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 > California handguns
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California handguns Discuss your favorite California handgun technical and related questions here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-14-2005, 12:52 PM
xsquid's Avatar
xsquid xsquid is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: SF Bay area
Posts: 311
iTrader: 35 / 100%
Default

Well it's official - I just got a pre-paid FedEx pack to send my "assualt" pistol back to Smith&Wesson to have the threaded barrel retrofitted so it's not longer in violation of CA laws

Thank you Bill Lockyer!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-14-2005, 1:26 PM
GTKrockeTT's Avatar
GTKrockeTT GTKrockeTT is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Los Angeles County
Posts: 1,958
iTrader: 36 / 100%
Default

did you initiate contact with S&W, if not, how did they know you have a P22?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-14-2005, 1:36 PM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,787
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

I'd bet S&W prob tracks thru their distrib. & dealer links and didn't get info from Cal DOJ.

So the dealer info from 4473/DROS comes from gunshops in dribs & drabs. When they got enough addresses, info etc - that is, they hit some threshold- they decided to kick it in gear.

Bill W
San Jose
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-14-2005, 2:14 PM
ivanimal's Avatar
ivanimal ivanimal is offline
Janitors assistant
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: East Bay
Posts: 13,780
iTrader: 176 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

I just got mine today as well. I dont think they had to look for me it has been back to their factory 3 time already. What is once more? I guess we dont have any recource. I hope it does not change anything in the maechanics, I just got it back in firing order finally after 2 years.
__________________
"I would kill for a Nobel peace prize." Steven Wright"
Board Member CGSSA Donate now!
NRA LIFE MEMBER
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-14-2005, 3:19 PM
PJA PJA is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Emeryville, CA
Posts: 269
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I have moved since buying mine. I wonder if they will be able to find me.
Pete
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-14-2005, 3:26 PM
GTKrockeTT's Avatar
GTKrockeTT GTKrockeTT is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Los Angeles County
Posts: 1,958
iTrader: 36 / 100%
Default

hmm...guess i need to give S&W a ring on the tele.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-14-2005, 3:48 PM
code33 code33 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 967
iTrader: 54 / 100%
Default

So how is the barrel removed on a CA "fixed" P22?
__________________
Disclaimer:
I am not a lawyer. Nothing in my posts should be considered legal advice.

Got ORI?

Front Sight Diamond Member
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-15-2005, 10:13 AM
GTKrockeTT's Avatar
GTKrockeTT GTKrockeTT is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Los Angeles County
Posts: 1,958
iTrader: 36 / 100%
Default

just called S&W, they're sending me out a call tag.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-16-2005, 4:51 PM
Rumpled's Avatar
Rumpled Rumpled is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: OC
Posts: 1,636
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

I just love the way DOJ works.

They approve a pistol, let a bunch of people buy one, decide it shouldn't be approved later and threaten you with prosecution if you aren't inconvenienced by having your pistol superglued to be less than what it was.

They screw up but you will be prosecuted for it.
Makes total sense to me.

I also see that compliance will "protect you from any enforcement action". What happened to 58 DA's may interpret this differently like has been said?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-16-2005, 5:17 PM
PatrickM. PatrickM. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Foster City, CA
Posts: 255
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Honestly.....

The CA DOJ can Kiss my white A#$!!!!!!!!!!

they can send a letter to my old address but they can't find me...

I LIVE IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON!!!!!!!!

ha ha ha ha ha...Bill Lockyer Can't find me!!!

this is so stupid....i hope you CA people will have that guy voted out of office!!!!

PatrickM.
__________________
"No, what you've have are bullets, and the hope that when your guns are empty I will no longer be standing, because if I am you will all be dead before you've reloaded."

V in V for Vendetta
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-16-2005, 5:46 PM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,787
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by PatrickM.:
The CA DOJ can Kiss my white A#$!!!
{...snip...}
this is so stupid....i hope you CA people will have that guy voted out of office!!!!
Irrelevant.

Lockyer is only one guy. He can't pass laws.

Even if we had John Wayne or Rambo for state AG he'd need the state Senate and state Assembly to creat new law to override SB23 assault weapon ban. And the governor would have to sign it.

Bill Wiese
San Jose
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-16-2005, 8:42 PM
imported_booknut imported_booknut is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Humboldt County
Posts: 77
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Haven't gotten my package yet.
I'm trying to decide what course of action I will take here.

