowing much about your organization nor finding much information on your website, I am very concerned you are exploiting this situation for your organization's benefit.

Since you have made a very public calling for gun owners of this state to contribute their hard earned dollars towards your "foundation", I must request that you immediately release this additional information.

1. Post your charter, bylaws, and other operational documents.

I will not donate money to an organization that I am unaware of its mission and purpose. I would also require that I know how your board of directors operates as far as allocation of funds and administrative costs. Please post a copy of your 501C3 letter.

2. Publicly state your exact affiliation with the defendants from your promotional material.

There is no clear affiliation stated in your flyer that states if any of the money sent to your organization will be used to assist this case. What guarantees do I have that the money I send you is used for David Lake's defense? What lawyers are working on this case? How will your organization distribute these funds?

3. Redistribute your materials with this new information.

Once you have answered these questions, then re-distribute your materials with this additional information.

I have been selling AR15 lower receivers in this state since December 2005. I have a vested interest in protecting the rights of my customers from all over the state. Until I learn more about your organization and its intent, I do not feel it is wise for any of my associates to blindly send money to an organization in what is so apparently a fear mongering solicitation for funds. If I am incorrect in my initial evaluation and your organization has a solid plan and is directly involved in the competent defense of this case, then I look forward to changing my opinion.

Sincerely,

Wesley Morris

Wesley Morris, Dean Rowden, & Becky Sharp
Ten Percent Firearms
1277 Kern St.
Taft, CA 93268
Phone: 661 765-6899
Fax: 661 765-9355
guns@tenpercentfirearms.com
http://www.tenpercentfirearms.com

[proraptor]

Nice letter!

[EasyT]

I'm not even seeing The Madison Society Foundation, Inc. on the Secretary of State listing of Corporations. Unless I missed it, I don't like the smell of this.

[Bobula]

IT's bs, also isn't that violating some privacy issues by sending out someones complaint cover sheet?

[bwiese]

IT's bs, also isn't that violating some privacy issues by sending out someones complaint cover sheet?

It's not BS. David is a good guy that's going thru a bad time. (He's the guy that found the bug/wiretap in his shop after a DOJ visit last fall.)

It's just that the other atmospherics from a local stir-the-pot organization that's not really a gunrights group really complicates things.

Criminal charges are indeed public record. I'm sure David doesn't mind these being posted since he's trying to fight this.

I just want David to fight the matter at hand and not be a cause celebre for another organization's fundraising for a cause that has a nil chance at being successful (i.e, fighting on RKBA grounds in CA etc etc).

[JGarrison]

It's not BS. David is a good guy that's going thru a bad time. (He's the guy that found the bug/wiretap in his shop after a DOJ visit last fall.)


What the heck is the story on that? I don't remember hearing about it at all. I actually bought a few lowers from David, seemed like a good guy.

[CALI-gula]

I do think it's disingenuous of the sponsors to imply that all OLL receivers are problematic, as opposed to fixed mag issues.

Huge second on that - and the letter seems to drum up a threat to gun owners to garner cash, using this case as bait. True, the case may be real, and many would be willing to help, but who or what is this entity?

Most of us here are not ignorant to what is legal and not legal about OLLs. But this plea seems no different than if a 3rd party unrelated to BWO, took early documents from BWO's case and panned for cash donations by implying that the ownership of 1919A4s is in an imminent and immediate threat, and only money doantions to some "who" will help keep them legal (and we all know those 6 charges were completely dropped.)

A notice is one thing, or even if the guy's lawyers or a group of his online buddies were asking for help (like us, more than glad to help BWO and Michel, and that is honorable, even in their asking) but for this 'Madison Society Litigation Fund' to drop in he following seems to be playing on fear for cash:

"Without the generous donations of patriots like you, we will be unable to fight the good fight... / ...Please join this fight by becoming a member and/or by making a one time or annual pledge to the Madison Society Litigation Fund." ...etc., etc.

Umm... who? May be I am ignorant? Madison Society Litigation Fund? I may be ignorant... but NOT gullible. Someone "learn" me. :confused:

.

[bwiese]

The MS folks are nice people. I am sure they are well-intentioned, too. I know David Lake is a good guy and very earnest. I just think they should not go about things in the wrong way.

But I don't think MS knows s*** from Shinola about politics, and I've heard from multiple sources they're a bit radioactive up in Sacramento from some issues back in the early/mid-90s regarding a problematic central valley gun dealer. I don't think Dave deserves the taint, and his case should stand on its own merits.

[EasyT]

I'm not even seeing The Madison Society Foundation, Inc. on the Secretary of State listing of Corporations. Unless I missed it, I don't like the smell of this.

Found it. It's incorporated in Nevada, not listed in CA.

[tenpercentfirearms]

The head honcho from MS called me on the phone an hour or so ago. I guess Dave is one of their members. They usually don't take criminal cases, but their board voted to help him out as long as he doesn't plea bargain. I guess they want to make this a bigger issue as they have stated.

It sounds like they are well intentioned and part of this without actually mentioning it is they might just be helping out one of their own.

I certainly like the idea of donating money to someone's legal fund and having it be tax deductable!!! He said he would have his guy work on the website and get some of the questions I asked taken care of.

So the phone call was a good first step and I will be keeping an eye on it. I might even call Dave in a day or two because I am pretty sure we have talked on the phone before.

[hoffmang]

Err... I thought a 501 c 3 couldn't fund someone else's legal battles...

