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 > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1121  
Old 05-23-2012, 12:25 PM
ke6guj's Avatar
ke6guj ke6guj is offline
Moderator
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 909
Posts: 23,317
iTrader: 42 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by winnre View Post
I recommend an amendment for Firearms specifically.
that would work, having the existing A-B trust amended to have specific Firearms language in it, but it seems that most of the attorneys that offer NFA trusts recommend that you set a separate trust for just your NFA stuff. Remember that you have to send in a copy of your complete trust to ATF everytime you want another stamp. Does ATF (and your local NFA dealer that is processing the transfer) need to know about your non-firearms-related trust specifics? And there are other reasons why separating fireams assets from other assets would be beneficial. But those are questions that are best answered by a trust attorney.
__________________
Jack



Do you want an AOW or C&R SBS/SBR in CA?

FrontSight Training Course certificates available $25, PM for details on them and other options.
No posts of mine are to be construed as legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #1122  
Old 05-23-2012, 11:05 PM
Notorious's Avatar
Notorious Notorious is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,487
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

The biggest pitfall of using a normal trust instrument is the specifics of NFA law and inadvertent actions which may land your beneficiaries or trustees in trouble when you are gone, such as transportation or subsequent transfer issues.

Personally, I think it's not that big of a deal to overcome as long as you do your due diligence in the trust instrument to take care of those eventualities... but hey, it's a niche market that some attorneys live on, so making it technical and specific is their livelihood. Every area of law is like that, with tons of lawyers making tons of issues out of every nuance so they can make a living. It's just how the system works.
__________________
Guns! More guns! I need more guns!
Reply With Quote
  #1123  
Old 05-24-2012, 7:11 AM
hammerhead_77 hammerhead_77 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 253
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I can see that there could be survivor-ship issues....but those would be rather easily addressed by me putting a letter with instructions into the trust that I have. The info is important, but not so much that it need be a structural part of the trust. "Be sure to contact a reputable NFA firearms dealer before trying to sell or transfer any of these weapons"...should pretty much cover it. My executor is a firearms instructor and armorer with DHS.

If I end up getting more than one (as in, I move to a free state some day) then I could certainly see a dedicated trust. I am trying to weigh the relative risks versus the cost if I only get one...especially since the decision is between a KelTec KSG and a AOW breaching gun.

Thanks much for the advice!! I'd say the net of it so far is "legally you are OK, but for serious NFA use you may want to keep it separate."
__________________

Be kind. Remember to spay and neuter liberals.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt-45 View Post
Argue with me all you want but the "pussification" of America is not a positive thing.
Reply With Quote
  #1124  
Old 05-24-2012, 7:32 AM
Notorious's Avatar
Notorious Notorious is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,487
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Don't forget, the mortgages of many NFA attorneys depend on you and the cloud of mystery lying over the whole NFA trust thing.
__________________
Guns! More guns! I need more guns!
Reply With Quote
  #1125  
Old 05-24-2012, 9:22 AM
hammerhead_77 hammerhead_77 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 253
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

yeah...well...um...
My ability to buy really cool toys and not end up paying alimony depends on making sound cost-vs-risk decisions. Oh, and getting ammo bulk.

$600 trust + AOW = hard to explain

AOW + $5 form 4 stamp = she's happy = I'm
__________________

Be kind. Remember to spay and neuter liberals.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt-45 View Post
Argue with me all you want but the "pussification" of America is not a positive thing.
Reply With Quote
  #1126  
Old 05-24-2012, 9:35 AM
winnre's Avatar
winnre winnre is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IE, Southern CA
Posts: 9,223
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

$200 trust for me.
__________________
"If Jesus had a gun he would be alive today"-Homer Simpson
Reply With Quote
  #1127  
Old 05-24-2012, 10:12 AM
Notorious's Avatar
Notorious Notorious is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,487
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by winnre View Post
$200 trust for me.
Not bad. For $200, I might just do it. Too lazy to figure it out myself. Got a recommendation?
__________________
Guns! More guns! I need more guns!
Reply With Quote
  #1128  
Old 05-24-2012, 11:09 AM
winnre's Avatar
winnre winnre is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IE, Southern CA
Posts: 9,223
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

I used the one recommended by the AOW dealer. Your dealer may have references too.
__________________
"If Jesus had a gun he would be alive today"-Homer Simpson
Reply With Quote
  #1129  
Old 05-25-2012, 10:09 AM
Notorious's Avatar
Notorious Notorious is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,487
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

You have a reference?
__________________
Guns! More guns! I need more guns!
Reply With Quote
  #1130  
Old 05-25-2012, 3:07 PM
winnre's Avatar
winnre winnre is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IE, Southern CA
Posts: 9,223
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