I will be writing the Governer to inform him of what's going on.
I will also be contacting our various gun rights orgaizations to see what they are doing about this.

It would be possible for our lawmakers to change the law to allow these pistols to remain in civilian hands the way they originally were made.
__________________
booknut
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-17-2005, 5:21 AM
stator's Avatar
stator stator is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 798
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by bwiese:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PatrickM.:
The CA DOJ can Kiss my white A#$!!!
{...snip...}
this is so stupid....i hope you CA people will have that guy voted out of office!!!!
Irrelevant.

Lockyer is only one guy. He can't pass laws.

Even if we had John Wayne or Rambo for state AG he'd need the state Senate and state Assembly to creat new law to override SB23 assault weapon ban. And the governor would have to sign it.

Bill Wiese
San Jose </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your brain must have farted. Lockyer is the sole person responsible for writing the CA criminal regulations code which is being used to press for this recall. Voting him out of office (elected position) over this does send a strong message to others.
__________________
**
3 Rules of Skeet: Head on the gun, eye on the target, and proper lead
M1a - If you can see it, you can hit it
Friends don't let friends vote demorat
Utah CCW permit holder
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-17-2005, 9:46 AM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,787
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Stator...

Quote:
bwiese wrote:
Irrelevant. Lockyer is only one guy. He can't pass laws.

Even if we had John Wayne or Rambo for state AG he'd need the state Senate and state Assembly to creat new law to override SB23 assault weapon ban. And the governor would have to sign it.
Quote:
Stator wrote:
Your brain must have farted. Lockyer is the sole person responsible for writing the CA criminal regulations code which is being used to press for this recall. Voting him out of office (elected position) over this does send a strong message to others.
My brain may fart and maybe even emits bursts of Denny's- grade diarrhea, but at least I understand the difference between, and subservience of, administrative/regulatory laws vs. statutory laws.

You have failed to understand that Calif DOJ cannot make new law whatsoever and can only make administrative regulatory law that is within the scope of statutory law already present.

The DOJ can offer technical expertise, etc. to realize a statutory law into more detailed regulations but its regulations cannot exceed authority granted by statutory law.

It is completely CLEAR from Calif. law, CPC 12275-12276 that pistols/handguns CANNOT have threaded barrels. Whether or not regulatory law even specifies it, it's black-letter statutory law. He is REQUIRED to enforce it.
The fact that he's not criminally prosecuting people is actually a luxury: simple possession of a P22 could be charged as a felony, no matter how legitimate/good intent the purchase was.

When Lungren unilaterally extended assault weapon registration period in the early 90s to get more reg compliance, he was (successfully) sued by the Brady bunch as exceeding his powers - since that was a decision only the legislature could make: Lungren was determined to have made new law.

And no matter how many guns the DOJ wants (or wants not) to ban, they can't. If the DOJ wants to ban Colt .45s or Jennings 22s the Senate and Assembly have to pass a law and gov has to sign it. If the DOJ wanted to specifically ban AR15-style trapdoor buttstocks on AR15s as yet another 'evil feature' on an assault weapon, they could not do this: this was not listed in the actual CPC 12225-12276 law.

However, DOJ could establish techical standards to determine what is and is not a flash hider - and would consider things like how much optical power reduction? orignal intent - hider or brake? etc. etc. So they do have a bit of determination in figuring 'what is what' but can't go too far overboard. In the Walther P22 case, there was no wiggle room: a threaded bbl is a threaded bbl.

[Frankly, I'm surprised DOJ allowed/approved modded AR15 lowers from GB sales!]

Burecratic agencies of all sorts can run a bit wild when there are gaps, various interpretations in the law, etc. And they do get sued by various parties if they've arrogated themselves 'legislative privilege' (as above).

Again, Lockyer is relatively irrelevant except to maybe degree or extent of enforcement. If there were no SB23 and no Roberti-Roos laws ever passed, he'd have zero gun control leverage. And, again as I say, even if John Wayne were AG, he'd be legally required to enforce AW ban or would be impeached from office.

All our battles belong in the legislative side (and, to some extent, gov's election). If you have to fight a bureacratic agency on minor interpretations of already exsiting statutory law banning something you want, you've already lost 80+% of the battle.

