Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #161  
Old 01-05-2017, 1:56 PM
code_blue's Avatar
code_blue code_blue is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Sac County
Posts: 3,455
iTrader: 177 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Billy Birdzell View Post
#1 - All legal gun transactions in California result in registration so the AW registration does not change what is known about any of us.

#2 - With the new law, an "AW" can be de-registered.

#3 - If the BB provision is struck down, there will be a benefit to those who registered in that they can have detachable magazine plus features.

#4 - Registering guns will be important for the challenge to the law. Made a video about it for anyone who wants to know more https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRNydjFf4Z4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
Thanks Billy, I posted the video earlier in the thread as well. It makes a far better argument than I can. It helped convince me this is the way to go.

For those of you that don't know, Billy is a former Marine and a founding member of MARSOC. He is also an activist and a patriot.


Newbie account with 4 posts defending OP. Hmmmm. Dual accounts?

Calling Kes to confirm!
__________________
Classifieds:

Radian & Aero Pistol lowers, Folsom
Reply With Quote
  #162  
Old 01-05-2017, 2:01 PM
sbrady@Michel&Associates's Avatar
sbrady@Michel&Associates sbrady@Michel&Associates is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 718
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anbu_yoshi View Post
Newbie account with 4 posts defending OP. Hmmmm. Dual accounts?

Calling Kes to confirm!
I cannot say anything one way or the other about Discogodfather (I have no idea who he is), but I can 100% vouch for Billy Birdzell. He is the man.

I am not taking sides in this debate (nor necessarily endorsing or disputing the view expressed in his video--God I am a lawyer), but I will defend him as a true patriot and supporter of gun rights, not to mention a bad *** with a firearm and great instructor. I recommend his courses to anyone.
Reply With Quote
  #163  
Old 01-05-2017, 2:02 PM
John Browning's Avatar
John Browning John Browning is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: California to Tennessee...back to California
Posts: 7,989
iTrader: 84 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by skyscraper View Post
Two other possiblities: Stockholm syndrome or bootlicker.
Totally possible that there is something slightly (or deeply) wrong with him, but I find that less likely. It could just be that he doesn't want to be the only one on the cattle car.
__________________
For Sale: Off Roster Handgun Moving Sale

For Sale: Off Roster CZ, Browning, PTR 91 Moving Sale

Quote:
Originally Posted by KWalkerM View Post
eh why bring logic into this, that makes too much sense... besides when you have bested a fool, you have accomplished nothing and he is a fool.
Reply With Quote
  #164  
Old 01-05-2017, 2:17 PM
glockmen17's Avatar
glockmen17 glockmen17 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 112
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
Everyone is so focused on the BB issue that they have forgotten about the other implications of the new regs. These implications further an argument that going RAW is better in the long run, and I will try and articulate that argument here.

PROS of RAW

(1) The BB has to stay, it's a bummer. But the BB is not a difficult thing to train around, and it's not the end of the world either. It makes changing a mag slightly more annoying. It can be taken off in a few minutes without any permanent ramifications to the firearm. There is a good chance the BB, after litigation, might be able to be taken off in the long run because of the distinction without a difference arguments.

(2) With RAW, you can go from a 30" OAL to a 26" OAL after registration. This opens a wide variety of options to many rifles. I personally have half a dozen pinned, welded, and epoxied folding or collapsing stocks that could be unpinned, etc. Almost all AK's, VZ's, SIG's, SCAR's, HK's, CETME's, etc. etc. and similar rifles make 26" easily when folded or collapsed.

(3) The DOJ rewrote the regs on how OAL is measured. With featureless and RAW, the OAL can only be measured is the stock is folded or collapsed AND measured from the muzzle face to the end of the stock. You can add the muzzle device to the length ONLY if it's permanently attached. That means that many featureless rifles will have to be permanently modified to make the new OAL measurement. That's a permanent mod to a rifle decreasing its value.

(4) People acting as if "Featureless" is some kind of home base and will be safe forever seem to be deluding themselves. SACF is on the horizon in general and another simple ban on wrapped grips could easily happen in the next few years. Kicking the can down the road is not a good strategy.

(5) People acting as if "Featureless" removes them from some kind of database seem to be deluding themselves. Unless you purchased pre 2014 you're in the system. If you think registration leads to confiscation you're ignoring the cost of confiscating the millions of SACF out there which would conservatively cost BILLIONS of dollars. It's a paranoid fantasy. Far far far more likely is that Featureless rifles with a grip wrap will make the list as a new feature in the near future.

(6) According to the DOJ de-registering RAW will be possible and available online. There is criticism of this process as others have tried to de-register RAW's from past periods and waited years with no results. I have never been able to confirm this and it seems to be just conjecture, but it's a valid problem if it's true.