The guy I use was referred to me by OC Armory.
__________________
"If Jesus had a gun he would be alive today"-Homer Simpson
Reply With Quote
  #1131  
Old 05-26-2012, 11:50 AM
Notorious's Avatar
Notorious Notorious is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,487
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Which guy?
__________________
Guns! More guns! I need more guns!
Reply With Quote
  #1132  
Old 05-26-2012, 2:39 PM
winnre's Avatar
winnre winnre is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IE, Southern CA
Posts: 9,223
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Notorious View Post
Which guy?
It was years ago and I only saw him once and don't remember his name. Just call OC Armory, tell them you want an AOW and need to do the trust first and do they have a guy they can recommend.
__________________
"If Jesus had a gun he would be alive today"-Homer Simpson
Reply With Quote
  #1133  
Old 05-26-2012, 9:17 PM
Notorious's Avatar
Notorious Notorious is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,487
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Thanks.
__________________
Guns! More guns! I need more guns!
Reply With Quote
  #1134  
Old 06-06-2012, 1:40 PM
CK_32's Avatar
CK_32 CK_32 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Orange County
Posts: 14,284
iTrader: 37 / 100%
Default

Good read thank you
__________________
For Sale: 40 S&W Bullet Case Valve Stem Caps

What's Your Caliber??


My Youtube channel
Reply With Quote
  #1135  
Old 07-05-2012, 9:04 PM
lorax3's Avatar
lorax3 lorax3 is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Santa Clara
Posts: 4,561
iTrader: 36 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Was the consensus CA would still allow a registered AOW to fall under the AOW exemption to the SBS restrictions, even when it no longer meets the definition of an AOW? (E.g. Judge with VFG removed).

Quote:
17710. (a) The provisions listed in Section 16590 do not apply to
"any other weapon" as defined in subsection (e) of Section 5845 of
Title 26 of the United States Code, which is in the possession of a
person permitted to possess the weapons under the federal Gun Control
Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-618), as amended, and the regulations
issued pursuant thereto.
The CA code is not very specific, both your letter and the new letter indicate an AOW will retain its status as an AOW even with certain configuration changes.

If the ATF really sticks to its logic on multiple Title II classifications, could be a way into SBS/SBRs in CA. Although a new letter with different answers makes that a dangerous game. I'd be curious to see if a MG stamp is still all holy, or now requires an SBR stamp too.
__________________
You think you know, but you have no idea.

If you live in San Diego Please read this thread and apply now to obtain your San Diego License to Carry (CCW).

The information posted herein is not legal advice. If you seek legal advice contact an attorney who is familiar with all the facts of your case.

Last edited by lorax3; 07-05-2012 at 9:06 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #1136  
Old 07-05-2012, 9:14 PM
Ubermcoupe's Avatar
Ubermcoupe Ubermcoupe is offline
★ Junior G Man ✈
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: This information has been redacted in accordance with Title 18 USC Section 798
Posts: 12,681
iTrader: 52 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lorax3 View Post
Was the consensus CA would still allow a registered AOW to fall under the AOW exemption to the SBS restrictions, even when it no longer meets the definition of an AOW? (E.g. Judge with VFG removed).



The CA code is not very specific, both your letter and the new letter indicate an AOW will retain its status as an AOW even with certain configuration changes.

If the ATF really sticks to its logic on multiple Title II classifications, could be a way into SBS/SBRs in CA. Although a new letter with different answers makes that a dangerous game. I'd be curious to see if a MG stamp is still all holy, or now requires an SBR stamp too.
Interesting idea but would this be limited to C&R SBS/SBRs? or could one AOW a modern SBS/SBR?
__________________
Hauoli Makahiki Hou


-------
Reply With Quote
  #1137  
Old 07-05-2012, 9:21 PM
winnre's Avatar
winnre winnre is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IE, Southern CA
Posts: 9,223
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

How can a Judge be a SBS when it has no shoulder stock?
__________________
"If Jesus had a gun he would be alive today"-Homer Simpson
Reply With Quote
  #1138  
Old 07-05-2012, 9:30 PM
Lagduf Lagduf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Placer County
Posts: 676
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by winnre View Post
How can a Judge be a SBS when it has no shoulder stock?
The California definition of a Short Barreled Shotgun differs from the Federal definition. CA, as usual, is more restrictive.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gio
It is so nice to drop mags freely even though I do that now with my featureless AR and AK it is not the same as the real thing. Like Coca Cola here in the US compared to Mexico with real sugar not corn syrup!
Reply With Quote
  #1139  
Old 07-05-2012, 9:32 PM
ke6guj's Avatar
ke6guj ke6guj is offline
Moderator
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 909
Posts: 23,317
iTrader: 42 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by winnre View Post
How can a Judge be a SBS when it has no shoulder stock?
because CA law does not require a firearm to be a shotgun before it can be considered an SBS. Since it is a firearm that can shoot a fixed shotgun shell and is <26" OAL with a barrel <18", it meets the CA definition of an SBS, even though it was never a shotgun.
__________________
Jack



Do you want an AOW or C&R SBS/SBR in CA?