-Gene

[Pthfndr]

Guys

I know nothing about the MS people. I do know Dave. Every month I shoot a long range match with Dave, his brother, and and another guy who works at his shop. Frequently we hang out at the range afterwards to shoot some steel.

Dave does not talk about the issue. Doesn't ask anyone to join up, or ask for money.

Dave is a good guy. He deserves our moral support at minimum.

[LAK Supply]

Pathfndr...... did you shoot at the match last weekend? I heard they even took Joe off guard with that lay your gun on its side crap..... :D

[Pthfndr]

Pathfndr...... did you shoot at the match last weekend? I heard they even took Joe off guard with that lay your gun on its side crap..... :D

Yep. took 4th. The "homie" shots as they came to be called by the shooters messed up a lot of people. Me included. BUT, I really learned something from it and won't make that mistake again.

[artherd]

Fer christsakes, I wish the MS foundation had just come right out with it, and not gone the route of exploitative marketing.

[bwiese]

Err... I thought a 501 c 3 couldn't fund someone else's legal battles...

-Gene

Yes. I do have significant concerns that contributions for general matters for this organization are tax deductible, but targeted contributions - i.e, those specifically solicited for, like "Dave needs lawyers to f*ck with the DOJ" - are not.

If you want to donate, don't rely on its tax deductibility.

[hoffmang]

Let me echo pathfinder - we should be supporting Dave.

-Gene

[WokMaster1]

Let me echo pathfinder - we should be supporting Dave.

-Gene

Gene, I hear you. Can either Bill or yourself talk to his attorney & set something up like BWO's case? Obviously I want my money & others to go directly to Dave's case not some other organization's admin cost. Let us know. Thanks!:)

[hoffmang]

One note of clarification. I had questioned whether a 501c3 could use tax deductible donations to fund litigation above. I was wrong - a 501c3 can be used to fund these sorts of public interest litigations. I was getting confused with restrictions on lobbying or endorsements.

-Gene

[bwiese]

One note of clarification. I had questioned whether a 501c3 could use tax deductible donations to fund litigation above. I was wrong - a 501c3 can be used to fund these sorts of public interest litigations. I was getting confused with restrictions on lobbying or endorsements.

Thank you, Gene, for looking that up. That was a concern of mine and I am relieved.

However, commingling actual defense funds for Dave vs the supposed public interest litigation does add unclarity, and I am not sure if MS made that clear.

And yes, Dave has gone thru a lot and we support him. I am just not sure if the added drama from the MS will remotely be useful, or even add color to his case.

[6172crew]

Not to sound like Im trying to rain on anyones parade but what happens if they loose this case? Do things get any worse for us or those who own OLLs or clones of those rifles named.

[CRTguns]

"Joe Gunguy" is represented by a different attourney. Mr Gunsguy's situation in life requires him to take a different choice of actions in this case.

[CRTguns]

My Defense in this case is an easy and quick one. This letter is not about me. It is about pre-empting similar action by the BOF in the future. I could simply plea, pay the fine... what have we accomplished? Nothing. That is not a victory. Those of you who call an acquittal a "victory" are mistaken and short sighted. I have seen these attourneys undo unconsitutional law, some 25 years old in wash. DC. They can and will do the same here. And I submit that if you do not contribute to the solution, this victory will not be yours. You will effectively be stealing from me and those patriots who have paid the price for a brighter future.
What else should we do... write our forking congressman? Seems we tried that. Didn't work. Everyone has an opinion about why we should not proceed, but no other viable option on the table.
I'd like to preserve some freedoms for my kids.
And I'm not waiting around. What will change in 1 month? 1 year? 1 decade?
Dya think the political climate in Sacramento will miraculously become softer on gun laws?
1 more important detail. if in 1 OLL case, mine or another, the prosecutor shows reason to subpeona DROS and 4473 records to prosecute the other owners of the other 30000 lowers- best of luck then folks.
This is about, yes, taking the offensive side. I don't give a shyte if someone in SAC gets upset or offended. I'd pay $$$ to see Chinn greeting people at the local Walmart.
Try this shoe on people!

[tenpercentfirearms]

My Defense in this case is an easy and quick one. This letter is not about me. It is about pre-empting similar action by the BOF in the future. I could simply plea, pay the fine... what have we accomplished? Nothing. That is not a victory. Those of you who call an acquittal a "victory" are mistaken and short sighted. I have seen these attourneys undo unconsitutional law, some 25 years old in wash. DC. They can and will do the same here. And I submit that if you do not contribute to the solution, this victory will not be yours. You will effectively be stealing from me and those patriots who have paid the price for a brighter future.
What else should we do... write our forking congressman? Seems we tried that. Didn't work. Everyone has an opinion about why we should not proceed, but no other viable option on the table.
I'd like to preserve some freedoms for my kids.
And I'm not waiting around. What will change in 1 month? 1 year? 1 decade?
Dya think the political climate in Sacramento will miraculously become softer on gun laws?
1 more important detail. if in 1 OLL case, mine or another, the prosecutor shows reason to subpeona DROS and 4473 records to prosecute the other owners of the other 30000 lowers- best of luck then folks.
This is about, yes, taking the offensive side. I don't give a shyte if someone in SAC gets upset or offended. I'd pay $$$ to see Chinn greeting people at the local Walmart.
Try this shoe on people!LOL. Sorry, I am not buying this rhetoric. The first area I bolded from you is a clear example of clever marketing. You are trying to get me to feel left out if I don't give to your cause or better yet even like a criminal for "stealing" the rights you are going to win for me. Sorry, this type of rationale doesn't work for me. Make me want to support you because I want to, not because I am scared not to.

