Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > FIREARMS DISCUSSIONS > Curio & Relic/Black Powder
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Curio & Relic/Black Powder Curio & Relics and Black Powder Firearms, Old School shooting fun!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-22-2019, 2:46 AM
Bigdog68 Bigdog68 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 58
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default CFARs kicking back on an SKS

Hi, looking to see if anyone can explain this. I purchased a Tula SKS using my 03 and COE and registered via the CFARs site. Now I got CFARS Incomplete Notice

"The California Department of Justice has received your electronic application; however, it cannot be processed for the following reason(s):

Please provide clear full-length pictures of both sides of the firearm, one close up of the serial number, magazine release, make, and model. Upload these pictures to this transaction and resubmit for processing."

What through me is this is the only time on a C&R that they asked for pictures. And then they state they want a photo that shows the magazine release. This is a normal SKS that uses a 10 round stripper clip. This makes me wonder are they thinking this is AW?

Any thoughts? I am probably going to call them to ask what is up, but thought I would check around first.
Thanks,
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-22-2019, 4:17 AM
edgerly779 edgerly779 is online now
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: canoga park, ca
Posts: 11,728
iTrader: 88 / 100%
Default

Make sure it is in complance before you submit pics. What is up is if they think it is an aw they will come and get it.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-22-2019, 4:41 AM
Freedom_shooter's Avatar
Freedom_shooter Freedom_shooter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Inland Empire / Rancho
Posts: 832
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

I had the same issue on a Russian SKS. I sent pictures and was A-OK.

Strange how the Yugo or Chinese variants never raised the red flag. DOJ is more interested with the Russian SKS in my dealings with them.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-22-2019, 8:34 AM
BrokerB's Avatar
BrokerB BrokerB is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Folsom , outside the walls
Posts: 3,118
iTrader: 17 / 100%
Default

Hell no.

Burn the c&r license along with the log book

Why would anyone submit photos to the jackboot thugs after the unconstitutional raids they have done already.

I have not read this law that requires photos be sent.
__________________
Beans and Bullets


Ruger Mk lll 22/45 .22lr , Uberti SAA .357 for sale
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s....php?t=1483671
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-22-2019, 9:38 AM
Dan_Eastvale's Avatar
Dan_Eastvale Dan_Eastvale is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 1,565
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

How can they not know that Tula SKS is automatically C&R and compliant? Maybe the tinfoil hats aren't so whacky.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-22-2019, 10:11 AM
SVT-40's Avatar
SVT-40 SVT-40 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Az
Posts: 9,311
iTrader: 28 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrokerB View Post
Hell no.

Burn the c&r license along with the log book

Why would anyone submit photos to the jackboot thugs after the unconstitutional raids they have done already.

I have not read this law that requires photos be sent.
Just go away...

If you don't have something of value to offer, just go away.

The reason they want the information is SKS type carbines with detachable magazines are illegal in CA.

The information is to show the carbine being registered by the OP isn't one of those.
__________________
Poke'm with a stick!


Quote:
Originally Posted by fiddletown View Post
What you believe and what is true in real life in the real world aren't necessarily the same thing. And what you believe doesn't change what is true in real life in the real world.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-22-2019, 10:48 AM
LEAD LAUNCHER LEAD LAUNCHER is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Simi Valley
Posts: 858
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Do you 03 FFL’s have to register your stuff online using the computer?

I thought you could mail it in the old school way-no?

...
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-22-2019, 10:59 AM
Bigdog68 Bigdog68 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 58
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Thanks everyone.

This was an instate purchase and yes, I am thinking for some reason they think the SKS could be an AW. I was just a bit concerned because for for other C&Rs I have done the paperwork on, I have not had to submit photos, and CFARs had only wanted photos when I did my "AW"s.

The original Russian SKS didn't have removable magazines, but I guess DOJ is not so sanguine. I had heard the DOJ system could be finicky and maybe I picked the wrong option for describing the rifle.

Lead Launcher, I think there is a mark 1 mod 0 snail mail way to do this, but computer is easier for me.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-22-2019, 11:07 AM
LEAD LAUNCHER LEAD LAUNCHER is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Simi Valley
Posts: 858
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigdog68 View Post
Thanks everyone.

This was an instate purchase and yes, I am thinking for some reason they think the SKS could be an AW. I was just a bit concerned because for for other C&Rs I have done the paperwork on, I have not had to submit photos, and CFARs had only wanted photos when I did my "AW"s.