FrontSight Training Course certificates available $25, PM for details on them and other options.
No posts of mine are to be construed as legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #1140  
Old 07-05-2012, 9:47 PM
lorax3's Avatar
lorax3 lorax3 is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Santa Clara
Posts: 4,561
iTrader: 36 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ubermcoupe View Post
Interesting idea but would this be limited to C&R SBS/SBRs? or could one AOW a modern SBS/SBR?
Well, CA says they will exempt you from having an illegal SBS, so long as it is an AOW under federal law.

Quote:
17710. (a) The provisions listed in Section 16590 do not apply to
"any other weapon" as defined in subsection (e) of Section 5845 of
Title 26 of the United States Code, which is in the possession of a
person permitted to possess the weapons under the federal Gun Control
Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-618), as amended, and the regulations
issued pursuant thereto.
Before the most recent letter, firearms within Title II fell under a single classification. For instance, if you had an AOW, and added a stock, it could no longer be an AOW. The "once a rifle, always a rifle" doctrine kicked in, and that firearm would forever be an SBS (unless it became a DD or a machinegun).

The most recent letter seems to indicate a firearm can go from an AOW to SBS back to an AOW, while still retaining its AOW status. The letter also indicates you would need to retain two stamps to make this transition.

Previously, there was no way in CA to go from an AOW to a modern SBS/SBR, because once you added the stock it would lose the ability to be an AOW. Since it was no longer an AOW, it no longer met the CA AOW exemption to being exempt from the laws against illegal SBS/SBRs.

Now, if a firearm could remain an AOW federally, it would retain its CA exemption to the SBS/SBR laws. So if a firearm is first registered as an AOW, and can be subsequently be registered federally as SBS while retaining its AOW status, CA would still exempt you from calling it an illegal SBS.

Franklin Armory mentioned in another thread you may still need a CA Dangerous Weapons Permit, however I think a DWP is just another exemption to 12020 [now 33210PC]. And if you are already exempted from that section under the AOW loophole [17710 PC] then I do not believe a DWP is required.

The question remains if the AOW exemption in CA applies to registered AOW's, or firearms in AOW configuration + registation. If mere AOW registration is enough I see no reason modern SBS/SBR's would be prohibited. That is until the ATF changes its mind and you have a multiple felonies to answer to

Paging ke6guj....
__________________
You think you know, but you have no idea.

If you live in San Diego Please read this thread and apply now to obtain your San Diego License to Carry (CCW).

The information posted herein is not legal advice. If you seek legal advice contact an attorney who is familiar with all the facts of your case.

Last edited by lorax3; 07-05-2012 at 9:53 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #1141  
Old 07-05-2012, 9:55 PM
ke6guj's Avatar
ke6guj ke6guj is offline
Moderator
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 909
Posts: 23,317
iTrader: 42 / 100%
Default

it makes sense to me.

ATF told me that if I had an AOW and temporarily removed the AOW feature and went back to a Title 1 configuration, that it was still considered to be an AOW, even when not currently in an AOW configuration. And since the feds still considred it to be an AOW, then the AOW exemption to CA's SBS law should still apply.

Now, whether or not that would work with AOW>SBS>AOW, I dunno.
__________________
Jack



Do you want an AOW or C&R SBS/SBR in CA?

FrontSight Training Course certificates available $25, PM for details on them and other options.
No posts of mine are to be construed as legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #1142  
Old 07-05-2012, 10:03 PM
Ubermcoupe's Avatar
Ubermcoupe Ubermcoupe is offline
★ Junior G Man ✈
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: This information has been redacted in accordance with Title 18 USC Section 798
Posts: 12,681
iTrader: 52 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

My current confusion lies with what would go from an AOW to SBS federally, yet retain AOW status in CA.

Using the Judge example previously, the Fed doesn’t consider that an SBS, just a normal revolver - so in CA it would be an SBS, yet exempted if reg’d as an AOW federally.

But once you add a stock it would no longer be an AOW federally ...