Next is another classic fear mongering tactic. What will happen if DA in Stanislaus County subpoenas some records? Records from whom? What authority do they have in Kern County or Orange County or for that matter any other county? What will these subpoenaed records show that would make me prosecutable in Stanislaus County? Who in Stanislaus County is going to pay to prosecute 30,000 of us? I know for a 100% fact my DA won't be prosecuting me down here in Kern County. God we could only hope that 30,000 of use would get prosecuted. I am not sure how much the average court case costs the county, but at a mere $1000 each that would be $30,000,000 that counties would have to justify wasting on these efforts.

Ok, so I just tried your shoe on and it doesn't fit. What now?

If you don't understand simple facts about the law and you are throwing your fear tactics around in order to gather financial support, don't be surprised if the well reasoned and articulate individuals in our movement call you on your BS.

I tell you what would have helped raise some money for this thing would have been a speech this simple and easy.

"An FFL and three of his customers are being charged for legally configured OLLs by the Stanislaus County DA. We want to try and make sure they win their case because we know that we are all following the law. If you are interested in donating to the cause the Madison Society has decided to take on the case and that makes your donations tax deductible. We know many of you don't have to worry about the Stanislaus County DA coming after you, but we feel it is important for all OLL owners to band together in this state and fight the CA DOJ at every opportunity. We would appreciate any support you can give. If you have any questions please contact us at X@X.com. Thanks guys and be safe."

Do you know how many guys on here would have started writing checks? Instead, we get this bull crap about how we are next and we are thieves and try some shoes on. Sorry, that tactic isn't going to work on this board and it shouldn't work anywhere else.

[hoffmang]

To add a piece on to Ten's thoughts, I think you have a lot of support to seek an injunction against the DOJ BOF enforcing cases like yours in the future. That may be a Federal Case, but its not a Second Amendment case. Its a 5th and 14th Amendment case brought under Section 1983 or a California state law case.

A case that seeks to first defend you and then second push back for an injunction against further abuses of process is a case everyone here will support.

What is worrisome is that that's not what is being communicated to all of us here. The people who open their wallets on this board are smart and well informed. Tell us the truth about what sort of case we're signing up for and the dollars will start flowing. That will take the Madison Society changing its Marketing message. PM, email, or call me if someone there wants some clarification on what messages would and should work.

-Gene

[spaceburger]

LOL. Sorry, I am not buying this rhetoric. ...Ok, so I just tried your shoe on and it doesn't fit. What now?
.Do you know how many guys on here would have started writing checks? ..

Well said, As always, 10%, bwise, hoffmang, etc..you guys are educated, articulate, and the bull**** radar is actively targeting CRTguns and Madison Society. I applaud these efforts even if it only stops these types to take a second and think about what comes out of thier mouths (or other associated posterior orifice).
I am all for educated articualte and calculated response. Without that we would all look like a bunch of emo politicains looking to get elected by saying anything...(like Giuliani all of a sudden saying he supports the 2nd A or like Hilary saying faith got her through Bill's cheating..Gezz!!!)

[bwiese]

My main concern is about the M.S. marketing this as a 2nd Amendment/RKBA case.

Any RKBA/2nd claim will fail and I hope the defendant(s) are not using that in their fight against charges.

As Gene says, this really has nothing to do with RKBA but irrational enforcement of non-regulations - and would be applicable in a variety of fields from toxics to real estate. I feel that this would have to be addressed/resolved as a state matter first before a Fed matter.

[bwiese]

1 more important detail. if in 1 OLL case, mine or another, the prosecutor shows reason to subpeona DROS and 4473 records to prosecute the other owners of the other 30000 lowers- best of luck then folks

Actually, it's 50,000 or more now.

And existence of ownership of an OLL lower has zero to do with this. A 4473'd lower offers no information on configuration of lower. This case is not about OLL receivers but about configuration - and it's a case that has been dismissed in other courts due to the current regulation being in force and the new proposed one being exactly that - proposed. Getting 4473 information will not get further details.

This is why the MS' handwaving is adding distortion to the matter at hand. I hope and pray it does not affect the outcome of Mr Lake's case because he is a very, very good guy undergoing a trying situation. (See how you feel if you find a bug/wiretap in your gunshop).

BTW, we should not judge Mr Lake because of Madison Society's atmospherics. I know his guns were 100% clean and legal w/letter + intent of law, and he did nothing to deserve this.

But the MS saying the RKBA will be defended is pure drama/hype.

I believe this case may have been filed in Modesto because they felt it might be easy pickins' with Modesto lawyers.

[CRTguns]

I cant wrap my head around this- why do you think we cannot win this under 2nd ammendment. THAT'S WHAT THE 2ND IS FOR!
Maybe you could look past tomorrow, and past your own gun collection. The govts agenda is not to limit how your guns look- it is to take EVERYweapon away from you.

[hoffmang]

The second amendment does not apply in California due to Silviera v. Lockyer. If the Supreme Court takes Parker v. D.C. and rules our way it will still leave a fight to make the second apply to the states. Either way, those cases will not be complete before this case has to be filed.