(7) Added to the 150,000 RAW's in CA from past periods, the new RAW will form a large block of people that have complied with the law and have agreed to the conditions of the DOJ. This creates strength in numbers and furthers the possibilities of paying the lawyers to do class action.

(8) It doesn't cost more than $20 to do all your rifles. Featureless costs lots of money. Consider what you have to pay with Featureless: Grip wrap $50, muzzle device $40, labor to install if you can't $100, labor to pin and weld muzzle if you need it to make 30" $50. That's potentially $200+ dollars a rifle. You can do it all yourself and the prices I quoted are too high and I know a guy? How about $100 total? I personally have 20 rifles that need this done. I will not comply to this $2000 cost, lol!

(9) RAW transport rules are a bummer, but they are not the end of the world. Consider that your Featureless rifle might be RAW in a few years or sooner, and now you have a real albatross to lug around with the exact same rules.


I just see no point to featureless other than HOPING they don't continue to ban more and more features and finally SACF. It's the ultimate stick your head in the ground temporarily and hope for the best nonsense.
Has the doj ever come to your house to check on your RAW? I hear that is something they are authorized/supposed to do periodically.
Reply With Quote
  #165  
Old 01-05-2017, 2:19 PM
ifilef ifilef is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: North County San Diego
Posts: 5,665
iTrader: 49 / 100%
Default

The coyotes here have come to feast on a person who may not follow the pack's view on things. It's Pathetic. Whether you agree with DG or not on some things is irrelevant.
Reply With Quote
  #166  
Old 01-05-2017, 2:33 PM
glockmen17's Avatar
glockmen17 glockmen17 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 112
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
There is most definitely going to be a punishment for a standard mag release with BBAW, and the magazine ban is a completely different issue to the AW legislation. We don't know for sure but it's looking like the BB has to stay after registration.

There is hope that the regs calling for a BB to stay on the rifle after registered will be challenged.
From user jcwatchdog
Just so everyone is clear, regulations can't create brand new punishments for breaking the law. If they say the bullet button has to remain on, there is nothing to threaten us with if it's taken off. Possession of a registered AW without a bullet button isn't mentioned in the law anywhere...
Reply With Quote
  #167  
Old 01-05-2017, 2:41 PM
SheepDog78's Avatar
SheepDog78 SheepDog78 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Way up in the hills
Posts: 630
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
Thanks ad-hominem. You even got a tasteless holocaust reference in there, congrats. If there was some kind of logical point beyond the personal attacks then I think we'd all love to hear it.


And I do worry about others, and their 2A rights.
The only logic I'm alluding to is the fact that there are 2 camps here, people who are ready and willing to register their rifles as AW, and those who choose to go featureless (well there is a third camp, but we won't go there). It's clear which camp you're in, and if that works for you, great. It doesn't work for everybody. We're all (for the most part) adults here and capable of making our own decisions. You've stated your case, but now you're like the cult leader continuing to preach until everybody here drinks the Kool-aid. What is it with your constant need to feel like to have to defend your case? It's like you really can't stand that people here still want to go featureless.

Nobody here can predict the future, so nobody really knows what the hell is going to happen regarding gun laws here. We can speculate, but that's it. Most people didn't think Trump had a snowball's chance in hell of winning the presidency, but lo and behold. We know this it's a shiite state for many reasons, and everybody has their own way of doing what's right by them. Do what you're going to do, leave everybody else to their own decisions.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
__________________
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." -Edmund Burke


Last edited by SheepDog78; 01-05-2017 at 2:43 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #168  
Old 01-05-2017, 2:57 PM
penguinman penguinman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 247
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
You sound like one of the young ones. Reg periods are 89, 99, 00, and a short session in 01. BB was in response to the 2003 laws, it did not widely spread until mid to late 2004. My point, which you missed completely, is that those that registered (like myself) were not re-classified as potential felons and there have been no attempts to further constrict RAW owners. BB, on the other hand, which was never sanctioned or endorsed by the government, has fallen victim to re-classification as a felony AW if in possession after Jan 1st 2018. ALL SIGNS point to the same thing happening to grip wraps and BB V2.0 next year. Just think about it for a second and you'll get it.

You might be able to McGuyver a featureless girly rifle in 5 seconds with some bubble gum and a toothpick for no money but most people can't approach your skill level and will have to buy parts and even pay others to do it. I'd say the vast majority fall into that boat, so $200 is not a bad starting point. Your looking at a minimum of $50-100 for parts if you need to buy them.

And before you come back with but I have a drill press and all the skills your talking to a guy who is an avid home builder. Let's not get into an argument of skill or knowledge on that or I will show you what I have made in my garage and you'll have to show me yours. It's not a question of skill for most people.