The original Russian SKS didn't have removable magazines, but I guess DOJ is not so sanguine. I had heard the DOJ system could be finicky and maybe I picked the wrong option for describing the rifle.

Lead Launcher, I think there is a mark 1 mod 0 snail mail way to do this, but computer is easier for me.
Thanks for the reply.

Don’t have my 03 yet but plan on getting it this year mainly for ammunition purchases.

I’m sure many people have success with DOJ’s online system, but it just looks like a fishing expedition for entrapment to me.

If I can ever avoid logging in to the DOJ system I will do it.

It’s Paper forms and US mail for me -if it’s still available.

Although if you did that way, I wonder if they would mail you a letter asking for pics LOL.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-22-2019, 11:36 AM
BrokerB's Avatar
BrokerB BrokerB is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Folsom , outside the walls
Posts: 3,118
iTrader: 17 / 100%
Default

C&R Tula SKS has a model with detachable magazines?


Still wondering where in the law it says will require photos for proof.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-22-2019, 11:58 AM
870classic 870classic is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Costa Mesa, CA
Posts: 193
iTrader: 31 / 100%
Default

Did you use the description of SKS "FIXED" magazine when submitting to CFARs?
If not, try it with the word "Fixed".

Best regards,
870classic
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-22-2019, 12:09 PM
hermosabeach's Avatar
hermosabeach hermosabeach is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 12,440
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

1- The SKS was a forgotten confiscation. The DOJ decided detachable magazine SKS were illegal and demanded people surrender them for no money.

2-Some SKS have a destructive device on them - obsolete grenade launcher.

3- some have a magazine over 10 rounds

They might be looking for a prohibited feature...

https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/zastava

http://www.level-headed.net/wp-conte...terLetters.jpg
__________________



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=g_a7dQXilCo
“Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you.”
— Neil deGrasse Tyson
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-22-2019, 12:09 PM
hermosabeach's Avatar
hermosabeach hermosabeach is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 12,440
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

1- The SKS was a forgotten confiscation. The DOJ decided detachable magazine SKS were illegal and demanded people surrender them for no money. They were allowed and then revered under Roberti Roos ( we know- Mini 14 is ok)

2-Some SKS have a destructive device on them - obsolete grenade launcher.

3- some have a magazine over 10 rounds

They might be looking for a prohibited feature...

https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/zastava

http://www.level-headed.net/wp-conte...terLetters.jpg
__________________



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=g_a7dQXilCo
“Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you.”
— Neil deGrasse Tyson
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-22-2019, 12:14 PM
BrokerB's Avatar
BrokerB BrokerB is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Folsom , outside the walls
Posts: 3,118
iTrader: 17 / 100%
Default

C&R Tula SKS has a model with detachable magazines?


Still wondering where in the law it says will require photos for proof.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-22-2019, 12:16 PM
robertmneal93 robertmneal93 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: East Bay
Posts: 141
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

There was a thread about someone pushing back for pictures.

"Someone" I know got a kickback today as well. That someone is debating whether or not they should send pictures in.
__________________
Welcome to California; Where the liberals are liberals and the conservatives are too!
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-22-2019, 2:15 PM
trivee trivee is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 5
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigdog68 View Post
This was an instate purchase and yes, I am thinking for some reason they think the SKS could be an AW.
You're not alone. I received the same email today for a Romanian Type 56 purchased privately in-state with 03 FFL and CoE.

As others have mentioned, SKS modified to accept a detachable mechanism is an assault weapon per Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989, codified as California Penal Code 12276(a)(11). So what they're probably looking for is the magazine configuration (original fixed vs. modified detachable).
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-22-2019, 2:38 PM
Califpatriot Califpatriot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Sf bay area
Posts: 1,804
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

You don't have any obligation to provide it to them. The fact they didn't process it doesn't matter:


Quote:
27966.
Commencing January 1, 2014, if all of the following requirements are satisfied, Section 27545 shall not apply to the sale, loan, or transfer of a firearm:

(a) The sale, loan, or transfer is infrequent, as defined in Section 16730.

(b) The firearm is not a handgun.

(c) The firearm is a curio or relic, as defined in Section 478.11 of Title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations, or its successor.

(d) The person receiving the firearm has a current certificate of eligibility issued pursuant to Section 26710.

