Tweet
Wow - just read through these posts after a few months away.
1) There is a lot of FUD here. Rid oneself of the FUD and you will be a thousand percent improved.
2) TL;DR (too long, didn't read) for everything: no, you're not a manufacturer, yes, you are deemed to have made (you "make" but aren't a licensed "manufacturer" even if the state tries to treat you like one) the build you have completed as an individual for your own purpose and not for sale or transfer*, yes, you have to serialize your build, no, you don't have to get a serial number from the state and register it.
*Some lawyers have said that the non-transferable part is challengeable in court. Don't know if that's viable yet despite the discussion that's been had.
3) No, you don't. You really, really don't have to get a serno from the state and register it... yep, even after the July 2018 date. Though the State law says you do. In an ideal world, AB 857 (2016) will be challenged, but people will of course be better off completing their builds before the July 2018 date, because the actual court filing (dates) against AB 857 cannot be indicated with certainty.
4) By the way, this is the year that AB 857 (2016) and its corresponding / implementing regulations will be challenged in court. (Nothing's been filed yet.) The actual legal arguments are different than I thought they'd be when I first explored this topic of "how to challenge / modify / or even overturn AB 857." (Some arguments I anticipated, some are quite different.) Wish I could say that also AB 1964 (2014) would be similarly able to be challenged in court, but I'm not convinced anymore that this will be the case.
Compilation of stuff from a while back on all this...
Some thought processes exploring why AB 1964 (2014) and AB 857 (2016) are invalid (again, these were initial forays and the actual arguments which would be used in a case will be different in various respects, for reasons)
Some discussion of prior restraint issues and serialization
(also covers specific language from AB 857 and GCA and GCA provisions dealing with conflict between federal and state laws)
The (so-called) "States' Rights" and the Supremacy Clause in the U.S. Constitution as it applies to this also... disproving FUD, etc.
The Commerce Clause problem with SB 1235 and Prop 63, or, why those two items actually can be overturned without even bringing the 2nd Amendment to bear on the State http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...2#post20035982
Nearly everything that has been posted on this forum in the past on the subject of 80 percenters has been wrong and here are a few reasons why
Probably unrelated to the above, but just in case it is within your sphere of interest:
Suggestion for changes to Mammal Hunting Regulations in California to allow certain types of BB devices for the hunting of pigs (this hasn't happened yet, so work in progress)
Cheers!
Editing to provide an advance reply to all the inevitable replies containing counterarguments with screaming rants more or less saying that "the State knows what's best and you're wrong about everything!" -- No, it doesn't. No, I'm not. Grow a pair.
1) There is a lot of FUD here. Rid oneself of the FUD and you will be a thousand percent improved.
2) TL;DR (too long, didn't read) for everything: no, you're not a manufacturer, yes, you are deemed to have made (you "make" but aren't a licensed "manufacturer" even if the state tries to treat you like one) the build you have completed as an individual for your own purpose and not for sale or transfer*, yes, you have to serialize your build, no, you don't have to get a serial number from the state and register it.
*Some lawyers have said that the non-transferable part is challengeable in court. Don't know if that's viable yet despite the discussion that's been had.
3) No, you don't. You really, really don't have to get a serno from the state and register it... yep, even after the July 2018 date. Though the State law says you do. In an ideal world, AB 857 (2016) will be challenged, but people will of course be better off completing their builds before the July 2018 date, because the actual court filing (dates) against AB 857 cannot be indicated with certainty.
4) By the way, this is the year that AB 857 (2016) and its corresponding / implementing regulations will be challenged in court. (Nothing's been filed yet.) The actual legal arguments are different than I thought they'd be when I first explored this topic of "how to challenge / modify / or even overturn AB 857." (Some arguments I anticipated, some are quite different.) Wish I could say that also AB 1964 (2014) would be similarly able to be challenged in court, but I'm not convinced anymore that this will be the case.
Compilation of stuff from a while back on all this...
Some thought processes exploring why AB 1964 (2014) and AB 857 (2016) are invalid (again, these were initial forays and the actual arguments which would be used in a case will be different in various respects, for reasons)
Some discussion of prior restraint issues and serialization
(also covers specific language from AB 857 and GCA and GCA provisions dealing with conflict between federal and state laws)
The (so-called) "States' Rights" and the Supremacy Clause in the U.S. Constitution as it applies to this also... disproving FUD, etc.
The Commerce Clause problem with SB 1235 and Prop 63, or, why those two items actually can be overturned without even bringing the 2nd Amendment to bear on the State http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...2#post20035982
Nearly everything that has been posted on this forum in the past on the subject of 80 percenters has been wrong and here are a few reasons why
Probably unrelated to the above, but just in case it is within your sphere of interest:
Suggestion for changes to Mammal Hunting Regulations in California to allow certain types of BB devices for the hunting of pigs (this hasn't happened yet, so work in progress)
Cheers!
Editing to provide an advance reply to all the inevitable replies containing counterarguments with screaming rants more or less saying that "the State knows what's best and you're wrong about everything!" -- No, it doesn't. No, I'm not. Grow a pair.
Comment