Thread: Ctr-02
View Single Post
Old 11-17-2005, 3:55 PM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,975
iTrader: 3 / 100%


Change your sigline, Tim Riegert's not at DOJ anymore. Apparently it's Alison Merilees now, perhaps just ad interim.

Originally Posted by artherd
It's encouraging, but you'll absolutely need to get a seperate DOJ letter regarding exactly the KT-10 build. Homebuilts are tricky, it is not clear to me how the DOJ treats them as far as 'make and model' goes. It is also not clear to me how

I would *think* that in order to remain consistant in law, that the Make and Model of the KT-10 would be "Bu-bye" and "My Rifle2005" respectively, and that to BAN them under CURRENT statutes, the DOJ would have to place an injunction, hold and win a Supior Court hearing, and then promologate the make/model in a list. Yes for each and every homebuilder. But this is reaching way way way far, the DOJ themselves should be consulted.
As you seem to realize - and like I told buBye before - homebuilt ARs and AKs can be tricky.

I really, really think if you were popped for AW possesion of a homebuilt AR that there's a fair chance Harrott v Kings County does not offer you protection even though your gun is 'off-list'.

A judge could rule as a matter of law that there's no way the DOJ Roster mandated by Harrott could conceivably be practical for homebuilts, and no way it could be created to ban homebuilts due to banning criteria is make and model, and that this was an attempt to bypass legislative intent - that is, ban ARs & AKs. The fact that Harrott allows some oddball mfgrd AR receivers to exist is a side effect and not central to the fact that the List could _never_ be set up for homebuilts by name/model/etc.

And if Harrott doesn't hold for an AR/AK, then Kasler takes over: it'd be an AR since it "walks like a duck and talks like a duck" and, since unregistered, you'd be guilty of illegal AW possession.

Bill Wiese
San Jose
Reply With Quote