That's not to say you should vote for Lockyer in the next election. But he'll likely be running for Gov, and Jerry Brown will be running for AG, so Lockyer's tenure as AG will be short.

For more information, consult your high school civic textbook on "How a Bill Becomes a Law" and "Separation of Powers". These concepts apply Federally as well as on a state basis.


Bill Wiese
San Jose



For more information, please consult your high school civics
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-17-2005, 12:25 PM
PatrickM. PatrickM. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Foster City, CA
Posts: 255
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
For more information, consult your high school civic textbook on "How a Bill Becomes a Law" and "Separation of Powers". These concepts apply Federally as well as on a state basis.
I am well aware how a law becomes a bill....I have a Degree in Political science, i wanted Lockyer out of office because he advises politicans in sacramento about guns and all gun policies and if he is out of office he is not able to influence gun control policy making in the state. Politicans in Sacramento are so stupid they will believe anything that is said from a "qualified expert source". you guys in CA need to get somebody into the AG office that knows about more than just "evil guns kill people" but that sensable gun control measures work.

thats just my 2 cents...

PatrickM.
__________________
"No, what you've have are bullets, and the hope that when your guns are empty I will no longer be standing, because if I am you will all be dead before you've reloaded."

V in V for Vendetta
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-17-2005, 1:13 PM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,787
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Patrick,

In my last post I was replying to Stator's comments, not yours.

With all the responsibilities of AG office, AG largely has a ceremonial gun control role. The DOJ Firearms Division is a relatively smal part of AG's office - staffing-wise and budget-wise.

And given demographics getting anything but a Democrat into that or gov's office will be a miracle - esp with predecessor Lungren's bible-thumping ways.

Again, most ALL new gun law proposals in CA arise from legislative staff work. In fact anything Lockyer might try to push thru Leg himself may well be rejected since he's seen as positioning himself for a run for Gov. - and some legislators may prefer another Democrat.

Sometimes tech questions may be asked of DOJ Firearms Div. DOJ will probably give reasonably honest answers about tech functioning of weapons: I am sure they've already told Koretz that AB352 is impractical - but does Koretz care??

Bill Wiese
San Jose
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-17-2005, 2:22 PM
PJA PJA is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Emeryville, CA
Posts: 269
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Somebody like Jerry Brown (Governor Moonbeam)?
Pete
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-17-2005, 3:43 PM
PatrickM. PatrickM. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Foster City, CA
Posts: 255
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

sorry about that bweise....i thought you were talking to me!!!!



Patrickm.
__________________
"No, what you've have are bullets, and the hope that when your guns are empty I will no longer be standing, because if I am you will all be dead before you've reloaded."

V in V for Vendetta
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-17-2005, 4:24 PM
Alles Alles is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 24
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

So, if I bought a perfectly legal gun in 2002 and in 2003 the legislature decided it wasn't legal, in 2005 they can:
1) reduce the value of my personal property
2) threaten my liberty (criminalize) me if I don't submit to this whimsical evaluation
...and there's nothing I can do about it?

No fourth amendment, Unreasonable Search & Seizure protections here?
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-17-2005, 4:58 PM
Alles Alles is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 24
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

The gun on the approved list has a short barrel. If mine has the 5" barrel are they just going to amputate it?


Not happy...does it show?
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 04-17-2005, 5:43 PM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,787
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Alles wrote:
So, if I bought a perfectly legal gun in 2002 and in 2003 the legislature decided it wasn't legal, in 2005 they can:
1) reduce the value of my personal property
2) threaten my liberty (criminalize) me if I don't submit to this whimsical evaluation
... and there's nothing I can do about it?

No fourth amendment, Unreasonable Search & Seizure protections here?
If your above statement/question is directly addressing the Walther P22 issue we're discussing here, this gun was illegally imported into CA, illegally sold to owners, illegally approved by DOJ, and is illegally possessed by Californians - since it is an assault weapon. These transactions should not have happened in the first place. There was nothing retroactive about this, and this gun was not in the state before these laws were passed & enacted ('by feature' AW registrations were due by 12/31/00).

I wouldn't have bought a P22 esp upon seeing the threading on the barrel, and if I found out later I'd've returned it to store ASAP for a full refund - including DROS fees etc.