(e) The person receiving the firearm is licensed as a collector pursuant to Chapter 44 of Title 18 of the United States Code and the regulations issued thereto.

(f) Within 30 days of taking possession of the firearm, the person to whom it is transferred shall forward by prepaid mail, or deliver in person to the Department of Justice, a report that includes information concerning the individual taking possession of the firearm, how title was obtained and from whom, and a description of the firearm in question. The report forms that individuals complete pursuant to this section shall be provided to them by the department.
You provided them the report. Everything else is overreach. Screw them.

Respond simply:

Quote:
There is no regulatory or statutory authority requiring me to provide photographs of my firearm. Furthermore, it does not matter whether the Bureau of Firearms processes this report. Penal Code section 27966 requires that a holder of a curio and relic license and a COE report a non-dealer transaction within thirty days of taking possession and provide a description of the firearm and of the transaction. I have already done so, and therefore fulfilled all statutory obligations on my end. What the Bureau of Firearms chooses to do is up to the Bureau; if the Bureau wants to comply with its statutory obligations to have an accurate AFS record, it will process the submission as it is.
__________________
In case it wasn't obvious, nothing I write here should be interpreted as legal advice.

Do you have a Kel-Tec P-11? Let me know as I may be interested in buying or trading for it.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-22-2019, 2:41 PM
Califpatriot Califpatriot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Sf bay area
Posts: 1,804
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

FWIW, I got an email this week regarding an SKS stating, "The California Department of Justice has received your electronic application and will begin processing your submission. You will be notified of the results via U.S. Mail." This usually indicates they've accepted it.

However, I had written in the notes that it was a fixed magazine SKS. I also stated the date of the proof marks. This was to establish non-AW status and C&R status respectively.
__________________
In case it wasn't obvious, nothing I write here should be interpreted as legal advice.

Do you have a Kel-Tec P-11? Let me know as I may be interested in buying or trading for it.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 02-22-2019, 2:44 PM
Califpatriot Califpatriot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Sf bay area
Posts: 1,804
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LEAD LAUNCHER View Post
Do you 03 FFL’s have to register your stuff online using the computer?

I thought you could mail it in the old school way-no?

...
You can. BOF form 961.
__________________
In case it wasn't obvious, nothing I write here should be interpreted as legal advice.

Do you have a Kel-Tec P-11? Let me know as I may be interested in buying or trading for it.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 02-22-2019, 3:48 PM
LEAD LAUNCHER LEAD LAUNCHER is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Simi Valley
Posts: 858
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Califpatriot View Post
You can. BOF form 961.
Ah...thanks ok.

This one.

https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/a...ms/bof_961.pdf

So if I am ever in a similar situation to the OP-the hot ticket would be
to fill out this form(writing “fixed magazine”next to the model name)and mail it in-so as not to receive the fishing expedition pic request from DOJ.

Lol -Dave Edmunds I hear you knocking(but you can’t come in)is playing on the radio as I type this.

How appropriate!

..
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 02-22-2019, 4:00 PM
Califpatriot Califpatriot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Sf bay area
Posts: 1,804
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Frankly, after seeing all this nonsense with CFARS photo requests, given the option between paper and CFARS, I would do paper. Make a copy of it, pay $3.50 for trackable or certified mail, and send it in. It doesn't make sense, but it seems that they're being a lot more difficult about CFARS submissions than paper submissions.
__________________
In case it wasn't obvious, nothing I write here should be interpreted as legal advice.

Do you have a Kel-Tec P-11? Let me know as I may be interested in buying or trading for it.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 02-22-2019, 4:01 PM
Pardini Pardini is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1,141
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hermosabeach View Post
1- The SKS was a forgotten confiscation. The DOJ decided detachable magazine SKS were illegal and demanded people surrender them for no money. They were allowed and then revered under Roberti Roos ( we know- Mini 14 is ok)

2-Some SKS have a destructive device on them - obsolete grenade launcher.

3- some have a magazine over 10 rounds

They might be looking for a prohibited feature...

https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/zastava

http://www.level-headed.net/wp-conte...terLetters.jpg

It should be noted that the SKS' s that were to be confiscated were those registered after Lungren extended the registration deadline. A court found that he had no legal authority to extend the deadline.