-Gene

[CRTguns]

If this is the first time you see a tactic used in the war on guns that scares you I must wonder if you've really been paying attention. You should be terrified about forthcoming laws and LE action against you. Your impending doom as free people is near if you continue to simply speculate and hypothesize and theorize about a solution.
10%- read John Locke- it has a little to do with the whole idea that formed our contry. And yes, If you enjoy a freedom that you did not earn, or support, that you are in fact stealing that right from those that did pay for it. They never thought it would happen to them in Poland either, but little by little look where an attitude like yours got them. And you say
"well, this is different, it won't happen here, not now..."
I assure you, you are wrong.
You'll do what you feel is right according to your own heads.
Good luck gents, may God have mercy on your souls.



It is not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom — for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.
From The Declaration of Arbroath 1320.

[bwiese]

The second amendment does not apply in California due to Silviera v. Lockyer. If the Supreme Court takes Parker v. D.C. and rules our way it will still leave a fight to make the second apply to the states. Either way, those cases will not be complete before this case has to be filed.

Correctamundo, and this is why I know the quality of MS advice given here has mislead poor Dave. James Madison was a pretty bright guy, and I think he'd be ashamed of the inopportune handwaving using his name.

Not only this is a function of the near-disastrous Silviera, it was also discussed in Kasler.

Until Parker comes thru, and derivative cases percolate thru elsewhere, there really is no 2nd in CA.

(If there were truly an extant RKBA in California, why was there a petition attempt to get RKBA on the ballot in CA.

If Dave uses RKBA as a defense against any charges - instead of dealing with simple matters of regulatory law - he will be convicted of a felony. There is a chance he might get a chance to appeal based on incompetence of representation.

And this is NOT the case to make a Parker-in-California stand.

[tenpercentfirearms]

10%- read John Locke- it has a little to do with the whole idea that formed our contry. And yes, If you enjoy a freedom that you did not earn, or support, that you are in fact stealing that right from those that did pay for it. They never thought it would happen to them in Poland either, but little by little look where an attitude like yours got them. And you say
"well, this is different, it won't happen here, not now..."
I assure you, you are wrong.
You'll do what you feel is right according to your own heads.
Good luck gents, may God have mercy on your souls.

You still don't get it. You are taking an antagonistic approach to fund raising and you wonder why no one wants to support you. You can have all of the great theory in your head about rights and liberty all you want, but it won't help your case when you push people away.

So explain to me what my attitude is. I have an attitude that I like to support causes with logic and reasoning. So far all we have going for this sales pitch is that if we don't support this case with our hard earned dollars the DOJ might come get our guns too. When asked for clarification we were further informed that if we don't support this case, then we are stealing our freedoms.

I tell you what. Why don't you go die on Mt. Surabachi, Hamburger Hill, or in Iraq. By your reasnoning until you give the ultimate sacrifice you are just stealing the rights from the dead soldiers that went before you. :rolleyes:

I think I will just stick to keeping my money going towards people who don't manage to act so high and mighty and like I owe them something. The problem is I do want to support those that get busted, but not with an attitude like this.

Good luck and remember, it is just your butt on the line, not mine. Next time use wiser fund raising tactics.

You probably didn't want my "head in the sand" dollars anyway. :D

[bwiese]

If this is the first time you see a tactic used in the war on guns that scares you I must wonder if you've really been paying attention. You should be terrified about forthcoming laws and LE action against you.

We are and that's why we prefer rational, thought-out fights instead of handwaving by some Modesto yokels who have no idea of what the law is.

Your impending doom as free people is near if you continue to simply speculate and hypothesize and theorize about a solution.

You use the term 'hypothesize' as a negative. But we hypothesized how high-speed neutrons broke up uranium nuclei - ask someone in Hiroshima if that hypothesis was correct or not.

A variety of folks here have a fair base of knowledge to know the outcome of what you'd term a fight but which will merely be an incompetent, inappropriate surrender.

We appreciate your willingness to fight, but it's the wrong place, wrong time. wrong matter.

Your case is simply a matter of proposed regulatory law being treated like active regulatory law, and an agency promoting this. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SECOND AMENDMENT, and the 2nd does not exist in CA until an incorporation battle is fought - post-Parker.

You have been woefully mislead by the technical incompetence of the Madison Society. They didn't do a whole helluva lotta good for Buffalo Guns (or whatever their name was) in the early 90s, either. And their fundraising for an inappropriate cause has tainted goodwill towards you, Dave.

We know you're a great guy, Dave, this is a BS case, and you've gone thru some savage times with the DOJ. I can only imagine your thoughts when your video installer found Iggy's bug in your ceiling.

But this simply isn't a 2nd Amendment case. Period.

[hoffmang]

CRT,

You're Don Quixote. I'm telling you the facts as a combatant on your side. The analogy here is that I'm telling you that as much as you'd like to try a frontal assault on the Redcoats, we are out of ammo and resupply is in 2 years. Instead I'm recommending we fix bayonets and flank them. Silviera was a suicide charge by an underequipped force and now we don't get to litigate the second ammendment in California thanks to a couple of rugby players with your attitude. Go read the typos in the briefs and tell me how well fought it was.

Don't tell people like 10% who put his butt on the line to read Locke. Instead you should be reading Silviera and learning about jurisprudence.

-Gene

[tenpercentfirearms]

Don't tell people like 10% who put his butt on the line to read Locke. Instead you should be reading Silviera and learning about jurisprudence.

-Gene

I appreciate the support Gene, but I have not put my butt on the line as much as these guys that have been arrested. The saddest thing here is instead of our community helping these people out, we end up shying away because of their combatitive stance. What are the chances CRT is a DOJ plant? He is doing too well of a job of screwing this up.

[hoffmang]

Ten,

I concur. That's why I say above that we should be supporting these guys.