I never said featureless is not an option, it's an option for those that want it. I think it's lying down and kicking the can down the road, that's all.
The difference being that in this case, kicking the can down the road might actually be a good idea with a potentially friendly SCOTUS on the horizon. Or perhaps forcing the legislature to overreach so far (i.e., banning all SACF) that the courts more or less HAVE to rule in our favor.
Reply With Quote
  #169  
Old 01-05-2017, 3:03 PM
five.five-six's Avatar
five.five-six five.five-six is offline
Former cabinetguy
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: In a cage at the San Diego Zoo
Posts: 34,329
iTrader: 74 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Capybara View Post
"Register and take up the real fight?"

That's like the Jews in '41 saying, "Hop in the Cattle Car and take up the real fight"

You went from 0 to Hitler way too slowly.
Reply With Quote
  #170  
Old 01-05-2017, 3:10 PM
code_blue's Avatar
code_blue code_blue is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Sac County
Posts: 3,455
iTrader: 177 / 100%
Default

Shouldn't there be a parody thread on this already?
__________________
Classifieds:

Radian & Aero Pistol lowers, Folsom
Reply With Quote
  #171  
Old 01-05-2017, 5:49 PM
ScottsBad's Avatar
ScottsBad ScottsBad is offline
Progressives Suck!
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Bye Bye Commiefornia!
Posts: 5,610
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ifilef View Post
The coyotes here have come to feast on a person who may not follow the pack's view on things. It's Pathetic. Whether you agree with DG or not on some things is irrelevant.
Another shill/troll.
__________________
C'mon man, shouldn't we ban Democracks from Cal-Guns? Or at least send them to re-education camps.
Reply With Quote
  #172  
Old 01-05-2017, 5:54 PM
ScottsBad's Avatar
ScottsBad ScottsBad is offline
Progressives Suck!
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Bye Bye Commiefornia!
Posts: 5,610
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Browning View Post
To all the undecided new people reading this:

Discogodfather is either a complete tool, a paid shill, or a troll. You would be wise to ignore everything he says. I'm not saying you have to listen to me, but I'm saying you shouldn't listen to him. Several people here have taken the time to point out why that's the case.

ScottsBad, you have to just ignore him. If you try to debate a fool, they bring you down to their level and then beat you with experience. My money is on him being a DOJ troll since he has RAWs but is somehow unbothered by the fact that the 30 round factory mags they came with are being effectively confiscated. Either he really doesn't understand this because he doesn't have what he says he has, or he isn't really effected by this because he isn't who he says he is.
It doesn't matter to me I'll debate anyone, even a scum sucking dumb DOJ shill. I can get into the dirt with anyone and usually come out smelling like a rose.

John Browning, thanks for the advice.
__________________
C'mon man, shouldn't we ban Democracks from Cal-Guns? Or at least send them to re-education camps.
Reply With Quote
  #173  
Old 01-05-2017, 6:17 PM
ScottsBad's Avatar
ScottsBad ScottsBad is offline
Progressives Suck!
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Bye Bye Commiefornia!
Posts: 5,610
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Billy Birdzell View Post

#1 - All legal gun transactions in California result in registration so the AW registration does not change what is known about any of us.

#2 - With the new law, an "AW" can be de-registered.

#3 - If the BB provision is struck down, there will be a benefit to those who registered in that they can have detachable magazine plus features.

#4 - Registering guns will be important for the challenge to the law. Made a video about it for anyone who wants to know more https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRNydjFf4Z4
#1 -- Wrong, it only applies to more recently purchased long guns (after 2014? I've forgotten when the law went into effect)

#2 -- We hope so, but apparently some had trouble trying to de-register their older RAWs.

#3 -- True, but they still have all the other RAW restrictions.

I'm AW registering recently purchased stuff thats already registered and leaving many other things featureless. I personally think that is the way to go if you have multiple rifles.

#4 -- Is not pertinent to the debate
__________________
C'mon man, shouldn't we ban Democracks from Cal-Guns? Or at least send them to re-education camps.
Reply With Quote
  #174  
Old 01-05-2017, 6:20 PM
John Browning's Avatar
John Browning John Browning is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: California to Tennessee...back to California
Posts: 7,989
iTrader: 84 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottsBad View Post
It doesn't matter to me I'll debate anyone, even a scum sucking dumb DOJ shill. I can get into the dirt with anyone and usually come out smelling like a rose.

John Browning, thanks for the advice.
Well, I pronounce you the winner, but will allow the pummeling to continue even after the TKO. Because fun.