Lundgren extended the deadline due to the confusion over the fixed/detachable mag issue to allow people who thought they Didn't have an AW extra time to register them. As I remember there were close to 200 guns registered during Lungrens Grace Period. After the Court found his Grace Period to be illegal the owners were sent letters that they now had unregistered AW' s and they needed to be surrendered. I don't know how many were surrendered and I don't recall that DOJ went looking for them, but they made that threat.

A F'd up situation. It was a slap in the face wake up call moment for me. Up until then I at least had some small amount of trust in the Government.
__________________
Originally Posted by OCEquestrian View Post
Excellent! I am thinking about it as well and I only have 4 points and an unfortunate "match bump" up to expert classification where I am far less "competitive" with my peers there.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 02-22-2019, 4:16 PM
Bobby Ricigliano's Avatar
Bobby Ricigliano Bobby Ricigliano is offline
Mit Gott und Mauser
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: The People's Glorious Republik of Southern Kalifornistan
Posts: 16,506
iTrader: 319 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVT-40 View Post
Just go away...

If you don't have something of value to offer, just go away.

The reason they want the information is SKS type carbines with detachable magazines are illegal in CA.

The information is to show the carbine being registered by the OP isn't one of those.
Yes, on all counts. Especially the first part.

This is the reason why they ask for photos. I don’t like it either, but there is no other alternative in this situation if you want to keep that firearm in California and avoid any imperial entanglements.

The real comedy gold in this thread is all the keyboard flatulence from people urging the OP to buck the system when they’d never commit such acts themselves.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 02-22-2019, 4:19 PM
Bobby Ricigliano's Avatar
Bobby Ricigliano Bobby Ricigliano is offline
Mit Gott und Mauser
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: The People's Glorious Republik of Southern Kalifornistan
Posts: 16,506
iTrader: 319 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Califpatriot View Post
Frankly, after seeing all this nonsense with CFARS photo requests, given the option between paper and CFARS, I would do paper. Make a copy of it, pay $3.50 for trackable or certified mail, and send it in. It doesn't make sense, but it seems that they're being a lot more difficult about CFARS submissions than paper submissions.
This is a good idea, but some people were still being pinged by the DOJ for photos even with the paper submissions.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 02-22-2019, 4:23 PM
Califpatriot Califpatriot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Sf bay area
Posts: 1,804
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Ricigliano View Post
Yes, on all counts. Especially the first part.

This is the reason why they ask for photos. I don’t like it either, but there is no other alternative in this situation if you want to keep that firearm in California and avoid any imperial entanglements.

The real comedy gold in this thread is all the keyboard flatulence from people urging the OP to buck the system when they’d never commit such acts themselves.
I don't think that's fair. There's no bucking the system. He complied with all legal obligations in 27966 it seems. There's nothing to go after him for. I'm suggesting that he simply point out that reality to them.

And plenty of people have told the DOJ to pound sand with overreaching photo requests--there's a number of threads about it. And in those cases, the DOJ generally has gone and pounded sand.
__________________
In case it wasn't obvious, nothing I write here should be interpreted as legal advice.

Do you have a Kel-Tec P-11? Let me know as I may be interested in buying or trading for it.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 02-22-2019, 4:47 PM
huntingsocal's Avatar
huntingsocal huntingsocal is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,137
iTrader: 31 / 100%
Default

As others have stated, it is to confirm there isn't a detachable mag mod on it. Had same thing happen to me when I first got my 03 a few years ago, sent some pics and talked to the guy on the phone and got the completion letter shortly after.

Understandable the hesitation now in light of recent events but I think you'd be worse off at this point trying to prove to them photos "aren't required"

They can ask for whatever the hell they want to ask for, required or not.

I decided not to renew my 03 as there are pretty much only two things left on my want list and I'm hoarding money now instead of guns
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 02-22-2019, 4:53 PM
Freedom_shooter's Avatar
Freedom_shooter Freedom_shooter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Inland Empire / Rancho
Posts: 832
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

I thought I would share that I got asked to provide pictures of a SVT-40 I got back in October.

It seems the DOJ has been pretty busy today...

I think the SVT-40 is considered featureless. Even with a detachable mag. If I will get in trouble with it I can ship it out of state. Last thing I need is the DOJ to come knocking.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 02-22-2019, 5:07 PM
userformerlyknownasfitty's Avatar
userformerlyknownasfitty userformerlyknownasfitty is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 471
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LEAD LAUNCHER View Post
Do you 03 FFL’s have to register your stuff online using the computer?