-Gene

[bwiese]

What are the chances CRT is a DOJ plant? He is doing too well of a job of screwing this up.

I can assure you Dave Lake is most certainly not a DOJ plant.

However, his blind following of "Madison Society" may be a good indicator why DOJ thinks Modesto is fertile ground for something that may turn into a conviction.

[hoffmang]

Let me leave everyone with some reading.

http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel200309230925.asp
Silveira v Lockyer (http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/661116A4ECB1A7BE88256C8600544DCB/$file/0115098.pdf?openelement)

-Gene

[C.G.]

Let me leave everyone with some reading.

http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel200309230925.asp
Silveira v Lockyer (http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/661116A4ECB1A7BE88256C8600544DCB/$file/0115098.pdf?openelement)

-Gene

Good read. Thank you.:)

[Scarecrow Repair]

Good read. Thank you.:)

Yeh, but the people that NEED to read it, and understand it, have long since concreted their brains.

[el_hombre70]

I can assure you Dave Lake is most certainly not a DOJ plant.



I can also assure you that David is NOT any kind of plant. I've had the privilage of competing with David and several of his co-workers on many occasions AND bought a Sun Devil lower from him. Now that I reside in WA, I enjoy it in it's intended configuration. Dave needs our backing 100%.

[tenpercentfirearms]

I can also assure you that David is NOT any kind of plant. I've had the privilage of competing with David and several of his co-workers on many occasions AND bought a Sun Devil lower from him. Now that I reside in WA, I enjoy it in it's intended configuration. Dave needs our backing 100%.

Dave my not be a plant, but who exactly is CRTguns?

[bwiese]

Dave my not be a plant, but who exactly is CRTguns?

CRTguns/Dave is Sierra Sports in Modesto. He was bugged by DOJ/Iggy approx end of summer 2006, discovered the bug 1 month later when installing security camera.

Dave sold a couple of fixed-mag OLL-based rifles that were entirely legitimately constructed - 10 rd fixed magazine, fixed mag securely affixed (apparently adhesive/epoxy used), etc.

[tenpercentfirearms]

CRTguns/Dave is Sierra Sports in Modesto. He was bugged by DOJ/Iggy approx end of summer 2006, discovered the bug 1 month later when installing security camera.

Dave sold a couple of fixed-mag OLL-based rifles that were entirely legitimately constructed - 10 rd fixed magazine, fixed mag securely affixed (apparently adhesive/epoxy used), etc.

Bill think outside of the box. We know who Dave is and what happened to him. How do we know CRTguns is still Dave? How do we know his account hasn't been compromised? Has anyone talked with Dave in the last couple of days on the phone?

[LAK Supply]

Hey 10%....

CRT is Dave Lake (Sierra Sports), and his account has not been compromised. I speak with him frequently. He's in a bad spot and feels like some things that are going on with his and others' situations are not being addressed in an appropriate manner; he's a little uptight right now. There's been a lot of BS going on with him and certain agencies and I think he's just trying to get some things changed on the advice of his legal council. I'm not an attorney so I'm not going to get into the legal issues by putting my opinion out there, but I can assure you that Dave is a good guy that's been put in a bad spot through no fault of his own. The approach.......? I'm not going to comment on that either as it's not my case.

[tenpercentfirearms]

I think I recall talking to Dave on two occasions about OLLs on the phone. He seemed like a real good guy.

Someone called me from Sierra Sports and I just saw the message today. I will call them back tomorrow. I don't think the account has been compromised.

[LAK Supply]

You have spoken with Dave, and your impression is correct. The guy's just tired of the DOJ running around the state screwing up people's lives and wants to help make it stop. He's a little fired up.....


I know a little about the case, and I think there's been one huge misconception here...... this case is not going to be fought on 2A grounds. I was waiting for Dave to clear it up, but it appears that he has not.

From what I know the case will be fought in Dave's defense regarding the fact that there is no legal basis for the charges. Since the DOJ has no law backing them the charges will likely be dropped anyway.

After the defense is dealt with Dave's attorneys want to go to DC to settle greviances with existing law enforcement. This may turn towards a 2A basis.... who knows. What is pretty clear is that the current facts of the case are NOT in favor of the DOJ, and that there is a good chance of action against the state in federal court. I think the attorneys involved failed to make the distinction between the two different actions.

[XDshooter]

Funny thing, I was talking to a range employee who was saying the same as that lawsuit.

That modifications did not count and that the original configuration of any AR-15 was a mag push button release and the prince50, BB, or anything else, basically that there is no legal way to have a fixed mag.


I don't recall anywhere in the law that said anything about permanence or that modifications don't count. Why is it that people insist on ADDING words to the law?

Also, what makes the p50 or BB a modification? It fits and is designed to work as an original function.


I was getting so pissed, I just said okay whatever you're right and went on to shooting. Does the DOJ come in and threaten FFLs and spread bogus info?

[LAK Supply]

This didn't happen to be the asshat at the Manteca range did it? :D

Funny thing, I was talking to a range employee who was saying the same as that lawsuit.

That modifications did not count and that the original configuration of any AR-15 was a mag push button release and the prince50, BB, or anything else, basically that there is no legal way to have a fixed mag.


I don't recall anywhere in the law that said anything about permanence or that modifications don't count. Why is it that people insist on ADDING words to the law?

Also, what makes the p50 or BB a modification? It fits and is designed to work as an original function.