Speaking more generally, the CA legislature can (without, unfortunately, taking broad 2nd Amend. considerations to heart) declare certain types of guns illegal. However, do note that everytime something in CA has been banned
(declared an assault weapon, 50BMG rifle, etc.) there has been a method for existing owners to continue retain their property via registration w/DOJ, or 'unsafe' handguns still transferable via F2F PPT or sold out of state. So there are no seizure issues. In addition, the guns can be sold/inherited out of state, so they are not legally 'dead' items without value.

Other state legislatures attempting to draft AW laws seem to be leaning to a total ban instead of registration with allowance for existing lawful users to retain/register them etc. - that is, a case even WORSE than California's. This may perhaps lead to a good court fight due to deprivation of existing property.

Bill Wiese
San Jose
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 04-17-2005, 5:47 PM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,787
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Alles wrote:
The gun on the approved list has a short barrel. If mine has the 5" barrel are they just going to amputate it?
I believe the orig gun that was actually an illegal AW was nevertheless DOJ approved as a handgun (drop test, etc.) for the barrel length in question. So on just a 'safety test' basis that handgun was legally sold and in your possession. The only reason it was illegal was that it is an assault weapon due threaded barrel.

Since the DOJ is acknowledging its screwup they are not, of course, prosecuting on its AW status. The gun was indeed on the approved list.

You will not have to worry about the 'approved' list - just get the non-AW update and you're good to go.


Bill Wiese
San Jose
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 04-17-2005, 6:42 PM
Alles Alles is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 24
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Bill,
Thanks much for the information. The gun in question is the target version purchased from Traders in San Leandro, December '02. It truly yanks my chain that the state of California fouled up and is exacting it from my gunsafe.

Additionally, I wouldn't mind so much registering it, as I will with another firearm in my possession, however they are confiscating 3/4s of the value with their 'improvement.' Are any of your friends out of state willing to buy a P-22 that has been officially bastardized?

Your input is appreciated, I haven't received my package yet and am exploring my options. If the state fouled up by declaring the gun legal, the state needs to take responsibility. My point is they're the arbitrators of what is and is not legal. So if they failed to perform full and complete checks (feature in addition to drop) that's not the consumers' fault.

Thanks

A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.
--Douglas Adams.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 04-17-2005, 7:33 PM
Alles Alles is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 24
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Ted,
Thanks, but they're eliminating my options to switch back and forth. It's one of the main attractions of this pistol. What do I do with my 3 1/2" barrel? Turn it into a whistle that plays the legislature's whimsical tune?

Thanks

I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.
-Hunter S. Thompson
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 04-17-2005, 9:49 PM
cvela cvela is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 14
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I have to agree with your situation Alles. My wife purchased this gun, after falling in love with it at the gun store, while I was purchasing a p99 .40. The thought it was so "cute," but hey, whatever gets more guns in the house!
Anyway, I purchased a 3.4" barrel for her within a month of the purchase, with the idea of swapping the 5" here and there. Now were going to have a paperweight! Its not our fault! Argh! Might as well send it out of the state, than bastarizing it .
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 04-17-2005, 9:57 PM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,787
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Well if you don't want to 'violate' your gun and make it CA compliant, you generally need to DRIVE the P22 out of state and sell it via an FFL there.

Then, buy a new CA-compliant P22 here.

If you want to ship the violating P22 to an out of state FFL you'd need the services of a CA FFL dealer who also holds a Calif Assault Weapons permit. There are a few: Traders (San Leandro) and a couple others in N. Bay/Contra Costa have these, but they may charge handling fees that make it not worth effort....

HOWEVER, _IF_ the one P22 'evil' feature - the threaded barrel - can readily be removed by yourself without damaging gun, you could ship (by UPS/FedEx) the P22 to an out of state FFL and he could remount the bbl. I would advise shipping the barrel SEPARATELY from the P22. The P22 without its offending threaded bbl is NOT an assault weapon by CA standards.


Bill Wiese
San Jose
Bill Wiese
San Jose
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 04-20-2005, 6:09 PM
s281c s281c is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Bay Area/Alameda County
Posts: 1,278
iTrader: 30 / 100%
Default

well, I got my letter last week, sent the gun out on Friday 4/15, and received the gun back today with the "certificate" of proof that the gun is now compliant.