I thought you could mail it in the old school way-no?

...
That's what I did. It has been a while and still haven't heard back.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 02-22-2019, 6:17 PM
Hhsohn Hhsohn is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 224
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

DOJ must indeed be busy today. I got an email asking me to update my COE expiration date for a Swiss K31 that I submitted.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 02-22-2019, 6:33 PM
Califpatriot Califpatriot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Sf bay area
Posts: 1,804
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom_shooter View Post
I thought I would share that I got asked to provide pictures of a SVT-40 I got back in October.

It seems the DOJ has been pretty busy today...

I think the SVT-40 is considered featureless. Even with a detachable mag. If I will get in trouble with it I can ship it out of state. Last thing I need is the DOJ to come knocking.
SVT-40s have a muzzle brake, right? You really want some idiot in Sacramento deciding that it's actually a flash hider and you have an evil AW?

Tell them to pound sand. I've provided you with a little template of how to do it. You've complied with all statutory requirements, period. Others who have done so have had good results, for what it's worth.

With AR pistols, people who told DOJ to pound sand have gotten registration confirmations. Those who sent in pictures got visits from DOJ Officer Lardass.
__________________
In case it wasn't obvious, nothing I write here should be interpreted as legal advice.

Do you have a Kel-Tec P-11? Let me know as I may be interested in buying or trading for it.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 02-22-2019, 8:23 PM
TRICKSTER's Avatar
TRICKSTER TRICKSTER is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Contra Costa County
Posts: 12,116
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Califpatriot View Post
SVT-40s have a muzzle brake, right? You really want some idiot in Sacramento deciding that it's actually a flash hider and you have an evil AW?
The US Army classifies it as a muzzlebreak. For SVT40 owners in CA. It may be a good idea to download this manual in case there is ever a problem.
https://www.forgottenweapons.com/us-...-rifle-manual/
__________________


Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankMo View Post
Almost every poll shows Trump losing very badly, yet poeple still believe some conspiracy. The party p[icked the weakest candidate so they have to own that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom2a View Post
Anything to protect Cheeto. Even though he just signed basically a gun confiscation order.
YES, TDS IS REAL, ORANGE MAN BAD

NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 02-22-2019, 8:26 PM
Freedom_shooter's Avatar
Freedom_shooter Freedom_shooter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Inland Empire / Rancho
Posts: 832
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Califpatriot View Post
SVT-40s have a muzzle brake, right? You really want some idiot in Sacramento deciding that it's actually a flash hider and you have an evil AW?

I don’t recall mentioning concern with the muzzle brake. I mentioned the detachable magazine. Ease up on the coffee.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 02-23-2019, 8:24 AM
joman8390 joman8390 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 10
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

I received the same email from DOJ yesterday asking for photos of my Tula SKS which I submitted to CFARS months ago.

They really are a piece of work!
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02-23-2019, 5:24 PM
Bigdog68 Bigdog68 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 58
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

This debate went somewhere weird. Fact is, I can see why they asked, but also it's not within the letter of the law. We will see, and as was pointed out, after a half dozen C&Rs done in this manner, I got this one kicking back.

Of course, maybe there is no law requiring this, and I can say go p*ss up a rope to the DOJ, but then they could find a reason to yank my COE. That means no more exception from the new ammo laws, no more easy purchase of C&Rs, no more avoiding 10 day waits on C&Rs from dealers, or other exceptions from a variety of things I enjoy as a holder of a COE.

As for dumping the C&R and burning my book, get real, there was a reason to get the C&R, I enjoy the hunt for interesting old firearms. And while I have not done much with it yet, the ability to go out of state is interesting. The 03 license privileges are a 2-way street, the feds don't need to see paperwork on every transaction, but if they ever get around to checking me (probably low odds given real life), I have to be willing to stand an audit. And if I do my bit as an upstanding, law abiding gun owner and 03 holder, I don't have much to fear from the le dudes and dudettes.

One other thing, our basic argument against the "progressive", ignorant AHs who want increasing gun control is that law abiding gun owners are not a threat, so give up trying to shove these laws on us. If we all start giving up on following the laws and ignoring the options that are open to us, then what the heck - start the revolution, who wants to head up the line for the next Lexington/Concord, 2020 version?

Last edited by retired; 02-24-2019 at 11:28 AM..
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 4:33 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.