|
California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#81
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
However, 857 specifically exempts firearms marked in accordance with 18 USC 44 and pursuant regs, and 27 CFR 478 is that reg. 478 doesn't prevent non licensed mfgs from marking in accordance with those guidelines, and neither does 857. I'd love to hear what Librarian has to say.
__________________
Quote:
Quote:
|
#82
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
And the law and regs are clear in the sense that they don't mentioned "unlicensed subjects" (which is what they call us in CA law and regs). I've asked this question many times to DOJ, they had absolutely nothing to say. I've called ATF, and they always seem vague. I ask the direct question "are home builders licensed manufacturers?". I've gotten yes, no, and maybe answers, with the constant disclaimer of "also check local and State laws". Not very confidence inspiring. There are other factors to consider too: 1) If you have the need to remain "off the radar" and have no other guns or are not in and databases, then this interpretation of having exemption A seems awfully close to what you would want to believe. Cooper seemed to have the intention, at least to me, to not allow this to happen. 2) If you have other registered post 2011 and 2014 guns, what difference does it make to appear in a DB when your already in? 3) Penalty for being wrong with a featureless rifle (or other non-AW) is a misdemeanor and possibly confiscation. Not particularly horrible, but not great either. 4) If you want to register as AW, the volreg method seems like the only way in without doing the DOJ assigned process, which I think anyone can agree is pretty much the most costly and difficult process possible. (of course we have no idea if it will work yet) Given those issues, where does it put us?
__________________
Quote:
|
#83
|
||||
|
||||
I'd love to believe that would stand up, but lets look at the definition of "manufacturer" in Chapter 44 if you would like to fall under it:
"The term “manufacturer” means any person engaged in the business of manufacturing firearms or ammunition for purposes of sale or distribution; and the term “licensed manufacturer” means any such person licensed under the provisions of this chapter." Here is the citation: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/921 Home builders are likely not in the business of manufacturing. So whether you put the word "licensed" in front of it seems to matter little. I sat through several Michel LLP webinars and each time they hit this issue, they indicated that we likely needed to VolReg or get a number from the DOJ to serialize. If anyone has spoken to them or a legit counsel who supports the "mark it by 7/2018 and you are fine" strategy, please speak up. |
#85
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
CA DoJ could do the same with exemptions A and/or D, basically ignoring them as if they didn't exist in the regulations they write. Therefore, even if you know, I know, and we all know that we could meet the exemptions under A and/or D pursuant to ATF regulations, CA DoJ's regulations will be the law of our state, until such time they're overturned in a successful court case. As such, that's why I want to keep this a bit close to the chest for now and wait for CA DoJ to release their regs and for them to be finalized. If they preserve exemptions A and/or D, then we can use them as the law is written. If they exclude those exemptions in the regulations effectively, then it's another argument for the eventual case when CRPA sues them. Does that make sense? |
#88
|
||||
|
||||
More or less, yes. Follow link in my signature for more info about registering stuff
__________________
Settle down, folks. The new "ghost gun" regulations probably don't do what you think they do. |
#89
|
||||
|
||||
I'm concerned with exemption (d) for Californians with home built items, that are registered, marked and tax stamped with ATF in accordance with NFA, but not entered into the ARS system. Depending on the regs, this could be a huge issue.
|
#90
|
||||
|
||||
Here's some info from the 80% Arms website, although it shouldn't be considered legal advice. It's also interesting that AB857 included language that defers the exemption to federal regulations, meaning home builders who opt to get their firearms professionally engraved and be done with it might have a defense beyond what is spelled out in the US code. Just thinking aloud:
Quote:
__________________
VISIT OUR STORE Follow us on Facebook CA Legal 80% Handgun Build Compliance Kits Polymer80 50cal Beowulf Magazines (10 Round California Legal) Compatible with: Glockstore SS80 (Glock 43), Glock 17 (PF940v1 + v2), Glock 19 (PF940C), Timberwolf Frames, Sig P320, and more! Email us for details info@inlanderarms.com |
#91
|
||||
|
||||
^^^^ until someone can explain how exemptions A & D apply to us, I'd take that as a misinterpretation or purely marketing. I've already had it explained how those exemptions don't apply to us, and can see the reasoning when reading the US code.
|
#92
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Honestly, I'd buy all new 100% receivers which will be auto registered when you buy them, assemble my firearms out of those to go shooting and (if and)when they confiscate everyone's guns, turn in the DROS'd receivers. Given how cheep AR lowers are, the amount of money above what it costs to VolReg them isnt significant enough to worry about. *shrug* |
#93
|
||||
|
||||
It's a giant gray area, but for the time being my priorities are:
1) Figure out a way to volreg so there is NO DOUBT that my serial and engraving will be accepted by these clowns at DOJ 2) Figure out a way into the AW registry without needed to do their stupid assigned serial process. That looks like the only solution is to try the volreg route. Even if the interpretation of the exemptions makes it so we can ignore doing anything further with the DOJ it still requires us to convert our guns to featureless, something I really don't want to do on some of my builds. Still waiting on MudCamper and a few others to give us work on the approval process. So far, it looks like applications are taking a good long time and who knows when the word will get back to us.
__________________
Quote:
|
#94
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I've seen cases where they asked for a 10 year ban for a case of carrying a concealed weapon and/or loaded weapon in the vehicle, and there is no other charge or crime alleged.
