#162
|
|||
|
|||
Application Kicked Back Again
I sent in my initial application for a 'receiver only' back on 6/28. Got the first incomplete email on 12/5 asking me to 'verify receiver only', no pictures were requested. I re-submitted the application as 'receiver only' on 12/5. Just received another incomplete email, this time they are asking for pictures of the complete rifle. It's a 'receiver only' application!! And, pictures are not required for self-built firearms if they already were engraved prior to 7/1/18! What gives? Do I just re-submit again and basically say "the firearm is a self-built receiver that is not assembled and current penal code does not require that pictures be submitted for this application". What happens if they deny it based on no pictures this time around? This is getting pretty ridiculous. Are there any flat out denials at this point? And/or lawsuits related to such?
Thanks boys, |
#163
|
||||
|
||||
Submitted on 6/29 and still waiting for initial response. Anyone else?
__________________
The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly. John 10:10 iTrader: https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1888351 |
#164
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Me too. I submitted an AR10 and an AR15 pistol. No news yet.
__________________
WTB: 2.5” Colt Python 2.5" Smith & Wesson Model 19 2.5" Smith & Wesson Model 66 4" Smith & Wesson Model 19 3.5" Smith & Wesson Model 29 Colt Series 70 1911 Sig Sauer West German P228 Glock Gen5 19/17/34 MOS |
#165
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
|
#166
|
|||
|
|||
Got the dreaded "we need pictures" email for a couple of AR pistols. Can I simply update the form or email back with "volreg pistols don't need pictures" ? They are compliant, but I don't want to submit anything I don't need to.
|
#167
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Quote:
|
#168
|
|||
|
|||
Significance of "Receiver Only" registration?
Back before the deadline, I tried to register a self-built 80% AR receiver engraved with my own S/N. I received an email saying it:
Quote:
1. Am I correct in my interpretation that the pics are required only if I change my mind and register as a complete firearm, otherwise they are not requiring pics? 2. If I am verifying that I am registering the receiver only, how am supposed to verify that, by replying to the email from bofcris@doj.ca.gov and saying “yes it is receiver only” or do I need to open my registration transaction where the admin has added the message referenced above and write a comment in the comments section saying “yes it is receiver only”? Is there some other method? 3. Please help me understand the significance of registering as “receiver only”. Does this limit my future flexibility to assemble it into .556, .224 Valkyrie, 300 Blackout, .458 SOCOM, etc.? If I assemble into one or more of these, does that somehow invalidate my exiting registration? Do I need to inform them or update my registration if my assembled configuration changes as long as it stays featureless? I’m having a hard time understanding why so many people are receiving letters asking for confirmation of “receiver only”. If feels like they are trying to put me into some sort of legal box. The fact that many others seem to have responded that it is indeed receiver only and had never been assembled into a complete firearm also has me concerned. What if it had? Would that mean it could not be disassembled and reassembled as s different configuration? If you manufactured the receiver yourself, why would you NOT register as receiver only?
__________________
I wish today's liberals could understand: You cannot be generous by giving away other peoples' money and you cannot demonstrate your virtue by your willingness to give up other peoples' rights. The more time I spend on this forum, the more sense kcbrown makes. |
#169
|
||||
|
||||
I send initial request for VolReg two 80%s on 6/29/18 and yesterday got email “incomplete.....”. Will try to upload pics tonight.
My co-worker got the same two weeks ago, upload pics and less than a week got his approval letter. |
#170
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The rejection notices are trying to trap people into submitting evidence that they have an assault weapon, plain and simple. If you get a “confirm your answer” rejection then do just that. As I posted above I just wrote, “the form was correct as submitted” and they approved it. |
#172
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
I wish today's liberals could understand: You cannot be generous by giving away other peoples' money and you cannot demonstrate your virtue by your willingness to give up other peoples' rights. The more time I spend on this forum, the more sense kcbrown makes. |
#175
|
||||
|
||||
Let's be clear. DO NOT SEND PICTURES. PERIOD! They have zero legal justification for asking for pictures. If you did assembled a complete firearm then submit with the caliber and barrel length info ONLY. If you wish to retain the flexibility for multiple caliber, don't assemble your firearm and emphatically state that you have a bare receiver only. I had to resubmit my volreg form 3 times on my bare receivers before they finally gave me my approval. Not once did I send them any pictures. Even if it's a picture of a bare receiver, they have no grounds for that request.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member NRA Certified Pistol, Rifle & Refuse To Be A Victim Instructor American Marksman Training Group Visit our American Marksman Facebook Page Diamond Bar CCW Facebook Page NRA Memberships at Discounted fee |
#176
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#177
|
||||
|
||||
They have no legal standing to ask for photos even on the pistols. I got approval on an 80% Polymer80 Glock pistol that was submitted without photos. I filled in all the requested information, including caliber and barrel length since I had no intentions of swapping calibers.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member NRA Certified Pistol, Rifle & Refuse To Be A Victim Instructor American Marksman Training Group Visit our American Marksman Facebook Page Diamond Bar CCW Facebook Page NRA Memberships at Discounted fee |
#178
|
||||
|
||||
I agree with the posting you responded to. I volreg'd 3 bare receivers only and was profuse on the form to state in no less than three places that is was a "FRAME ONLY". I put "N/A" for caliber and barrel length. No pix necessary.