Carry on.
__________________
For Sale: Off Roster Handgun Moving Sale

For Sale: Off Roster CZ, Browning, PTR 91 Moving Sale

Quote:
Originally Posted by KWalkerM View Post
eh why bring logic into this, that makes too much sense... besides when you have bested a fool, you have accomplished nothing and he is a fool.
Reply With Quote
  #175  
Old 01-05-2017, 6:52 PM
Kappy's Avatar
Kappy Kappy is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sutter Co.
Posts: 5,348
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I'm doing featureless. I'll put on a regular button at the same time. That's the plus for me. I'll be able to pass it on to my daughter if things stay the way they are. If I register, the gun dies with me.

That all being said, I know that every time I do something to neuter my gun, they'll do something ridiculous next year to make it even harder to own.
__________________
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.
Reply With Quote
  #176  
Old 01-05-2017, 7:21 PM
MrKiltYou's Avatar
MrKiltYou MrKiltYou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: East Bay, CA
Posts: 160
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Billy Birdzell View Post

#4 - Registering guns will be important for the challenge to the law. Made a video about it for anyone who wants to know more https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRNydjFf4Z4
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottsBad View Post

#4 -- Is not pertinent to the debate
I disagree. That is the most pertinent part of the debate in which this thread was started on. Really outside of how it could effect legal challenges who cares if someone goes featureless or not? I personally am not going to go featureless and will register. What someone else does generally I could careless about. It's their rifle to do as they please. That being said if it helps with challenging the law I would encourage people to not go featureless.
Reply With Quote
  #177  
Old 01-05-2017, 7:27 PM
Intel0116's Avatar
Intel0116 Intel0116 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Nevada
Posts: 1,280
iTrader: 43 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiz-of-Awd View Post
How about all the current RAWs in the hands of members on this board, who still possess and use them?

Does that count as an example?

A.W.D.
Not really, aren't they required to be turned over and destroyed at the end of your life? Sounds like confiscation to me.....
And how many SKS's with detachable magazines are in California today?
If it walks like a duck talks like a duck.......
__________________
"You cannot invade the mainland of the United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."
-Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander-in-Chief, Imperial Japanese Navy WW2

Last edited by Intel0116; 01-05-2017 at 7:32 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #178  
Old 01-05-2017, 7:36 PM
MrKiltYou's Avatar
MrKiltYou MrKiltYou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: East Bay, CA
Posts: 160
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Intel0116 View Post
Not really, aren't they required to be turned over and destroyed at the end of your life? Sounds like confiscation to me.....
And how many SKS's with detachable magazines are in California today?
If it walks like a duck talks like a duck.......
I understanding is that they ether have to be turned over or the estate can give/sell them to someone in a state which they are allowed. The only restriction while big for a lot of people is that they can't be sold/given to someone in the state of CA.
Reply With Quote
  #179  
Old 01-05-2017, 7:37 PM
walmart_ar15 walmart_ar15 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,712
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ifilef View Post
This has been described as a 'light confiscation' with monetary compensation in excess greatly of what many paid in the first place.

Someone could probably write a book on all the screwups by late registrants themselves and AG Lundgren. The amnesty extension to register was not considered to be lawful, notwithstanding it was offered by Lundgren- separation of powers issue.

This is a very poor example of a 'true' confiscation and it's more of an aberration. Legislation was enacted to protect those people and provide monetary compensation to them. See, https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...=2.&article=3.
If I remember correctly the mess started due to a confusion on if SKS are considered "fixed" mag or not. It was deemed fixed initially then DOJ changed its mind and considered it detachable, hence, the error on AG to unlawfully extend the register period. Those gotten their rifle taken away was compensated. Imagine if the number was bigger.

This also sets a precedent that any rifle to be confiscated while registered with the DOJ will likely be compensated. Unlike the 10+ mags or future semi-auto rifles (since u can sell it or remove it out of State).

This alone will give pause for whole sale confiscation on RAW. Likely why the lawyers in DOJ probably prefer no one register. 150k RAW on the books, at just $1k a pop, that would be $150mil. Sure CA is rich State, $150mil is a drop in the bucket, but its big enough to catch voters attention. It will never pass through appropriation committee.