The certificate is really just a computer generated printout on a cheap piece of paper with no watermark or letterhead, something anyone could print on a laser printer.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 04-20-2005, 9:56 PM
Hank Zudd Hank Zudd is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 15
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

so, what if someone you know happened to have one of these p-22's and the letter from the state, and just moved out with said gun prior to the 45 days lapsing without telling anyone? (I was in the process of moving prior to recieving the package)
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 04-21-2005, 7:39 AM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,787
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

My opinion - and I'm not a lawyer...

The original P22 "assault weapons" are 'by feature' AWs. The evil feature is, of course, a threaded barrel. P22s are not banned by name, etc.

If you're moving/moved out of state, tell 'em to f**k off.

P22 AW owners are under no legal obligation to use S&W to modify/change their P22. They could turn the threads off themselves, have another smith do it, etc.

DOJ has NO idea of the status of your P22. Is it an AW? Did you fix it yourself by turning the threads? etc etc.

And nonresponse to this letter shouldn't be grounds for a search warrant. (But mind your Ps & Qs just the same: this could be fun for the right person to take on DOJ...)

Removal of P22 barrel and keeping them locked separately, or purchasing a new unthreaded bbl should also comply with law - exactly similar to having a FAL clone with a separate pistol grip. Of course you could never assemble/shoot your P22 in CA this way until threaded bbl replaced, but the DOJ can't force you to have a working gun

Bill Wiese
San Jose
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 04-22-2005, 5:33 AM
Hank Zudd Hank Zudd is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 15
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Sorry Ted, forgot to add, I'm moving out of state.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 05-04-2005, 12:12 PM
ivanimal's Avatar
ivanimal ivanimal is offline
Janitors assistant
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: East Bay
Posts: 13,780
iTrader: 176 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Here is a picture of my newly modified pistol. It looks as though they used the super glue method and a non wrenchable cap. I believe you could just remove it with some force and a good pair of vice grips if you were so inclined. That of course would be in violation of the law. I am just saying how it looks. I obviously would never do that, as long as I have it in this state. The fact that I sent it to them in the first place shows you how far I would go to be compliant to this nanny state and their foolish laws. What I am saying is that a person who does not care about the law could easily make this as it was, with the most basic of tools. I feel silly owning this weapon.

__________________
"I would kill for a Nobel peace prize." Steven Wright"
Board Member CGSSA Donate now!
NRA LIFE MEMBER
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 05-04-2005, 6:22 PM
imported_kantstudien imported_kantstudien is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 52
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by bwiese:
Removal of P22 barrel and keeping them locked separately, or purchasing a new unthreaded bbl should also comply with law - exactly similar to having a FAL clone with a separate pistol grip. Of course you could never assemble/shoot your P22 in CA this way until threaded bbl replaced, but the DOJ can't force you to have a working gun

Bill Wiese
San Jose
Actually, I do not believe separating the upper and the lower would be legal because one cannot even possess a threaded pistol barrel in California. It would be like owning an unregistered AR lower that was dissassembled, it would still be illegal. It would have to have the threads removed, be destroyed, or else shipped out of state if the modification is not done. Correct me if I am wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 05-05-2005, 9:05 PM
Bruce's Avatar
Bruce Bruce is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,123
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Alles:
The gun on the approved list has a short barrel. If mine has the 5" barrel are they just going to amputate it?


Not happy...does it show?
The 5" is on the list. Expires 09/22/2005...
__________________
GOD SAVE THE UNITED STATES!
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 05-05-2005, 11:42 PM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,787
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by kantstudien:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bwiese:
Removal of P22 barrel and keeping them locked separately, or purchasing a new unthreaded bbl should also comply with law - exactly similar to having a FAL clone with a separate pistol grip. Of course you could never assemble/shoot your P22 in CA this way until threaded bbl replaced, but the DOJ can't force you to have a working gun

Bill Wiese
San Jose
Actually, I do not believe separating the upper and the lower would be legal because one cannot even possess a threaded pistol barrel in California. It would be like owning an unregistered AR lower that was dissassembled, it would still be illegal. It would have to have the threads removed, be destroyed, or else shipped out of state if the modification is not done. Correct me if I am wrong. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There is no law anywhere in CA or Fed law that bans possession of a threaded barrel - nor pistol grip, nor flash hider, etc., etc. Also, threaded barrels are an 'evil feature' for pistols only.