A pistol is no different if you complete an 80% frame. IF you want the flexibility of calibers, this is the only way and that is EXACTLY why I did it that way with my AR receivers. Not to mention, I can build them any way that is legal at the time...I am not locked into a configuration because I registered it that way, sent pix, using a broken system, to people who want nothing more than to take my guns anyway. There is no difference for pistol. Let's say you want to do a Glock or a Sig build but want the 9/40 conversion possibilities without the headaches of registering each calibre. The easiest way is to register the bare frame. That said, to answer the question about pix for a pistol, you DO NOT need pix for a volreg'd bare receiver. By the way...DO NOT USE THE CFARS ELECTRONIC SYSTEM. I used the old snail mail with the volreg form and the $19 check. I got my DOJ letters back in a few weeks with ZERO hiccups or difficulty.
__________________
--Magazines for Sig Sauer P6 --Walther P-38. Prefer Pre 1945 --Luger P08 Last edited by Supersapper; 12-22-2018 at 6:24 PM.. |
#179
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Others here are correct...as long as your eventual build is LEGAL for the existing law at the time, you are good with a receiver only. If today, bullet buttons are good and tomorrow they are not, then my "receiver only" just needs me to change out the bullet button to whatever is good and it's still legal. For realism, right now, if I built the receiver into a rifle, it MUST be featureless. However, let's say the unicorns come home and the featureless thing is changed again. A rifle registered as featureless can NOT be changed, but a bare receiver needs only be changed to meet the new legal definition.
__________________
--Magazines for Sig Sauer P6 --Walther P-38. Prefer Pre 1945 --Luger P08 Last edited by Supersapper; 12-22-2018 at 6:42 PM.. |
#180
|
||||
|
||||
I just got my approval letters for my 4 P80 pistols today. Odd thing here is that I got all the kick backs on Nov 29. I updated my AR pistol submission a couple days later and got a notification that the submissions were accepted on Dec 7. I submitted the P80 updates on Dec 14 and got the email that they were all accepted that same day.
I'm still waiting for my AR pistol approvals which have been accepted. Anybody in the same boat getting AR pistol approvals taking longer than P80? |
#181
|
|||
|
|||
What were the exact words of the notice?
Did it say "submissions accepted" or "submissions confirmed, will begin processing"? Quote:
|
#182
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
W...T....F Quote:
The letters I received in the mail said "Report of Firearm Ownership Approval". I am now only waiting on two more of these for two AR pistols. Last edited by SkyHawk; 12-22-2018 at 10:14 PM.. |
#183
|
||||
|
||||
Ok I guess we're in the same boat. Good news is at least people are getting their AR pistols approved, so hopefully those are next soon.
|
#185
|
||||
|
||||
So are you saying that my Kimber 1911 .45ACP needs to be registered as a .22LR before I can put on my .22LR slide because it was DROS'd as a .45ACP?
|
#186
|
||||
|
||||
I got letters today. 6 days after the "processing" email. Two separate envelopes. One letter in one envelope, 3 letters in the other. I had no kickbacks or picture requests, but I submitted the volregs back in March! Interestingly the letters were from a mix of 2 volregs from March, a C&R submittal from June, and another C&R from October. All "processed" finally, at the last minute.
|
#187
|
|||
|
|||
I have a similar update. I received my letter notices on November 21 with 3-4 per envelope. This was 10-12 days after the DOJ called me from a private number and asked a few clarification questions.
|
#188
|
||||
|
||||
This is my question too since it appears likely that I'm going to have to "do" something.