Last edited by walmart_ar15; 01-05-2017 at 7:43 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #180  
Old 01-05-2017, 7:43 PM
Intel0116's Avatar
Intel0116 Intel0116 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Nevada
Posts: 1,280
iTrader: 43 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrKiltYou View Post
I understanding is that they ether have to be turned over or the estate can give/sell them to someone in a state which they are allowed. The only restriction while big for a lot of people is that they can't be sold/given to someone in the state of CA.
That's correct. And if your kids don't live out of state your SOL. Your rifle will be confiscated and destroyed.
__________________
"You cannot invade the mainland of the United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."
-Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander-in-Chief, Imperial Japanese Navy WW2
Reply With Quote
  #181  
Old 01-05-2017, 7:46 PM
MrKiltYou's Avatar
MrKiltYou MrKiltYou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: East Bay, CA
Posts: 160
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Intel0116 View Post
That's correct. And if your kids don't live out of state your SOL. Your rifle will be confiscated and destroyed.
Well if that was the case as part of my will I would have it transferred to an out of state dealer and sold and the proceeds go to my family. I would never let the state have the satisfaction of chopping it up.
Reply With Quote
  #182  
Old 01-05-2017, 7:52 PM
Intel0116's Avatar
Intel0116 Intel0116 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Nevada
Posts: 1,280
iTrader: 43 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrKiltYou View Post
Well if that was the case as part of my will I would have it transferred to an out of state dealer and sold and the proceeds go to my family. I would never let the state have the satisfaction of chopping it up.
Why wait ? You could do that now. Might as well get rid of it now so your kids never have memories of it with you and or with them and get attached to it. Get a mini 14 with the money you get, you can pass that on. Wait then that plan foils when they ban all semi auto rifles. See where this is going?
__________________
"You cannot invade the mainland of the United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."
-Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander-in-Chief, Imperial Japanese Navy WW2

Last edited by Intel0116; 01-05-2017 at 7:54 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #183  
Old 01-05-2017, 7:55 PM
MrKiltYou's Avatar
MrKiltYou MrKiltYou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: East Bay, CA
Posts: 160
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Intel0116 View Post
Might as well get rid of it now so your kids never have memories of it with you and or with them and get attached to it. Get a mini 14 with the money you get.
Luckily I don't have nor really want any kids. As for the Mini 14 that is what I would have gotten instead if I bought an AR with the intention of going featureless. Well that and an M1A.
Reply With Quote
  #184  
Old 01-05-2017, 7:56 PM
walmart_ar15 walmart_ar15 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,712
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrKiltYou View Post
Well if that was the case as part of my will I would have it transferred to an out of state dealer and sold and the proceeds go to my family. I would never let the state have the satisfaction of chopping it up.
Anyone with RAW should have a Trust setup. Once u get called upstairs, the trustee can then legally dispose any of the RAW under the Trust.

It is also important that everyone registering to put their adult family member living under the same roof on the registery as well. In case u get run over by a bus unintentionally, ur family is not all of sudden in possession of UAW. Folks do this in free States with their NFA toys.
Reply With Quote
  #185  
Old 01-05-2017, 7:57 PM
Intel0116's Avatar
Intel0116 Intel0116 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Nevada
Posts: 1,280
iTrader: 43 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve1968LS2 View Post
There's a lot more BBRAW restrictions than that..

Hell, I couldn't even let my son shoot my RAW.. The state can eat a bag of dicks.
Amen brother
__________________
"You cannot invade the mainland of the United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."
-Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander-in-Chief, Imperial Japanese Navy WW2
Reply With Quote
  #186  
Old 01-05-2017, 7:58 PM
MrKiltYou's Avatar
MrKiltYou MrKiltYou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: East Bay, CA
Posts: 160
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walmart_ar15 View Post
Anyone with RAW should have a Trust setup. Once u get called upstairs, the trustee can then legally dispose any of the RAW under the Trust.

It is also important that everyone registering to put their adult family member living under the same roof on the registery as well. In case u get run over by a bus unintentionally, ur family is not all of sudden in possession of UAW. Folks do this in free States with their NFA toys.
CA does not allow trusts for RAW's like the Fed and other states do with NFA's. I believe it explicitly says trusts are not allowed.
Reply With Quote
  #187  
Old 01-05-2017, 8:00 PM
Intel0116's Avatar
Intel0116 Intel0116 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Nevada
Posts: 1,280
iTrader: 43 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrKiltYou View Post
Luckily I don't have nor really want any kids. As for the Mini 14 that is what I would have gotten instead if I bought an AR with the intention of going featureless. Well that and an M1A.
Hey I respect that, kids ain't easy.
However I have kids, and a huge amount of people that own BB Ar's do too, and it matters to us.
Also many bought there rifles way before these ridiculous new regulations
__________________
"You cannot invade the mainland of the United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."
-Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander-in-Chief, Imperial Japanese Navy WW2

