CFARS 80% ar15 pistol confiscation

[RickD427]

In Salinas, the suspect answered some questions and refused to answer others without actually invoking his 5th amendment rights. I think those facts were salient for the court.

If an officer asks you a question and you say, "I decline to be interviewed outside the presence of counsel" or some other such formulation, then no, silence cannot be considered in evaluating guilt.

Didn't I address this point in Post #114?

[acespawnshop]

https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/attachments/press-docs/consumer-alert.pdf

Did anybody else post this yet?

[acespawnshop]

Not to be insensitive to the OP but I’m not surprised this happened. We’ve been telling folks this for years that in our opinion the way we read the PC concerning the manufacture of unsafe handguns that it was never acceptable to make an 80% into a semi auto pistol. Even the brownells Glock Frame 80% still doesn’t meet drop testing and micro stamping requirements.

[Gowking]

Did you guys ever sell single shot exempt pistols in the years after microstamping was required? Because it sounds like they may be of the opinion those needed to meet the microstamping requirement too.

[acespawnshop]

We didn’t do SSE1. We never at the parts to do them. We used to refer everyone to Baboosh at 2A back then.

[Bluemonstercali]

Turn in

Does anyone have an idea on how to cancel or turn in the lower on a 80% pistol. Instead of dealing with the possibility of them raiding my home. I might as well turn in my lower and sell my upper.

[Bluemonstercali]

I've been awaiting my letter and all it says it " images in review"

[edgerly779]

turn into rifle

[Bluemonstercali]

No turn in the lower. And resolve the headache.

[aermotor]

This is all just sounding pretty bad. I volregged an 80% ARP built legally and before the original cutoff date and got an approval letter back (did not submit photos and was not asked to), but I'm not sold and will be dismantling and storing in a separate safe by itself until I want to use it. If they come looking, they can have the stripped lower.

06/2018 Submitted CFARS
01/2019 Approval Letter

[SiggleWiggle]

This is all just sounding pretty bad. I volregged an 80% ARP built legally and before the original cutoff date and got an approval letter back (did not submit photos and was not asked to), but I'm not sold and will be dismantling and storing in a separate safe by itself until I want to use it. If they come looking, they can have the stripped lower.

06/2018 Submitted CFARS
01/2019 Approval Letter

Having said that. All this goes out the window in regards to DOJ confiscating said AR pistols IF the statute of limitations has passed. For example, ar pistol built as single shot and then converted 2016. VolReg in late 2017. Approval letter is received with it recorded in late 2017. Fast forward now to early 2019. Obviously it has been more than a year so statute of limitations has passed? Ok or no go? I am not a lawyer...RICK!!!!! Thanks

[RickD427]

Having said that. All this goes out the window in regards to DOJ confiscating said AR pistols IF the statute of limitations has passed. For example, ar pistol built as single shot and then converted 2016. VolReg in late 2017. Approval letter is received with it recorded in late 2017. Fast forward now to early 2019. Obviously it has been more than a year so statute of limitations has passed? Ok or no go? I am not a lawyer...RICK!!!!! Thanks

This one is kinda hard to comment on, primarily because DOJ seems to be really pushing the limits of the law on this one, and because we're lacking case law on where the limits really are.

But remember that the Statute of Limitations only applies to criminal prosecution. There's nothing that I'm aware that prevents the seizure of evidence of crime even after the statute has run. The SOL doesn't prevent the seizure of evidence. There is a rationale for this to be the case because there is always the potential for the statute to be tolled.

Please check out Post #222 in this thread for a more detailed explanation: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ht=rios&page=6

[mshill]

This one is kinda hard to comment on, primarily because DOJ seems to be really pushing the limits of the law on this one, and because we're lacking case law on where the limits really are.

But remember that the Statute of Limitations only applies to criminal prosecution. There's nothing that I'm aware that prevents the seizure of evidence of crime even after the statute has run. The SOL doesn't prevent the seizure of evidence. There is a rationale for this to be the case because there is always the potential for the statute to be tolled.

Please check out Post #222 in this thread for a more detailed explanation: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ht=rios&page=6

Having said that... likelihood of getting a warrant for evidence of a potential crime for which SOL has expired?

They cannot confiscate something without a warrant UNLESS YOU HAND IT TO THEM. Don't answer the door. Don't let them in your house without a warrant. Don't hand them your property for "inspection".

[RickD427]

Having said that... likelihood of getting a warrant for evidence of a potential crime for which SOL has expired?

They cannot confiscate something without a warrant UNLESS YOU HAND IT TO THEM. Don't answer the door. Don't let them in your house without a warrant. Don't hand them your property for "inspection".

I've never sought a warrant in a case where the SOL had run out. I picked up a pretty good feel for the inclinations of the judges who I sought warrants from and I don't think that any of them would have issued a warrant without there being some evidence that SOL had been tolled.

I don't think that your assertion "They cannot confiscate something without a warrant" is factually correct. There are a great many circumstances where a LEO could properly seize an item without a warrant, and without it being handled to them.

[Joefear7]

I've never sought a warrant in a case where the SOL had run out. I picked up a pretty good feel for the inclinations of the judges who I sought warrants from and I don't think that any of them would have issued a warrant without there being some evidence that SOL had been tolled.

I don't think that your assertion "They cannot confiscate something without a warrant" is factually correct. There are a great many circumstances where a LEO could properly seize an item without a warrant, and without it being handled to them.

Curious, how would they seize it then like if it was in your house?