I was getting so pissed, I just said okay whatever you're right and went on to shooting. Does the DOJ come in and threaten FFLs and spread bogus info?

[bwiese]

From what I know the case will be fought in Dave's defense regarding the fact that there is no legal basis for the charges. Since the DOJ has no law backing them the charges will likely be dropped anyway.

That is encouraging. Maybe the damned Madison Society should get its left hand vs right hand squared away because that's sure as hell the impression they left - that the immediate fight would be on an RKBA basis.

After the defense is dealt with Dave's attorneys want to go to DC to settle greviances with existing law enforcement. This may turn towards a 2A basis....

He has to exhaust CA remedies first (and they do exist). It's not a federal case - yet.

I do hope it goes well for David for the base charges and hope he has knowledgable representation in this area. I am puzzled why he didn't use the attorneys most likely to win this out the gate even before trial, but I suspect MS handwaving intervened.

[LAK Supply]

He has to exhaust CA remedies first (and they do exist). It's not a federal case - yet.

Bill,

Have I been misinformed that citizens can go straight to DC to bring suit against the gov't? I thought that was the only place one could go to file suit at the federal level without working up through the state courts?

[hoffmang]

Let me try to put a little framework around the DC issue.

What Bill is saying is that there are plenty of remedies under California Law which does incorporate Federal rights that would be actionable against CA DOJ BOF right here in California and do not implicate the second amendment. Those same cases can potentially be brought in Federal court here in the Ninth Circuit, but that is a strategic decision best left to the lawyers.

The second amendment means something in the DC Circuit because of the ruling of the court of appeals in Parker. However, its a bit premature to really rely on that until SCOTUS either does or does not grant Cert. The problem with using that theory at all in David's case is that I do not think David can sue CA DOJ (Brown in his official capacity) or his Modesto DA in DC. David could sue the Federal Government (aka Gonzales in his official capacity.) The problem is that the Federal Government is not the problem here on David's issue.

Federal law - 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (http://www.constitution.org/brief/forsythe_42-1983.htm) - is potentially what this case could and should be brought under seeking a permanent injunction against CA DOJ BOF for violating both the 4th and 5th amendments and for malicious prosecution. This is all once David is cleared of the charges.

I hope that clears things up a little bit.

-Gene

[LAK Supply]

Thanks Gene.

BTW.... I just noticed the PM. I'll reply tomorrow.

[hoffmang]

I should also note that I use "malicious prosecution" in the layman's variety. The California lawyers on here know that malicious prosecution is not available as a cause of action in California against a DA or other State official but instead private parties.

-Gene

[XDshooter]

This didn't happen to be the asshat at the Manteca range did it? :D

No it's at my local range that I have a membership. I'm not going to say who, just because he's a really cool guy, I like the range and it's close, but I think the DOJ just gives them sh*t.

I'm pretty sure he is simply referring to the Proposed Text of Modified Regulations. I don't think he knows that this never became effective. If it did, we'd all be f*cked.

He thinks that the DOJ has all this power to amend laws any which way they choose without going through the legislative process.

It's just with people like this you're talking to a brick wall. They only will listen to what the DOJ tells them.

[bwiese]

... referring to the Proposed Text of Modified Regulations. I don't think he knows that this never became effective. If it did, we'd all be f*cked.

Short term yes. Good chance a court would open a reg period for new AWs, though.

[XDshooter]

Short term yes. Good chance a court would open a reg period for new AWs, though.


A question about that. Why would they allow a new reg period?

Who says that this is okay? You say the courts, but how does that work? Does it happen when amends and new laws are sent through the Judicial branch for approval?

Also, how are amends to laws approved. Does it go through the same legislative process as new laws or what determines when an amend to a law is not okay and a new law needs to be made?


Thanks Bill

[hoffmang]

If the registration were to go through without a registration period it would be an unconstitutional taking. A court would either have to invalidate the rulemaking (which I think would be the likely outcome as it violates both the APA and the Constitution) or force a registration window based on narrowing the reading of the statute to save it Constitutionally.

-Gene

[bwiese]

A question about that. Why would they allow a new reg period?

Who says that this is okay? You say the courts, but how does that work?


Gene's got a good summary above. I'll go into some lower-level details...

"They" (DOJ) wouldn't allow it, of course.

But if they somehow forced the definition thru and had buddies at the OAL that would let it slide thru without addresssing all the side-effect matters, it becomes very "interesting" legally.

This change in regulation would cause a transition of legally-owned, legally-acquired firearms - including fixed-mag firearms already approved by DOJ - into AW status outside the firearm owner's volition. The DOJ has ZERO authority to mandate changes to firearms - there is no authority to 'render safe', order surrender or dismantling, or require modifications, etc. The DOJ caused the transition to AW status itself.

While there were a couple of registration periods opened & closed over the last 15 years for various assualt weapon categories, the fundamental overrarching sentiment of the orig Roberti-Roos law - upon which SB23 is merely a few definitions patched into Roberti-Roos structure - is that exsiting owners of lawfully-acquired firearms were allowed to keep their firearms after registration. The legislature never envisioned that AWs would be 'manufactured' by an agency redefinition and that such action would end up 'manufacturing' assault weapons. Roberti-Roos passed by only one vote in 1989 and significant debate occurred concerning ensuring existing owners of firearms that became AWs were allowed to retain them.

There's also some interesting ground in that last year's AB2728 allowed the DOJ to get out of 'listing' new AWs thru adding to the Kasler list or going thru the 12276.5 superior court 'add on' process. Given that they surrendered gross-detail authority to transition firearms into assault weapons status, why would they want to retain fine-level detail?