Last edited by Intel0116; 01-05-2017 at 8:11 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #188  
Old 01-05-2017, 8:07 PM
walmart_ar15 walmart_ar15 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,712
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrKiltYou View Post
CA does not allow trusts for RAW's like the Fed and other states do with NFA's. I believe it explicitly says trusts are not allowed.
Yes, I believe it's correct if Trust is used to pass on ownership in CA. I seems to remember in original AW clause that a trustee/admin is exempt from procession while they dispose of the AW outside of CA.
Reply With Quote
  #189  
Old 01-05-2017, 8:11 PM
MrKiltYou's Avatar
MrKiltYou MrKiltYou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: East Bay, CA
Posts: 160
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walmart_ar15 View Post
Yes, I believe it's correct if Trust is used to pass on ownership in CA. I seems to remember in original AW clause that a trustee/admin is exempt from procession while they dispose of the AW outside of CA.
Ah ok. I get your point. Yes that is a good idea. I will need to update my own will to included the disposition of my now current BBRAW's. Have that money given to any currently living family otherwise to a Pro 2A foundation in CA. Maybe include a picture of the RAW, the check to the org, and my middle finger superimposed into the photo and send it to the CADOJ.
Reply With Quote
  #190  
Old 01-05-2017, 8:46 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Low-Functioning Genius
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 5,506
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottsBad View Post
Your analysis belies a cognitively challenged mind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Browning View Post
Discogodfather is either a complete tool, a paid shill, or a troll.
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyscraper View Post
Two other possiblities: Stockholm syndrome or bootlicker.
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Browning View Post
Totally possible that there is something slightly (or deeply) wrong with him, but I find that less likely. It could just be that he doesn't want to be the only one on the cattle car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by five.five-six View Post
You went from 0 to Hitler way too slowly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottsBad View Post
Another shill/troll.
ad ho·mi·nem
ˌad ˈhämənəm/
adverb & adjective
1. (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.

I'll leave the personal attacks alone and discount the tasteless holocaust references as anger felt in the moment. If you feel threatened by some of the arguments made in this thread then I would think more about your positions, and how the anger is a reaction to not being able to maintain a cogent position. Maybe I am the wrong ambassador on the subject, but I have tried to keep any personal insults out of my posts.

It's a tough time and the confusion sown by the legislators and the DOJ is extremely frustrating.
Reply With Quote
  #191  
Old 01-05-2017, 8:47 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Low-Functioning Genius
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 5,506
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

I'd like to add my theory of what happens in the next few years. If you go to Atlantic firearms or any of the other big retail outlets and check their CA inventory they have basically moved to selling featureless rifles, or more specifically adding grip raps and muzzle brakes to their rifles. If you go to your local gun shop your going to see that's what available right now.

I firmly believe the purpose of all anti-gun legislation is to destroy the juicy CA market for so called AW. I have estimated that market o be in the 250 million to 300 million dollar range PER YEAR, based on a simple metric of DROS applications. That equates to 50-100 million dollars in profit for the gun industry directly related to the selling of AW in the CA market.

The advance of SB 880 and AB 1135 will most certainly put a dent in the market since people are going to be less interested in buying a neutered rifle for obvious reasons. That might be a 25% to 50% reduction in the market, but that's just my estimate.

Later this year we will be able to better estimate what the numbers are. My question is what do you think the anti-gun movement will do when their strategists see that there is still a large market and income coming from said "featureless" rifles? My guess is that they are going to turn to the legislators to close another "loophole", as in their eyes what we consider a featureless rifle is just another bullet button loophole. That's the easiest, most low lying fruit- they have the entire system in place to simply add something to the feature list or re-define what a pistol grip means.
Reply With Quote
  #192  
Old 01-05-2017, 8:50 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Low-Functioning Genius
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 5,506
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by glockmen17 View Post
Has the doj ever come to your house to check on your RAW? I hear that is something they are authorized/supposed to do periodically.
No, has not happened in 15 years. You might be thinking about the assault weapons permit, which is a business / dealer permit that requires periodic inspections.
Reply With Quote
  #193  
Old 01-05-2017, 9:46 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Low-Functioning Genius
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 5,506
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Browning View Post
Either he really doesn't understand this because he doesn't have what he says he has, or he isn't really effected by this because he isn't who he says he is.
Yeah, I am not effected by this. Just going off to dinner with Kamala in my DOJ provided limo.

Reply With Quote
  #194  
Old 01-05-2017, 11:04 PM
racerx944's Avatar
racerx944 racerx944 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,819
iTrader: 108 / 100%
Default

My AR has a .22 upper. It has no BB and will not need one. It won't be neutered.

The state can take its registration crap and shove it up Kamala Harris's A**.
Reply With Quote
  #195  
Old 01-05-2017, 11:12 PM
stevebla stevebla is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: North
Posts: 709
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

F them featureless. They will be irate to see ar pattern rifles for sale in 2017 they might over reach. my prediction is that a salt weapon bans will be tossed out by SCOTUS with magazine capacity bans upheld. Would beat the current state of affairs. Count your blessings and worry less about the a***** in Sac. Be grateful the nasty woman lost. Go shooting teach someone to shoot.
Reply With Quote
  #196  
Old 01-06-2017, 1:39 AM
glockmen17's Avatar
glockmen17 glockmen17 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 112
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walmart_ar15 View Post
Anyone with RAW should have a Trust setup. Once u get called upstairs, the trustee can then legally dispose any of the RAW under the Trust.

