PDA

View Full Version : From Another Board, Opinions?


Bruce
10-21-2007, 5:39 PM
"How about a levergun swap?

I have a .44mag Winchester 94AE with removed and covered safety and I want to get a Puma 92 .357

I live in xxxxxxxxx, CA. Any guys in the area care to swap firearms? Registration will be done legally by printing the form off of the DOJ website and mailing it in for 19 bucks (vs. 50 bucks from a dealer). Yes people, this is legal, it has been verified by several LEOs that I know."

IIRC ALL sales/PPT's have to go through a dealer. :confused:

leelaw
10-21-2007, 5:41 PM
Are those longguns over 50 years old?

If not, then it's illegal and he's talking through his butt.

metalhead357
10-21-2007, 5:43 PM
Are those longguns over 50 years old?

If not, then it's illegal and he's talking through his butt.


+1000000000000

CSACANNONEER
10-21-2007, 5:46 PM
Just goes to show that all Ca LEOs don't know all Ca laws.

CCWFacts
10-21-2007, 6:12 PM
Even if it is over 50 years old that does not automatically make it a C&R. Even if the type is listed on the C&R list, if it has been modified it might not have C&R status.

LEOs are not lawyers or firearms dealers either.

FortCourageArmory
10-21-2007, 8:03 PM
Both the Puma 92 and Winchester 94AE most certainly are NOT C&R guns. This is an illegal transaction.

metalhead357
10-21-2007, 8:13 PM
Both the Puma 92 and Winchester 94AE most certainly are NOT C&R guns. This is an illegal transaction.

Dont know anything about the puma....but the 94???????? They were made pre WWII...just dont know about the AE designation.

CCWFacts
10-21-2007, 9:09 PM
The BATF provides a helpful list:

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/curios/index.htm

Note that the gun must be on the list, and not substantially modified from its original configuration. I'm not sure what the definition of "substantially modified" is; I would be very conservative on this. I think it's also possible to get a letter from the ATF designating a particular gun as C&R by documenting its historical status or whatever.

For me, if I can't a) see that the gun is clearly the type on the list and b) unmodified and c) I'm familiar enough with the type of gun to know its identification and that it isn't modified, I wouldn't handle it as a C&R, personally.

LECTRIKHED
10-21-2007, 9:55 PM
LEOs aren't attorneys, many of them don't even have college degrees. Don't trust them for legal advice. Trust an attorney.

metalhead357
10-21-2007, 10:40 PM
LEOs aren't attorneys, many of them don't even have college degrees. Don't trust them for legal advice. Trust an attorney.

Pssssht. Wrong. the 9th circut court is filled with attorney's that have been soooooooo overruled by the supreme court so many times its laughable. The 9th votes one way-- you know in reality what the truth is...it'll be the other. Attorneys.......... they WONT be serving time in the cell with you when/if they're wrong either. Trust the law....such as it is, but CONSULT an attorney...but TRUST??????:cool:

redneckshootist
10-21-2007, 11:36 PM
Dont know anything about the puma....but the 94???????? They were made pre WWII...just dont know about the AE designation.

the 94AE stands for angle eject. winchester did it that way so you could mount a low mount scope on it. cant remember the year they started that (I would have to look it up) but it was after '64.

oyeah and this would be an illegal transaction it would have to go through a dealer

FortCourageArmory
10-22-2007, 12:00 AM
Puma 92 began manufacture in the 60s in Brazil (it's a very very popular model down there!). The 94AE...for Angle Eject was came out in the mid 1990s to get closer to exact. Either way, that would make a "handshake transaction" for these two rifles highly illegal and to be avoided.

socalguns
10-22-2007, 12:41 AM
maybe it was a father-son website, where the guy was talking to his sons? :p

slick_711
10-22-2007, 12:43 AM
Dont know anything about the puma....but the 94???????? They were made pre WWII...just dont know about the AE designation.

They were made long before WWII, long before any form of gun control. :) As a matter of fact, there were over a million 94s produced and sold before the NFA. I think the millionth one was given to President Coolidge. So yeah, a lot of them would be C&R, but as the other guys already pointed out, the AEs are not. And the Puma certainly is not.

This guy, just by the way he worded and added his affirmation that such a transfer is legal... is an idiot. His LEO friends are either out of state, or oblivious and possibly also idiots.

-hanko
10-22-2007, 6:46 AM
Just goes to show that all Ca LEOs don't know all Ca laws.
Welcome to last year;)

-hanko

Forestboy
10-22-2007, 6:46 AM
94 AE came out in the 80's as it was my first rifle purchased with my first paycheck in 1987.

FortCourageArmory
10-22-2007, 8:38 AM
94 AE came out in the 80's as it was my first rifle purchased with my first paycheck in 1987.

I stand corrected. :)

metalhead357
10-22-2007, 6:10 PM
thank gents for the 94 & puma info; Yeah, I knew the AE was angle eject but never stopped to ask before this thread when that was integrated into Winnie's lineup..... but Post/after the '64 says it all even without venturing into the 60's puma...............

the OP on the other board is just flat out wrong. Wouldnt surprise me a bit if it twer a sting.............