[XDshooter]

Thanks for all the help guys.

I always seam to get into this with gun store employees or range employees. Why is it that they don't know the laws and regulations of their own business?

I'm definitely going to avoid talking or trying to explain stuff like this to anyone who doesn't want to listen. They are just set in their ideas and are brick walls.

[G17GUY]

Are these letters being sent out in the mail, or was this just an online offering?

[LAK Supply]

G17 - These letters were sent out by mail. There are at least 380 of them out there that I know of.... but I'm sure there have been more sent that I'm unaware of.

[artherd]

Bill,

Have I been misinformed that citizens can go straight to DC to bring suit against the gov't? I thought that was the only place one could go to file suit at the federal level without working up through the state courts?

One needs standing; Dave may or may not have it, I suspect not yet. You start in US Disctict court, then take it up from there.

If Dave dosen't know this, his attorneys are doing a poor job of briefing him, if his attorneys don't know this....

[thefifthspeed]

I just joined this forum and this story is nuts. I literally live about a half mile away from this store. Dave is actually one of the few gun store owners who actually knows his stuff when it comes to firearms and laws in the area. After many trips to other gun shops I now only go to sierra because I can rely on accurate information.
On another note which lowers are in question? Is it a certain mfg or is the suite claiming manipulation or something?

[G17GUY]

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=59915

If you go to this link, it is the first page of this thread. A few posts down you can see the charges on the form the Madison Society sent out. Looks to be a superior arms 5.56 Oll. I don't think the manufacturer matters here as it could have been any off list lower.

[Two Shots]

I just joined this forum and this story is nuts. I literally live about a half mile away from this store. Dave is actually one of the few gun store owners who actually knows his stuff when it comes to firearms and laws in the area. After many trips to other gun shops I now only go to sierra because I can rely on accurate information.
On another note which lowers are in question? Is it a certain mfg or is the suite claiming manipulation or something?

I've been buying from his shop for years and I agree they know thier stuff and have been helpful. Interesting how they can have a legal item (OL) and then DOJ can change it so they can make people crimnals.

[LAK Supply]

They definitely know their stuff in there...... except for J that is...... I think there's something wrong with him; I don't care how far he can shoot! :D ;)

Seriously, Dave and his guys are doing a great job holding the ship together while under fire..... They all get Kudos.

[BBR]

Hi guys,
I have been reluctant to chime in on this, for reasons of consequences upon myself. I am not a conspiracy theory dork or anything, but people I know who have just as much info on this topic as I do have faced things I do not want to deal with.

The whole story is like something out of a Tom Clancy novel; Political intregue, a dead intern, bribes, lies and all that.

I was hanging around the gun shop when the whole idea of the Madison Society was thought up. Originally it was set up to promote second amendment rights in the central valley.

Its first big fight was to protect a great gun shop and even greater family from undue prosectution by the ATF and DOJ. Bassically the shop was raided by DOJ, DEA and sheriffs and multiple weapons were confiscated. The shop owner was the first to remove the pistol grips on evil rifles and thus got himself posted as a target.

I really don't want to go into the whole story on open forum but if you would like to know more about the Madison Society, the true start of the OLL craze, and a little something about a dead intern PM me.

I will tell you, the MS is on the level. They are using the case to do what they have been trying to do for many years - get gun cases infront of judges. Personaly I would not have anything the do with virgil if I was in a sticky situation, but thats because I would not be interested in a 12 round legal title fight.
BBR

[CRTguns]

BBR's last comment was about another shop- not mine. I was not raided, nor was I arrested
Just to clarify.

[bwiese]

BBR's last comment was about another shop- not mine. I was not raided, nor was I arrested
Just to clarify.

Yeah, just bugged apparently without a warrant. Bastards.

[BBR]

BBR's last comment was about another shop- not mine. I was not raided, nor was I arrested
Just to clarify.

Yes, I am talking about an incident that happened in 2001 IIRC. It also happened to someone who was a very good friend of mine.

I hope everything works out fine for CRTguns. Though I have never had the opportunity to do business with him, his reputation is one of a real straight shooter.

For those of you questioning support of CRTguns due to the involvment of the MS should understand that the MS is legit and will use all funds to help defend CRTguns.

Hope this clarifies things.
BBR

[Scarecrow Repair]

Wes, you are not exactly chopped liver yourself! :scooter: :rockon:

He's the garlic and onions?

[Lashlarue]

Isn't this Chinn guy the same agent who arrested swimmingpoolguy last year. The one who makes up the law as he goes!

[hoffmang]

I don't believe that Iggy Chinn was involved in Swimmingpoolguy's travails.

However there are plenty of other examples.

-Gene

[Gagnastiak]

I personally have to disagree about Mr. Lake. In knowing him firsthand, and having had the DOJ come to my house and take the gun he built for me, I personally think he has made his own bed, with both bad attitude, and risky product, putting not only himself at risk, but every customer that depended on him to sell them a legal firearm.



I also recieved one of those letters. I think that everyone who purchased from him probably recieved one.

[SunriseF150]

I personally have to disagree about Mr. Lake. In knowing him firsthand, and having had the DOJ come to my house and take the gun he built for me, I personally think he has made his own bed, with both bad attitude, and risky product, putting not only himself at risk, but every customer that depended on him to sell them a legal firearm.



I also recieved one of those letters. I think that everyone who purchased from him probably recieved one.