It is also important that everyone registering to put their adult family member living under the same roof on the registery as well. In case u get run over by a bus unintentionally, ur family is not all of sudden in possession of UAW. Folks do this in free States with their NFA toys.
Would a cop or blm agent even have access to know if a now featureless RAW your child received after your passing is a RAW if stopped going to a range or on blm land, seems like if they see a featureless rifle they wouldn't even think of questioning it if everything else is on the up and up.

Last edited by glockmen17; 01-06-2017 at 1:41 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #197  
Old 01-06-2017, 2:17 AM
glockmen17's Avatar
glockmen17 glockmen17 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 112
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
Yeah, I am not effected by this. Just going off to dinner with Kamala in my DOJ provided limo.

All that proves is you have access to the DOJ evidence locker
Reply With Quote
  #198  
Old 01-06-2017, 5:35 AM
twidget1995 twidget1995 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: San Diego
Posts: 165
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default Featurless is civil disobedience

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
Everyone is so focused on the BB issue that they have forgotten about the other implications of the new regs. These implications further an argument that going RAW is better in the long run, and I will try and articulate that argument here.

PROS of RAW

(4) People acting as if "Featureless" is some kind of home base and will be safe forever seem to be deluding themselves. SACF is on the horizon in general and another simple ban on wrapped grips could easily happen in the next few years. Kicking the can down the road is not a good strategy.

(5) People acting as if "Featureless" removes them from some kind of database seem to be deluding themselves. Unless you purchased pre 2014 you're in the system. If you think registration leads to confiscation you're ignoring the cost of confiscating the millions of SACF out there which would conservatively cost BILLIONS of dollars. It's a paranoid fantasy. Far far far more likely is that Featureless rifles with a grip wrap will make the list as a new feature in the near future.

(7) Added to the 150,000 RAW's in CA from past periods, the new RAW will form a large block of people that have complied with the law and have agreed to the conditions of the DOJ. This creates strength in numbers and furthers the possibilities of paying the lawyers to do class action.

(8) It doesn't cost more than $20 to do all your rifles. Featureless costs lots of money. Consider what you have to pay with Featureless: Grip wrap $50, muzzle device $40, labor to install if you can't $100, labor to pin and weld muzzle if you need it to make 30" $50. That's potentially $200+ dollars a rifle. You can do it all yourself and the prices I quoted are too high and I know a guy? How about $100 total? I personally have 20 rifles that need this done. I will not comply to this $2000 cost, lol!

I just see no point to featureless other than HOPING they don't continue to ban more and more features and finally SACF. It's the ultimate stick your head in the ground temporarily and hope for the best nonsense.
(4) No, people going featureless don't see it as a "homebase" that will be safe forever. I think most of us see it as a way to not give in to stupid laws that ban cosmetic features that don't affect the actual function of the rifle. Sure, there are some ergonomic compromises, but the actual function of the rifle isn't afected. The BB was a kick the can down the road strategy. Registering your BBAW is a kick the can down the road strategy.

If, as you say (and I don't disagree) SACF ban is coming, then even registering your BBAW isn't going to stop that. If a SACH ban is coming, why give in to compliance with a stupid law that bans, essentially, one feature. Non-compliance will force them to actually ban SACF rifles and may get more CA gun owners riled up. Probably won't, but more likely than the small number of BBAW registered owners will.

(5) We all know we're in the DOJ database(s) already. Why help them create yet another database? Compliance helps the State create yet another database as well as ceating more jobs for the bureaucracy, which only expands government sill further requiring a need to create more jobs.

Even if you purchased prior to 2014 you're in the system. CA can get access to Federal databases. The government never deletes anything even when it's supposed to - unless something nefarious is going on.

The argument that registration leads to confiscation, while now being made about BBAWs now, RAWs in the past and featureless in the future has also been made about every other category of firearm. I’ve seen discussions of how the eventual ban on .50BMG weapons started with registration and turned into an outright ban. The objective is to provide the State with a good idea of how many of these rifles are out there because if they can split off small groups and ban their firearms piecemeal, they will.

The .50BMG ban happened because a tiny, tiny number of people had them and most gun owners didn’t see that as a threat. RAWs happened because a tiny number of people at the time had EBRs and most gun owners didn’t care because it didn’t affect them. The BBAW ban is going to happen because a small portion of CA gun owners have these rifles while most don’t see it affecting them. Everyone who registers confirms to the State how small that population of BBAW owners is and encourages them to try harder.

