PDA

View Full Version : Request for info: DOJ BoF Comments or Documents


hoffmang
09-08-2007, 11:04 AM
All,

There have been recent new rumors that the DOJ BoF is attempting to spread further fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD) by claiming that they'll re-interpret something (illegally) and otherwise make FFL's lives miserable.

With my pending OAL petition, I need paper on this. If you are or know an FFL or a LEO who has had a first person conversation, I'd like to get a statement in the form of a sworn affidavit. If you've seen a letter or a memo or other writing that says anything that looks or sounds like the magazine permanence memo, some attempt to subvert Harrot and re-create series nomenclature, or something claiming that any of the featureless compliance parts aren't compliant, please post it here or PM it to me.

Any of these sorts of things are underground regulation and per-se illegal under the California Government Code.

-Gene

artherd
09-08-2007, 4:22 PM
Some people never learn; you'd think the office of the Attorney General would want to comply with California law.

LAK Supply
09-08-2007, 4:29 PM
PM CRT Gene..... he has some information that you would love to get your hands on.

All,

There have been recent new rumors that the DOJ BoF is attempting to spread further fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD) by claiming that they'll re-interpret something (illegally) and otherwise make FFL's lives miserable.

With my pending OAL petition, I need paper on this. If you are or know an FFL or a LEO who has had a first person conversation, I'd like to get a statement in the form of a sworn affidavit. If you've seen a letter or a memo or other writing that says anything that looks or sounds like the magazine permanence memo, some attempt to subvert Harrot and re-create series nomenclature, or something claiming that any of the featureless compliance parts aren't compliant, please post it here or PM it to me.

Any of these sorts of things are underground regulation and per-se illegal under the California Government Code.

-Gene

hoffmang
09-08-2007, 4:42 PM
I should also have clarified that I'm looking for statements or events that happened after approximately July 17, 2007.

LAK: Other than his dismissal do you know if CRT has something newer?

-Gene

bwiese
09-08-2007, 6:14 PM
Incoming PM, Gene...

LAK Supply
09-08-2007, 6:34 PM
I should also have clarified that I'm looking for statements or events that happened after approximately July 17, 2007.

LAK: Other than his dismissal do you know if CRT has something newer?

-Gene

He doesn't have anything "newer," but he has something better for what you're doing. Check you inbox.

Ford8N
09-08-2007, 7:12 PM
All,


Any of these sorts of things are underground regulation and per-se illegal under the California Government Code.

-Gene

If it is "per-se illegal" Gene, what is the punishment for breaking the law and who gets fined or goes to jail?

jdberger
09-08-2007, 7:33 PM
If it is "per-se illegal" Gene, what is the punishment for breaking the law and who gets fined or goes to jail?

That comes later....

As my Sicilian cousins (and Khan from Star Trek) like to say, "Revenge is a dish best served cold."

JawBone
09-08-2007, 8:05 PM
I don't know exactly what you are looking for but one of the current FAQ's on Assault Weapons, question 13 still references "AR and AK series weapons"...I find that odd given Harrott has been decided for how long now?

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/regagunfaqs.php#13



3. What are AK and AR-15 series weapons and how are they controlled?

Any firearm which is a variation, with minor differences, of the AK or AR-15 type (i.e., series weapon), regardless of manufacturer, is an assault weapon under the original Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989. These assault weapons are listed by the Department of Justice in the California Code of Regulations, Title 11, Chapter 12.9, Section 979.11 (11 CCR 979.11)

...

8. I am a firearms dealer. If I remove the characteristic(s) that make a firearm an assault weapon, can I sell it?

Yes, but only if the firearm is an assault weapon that is defined as such only by its characteristics, and only if you have registered it as an assault weapon with the DOJ. (Penal Code section 12276.1, SB 23 - This section of law may be accessed on the DOJ Bureau of Firearms Website's Online Dangerous Weapons Control Laws). THIS DOES NOT APPLY TO ORIGINAL ROBERTI-ROOS ASSAULT WEAPONS OR AK and AR-15 SERIES WEAPONS.

...

13. If I registered my SB 23 assault weapon and now I remove the characteristic(s) that make it an assault weapon, can I cancel the registration?

Yes. If the defining characteristics establishing a firearm as an SB 23 assault weapon are removed, it is no longer an assault weapon and the registration may be canceled. However, once the registration is canceled, you can never replace the characteristic(s) that make it an assault weapon, or you will be in possession of an illegal weapon.

THIS APPLIES ONLY TO FIREARMS DEFINED AS ASSAULT WEAPONS BY CHARACTERISTICS (Penal Code section 12276.1, SB 23). THIS DOES NOT APPLY TO ORIGINAL ROBERTI-ROOS ASSAULT WEAPONS OR AK and AR-15 SERIES WEAPONS IN THAT REMOVAL OF THEIR CHARACTERISTICS DOES NOT NEGATE THE REQUIREMENT TO REGISTER THE ASSAULT WEAPON.

Hope it helps...give 'em heck.

ETA: Actually I just read through that whole FAQ and there are several more instances where Harrot is very cleary ignored.

bwiese
09-08-2007, 9:55 PM
I don't know exactly what you are looking for but one of the current FAQ's on Assault Weapons, question 13 still references "AR and AK series weapons"...I find that odd given Harrott has been decided for how long now?

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/regagunfaqs.php#13



Hope it helps...give 'em heck.

ETA: Actually I just read through that whole FAQ and there are several more instances where Harrot is very cleary ignored.

Yup. DOJ info is in a time-warp regarding Harrott and all their AW idenfication materials. It's still 2000 to them.

artherd
09-09-2007, 1:33 PM
Yup. DOJ info is in a time-warp regarding Harrott and all their AW idenfication materials. It's still 2000 to them.

And yet they love to quote Kasler; you would think attorneys would be above adgenda-based selective enforcement of case law.

Crazed_SS
09-09-2007, 1:50 PM
The AW Identification guide also mentions series language still..
http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/awguide.pdf

Interestingly enough, it does have the kasler list at the very end (after the glossary) and it's titled "Combined Listing of Category 1 and Category 2 Assault Weapons"

I was at a gun store here that caters to LEOs yesterday and the AW guide they were selling is the same as that PDF there. I guess if you had to argue with a LEO about an OLL, you could point out that your Stag-15 or whatever isnt on the "Combined Listing of Category 1 and Category 2 Assault Weapons" and it doesnt have the features of a Category 3 Assault Weapon, so it is therefore legal.