DOJ says it's a "high capacity feeding device".. Am I missing something?

[AK all day]

The CA DOJ has stated (through a third party) that the RPD drum container is a feeding device that can hold more than 10 rounds, thus making it high capacity.


Okay, am I missing something, or would a dangling plastic bag from the bottom of the rifle holding a 10 round belt also be considered a "high capacity feeding device" because it has the ability to hold more than 10 rounds..? The drum has no function aside from containing the belt that would normally dangle around (50-100 rounds), hence.. The belts are the feeding device.

http://www.collectorssource.com/russian-drum-magazine-7-62-x-39.html

Under this logic, wouldn't a .50 / .30 caliber ammunition storage can be considered a high capacity feeding device as well? Are they mistaken, or am I missing something here?

[Merc1138]

Whoever you spoke to at the DOJ likely had no idea what you were talking about, and this is primarily why contacting the DOJ is a waste of time(anyone who does know, wouldn't say anything). Unfortunately now that you've gotten an answer from them for a question that didn't need to be asked...

[AK all day]

Whoever you spoke to at the DOJ likely had no idea what you were talking about, and this is primarily why contacting the DOJ is a waste of time(anyone who does know, wouldn't say anything). Unfortunately now that you've gotten an answer from them for a question that didn't need to be asked...

Exactly my thinking.... I couldn't understand how that tin container could be considered as such.

I edited my post as I did not contact them, a local LGS who was concerned about it did.

[Merc1138]

lol, it wasn't GFOS was it?

[AK all day]

I'm not quite sure what that is, but I do not think so.

[Merc1138]

I'm not quite sure what that is, but I do not think so.

Guns, Fishing, and Other Stuff out of Vacaville. Based on your location I doubt it(and it was a joke), but those guys posted on the forum that they were contacting the DOJ with customer info regarding the legal status or AR pistols(might have been AK pistols), among other things.

[bohoki]

in my experience the box doesn't feed anything but you cant change someone who knows they are right

save yourself and dont bother fighting

[Librarian]

The CA DOJ has stated (through a third party) that the RPD drum container is a feeding device that can hold more than 10 rounds, thus making it high capacity.


Okay, am I missing something, or would a dangling plastic bag from the bottom of the rifle holding a 10 round belt also be considered a "high capacity feeding device" because it has the ability to hold more than 10 rounds..? The drum has no function aside from containing the belt that would normally dangle around (50-100 rounds), hence.. The belts are the feeding device.

http://www.collectorssource.com/russian-drum-magazine-7-62-x-39.html

Under this logic, wouldn't a .50 / .30 caliber ammunition storage can be considered a high capacity feeding device as well? Are they mistaken, or am I missing something here?

Your link has the title

Russian drum magazine, RPD, RPK, 7.62 x 39

and text

Empty drum magazine for the Russian 7.62 x 39 series of belt fed light machine guns (RPD, RPK). Excellent blued condition. No markings. This is original, not a recent repro.

A non-gun person should be forgiven for not knowing this thing is a case for a coiled belt.

That non-gun people might be responding to gun questions is a separate problem, which lies at the feet of the elected California Constitutional Officer who administers the Department of Justice.

[AK all day]

So I know what DOJ says over the phone does not make things legal or illegal... However would this statement cause concern when selling or transferring the empty case, or by definition is the empty case NOT a feeding device therefore not falling under the PC?

I undertand that what the said may have been incorrect, but did it have authority? Can they simply pick and choose what is a feeding device and what is not?

There is one for sale on eBay currently, would it be illegal to purchase it?

Thank you for you responses everyone.

[Merc1138]

I don't see why it would be illegal, since it doesn't meet the definition of being a high capacity feeding device, since it's simply a container for a feeding device(it doesn't feed ammunition).

My comment regarding not asking the DOJ unnecessary questions was simply regarding that I wouldn't ever waste my(or anyone else's) time contacting the DOJ about something they're never going to have any idea about and giving them any ideas that they need to look into something.

[bohoki]

So I know what DOJ says over the phone does not make things legal or illegal... However would this statement cause concern when selling or transferring the empty case, or by definition is the empty case NOT a feeding device therefore not falling under the PC?

I undertand that what the said may have been incorrect, but did it have authority? Can they simply pick and choose what is a feeding device and what is not?

There is one for sale on eBay currently, would it be illegal to purchase it?

Thank you for you responses everyone.

the can is a belt storage device the belt is the ammunition feeding device


the trick is never calling it a "drum" it is a can or a box at least with the pkm it looks like an ammocan

[pacrat]

Whether illegal or not is no longer of any consequence in Commyfornia.

A cop can just call it a "nuisance" and steal it from you, even if you own it legally.

JMO

[Librarian]

So I know what DOJ says over the phone does not make things legal or illegal... However would this statement cause concern when selling or transferring the empty case, or by definition is the empty case NOT a feeding device therefore not falling under the PC?

I undertand that what the said may have been incorrect, but did it have authority? Can they simply pick and choose what is a feeding device and what is not?

There is one for sale on eBay currently, would it be illegal to purchase it?

Thank you for you responses everyone.

Generally speaking, if they won't put it in writing they really don't know. In this case the response you got was clearly wrong.

Seems to be a bit like calling the IRS - even if you follow the advice, you might still be guilty of Something Bad, and They Are Not Responsible.