WAIT: So AOW in CA (say an 870), then (attempt to) From 1 it federally. IF the Fed approved the From1, mount a stock and one would have just successfully reg’d an SBS federally, which is exempt to CA33210PC, thus having a LEGAL SBS?

Please edit my post if I’ve said too much.
__________________
Hauoli Makahiki Hou


-------
Reply With Quote
  #1143  
Old 07-05-2012, 10:13 PM
lorax3's Avatar
lorax3 lorax3 is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Santa Clara
Posts: 4,561
iTrader: 36 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ubermcoupe View Post
So AOW in CA (say an 870), then (attempt to) From 1 it federally. IF the Fed approved the From1, mount a stock and one would have just successfully reg’d an SBS federally, which is exempt to CA33210PC, thus having a LEGAL SBS?
Yes, basically.

Someone who currently has an AOW could file a form 1 for an SBS/SBR and attach both the previous ATF letter about AOW>SBS>AOW, and a letter with the various CA exemptions just to see if it gets approved.

Any takers? If you were denied the SBR/SBS stamp, you will get your $200 back.

I'd like to take an AR Pistol with a VFG to see if they will approve an SBR. Gets a little tricky with pistol tubes and such but it might work.
__________________
You think you know, but you have no idea.

If you live in San Diego Please read this thread and apply now to obtain your San Diego License to Carry (CCW).

The information posted herein is not legal advice. If you seek legal advice contact an attorney who is familiar with all the facts of your case.
Reply With Quote
  #1144  
Old 07-05-2012, 10:15 PM
Ubermcoupe's Avatar
Ubermcoupe Ubermcoupe is offline
★ Junior G Man ✈
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: This information has been redacted in accordance with Title 18 USC Section 798
Posts: 12,681
iTrader: 52 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lorax3 View Post
Yes, basically.

Someone who currently has an AOW could file a form 1 for an SBS/SBR and attach both the previous ATF letter about AOW>SBS>AOW, and a letter with the various CA exemptions just to see if it gets approved.

Any takers? If you were denied the SBR/SBS stamp, you will get your $200 back.

I'd like to take an AR Pistol with a VFG to see if they will approve an SBR. Gets a little tricky with pistol tubes and such but it might work.
I’d do it, but I don’t have an AOW.

It would be interesting if the ATF just saw the paperwork and went “AOW to SBS? Approved!"
__________________
Hauoli Makahiki Hou


-------
Reply With Quote
  #1145  
Old 07-05-2012, 10:21 PM
mag360 mag360 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 5,037
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

oooooooo now i want an aow haha. although don't the AOW AR 'pistols' still require a bullet button?
__________________
just happy to be here. I like talking about better ways to protect ourselves.

Shop at AMAZON to help Calguns Foundation

CRPA Life Member. Click here to Join.

NRA Member JOIN HERE/
Reply With Quote
  #1146  
Old 07-05-2012, 10:29 PM
Ubermcoupe's Avatar
Ubermcoupe Ubermcoupe is offline
★ Junior G Man ✈
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: This information has been redacted in accordance with Title 18 USC Section 798
Posts: 12,681
iTrader: 52 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mag360 View Post
oooooooo now i want an aow haha. although don't the AOW AR 'pistols' still require a bullet button?
Yes, but with an AOW, you could apply to the ATF for an SBR (on a Form 1) and if granted, it would be exempt from the CA-AWB.

See below...
__________________
Hauoli Makahiki Hou


-------

Last edited by Ubermcoupe; 07-05-2012 at 11:29 PM.. Reason: Opps... :)
Reply With Quote
  #1147  
Old 07-05-2012, 10:38 PM
lorax3's Avatar
lorax3 lorax3 is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Santa Clara
Posts: 4,561
iTrader: 36 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ubermcoupe View Post
Yes, but with an AOW, you could apply to the ATF for an SBR (on a Form 1) and if granted, it would be exempt from the CA-AWB.
Even an approved SBR is not exempt from CA Assault Weapon provisions. Makes my above example with an SBR off an AR Pistol a little complicated.
__________________
You think you know, but you have no idea.

If you live in San Diego Please read this thread and apply now to obtain your San Diego License to Carry (CCW).

