PDA

View Full Version : Forcing the DOJ to approve the bullet button


LECTRIKHED
10-15-2007, 7:20 AM
The whole SU-16 & PLR-16 bb issue got me thinking. We may be able to force the DOJ into approving the bullet buttons by utilizing the handgun safety certification. All we need is a handgun that would meet the criteria. Basically it would need to be an AW by generic characteristics. Then a bb could be added and a magazine disconnect safety. Once submitted the DOJ would have to either approve it, (providing it passed the drop test) or they could rule it is an AW. We know that the latter is not possible, because they would have already done that, and the recent APA smack down. If they did not approve it, we could use the courts and APA again to force it into approval.

All we need is a willing manufacturer, who will make 1 or 2 pistols that would meet this criteria and send them to CA. Perhaps Barett, would like to submit a pistol for the sake of CA, gun owners.

supersonic
10-15-2007, 8:09 AM
Excuse me if I have missed something, but are you saying that a BB would be installed on a handgun? Is that even POSSIBLE? Oh, and unless I'm missing something else : Barrett doesn't manufacture or distribute anything but long guns.:confused:

sunborder
10-15-2007, 8:36 AM
Supersonic: Take a look at the AR-15 pistols that are out there. Basically an AR-15 with no stock, a TINY barrel, and weighs a ton with a HUGE muzzle blast. Legally a pistol. Would accept a BB with minor modifications, IIRC.

tgriffin
10-15-2007, 10:25 AM
The whole SU-16 & PLR-16 bb issue got me thinking. We may be able to force the DOJ into approving the bullet buttons by utilizing the handgun safety certification. All we need is a handgun that would meet the criteria. Basically it would need to be an AW by generic characteristics. Then a bb could be added and a magazine disconnect safety. Once submitted the DOJ would have to either approve it, (providing it passed the drop test) or they could rule it is an AW. We know that the latter is not possible, because they would have already done that, and the recent APA smack down. If they did not approve it, we could use the courts and APA again to force it into approval.

All we need is a willing manufacturer, who will make 1 or 2 pistols that would meet this criteria and send them to CA. Perhaps Barett, would like to submit a pistol for the sake of CA, gun owners.

Definitely A+ for effort. I find your creativity inspiring, but I believe that the risks outweigh the rewards. To push our hand in this manner would definitely force the BOF into a corner. A cornered quarry is a dangerous and unpredictable one. What if they arbitrarily rule against? You must agree there is room there for "what if". For example, what if a DA used that as dicta and guidance to prosecute a current or future case? Yes it would be defendable, but why add complexity to the process? Why give them the opportunity when we have anything less than guaranteed win?

Also, why do we need it to be certified? It is working so far, and is yet untested in court. I believe we should wait until there is an incident and court case. That will be the real acid test. Legal precedent carries far more weight than opinion of a bureau with a long list of "oops's" (think iggy/certain FFL and welded receivers ) and overturned opinion (think hoffmang and underground regulation viz BOF website)

Again, I think your heads in the right place, but perhaps not the right time nor method.



Let's maintain the status quo until we know a little more about what will happen with Parker/Heller v. DC.

bwiese
10-15-2007, 11:21 AM
Why do you need certification for what the law already says is legal?

DOJ staff has often given approval for things that turn out not to be, so except for a 'detrimental reliance' defense, your best bet is to understand and comply with the law & regulations as they are.

One other problem is that most DOJ approvals come from staff types who are not lawyers, adding further to confusion.

Remember...
- DOJ approved Walther P22s pistol for sale in CA even though they were AWs;
- DOJ approved the Vulcan fixed-mag AR even though the fixed mag can be manhandled out by hand (pin shears, sealant/adhesive cracks) without a tool;
- DOJ arrested folks for selling legal HK pistol grips;
- DOJ seized Robinson Arms gripless M96 rifles cuz they couldn't read;.


Do your thing, follow the law. That's what you need to do.

thmpr
10-15-2007, 11:36 AM
Why do you need certification for what the law already says is legal?

DOJ staff has often given approval for things that turn out not to be, so except for a 'detrimental reliance' defense, your best bet is to understand and comply with the law & regulations as they are.

One other problem is that most DOJ approvals come from staff types who are not lawyers, adding further to confusion.