[You might be confusing this w/the Fed short barrel issue, where if the barrel is under 16", it had better have its muzzle brake or flash hider permanently pinned/welded on to bring length up to a 16" minimum. The BATF holds that possession of a less-than-16" AR upper with an AR lower is illegal even if detached, (unless one owns an AR pistol in his mix). This craziness is not necessarily due to Fed gun law but due to the Nat'l Firearms Act of 1934 being tax law.]

Calif. DOJ Firearms has said on their FAQ on their website (and in direct conversation with their senior managers at at a recent Calif NRA Members' Council meeting in San Jose) that removing certain evil features from an AW makes it no longer an AW even if registered as one.

So, if you have a P22 or HK USP Tactical with a threaded barrel, you can remove & replace bbl with a plain one and you are in compliance. And you can still retain the barrel separately.

(Similarly, one can have an Entreprise FAL clone, for example, that does not have a pistol grip.)

Again I'd be slightly cautious travelling with these items together (FAL + separate pistol grip; P22 w/separate bbl, etc.) I'd keep the evil feature locked away - and ideally not transited with at same time - from the gun so that a local DA wouldn't have raised hairs about this.

Bill Wiese
San Jose
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 05-07-2005, 5:40 PM
imported_EOD Guy imported_EOD Guy is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Concord, CA
Posts: 87
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I just got my box today. All that was in the envelope was the letter and a box. I checked with Fedex and they said it would cost me $38.00 to ship it to S&W. How are they going to reimburse me or do I have to eat the cost?
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 05-07-2005, 6:12 PM
imported_TMC imported_TMC is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Antioch, CA
Posts: 57
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by EOD Guy:
I just got my box today. All that was in the envelope was the letter and a box. I checked with Fedex and they said it would cost me $38.00 to ship it to S&W. How are they going to reimburse me or do I have to eat the cost?
Mine came on Friday with a label for shipping, no cost to me as far as I can tell.

The declared value is only $100.00 How about that, not only due they devalue my gun becasue now I can't change barrels but if its lost they'll only pay me $100!
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 05-08-2005, 2:43 AM
ivanimal's Avatar
ivanimal ivanimal is offline
Janitors assistant
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: East Bay
Posts: 13,780
iTrader: 176 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

I had an issue with the declared value as well but sent it any ways. I figured they could relace it if lost. Call S and W with any questions regarding shipping they will assure you of your transaction. It sux but I dont need headaches.
__________________
"I would kill for a Nobel peace prize." Steven Wright"
Board Member CGSSA Donate now!
NRA LIFE MEMBER
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 05-08-2005, 7:09 AM
imported_EOD Guy imported_EOD Guy is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Concord, CA
Posts: 87
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

There was no label in the envelope I received. All that was in there was a box, the DOJ letter, and the instruction list. I guess I'll have to call S&W on Monday.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 05-11-2005, 3:08 PM
96eunos 96eunos is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 3
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Here's a question for anyone before I call the AG's office:

I have the letter and the shipping box. The Pistol, however is at my second home out of state, where I intended that it stay, or maybe get sold.

Do I have to bring it back to be in compliance, or can I fill out the form stating that the pistol no longer resides in California (and neither will I in a couple of years)?

TIA
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 05-11-2005, 4:20 PM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,787
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by 96eunos:
I have the letter and the shipping box. The Pistol, however is at my second home out of state, where I intended that it stay, or maybe get sold.

Do I have to bring it back to be in compliance, or can I fill out the form stating that the pistol no longer resides in California (and neither will I in a couple of years)?
No matter what Cal DOJ says, you do NOT have to bring the gun back into the state and modify it.
There is no law prohibiting you from owning/possessing a P22 in another (free) state, and CA can't tell you what to do in that other state: CA AW laws only specify that you can't possess evil guns within CA. All you have to do is never bring P22 into CA again after 45 days are up.

The folks issuing letters at Cal DOJ never prob thought of 'people like us' storing guns out of state - we'd either modify it or sell it, they think.

So send 'em a letter telling 'em it's out of state and will never reenter CA, and that Cal DOJ cannot regulate ownership outside CA.

Bill Wiese
San Jose
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
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 11:33 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, 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 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.