The information posted herein is not legal advice. If you seek legal advice contact an attorney who is familiar with all the facts of your case.
Reply With Quote
  #1148  
Old 07-05-2012, 10:41 PM
Calm Down Calm Down is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 324
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ke6guj View Post
because CA law does not require a firearm to be a shotgun before it can be considered an SBS. Since it is a firearm that can shoot a fixed shotgun shell and is <26" OAL with a barrel <18", it meets the CA definition of an SBS, even though it was never a shotgun.
Is there case law to support the opinion that the Judge is illegal? I know of one arrest for possession of a Judge; however the DA declined to pursue the SBS charge but pursued others. I’m of the opinion that .410 chambered pistols are legal. I’m willing to change my opinion if someone can cite a case where it was deemed a SBS.
Reply With Quote
  #1149  
Old 07-05-2012, 10:43 PM
ke6guj's Avatar
ke6guj ke6guj is offline
Moderator
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 909
Posts: 23,317
iTrader: 42 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lorax3 View Post
Yes, basically.

Someone who currently has an AOW could file a form 1 for an SBS/SBR and attach both the previous ATF letter about AOW>SBS>AOW, and a letter with the various CA exemptions just to see if it gets approved.

Any takers? If you were denied the SBR/SBS stamp, you will get your $200 back.

I'd like to take an AR Pistol with a VFG to see if they will approve an SBR. Gets a little tricky with pistol tubes and such but it might work.
my luck would be that they would approve it then, after I tossed a stock on it, they'd send a recall on the SBS Form 1 and then say that it couldn't go back to AOW, that it was contraband.

And ATF has done stuff like that in the past. A guy sent in an MG form 1 on a lark a couple years ago and they approved it. The guy realized that that wasn't supposed to happen and made some calls before he actually put the go-fast hole in his AR lower. ATF then realized what they had done and full-court pressed him to get the Form 1 back. If he had actually drilled the lower, it would have gone bye-bye.
__________________
Jack



Do you want an AOW or C&R SBS/SBR in CA?

FrontSight Training Course certificates available $25, PM for details on them and other options.
No posts of mine are to be construed as legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #1150  
Old 07-05-2012, 10:46 PM
ke6guj's Avatar
ke6guj ke6guj is offline
Moderator
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 909
Posts: 23,317
iTrader: 42 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calm Down View Post
Is there case law to support the opinion that the Judge is illegal? I know of one arrest for possession of a Judge; however the DA declined to pursue the SBS charge but pursued others. I’m of the opinion that .410 chambered pistols are legal. I’m willing to change my opinion if someone can cite a case where it was deemed a SBS.
I can only point that the letter of the law that says that a stock Judge is illegal. I don't have any access to case law for rulings on the Judge or other .410 handguns. I'd guess that there might be some cases with regards to .45/.410 derringers, and maybe some for the .45/.410 Thompson Contender barrels.


Why do you thin that a .410 pistol is legal even though a .410 shell would meet the common definition of a fixed shotgun shell and it is chambered in a firearm that has a barrel <18" and an OAL <26"?

As you know, the DA has discression. I can point to a case where the defendant had a Thompson Contender assembled with a shoulder stock and a 14" barrel (a definite SBR) and the DA dismissed the charges. Tht doesn't mean that it wasn't an SBR, just that the charges were dropped.
__________________
Jack



Do you want an AOW or C&R SBS/SBR in CA?

FrontSight Training Course certificates available $25, PM for details on them and other options.
No posts of mine are to be construed as legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.

Last edited by ke6guj; 07-05-2012 at 10:49 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #1151  
Old 07-05-2012, 10:58 PM
Quiet's Avatar
Quiet Quiet is offline
short bus driver
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: the 909
Posts: 18,712
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

In the past...
BATFE NFA Branch stated AOW -> SBS = SBS, no longer considered an AOW


Also, if the applicant is a CA resident, BATFE NFA Branch will not approve a Form 1 or Form 4 for a SBR or SBS, unless the applicant also has a valid CA DOJ BOF Dangerous Weapons Permit for a SBR/SBS. And the BATFE will not approve the transport of a SBR/SBS into CA, unless the applicant has a valid CA DOJ BOF Dangerous Weapons Permit for a SBR/SBS.
__________________


"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.” - Dalai Lama (Seattle Times, 05-15-2001).
Reply With Quote
  #1152  
Old 07-05-2012, 11:05 PM
Calm Down Calm Down is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 324
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ke6guj View Post
I can only point that the letter of the law that says that a stock Judge is illegal. I don't have any access to case law for rulings on the Judge or other .410 handguns. I'd guess that there might be some cases with regards to .45/.410 derringers, and maybe some for the .45/.410 Thompson Contender barrels.


Why do you thin that a .410 pistol is legal even though a .410 shell would meet the common definition of a fixed shotgun shell and it is chambered in a firearm that has a barrel <18" and an OAL <26"?