Care to inform us on how this gun was configured when it was sold to you? What brand/model lower was used, length of barrel, flash hider/muzzle break/compensator & pinned or screwed on, evil features?, ect.

[bwiese]

I spoke with both of 'em. It coulda been handled better on both sides but I understand Dave Lake's situatation...

While I have had some tactical disagreements about case handling/appropriatenees of marketing job by Madison Society, Dave is a good guy and knows the relevant laws.

The dustup was caused apparently because Lake felt G. barged into his shop, was rude/accusatory, and given that his shop was just bugged by DOJ, I'm guessing he felt he might possibly be set up by that individual for further audio recording. (I know I would have.) Not the case, but when you pull funny wires outta your ceiling just a few weeks before, paranoia sets in fast.

Dave knew the laws; it appears all such rifles were legally configured fixed-mag rifles with screwed-down 10rd mags - compliant with 12276.1PC and 11 CCR 5469(a). No FFL is gonna risk his license for a small profit on a fixed mag rifle or two.

Sh*t happens and everyone needs to pull together - no one did anything wrong except DOJ and prosecutor, and naive behavior is being exhibited that prosecutors would love. I'm guessing that's why they picked Modesto.

In every other one of these similar OLL rifle cases, the charges were dropped - maybe a dude loses his rifle since it's cheaper doing that than paying attorney fees to get to the next stopping point, but those are easy to reacquire :)

[Gagnastiak]

I guess I did have the ultimate case of bad timing if this is the case. I had no idea about Daves stresses at the time, I just wanted to getwhat I had paid for, next thing you know I am asked to leave under threat of unwanted ventilation to the center mass.

But well whatever....I wasnt a cop, no extra wires, maybe this accounts for Davids stress issue...


And as far as the rifle goes, yea, cheaper to rebuild than to pay an attourney.

[CRTguns]

I believe- not insinuating fact- but I think- that Gag called the DOJ to spite me, telling them that I had sold him an illegal firearm- this would have been done to "get" me- but also would have been a voluntary surrender on Gag's part. This move doesn't work in poker or chess either.
(Ed Planteric at DOJ- Chinn's SUPERVISOR told me a customer called and "told" on me.)

If I had it to do over again, I would repeat as before. I do not tolerate for personal disrespect of my employess or myself. Didn't then and still don't.

[CRTguns]

also- I did in fact refund 100% of gag's deposit. He got what he paid for.

[CRTguns]

Gag's gun was a superior lower, a Model 1 24" bull upper with A2 furniture. No callapsible anything- no threads- no brake or suppressor.
I regret and feel badly that anybody loses thier gun- especially a legal one. This usully is the result of some indiscretion however- talking too loudly or showing it off where you ought not show it off.

[bwiese]

I believe Gag got worried because he was unclear, perhaps saw DOJ memos about proposed rulemaking as opposed to current law and got confused.

He then made the mistake of calling the DOJ asking about legality (like that's even useful - those answers depend on the DOJ phone clerk's knowledge of the phase of the moon.)

Things just got outta hand, all parties should step back and take a deep breath.

Dave/CRTguns is not having a great time - how'd you feel if you found a bug planted during a DOJ 'swarm audit' of your shop - 1 or 2 clerks on duty and 6 or 8 DOJ people swarming a small shop like a gypsy robbery of a 7-11?

This crap will go away. There is no law supporting the case and DOJ just found a tame young ~28 year old local prosecutor that wants to make a name.

[DHiggmo]

It always amazes me how people get tunnel-vision when trying to through someone under the bus and get run over by it :D.

[LAK Supply]

I did in fact refund 100% of gag's deposit.

How come I never got a deposit back? :confused: Somethin' shady's going on here.....:2guns:

[brighamr]

So, who will be attending Monday's meeting? (I'm referring to the new letter received today regarding this case)

[CRTguns]

BrighamR..
Thank you, for your open-mindedness. The meeting is held quarterly- most local MS members attend, and many others just interested in the issues we're dealing with. It's at the Modesto PD main floor 7pm.

[CRTguns]

LAK...
you only get your deposit back if
1. you agree to get it looking at the muzzle of my .45, or
2. you're a complete retard.

[brighamr]

CRT,

It's not being open-minded, it's standing up for a great guy and to stop the outrageous DOJ. I frankly don't know what this forum's problem is.

There was someone else who got arrested, and 99% of the forum sent money, asked how to help, drove 4 hours to see him, etc, etc. The whole world stopped.

Now we have someone else get harrased by DOJ who owns a store, has an ffl, has already fought DOJ, etc. and no-one wants to do a damn thing.

Pretty sad if you ask me. I'll be there, hopefully the people on this forum who support you and your case will be there too.

[hoffmang]

brighamr,

I think what many here reacted negatively to is scare tactics in the fund raising letter.

We should be supporting Dave/CRT.

-Gene

[LAK Supply]

Gene's right.... both Dave and this case are worth supporting. The whole thing is a glaring example of the DOJ's intimidation campaign.....

LAK...
you only get your deposit back if
1. you agree to get it looking at the muzzle of my .45, or
2. you're a complete retard.


You'd better watch it or I'll call the DOJ and tell them I bought an EBR.... I'm sure that would work out well... :rofl2: :p

That meeting's this Monday....? I didn't get the letter. Give me a call this weekend if you get a chance....

[CRTguns]

What's an EBR?
it's moday at 7 pm at the PD.

[LAK Supply]

EBR = Evil Black Rifle.

I'll be there.... so will Ali.