__________________
NRA Benefactor CRPA Life Member GOA Member |
#95
|
||||
|
||||
Yeah, there seems to be zero reason not to Volreg things if you have to AW register anyway. My worry there would be since you didnt do so before Dec of last year, can you still do so now? You dont have "proof" you built it before you couldn't buy a BB assault weapon so... are they going to allow a grace period on good faith? Of course that might have been the original question in the thread, Im too lazy to go back and reread it though
Last edited by smokehammer; 08-20-2017 at 9:15 PM.. |
#97
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Quote:
|
#99
|
||||
|
||||
Obviously we like the 80 percent arms interpretation better, but why is there any question on the law? This is ridiculous.
Any lawyers on here that can chime in on the 80 percent arms vs the advice in this thread (request sn, volreg, etc.). |
#100
|
||||
|
||||
That's a great question. I have a feeling it's so ambiguous to them they can't even say.
__________________
Quote:
|
#101
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
The problem is all those voluntary registration were "single shot" not semi auto. If you try to register a single shot pistol, I don't think that qualifies as an AW. And if you changed it to semi auto, will there be an issue to try to register it as an AW? |
#102
|
||||
|
||||
Think of it this way, though... stripped AR lowers were not semi-auto either when we bought them, andalso not registered in AFS as semi-auto, but if at some point we built it into a semi-auto rifle, they want us to register it. It was not illegal to build a rifle, nor was it illegal to convert a single-shot pistol to semi-auto, so regardless of what it's registered in AFS as, they should accept AW registration for both scenarios if that's what it is now.
__________________
Settle down, folks. The new "ghost gun" regulations probably don't do what you think they do. Last edited by CandG; 08-21-2017 at 5:44 PM.. |
#103
|
||||
|
||||
I don't think all of them were pistols, some rifles too. I will know shortly myself because I just submitted.
__________________
Quote:
|
#105
|
|||
|
|||
So here's something interesting - you can fill out this ATF form send in $200 dollars an be a registered mfg. It's for NFA though . . . Wonder if it would work for Title 1 guns?
https://www.atf.gov/file/11281/download Last edited by Nick123; 08-25-2017 at 11:16 PM.. |
#106
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Not all voluntary registered 80% A.R. pistols were registered as single shot. I just submitted one a few weeks ago provided no photos only commented that it was built as singleshot initially and converted to semi auto in 2014. Submitted electronically and received confirmation letter in about a week |
#107
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Sure put a vertical grip on your 80% pistol with overall length of less than 26 inches and you could register as an NFA AOW using the ATF form 1 and voila you have a US DOJ approved serial number |
#108
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Quote:
|
#109
|
||||
|
||||
How do we VolReg? Is there a link or do we have to snail mail?
__________________
WTB: 2.5” Colt Python 2.5" Smith & Wesson Model 19 2.5" Smith & Wesson Model 66 4" Smith & Wesson Model 19 3.5" Smith & Wesson Model 29 Colt Series 70 1911 Sig Sauer West German P228 Glock Gen5 19/17/34 MOS |
#110
|
||||
|
||||
There is a form but you can use the CFARS, the CRIS system was rolled into it. I would just do it online personally, some people report it only takes a few weeks.
__________________
Quote:
|
#111
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Can you provide a link?
__________________
WTB: 2.5” Colt Python 2.5" Smith & Wesson Model 19 2.5" Smith & Wesson Model 66 4" Smith & Wesson Model 19 3.5" Smith & Wesson Model 29 Colt Series 70 1911 Sig Sauer West German P228 Glock Gen5 19/17/34 MOS |
#112
|
||||
|
||||
CFARS website (make an account and from left side menu choose Firearm Ownership Report (this is volreg).
Volreg using paper form and snail mail.
__________________
Quote:
|
#113
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Thank you very much, sir!!
__________________
WTB: 2.5” Colt Python 2.5" Smith & Wesson Model 19 2.5" Smith & Wesson Model 66 4" Smith & Wesson Model 19 3.5" Smith & Wesson Model 29 Colt Series 70 1911 Sig Sauer West German P228 Glock Gen5 19/17/34 MOS |
#114
|
||||
|
||||
I VolReg'd an 80% build I completed in 2014 on 8/14/17. Received my approval letter on 8/23. This was way faster than submitting the manual forms via snail mail.
|
#115
|
|||
|
|||
So say I have an unserialized home build and I just want to get a DOJ issued serial and be done with it. I haven't been able to get a response from the DOJ email address specified in the regulations or find the relevant for. Any advice? This should be doable right?
|
#116
|
|||
|
|||
What style of 80% handgun did you submit? AK? AR? HK? XX?
|
#117
|
||||
|
||||
I honestly don't even know where to begin in understanding this 80% crap. Mine will be that way forever since I have no god dam clue what to do. bought it last year and it has sat and will for the time being.
__________________
http://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php Thank your neighbor and fellow gun owners for passing Prop 63. For that gun control is a winning legislative agenda. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6Dj8tdSC1A contact the governor https://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php In Memory of Spc Torres May 5th 2006 al-Hillah, Iraq. I will miss you my friend. NRA Life Member. |
#118
|
||||
|
||||
Another reason to wait and see if our volreg to AW reg works.
__________________
Quote:
|
#120
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I'm going to try to give them a call and find out what's going on with that. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|