As you know, the DA has discression. I can point to a case where the defendant had a Thompson Contender assembled with a shoulder stock and a 14" barrel (a definite SBR) and the DA dismissed the charges. Tht doesn't mean that it wasn't an SBR, just that the charges were dropped.
I formed my opinion well before the arrest even occoured. The DA's lack of pursuing the charge played no part in forming my opinion. I formed my opinion based on the fact there is no defination of "shotgun shell". Some people have said there does not need to be a legal defination for everything but I'll point out that .50BMG has been defined, detachable magazine has been defined and protruding pistol grip has been defined. Where there's ambiguity in the law; a defination should be made.

We must isolate the only two sections of code that utilize the exact verbiage "shotgun shell". The only sections I am aware of are the California Penal Code and the United States Code definitions of "destructive devices" Each code specifically mentions a "shotgun" or "shotgun shell" as being exempt from being destructive devices though they are greater than .50" (fed) and .60" (state). By specifically exempting a shotgun and shotgun shell under these sections; one could argue that only firearms with bores greater than .50" and .60" can be considered shotguns unless they have smooth bores.



17180 PC: As used in this section, a "short-barreled shotgun" means any of the following:

(A) A firearm which is designed or redesigned to fire a fixed shotgun shell and having a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length.
(B) A firearm which has an overall length of less than 26 inches and which is designed or redesigned to fire a fixed shotgun shell.

(C) Any weapon made from a shotgun (whether by alteration, modification, or otherwise) if that weapon, as modified, has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length.

(D) Any device which may be readily restored to fire a fixed shotgun shell which, when so restored, is a device defined in subparagraphs (A) to (C), inclusive.
(E) Any part, or combination of parts, designed and intended to convert a device into a device defined in subparagraphs (A) to (C), inclusive, or any combination of parts from which a device defined in subparagraphs (A) to (C), inclusive, can be readily assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person.



16460 PC



(a) As used in Sections 16510, 16520, and 16780, and in
Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 18710) of Division 5 of Title 2,
"destructive device" includes any of the following weapons:
(1) Any projectile containing any explosive or incendiary material
or any other chemical substance, including, but not limited to, that
which is commonly known as tracer or incendiary ammunition, except
tracer ammunition manufactured for use in shotguns.
(2) Any bomb, grenade, explosive missile, or similar device or any
launching device therefor.
(3) Any weapon of a caliber greater than 0.60 caliber which fires
fixed ammunition, or any ammunition therefor, other than a shotgun
(smooth or rifled bore) conforming to the definition of a
"destructive device" found in subsection (b) of Section 479.11 of
Title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations, shotgun ammunition
(single projectile or shot), antique rifle, or an antique cannon.
(4) Any rocket, rocket-propelled projectile, or similar device of
a diameter greater than 0.60 inch, or any launching device therefor,
and any rocket, rocket-propelled projectile, or similar device
containing any explosive or incendiary material or any other chemical
substance, other than the propellant for that device, except those
devices as are designed primarily for emergency or distress signaling
purposes.
(5) Any breakable container that contains a flammable liquid with
a flashpoint of 150 degrees Fahrenheit or less and has a wick or
similar device capable of being ignited, other than a device which is
commercially manufactured primarily for the purpose of illumination.
(6) Any sealed device containing dry ice (CO2) or other chemically
reactive substances assembled for the purpose of causing an
explosion by a chemical reaction.
(b) A bullet containing or carrying an explosive agent is not a
destructive device as that term is used in subdivision (a).



U.S.C. Title 26 Section 5845, we see the definition:

(d) Shotgun
The term “shotgun” means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed shotgun shell to fire through a smooth bore either a number of projectiles (ball shot) or a single projectile for each pull of the trigger, and shall include any such weapon which may be readily restored to fire a fixed shotgun shell.

18 USC 921

(f) Destructive device
The term “destructive device” means
(1) any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas
(A) bomb,
(B) grenade,
(C) rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces,
(D) missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce,
(E) mine, or
(F) similar device;
(2) any type of weapon by whatever name known which will, or which may be readily converted to, expel a projectile by the action of an explosive or other propellant, the barrel or barrels of which have a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter, except a shotgun or shotgun shell which the Secretary finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes;
and
(3) any combination of parts either designed or intended for use in converting any device into a destructive device as defined in subparagraphs (1) and (2) and from which a destructive device may be readily assembled. The term “destructive device” shall not include any device which is neither designed nor redesigned for use as a weapon; any device, although originally designed for use as a weapon, which is redesigned for use as a signaling, pyrotechnic, line throwing, safety, or similar device; surplus ordnance sold, loaned, or given by the Secretary of the Army pursuant to the provisions of section 4684 (2), 4685, or 4686 of title 10 of the United States Code; or any other device which the Secretary finds is not likely to be used as a weapon, or is an antique or is a rifle which the owner intends to use solely for sporting purposes.