Remember...
- DOJ approved Walther P22s pistol for sale in CA even though they were AWs;
- DOJ approved the Vulcan fixed-mag AR even though the fixed mag can be manhandled out by hand (pin shears, sealant/adhesive cracks) without a tool;
- DOJ arrested folks for selling legal HK pistol grips;
- DOJ seized Robinson Arms gripless M96 rifles cuz they couldn't read;.


Do your thing, follow the law. That's what you need to do.



+1


No one will follow up on this (No backing), this is what I would worry about if we did move forward on this.

Addax
10-15-2007, 11:49 AM
By installing the BB into a rifle like the AR BB or the AK version, and the HK/PTR91/MP5 version, you render the factory designed/installed original magazine release button inoperable.

So with the bullet button installed, it deletes the function of the original magazine release button and now requires the shooter/gun owner to utilize a tool to disassemble the magazine from the rifle receiver since it is stuck in the fixed position with the Bullet Button installed vs. the original magazine release button.

Tell me how DOJ or any DA can argue this?
All you need to do (if you are ever dragged into court) is to hire a firearms expert and have them testify that the magazine release buttons original design feature that requires you to use your finger or any part of your body to engage the magazine release button to release/detach the magazine from the rifle.

With the Bullet Button installed, the BB locks the magazine into a fixed position that cannot be released from the rifle without the use of a tool like a flat head screw driver to engage the internal button to enable the disassembly / unlocking / release of the magazine from the receiver.

You know if someone angles this just right, the BB could be marketed as a firearm safety device too.....

Think about it....:D

Regards,
Addax

shark92651
10-15-2007, 1:24 PM
I don't think this would fly anyway as they have already defined any handgun that has a magazine in a position other than in the pistol grip as an AW in California.

jmlivingston
10-15-2007, 1:29 PM
You know if someone angles this just right, the BB could be marketed as a firearm safety device too.....

Think about it....:D


I hope not! Otherwise that'll be the next feature added to the requirements for anything to be added to the safe handgun list. :cuss:

John

gose
10-15-2007, 3:50 PM
I don't think this would fly anyway as they have already defined any handgun that has a magazine in a position other than in the pistol grip as an AW in California.

Not at all.

(4) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer.
(B) A second handgrip.
(C) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel that allows the bearer to fire the weapon without burning his or her hand, except a slide that encloses the barrel.
(D) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.
(5) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

Addax
10-15-2007, 5:53 PM
I hope not! Otherwise that'll be the next feature added to the requirements for anything to be added to the safe handgun list. :cuss:

John

Sorry, I was thinking of rifles when I typed that...

shark92651
10-15-2007, 7:07 PM
Not at all.
(D) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.


Ahhh, the infamous "detachable" keyword :D I stand corrected.

artherd
10-15-2007, 10:15 PM
DOJ also approved the SKS Sporters...

Know the law, rely on DOJ as much as you would rely on opposing consul in kahootz with the Brady Center...

Why do you need certification for what the law already says is legal?

DOJ staff has often given approval for things that turn out not to be, so except for a 'detrimental reliance' defense, your best bet is to understand and comply with the law & regulations as they are.

One other problem is that most DOJ approvals come from staff types who are not lawyers, adding further to confusion.

Remember...
- DOJ approved Walther P22s pistol for sale in CA even though they were AWs;
- DOJ approved the Vulcan fixed-mag AR even though the fixed mag can be manhandled out by hand (pin shears, sealant/adhesive cracks) without a tool;
- DOJ arrested folks for selling legal HK pistol grips;
- DOJ seized Robinson Arms gripless M96 rifles cuz they couldn't read;.


Do your thing, follow the law. That's what you need to do.

supersonic
10-16-2007, 11:48 AM
Supersonic: Take a look at the AR-15 pistols that are out there. Basically an AR-15 with no stock, a TINY barrel, and weighs a ton with a HUGE muzzle blast. Legally a pistol. Would accept a BB with minor modifications, IIRC.

AR pistols are HIGHLY VERBOTEN in PRK, so wouldn't it be a moot point to try and make?

MotoGuy
10-16-2007, 3:15 PM
Looks like CA legal AR-15 pistols might be on the way:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=72245

aplinker
10-16-2007, 3:30 PM
AR pistols are HIGHLY VERBOTEN in PRK, so wouldn't it be a moot point to try and make?

Where have you been? This has been discussed and done in several different ways. :D

Build it yourself or bring it in as a single-shot pistol, using the safe drop exemption. Then proceed to modify with (almost complete) abandon.