Are sawed off shotguns illegal?

[Merc1138]

With all the back and forth you would think we had the bet. If we agree to disagree we both win.

Happy thanksgiving.

The "problem" is that you're wrong about what's legal and what isn't in CA. I personally don't care about the bet(it's not like I'd be getting the $50), my concern is that you're wrong.

Ok, I'm confused. What's the difference between the AOW and a SBS that makes the AOW legal and the SBS illegal? And forgive me if in the case it was written in this post and I somehow missed it.

The AOW(the serbu posted above) is a smooth bore pistol. There are other types of guns besides smooth bore pistols that can be AOW's. The defining factor IIRC is that vertical forward grip(even if it's folded).

[Superduper2013]

The "problem" is that you're wrong about what's legal and what isn't in CA. I personally don't care about the bet(it's not like I'd be getting the $50), my concern is that you're wrong.

.

Is this statement wrong?

"In California it is illegal to cut down your shotgun barrel to 14" without a tax stamp"

[Merc1138]

Is this statement wrong?

"In California it is illegal to cut down your shotgun barrel to 14" without a tax stamp"

Did you see such a statement in the original post? If you really want to get technical, if you go and buy a shotgun barrel and cut it down to 14" but don't have the rest of the shotgun to cause a constructive possession issue, that's not a problem either. Aren't details fun?

[Superduper2013]

Did you see such a statement in the original post? If you really want to get technical, if you go and buy a shotgun barrel and cut it down to 14" but don't have the rest of the shotgun to cause a constructive possession issue, that's not a problem either. Aren't details fun?

Exactly why I said it was a draw, neither one mentioned a tax stamp.
We basically had the same argument just different wording.

My statement:
Illegal unless...tax stamp

Your statement:
Legal if...tax stamp


Isn't logic fun

You sucked me back in, good job you win. Unsubscribing.

[Merc1138]

Exactly why I said it was a draw, neither one mentioned a tax stamp.
We basically had the same argument just different wording.

My statement:
Illegal unless...tax stamp

Your statement:
Legal if...tax stamp


Isn't logic fun

But cutting down a shotgun barrel without a tax stamp isn't always illegal. I just told you that. Reading is also fun.

Bob is in CA.
Bob doesn't own a Remington 870 or any clone of it.
Bob buys a 26" Remington 870 barrel.
Bob decides it should be shorter and cuts it down to 14".

Is this statement wrong?

"In California it is illegal to cut down your shotgun barrel to 14" without a tax stamp"

What this hypothetical guy just did was legal. It was his shotgun barrel, and he cut it down to 14" without a tax stamp.

[CSACANNONEER]

I understood the bet as personally sawing off a barrel to a very short size as seen on TV, so my comment still stands. As far as c&r I do not think you can alter it but may buy an altered on. Not sure though someone can help me with that.

But, with a Form 1 filled out and tax stamp received, you can cut down the barrel of you're brand new pistol grip only smoothbore 12g to 14" or shorter. Also, on a federal level, you can have a +26" OAL smoothbore 12g without a stock and a barrel less than 18" WITHOUT a tax stamp. It's that same principle as a 11" barrelled AR that is over 26" OAL and has a FPG without being a NFA item.

Is this statement wrong?

"In California it is illegal to cut down your shotgun barrel to 14" without a tax stamp"

Sorry, I didn't see the "tax stamp" thing in your earlier posts.

[ArcherDog]

OP is definitely the winner in finding loopholes and obfuscating statements.

I think he owes $50 and should consider it a cheap lesson in being specific when making bets.

[Intimid8tor]

OP is definitely the winner in finding loopholes and obfuscating statements.

I think he owes $50 and should consider it a cheap lesson in being specific when making bets.

Ain't that the truth.

I think I'm right, therefore I'm right.

[Merc1138]

OP is definitely the winner in finding loopholes and obfuscating statements.

I think he owes $50 and should consider it a cheap lesson in being specific when making bets.

I'd say he's actually not very good at finding loopholes and obfuscating statements. Of course it's not just the OP, we've got someone else using that "lets agree to disagree" copout because they don't want to admit to being wrong.

The gun laws we already have to put up with in CA are bad enough as it is. Do not make up nonsense like some FUD spreading liar to try and convince people that otherwise completely legal(and already done by plenty of people on this forum) activities are illegal.

Maybe the OP's friend is a member of calguns and just didn't want the OP to feel bad?