Something about OLL's that I don't get...legalwise

[mxpatriot51]

From GB sale's website:

The availability of "Off-List" receivers has created much confusion in the marketplace. While different literal interpretations of the Regulations exist, it can be easily argued that these receivers violate the spirit of the California Assault Weapons Ban and can create a myriad of legal problems for individuals acting on the advice of promoters of these receivers. We have yet to see a completed rifle built from the parts kits being sold to the public, sitting on the countertop of one of these promoters. Think about it.

In the underlined portion: Why don't we see OLL's already built up according to the law being sold? For example, at Ten Percent Firearms, the sample AR's use FAB10 receivers instead of OLL's.

I totally understand why they would do that, as they can't risk their business on the legality of a Monsterman grip, U-15 stock, or Prince50 maglock kit. They have much more at stake than a regular individual; though I highly value my freedom.

So, if everyone is so sure building up these OLL's is legal, why don't we see them being sold as complete rifles? I have put my stake in their legality by buying one. I believe they are legal. Why aren't we seeing a company that thinks the same way?

P.S. We all know GB's are named receivers, but he has permission from the DOJ. Whether or not Iggie had the authority to do that or not is the DOJ's problem, not GB's.

[PLINK]

A few vendors (DD's, CWS, Lan, etc) will sell you a complete rifle minus the evil features attached or with the mag fixed in place.

[grammaton76]

So, if everyone is so sure building up these OLL's is legal, why don't we see them being sold as complete rifles? I have put my stake in their legality by buying one. I believe they are legal. Why aren't we seeing a company that thinks the same way?

One word explaination: Milpitas.

Longer version: Even if it's completely legal, they can still sieze everything as "an investigation". They'd LOVE to tie up as much vendor money as possible in stuff that sits in Iggy's closet... the more capital they can freeze through "investigation", the less traffic occurs.

[tenpercentfirearms]

Some people do sell complete rifles. I am starting to think about it. The main reason I don't is it is much easier for the DOJ to come into my shop on an inspection, look at my items, and then confiscate them for "evaluation". Abusing their power they will then make me fight to get my siezed property back. Having already been a victim of this crime, I am reducing my risk for the future. They can't claim my FAB-10s have a detachable magazine and claim the Prince50 or Bullet Button doesn't meet the definition of a fixed magazine.

I gunsmith lowers for guys all the time and they often will bring me a receiver and I will build it for them. They walk out with it complete. As long as it isn't in my shop under my name, it enjoys legal protections above what my own inventory does.

As far as GB goes, he is the one selling listed receivers. He is the one who should be worried. After all, what is permanent especially when he advertises the process can be reversed?

Didn't you see my complete WASR on the rack with a MonsterMan grip on it? That wasn't good enough for you?

[SigShooter]

I don't know about at his brick & morter but the chap at Sonoma Firearms constantly has built-up OLLs for sale at the gun shows. I seem to recall none had mag-locks and all had PGs removed. Not only AR OLLs but also FALs

[mxpatriot51]

Some people do sell complete rifles. I am starting to think about it. The main reason I don't is it is much easier for the DOJ to come into my shop on an inspection, look at my items, and then confiscate them for "evaluation". Abusing their power they will then make me fight to get my siezed property back. Having already been a victim of this crime, I am reducing my risk for the future. They can't claim my FAB-10s have a detachable magazine and claim the Prince50 or Bullet Button doesn't meet the definition of a fixed magazine.

I gunsmith lowers for guys all the time and they often will bring me a receiver and I will build it for them. They walk out with it complete. As long as it isn't in my shop under my name, it enjoys legal protections above what my own inventory does.

As far as GB goes, he is the one selling listed receivers. He is the one who should be worried. After all, what is permanent especially when he advertises the process can be reversed?

Didn't you see my complete WASR on the rack with a MonsterMan grip on it? That wasn't good enough for you?

I totally understand why you wouldn't want to sell complete rifles. The DOJ harassment would be off the charts. Plus, you have a business to run. You can't play around with all that investment like that.

I saw the WASR, didn't realize it was for sale.

[hoffmang]

San Jose Gun Exchange had fully built rifles on display and all the parts you need. Their FFL is currently not in place so I doubt they'll sell them now, but that kind of goes against what he's saying.

-Gene

[PLINK]

I don't know about at his brick & morter but the chap at Sonoma Firearms constantly has built-up OLLs for sale at the gun shows. I seem to recall none had mag-locks and all had PGs removed. Not only AR OLLs but also FALs

Most of his built rifles are Vulcan V15's and DSA FAL's. Both are either fixed mag by blind roll pin or weld.

He does sell OLL's also but I don't think I have seen one of them built.

[bwiese]

Haha, Evans is a POS.

He's misstating things to taint legit products with concerns that actually should really be associated with his own (EGSW) products. (Fortunately, the DOJ screwed the pooch on that one so much the customers are golden - this is not just an Iggy gig, this went up the line, and Evans just happened to luck out - this is one time someone has the DOJ by the gonads.)

