How about a 50BMG upper on BBRAW

[hermosabeach]

Maybe this-

30600. (a) Any person who, within this state, manufactures or causes to be manufactured, distributes, transports, or imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives or lends any assault weapon or any .50 BMG rifle, except as provided by this chapter, is guilty of a felony, and upon conviction shall be punished by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for four, six, or eight years

[rromeo]

A .50 caliber upper is not illegal. A .50 BMG is a no go for reasons stated above.

[emgee00]

Maybe this-

30600. (a) Any person who, within this state, manufactures or causes to be manufactured, distributes, transports, or imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives or lends any assault weapon or any .50 BMG rifle, except as provided by this chapter, is guilty of a felony, and upon conviction shall be punished by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for four, six, or eight years

[nicky c]

[onelonehorseman]

Caveat utilitor!

Though there is perhaps some gray area to work with, anyone who chooses to try this publicly should be financially prepared to become a test case, and face potentially devastating long-term legal ramifications.

[E Pluribus Unum]

Sooo.. my thread was merged... which is cool, it could have been deleted...


Here's my idea on it. When they banned 50 calibers, it was discussed, and the legal minds said that weapons that were already RAWs did not have to be registered as a 50 caliber RAW. It was also determined that anyone that registered a 50 caliber, could then put a .223 upper on it because a RAW is a a RAW is a RAW.

Given THAT logic, it should be kosher... though, they are saying removing a BB is "manufacturing" a new weapon so.... there's no telling what they think.