18 USC 921

By specifically identifying shotguns and shotgun shells in The California Penal Code and in federal code as having a diameter in excess of ½ inch, but allowing an exemption to be made if they are suitable for sporting purposes; only firearms or shot shells with a diameter in excess of ½ inch are applicable.


My opinion is this: A .410 shot shell fired from a pistol/ handgun is not a short-barreled shotgun because the diameter of the bore is not in excess of ½ inch.
Reply With Quote
  #1153  
Old 07-05-2012, 11:07 PM
ke6guj's Avatar
ke6guj ke6guj is offline
Moderator
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 909
Posts: 23,317
iTrader: 42 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quiet View Post
In the past...
BATFE NFA Branch stated AOW -> SBS = SBS, no longer considered an AOW


Also, if the applicant is a CA resident, BATFE NFA Branch will not approve a Form 1 or Form 4 for a SBR or SBS, unless the applicant also has a valid CA DOJ BOF Dangerous Weapons Permit for a SBR/SBS. And the BATFE will not approve the transport of a SBR/SBS into CA, unless the applicant has a valid CA DOJ BOF Dangerous Weapons Permit for a SBR/SBS.
or has some other exemption to CA's SBx laws. If ATF says that an AOW temporarily modified into an SBS is also allowed to maintain its AOW regstration, then that might be able to still be used as an exemtion to CA's SBx law without there needing to be a DW permit.
__________________
Jack



Do you want an AOW or C&R SBS/SBR in CA?

FrontSight Training Course certificates available $25, PM for details on them and other options.
No posts of mine are to be construed as legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #1154  
Old 07-05-2012, 11:11 PM
ke6guj's Avatar
ke6guj ke6guj is offline
Moderator
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 909
Posts: 23,317
iTrader: 42 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calm Down View Post


My opinion is this: A .410 shot shell fired from a pistol/ handgun is not a short-barreled shotgun because the diameter of the bore is not in excess of ½ inch.
I see where you are going with this. If that was the case, then we'd be able to build full-on .410 SBS's in CA. .410 870 with a shoulder stock, just need ATF SBS Form 1, no need for a CADOJ DW permit.



I'd suggest that the case law searches include .410 derringers and .410 barreled T/C pistols. I'm seem t orecall hearing about some convictions for some of those, expecially the .410 T/C pistols.
__________________
Jack



Do you want an AOW or C&R SBS/SBR in CA?

FrontSight Training Course certificates available $25, PM for details on them and other options.
No posts of mine are to be construed as legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #1155  
Old 07-05-2012, 11:13 PM
lorax3's Avatar
lorax3 lorax3 is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Santa Clara
Posts: 4,561
iTrader: 36 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calm Down View Post
Is there case law to support the opinion that the Judge is illegal?
A path I would not go down. The definition is clear, and there is a 9th circuit case that mentioned a Taurus Judge is designed to fire both .45 Colt and .410, although is examining the Judge on different merits.

Quote:
17180. As used in Sections 16530 and 16640, Sections 17720 to
17730, inclusive, Section 17740, Article 1 (commencing with Section
27500) of Chapter 4 of Division 6 of Title 4, and Article 1
(commencing with Section 33210) of Chapter 8 of Division 10 of Title
4, "short-barreled shotgun" means any of the following:
(a) A firearm that is designed or redesigned to fire a fixed
shotgun shell
and has a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in
length.
Stage et al v. Taurus International Manufacturing Incorporated et al
Case Numer: 2:2011cv00936
Page 2, Line 3 of an Order on Plaintiff's MSJ
Quote:
The Judge revolver is designed to fire both .45 Colt handgun cartridges and .410 gauge shot shells manufactured to the specifications of the Sporting Arm and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute (“SAAMI”).
__________________
You think you know, but you have no idea.

If you live in San Diego Please read this thread and apply now to obtain your San Diego License to Carry (CCW).

The information posted herein is not legal advice. If you seek legal advice contact an attorney who is familiar with all the facts of your case.
Reply With Quote
  #1156  
Old 07-05-2012, 11:16 PM
Quiet's Avatar
Quiet Quiet is offline
short bus driver
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: the 909
Posts: 18,712
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

CA law [PC 16530(b)] also allows handguns to be classified as SBS/SBR.