The simple reason you don't see more assembled OLL rifles is simply ATF manufacturing + transfer tax issue. The OLL receiver has no transfer tax associated with it; complete operating guns do.

As Xenophobe said, an FFL dealer can build 49 rifles (in a year?) without paying the transfer tax. On the 50th rifle the taxes on the past rifles become due/payable....

Most dealers don't wanna deal with these issues. When Xeno was at the SJGE, they did have assembled rifles on the counter.

We are already seeing one (or two?) CA FFLs in some sort of trouble for building AK rifles and not paying attention to this transfer tax stuff, as well as some non-FFL gunsmithing apparently involved.

[mxpatriot51]

Haha, Evans is a POS.

He's misstating things to taint legit products with concerns that actually should really be associated with his own (EGSW) products. (Fortunately, the DOJ screwed the pooch on that one so much the customers are golden - this is not just an Iggy gig, this went up the line, and Evans just happened to luck out - this is one time someone has the DOJ by the gonads.)
The simple reason you don't see more assembled OLL rifles is simply ATF manufacturing + transfer tax issue. The OLL receiver has no transfer tax associated with it; complete operating guns do.

As Xenophobe said, an FFL dealer can build 49 rifles (in a year?) without paying the transfer tax. On the 50th rifle the taxes on the past rifles become due/payable....

Most dealers don't wanna deal with these issues. When Xeno was at the SJGE, they did have assembled rifles on the counter.

We are already seeing one (or two?) CA FFLs in some sort of trouble for building AK rifles and not paying attention to this transfer tax stuff, as well as some non-FFL gunsmithing apparently involved.

So Evan's builds the rifles, and GB sells them? Please further explain the underlined part.

[Prc329]

From GB sale's website:



In the underlined portion: Why don't we see OLL's already built up according to the law being sold? For example, at Ten Percent Firearms, the sample AR's use FAB10 receivers instead of OLL's.

I totally understand why they would do that, as they can't risk their business on the legality of a Monsterman grip, U-15 stock, or Prince50 maglock kit. They have much more at stake than a regular individual; though I highly value my freedom.

So, if everyone is so sure building up these OLL's is legal, why don't we see them being sold as complete rifles? I have put my stake in their legality by buying one. I believe they are legal. Why aren't we seeing a company that thinks the same way?

P.S. We all know GB's are named receivers, but he has permission from the DOJ. Whether or not Iggie had the authority to do that or not is the DOJ's problem, not GB's.

Ammo bros has Fals and AKs on the shelf and will build you an AR

[SemiAutoSam]

There is no basis in the law for what Evans builds.
Its all based on a letter from a DOJ Employee. nothing else.

Below is a letter from Ignatius Chinn at the time a California DOJ employee.

http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/Evans-Gun-Smithing-2004-11-19.pdf

The information at the link below also shows where a MAG-LOCK or Bullet Button is legal along with the usual 58 DA threat / Intimidation.

http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/CA-DOJ-Detachable_Magazine_Niether_Nor-2001-02-22.pdf

So Evan's builds the rifles, and GB sells them? Please further explain the underlined part.

[bwiese]

So Evan's builds the rifles, and GB sells them? Please further explain the underlined part.

There appears to be some kinda joint relationship/partnering btwn Evan's and GBSales. I don't have all the details. When I speak of Evan's I speak of Evan's/GB Sales and "California Bushmaster" etc.

They sell a high-priced rifle and somehow got approval to weld-up banned named guns. Iggy wrote an approval letter that could be interpreted as approval. Evans apparently has some other docs from higher-ups at DOJ so he can hold the DOJ's feet to the fire, so he's not in trouble for illegal AW sales even though some of his welded-up guns are named guns. Evans/GB and the owners of these guns have a strong 'detrimental reliance' case if somebody charges them w/possession of a named AW.

[BTW Not all Evan's/GB builds are on named guns.]

Their sales took a hit when the OLL revolution hit (as did FAB10's) and so they are trying to spread FUD (fear/uncertainty/doubt) about OLL builds that are actually not legally questionable unlike his.

There is a possible escape for some of Evan's 'listed' guns since "Colt AR-15" is not really a valid make/model: 'AR15' is not really a valid Colt model, you can't order one: they actual models/order codes are R6000, R6600, MT6400, LE1020, etc. The DOJ itself helped stab the heart out of a key Roberti-Roos exemplar - there really is no specific "Colt AR-15".

[MonsterMan]

You can go into Ammo Brothers and see AK's on the shelf ready for sale. All they are missing is the pistol grip. I haven't looked for AR's. I like to build them to my own specs anyway.

[JPN6336]

There is no basis in the law for what Evans builds.
Its all based on a letter from a DOJ Employee. nothing else.

Below is a letter from Ignatius Chinn at the time a California DOJ employee.

http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/Evans-Gun-Smithing-2004-11-19.pdf

This letter doesn't say anything about listed receivers. It refers only to series bans which I thought by the date of that letter had given way to the manufacturer/model list?