__________________
The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly. John 10:10 iTrader: https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1888351 |
#189
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Personally, if I were you, keep track and records of your submissions. You are not going to be raided for being a law abiding citizen. If you get served then you can tell the judge you did your best and the DOJ screwed up. |
#190
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
T |
#191
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Second, Sig, Glock and a host of others do caliber conversion kits for their pistols and they are advertised as such with Sig; not as "repair kits", but as "caliber conversion kits". Since it is only the frame/receiver that is the "firearm", then it does not matter what's on it. I don't think they'd be allowed to sell them if there were something illegal about them. When I made the comment you quoted, I was referring to an 80% build that wasn't complete and if you wanted the exchange possibilities, the easiest way to avoid all of the conversion issues was to register it as a "multi" or "frame only" in order to build it as a multi caliber firearm. For example, if I were to register an 80% Glock or Sig frame as a frame only and did exactly what people did with the 80% AR lowers as "multis" or "frame only", then I'd have a multi caliber pistol, ie .22, 9mm, .40, .357 Sig, .45. You would still have to build the pistol IAW legal requirements, but I can't see why you couldn't.
__________________
--Magazines for Sig Sauer P6 --Walther P-38. Prefer Pre 1945 --Luger P08 Last edited by Supersapper; 12-28-2018 at 11:08 AM.. |
#192
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
As far as I have read, whether you DROS or vol-reg (or RAW, frankly) a firearm as multi-caliber (8888) or frame only (0000) or as a specific caliber doesn’t matter for the purposes of changing barrels/uppers/magazines at a later time so that it can use a different caliber. |
#193
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
If you registered as a .223 and then changed it to 300 blackout or 5.75mm Velo-dog it's pretty moot. I think from a manufacturers standpoint they want and need to mark to remove some level of liability of conversion to a caliber it's not designed for, but that is dependent on the design and is the only practical reason for marking a firearm I can see. Maybe some safety issues when Bubba loads Velo-Dog into a 5.56 because he can't see it marked?
__________________
Quote:
|
#194
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
That was why I referenced the legal experts. I was envisioning some clown stopping a citizen, running the number on the firearm and seeing that it was DROS'd as a .40, but now has a 9mm barrel. Then they are arrested for an illegal gun, charged with illegally manufacturing or modifying a firearm, then the poor person having to expend a huge amount of resources and money proving that he didn't do anything wrong. In 45+ other states, no one would ever have this issue because it's absurd. But we live in the Communist State of California, so any way to shaft the citizenry is on the table. THAT was the specific conversion issue I was alluding to.
__________________
--Magazines for Sig Sauer P6 --Walther P-38. Prefer Pre 1945 --Luger P08 Last edited by Supersapper; 12-28-2018 at 3:05 PM.. |
#195
|
||||
|
||||
I've mentioned in other threads, but IMO the caliber cannot be relevant to the legality of a firearm (.50BMG excepted). In many cases the DOJ does not even allow you to set a single caliber in the registration; several calibers are lumped together in a single selection. If you buy a bolt gun, ".300 BLK" is lumped together with ".300 win mag" and 3 other .300 varieties, so which is it? What would it come up as if run in AFS? I have a .300BLK AR, and my volreg receipt paper just says "300". If you sent in an AKM registration you would have chosen "7.62x54R, 7.62x39, 7.62x51, 7.62x35". So which is it? The paper would just say "762". If DOJ wanted to legally say caliber matters, they would make you be explicit, but they don't. From a certain point of view, all firearms have interchangeable barrels, it's just a matter of how easy it is.
|
#199
|
|||
|
|||
I vol-reg'd a few 80%s in late June 2018 following what others on calguns did. Submitted the applications as receiver only, rifle, semi-automatic, US as the make, (comment - self built), multi-caliber, with my own model & serial# engraved.
Mid-December I received emails from CFARS that went to my Spam folder. After reading some posts on here saying the same thing, I looked in my spam folder & found these emails about 10 days after they were sent. I logged into my CFARS account to find the status of my vol-reg forms changed from in progress to incomplete, along with the standard comment everyone is getting: "Verify your answer to the question "receiver only?". If the firearm is fully assembled, it is not receiver only. Please provide the caliber and barrel length of your firearm." I simply responded with a comment "Application was correct as submitted, RECEIVER ONLY." Within a few hours I received emails back that stated: "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." Status in my account changed back to in progress. Kind of a relief for me that this went through before the end of the year. 9 days later (yesterday) I received my letters in the mail, the date at the top of the letter dated as Jan. 3 2019. |
#200
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|