Street address for DoJ

[treelogger]

... for delivery of letters against the proposed regulation by FedEx?

All I have is POB 820200 in Sacto, CA 94203, from the DoJ web site. I thought that the DoJ is on Broadway, but I don't seem to be able to find the address.

If nobody has it, I'll send my letter via USPS overnight instead, but I trust FedEx more.

I just finished my letter, but I'm too embarassed to post it. In comparison to the wonderful letters we've seen here (Gene sets high standards), it is quite minor, and only makes a few small points. I managed to sneak in references to one of the Alison Merrilees letters and the February memo (both if which announce that the listing will occur soon), so I'm attaching copies of those, for the OAL to have a copy in the record.

[hoffmang]

Tree,

Thanks man, but my letter was eclipsed by Paratus.

For DOJ:
Firearms Division
4949 Broadway
Sacramento, CA 95820

-Gene

[tiki]

Tree,
Thanks man, but my letter was eclipsed by Paratus.

Both are great letters.
I read the one that was sent by the NRA also. Wow!

I can't wait to see what happens at the OAL.

[Paratus et Vigilans]

Tree,

Thanks man, but my letter was eclipsed by Paratus.

For DOJ:
Firearms Division
4949 Broadway
Sacramento, CA 95820

-Gene

Wow. Thanks, Gene. That's high praise, coming from you!

I have to say that, the more I reflect on this situation, it seems to me that the DOJ may not be proffering their "amended" definition of subsection (f) with any kind of expectation of actually having it become effective. It's so poorly thought through, even under the most objective level of scrutiny. I think it may be just another in their line of efforts to scare people away from OLL's, like the "doom and gloom" letters about Stag-15's "soon" being listed as AW's.

The ultimate irony is that we are all trying so hard to be "legal," and the DOJ, which should be an ally in that effort, seems to view itself in an adversarial role, and does such childish things as ignoring Darrin Prince's request for an opinion on the (obvious) legality of the Prince50 mag lock kit, or telling people that it's not the DOJ whose opinion of legality counts, but rather it is that of the 58 DA's in California. Honestly. If they want a broader law on AW's then they need to go to their contacts in the leglislature and make their case for someone to sponsor the appropriate legislation. Then the people's elected representatives get to vote on it and the elected governor gets to decide whether to sign it or veto it. That's how the system works. We are a republic, and a republic is government of the people BY the people, and by God, the DOJ works for US, the PEOPLE! Not the other way around. Instead of playing these childish word games with your law abiding constituency, why not put your effort into a program to educate law enforcement officers statewide on how to recognize an AW and how to recognize a legal OLL that has been built into a legal Stoner-type rifle. Do a video tape, and distribute it to all police chiefs and sheriffs throughout the state so that the LEO "on the street" has a grasp of what's what and can avoid the kind of foolishness that SPG just went through.

BTW, all of you who have state senators or assemblymen whom you think might be willing to help straighten out this mess - call their office, talk to their staff, tell them about this problem, and see if the senator or assemblyman would be willing to sponsor a bill to amend the Penal Code to establish without doubt that a maglocked rifle is NOT an AW. We have the power to effect change through the political process - let's USE it!

There. That's my RANT for this evening. Thank you for your attention. The range is now closed. Drive safely on your way home.

[Shane916]

Just send me the letters and i'll walk them over to the DOJ for ya Then they can't say they didn't receive them!

[WokMaster1]

... for delivery of letters against the proposed regulation by FedEx?

All I have is POB 820200 in Sacto, CA 94203, from the DoJ web site. I thought that the DoJ is on Broadway, but I don't seem to be able to find the address.
If nobody has it, I'll send my letter via USPS overnight instead, but I trust FedEx more.

I just finished my letter, but I'm too embarassed to post it. In comparison to the wonderful letters we've seen here (Gene sets high standards), it is quite minor, and only makes a few small points. I managed to sneak in references to one of the Alison Merrilees letters and the February memo (both if which announce that the listing will occur soon), so I'm attaching copies of those, for the OAL to have a copy in the record.

Tree, why go thru all that trouble? Look out your front window. Did you see the Suburban with tinted windows in front of your house? Just walk it up to them & ask them if they could help & see that Jeff Amador gets the letter.


Paratus,

I still think that if Cal-NRA makes a public stand on this OLL issue & issues an ID video/DVD on its website, that will put the DOJ on notice. Since the DOJ has refused to give us clarity in understanding & complying with the law, the Cal-NRA can & should step in as a surrogate authority. The NRA may not have the legal authority but it sure has the muscle to make the right people squirm in their seats & force them to do the right thing ....or not!

[mikehaas]

You probably do not have time to use the US Mail for this comment period. I suspect this is why NRA included only email and fax number in the Nov. 7 alert.

Mike