Penal Code 16530
(a) As used in this part, the terms "firearm capable of being concealed upon the person," "pistol," and "revolver" apply to and include any device designed to be used as a weapon, from which is expelled a projectile by the force of any explosion, or other form of combustion, and that has a barrel less than 16 inches in length. These terms also include any device that has a barrel 16 inches or more in length which is designed to be interchanged with a barrel less than 16 inches in length.
(b) Nothing shall prevent a device defined as a "firearm capable of being concealed upon the person," "pistol," or "revolver" from also being found to be a short-barreled rifle or a short-barreled shotgun.
__________________


"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.” - Dalai Lama (Seattle Times, 05-15-2001).
Reply With Quote
  #1157  
Old 07-05-2012, 11:21 PM
lorax3's Avatar
lorax3 lorax3 is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Santa Clara
Posts: 4,561
iTrader: 36 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quiet View Post
In the past...
BATFE NFA Branch stated AOW -> SBS = SBS, no longer considered an AOW

ATF will not issue a stamp for a Title II firearm unless it's legal in the state of the applicant. I'd guess the ATF has that rule in regards to the DWP since that is the most common legal way to get an SBR in CA, Even if there are very few. If the ATF is actually changing its position and allowing a firearm to be both an SBS/AOW then additional exemptions may exist, and the ATF may have to re-examine their policy on issuing SBR stamps to CA residents without DWPs.
__________________
You think you know, but you have no idea.

If you live in San Diego Please read this thread and apply now to obtain your San Diego License to Carry (CCW).

The information posted herein is not legal advice. If you seek legal advice contact an attorney who is familiar with all the facts of your case.
Reply With Quote
  #1158  
Old 07-05-2012, 11:29 PM
Ubermcoupe's Avatar
Ubermcoupe Ubermcoupe is offline
★ Junior G Man ✈
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: This information has been redacted in accordance with Title 18 USC Section 798
Posts: 12,681
iTrader: 52 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lorax3 View Post
Even an approved SBR is not exempt from CA Assault Weapon provisions. Makes my above example with an SBR off an AR Pistol a little complicated.
I didn’t know that. I thought if the ATF paperwork was valid @ the fed level, CAWB didn’t apply.


I will fix my OP.
__________________
Hauoli Makahiki Hou


-------
Reply With Quote
  #1159  
Old 07-06-2012, 8:26 AM
winnre's Avatar
winnre winnre is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IE, Southern CA
Posts: 9,223
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

So can I take my Serbu Super Shorty to Nevada and put a stock on it when there but put the pistol grip back on when I am coming back to CA? I wonder what that paperwork would look like.

Interesting but that my AOW is not a SBS because there an the AOW clause. My Serbu is 16.5" overall and has a 6/5" barrel and fires 12ga shells. It DOES have a forward grip, would it still be legal if there was no forward grip like the Judge???
__________________
"If Jesus had a gun he would be alive today"-Homer Simpson
Reply With Quote
  #1160  
Old 07-06-2012, 9:30 AM
Calm Down Calm Down is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 324
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quiet View Post
CA law [PC 16530(b)] also allows handguns to be classified as SBS/SBR.


Penal Code 16530
(a) As used in this part, the terms "firearm capable of being concealed upon the person," "pistol," and "revolver" apply to and include any device designed to be used as a weapon, from which is expelled a projectile by the force of any explosion, or other form of combustion, and that has a barrel less than 16 inches in length. These terms also include any device that has a barrel 16 inches or more in length which is designed to be interchanged with a barrel less than 16 inches in length.
(b) Nothing shall prevent a device defined as a "firearm capable of being concealed upon the person," "pistol," or "revolver" from also being found to be a short-barreled rifle or a short-barreled shotgun.
If the handgun or pistol were smooth bore; I'd agree it would fall under this law. The Judge is rifled, so it would not.




Quote:
Originally Posted by lorax3 View Post
A path I would not go down. The definition is clear, and there is a 9th circuit case that mentioned a Taurus Judge is designed to fire both .45 Colt and .410, although is examining the Judge on different merits.



Stage et al v. Taurus International Manufacturing Incorporated et al
Case Numer: 2:2011cv00936
Page 2, Line 3 of an Order on Plaintiff's MSJ
The Judge revolver is designed to fire both .45 Colt handgun cartridges and .410 gauge shot shells manufactured to the specifications of the Sporting Arm and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute (“SAAMI”).
And in that case it was called a shot shell (shotshell), not a shotgun shell. If there are two handguns, one chambered with a .45LC #9 shotshell and another handgun chambered with .410 #9 shotshell; what’s the difference? What makes the .410 a shotgun shell? This goes back to my arguement about the ambiguity of the definition of shotgun shell.
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 4:42 AM.




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.