A full on SACF rifle ban/registration would probably hit enough people to make them wake up.

(7) Everyone who registers and complies further encourages the State to do more. “Hey, if these guys were willing to comply what else can we do?” Civil disobedience (because featureless rifles are not actually defined in the law) demonstrates that the law is ridiculous and unenforceable. By complying you agree that the law may not be ridiculous and could be enforceable.

It doesn’t create strength in numbers. There aren’t enough of you to scare the State. It just confirms there are, maybe 200K people who they can safely ignore.

(8) Your math assumes you buy everything and ignores how many people are willing to DIY things. It also assumes that the only cost to comply is monetary.

Compliance is sticking your head in the ground and hoping. Civil disobedience is saying that you aren't going to comply with stupid laws.
Reply With Quote
  #199  
Old 01-06-2017, 5:38 AM
DrjonesUSA's Avatar
DrjonesUSA DrjonesUSA is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,599
iTrader: 26 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
Everyone is so focused on the BB issue that they have forgotten about the other implications of the new regs. These implications further an argument that going RAW is better in the long run, and I will try and articulate that argument here.

PROS of RAW

(1) The BB has to stay, it's a bummer. But the BB is not a difficult thing to train around, and it's not the end of the world either. It makes changing a mag slightly more annoying. It can be taken off in a few minutes without any permanent ramifications to the firearm. There is a good chance the BB, after litigation, might be able to be taken off in the long run because of the distinction without a difference arguments.

(2) With RAW, you can go from a 30" OAL to a 26" OAL after registration. This opens a wide variety of options to many rifles. I personally have half a dozen pinned, welded, and epoxied folding or collapsing stocks that could be unpinned, etc. Almost all AK's, VZ's, SIG's, SCAR's, HK's, CETME's, etc. etc. and similar rifles make 26" easily when folded or collapsed.

(3) The DOJ rewrote the regs on how OAL is measured. With featureless and RAW, the OAL can only be measured is the stock is folded or collapsed AND measured from the muzzle face to the end of the stock. You can add the muzzle device to the length ONLY if it's permanently attached. That means that many featureless rifles will have to be permanently modified to make the new OAL measurement. That's a permanent mod to a rifle decreasing its value.

(4) People acting as if "Featureless" is some kind of home base and will be safe forever seem to be deluding themselves. SACF is on the horizon in general and another simple ban on wrapped grips could easily happen in the next few years. Kicking the can down the road is not a good strategy.

(5) People acting as if "Featureless" removes them from some kind of database seem to be deluding themselves. Unless you purchased pre 2014 you're in the system. If you think registration leads to confiscation you're ignoring the cost of confiscating the millions of SACF out there which would conservatively cost BILLIONS of dollars. It's a paranoid fantasy. Far far far more likely is that Featureless rifles with a grip wrap will make the list as a new feature in the near future.

(6) According to the DOJ de-registering RAW will be possible and available online. There is criticism of this process as others have tried to de-register RAW's from past periods and waited years with no results. I have never been able to confirm this and it seems to be just conjecture, but it's a valid problem if it's true.

(7) Added to the 150,000 RAW's in CA from past periods, the new RAW will form a large block of people that have complied with the law and have agreed to the conditions of the DOJ. This creates strength in numbers and furthers the possibilities of paying the lawyers to do class action.

(8) It doesn't cost more than $20 to do all your rifles. Featureless costs lots of money. Consider what you have to pay with Featureless: Grip wrap $50, muzzle device $40, labor to install if you can't $100, labor to pin and weld muzzle if you need it to make 30" $50. That's potentially $200+ dollars a rifle. You can do it all yourself and the prices I quoted are too high and I know a guy? How about $100 total? I personally have 20 rifles that need this done. I will not comply to this $2000 cost, lol!

(9) RAW transport rules are a bummer, but they are not the end of the world. Consider that your Featureless rifle might be RAW in a few years or sooner, and now you have a real albatross to lug around with the exact same rules.


I just see no point to featureless other than HOPING they don't continue to ban more and more features and finally SACF. It's the ultimate stick your head in the ground temporarily and hope for the best nonsense.

Why are you so completely invested in ensuring everyone complies and registers?




.
Reply With Quote
  #200  
Old 01-06-2017, 5:39 AM
DrjonesUSA's Avatar
DrjonesUSA DrjonesUSA is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,599
iTrader: 26 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
Yeah, I am not effected by this. Just going off to dinner with Kamala in my DOJ provided limo.


HA!!!! I KNEW IT!!!

Anyone with that many AK's HAS to be a real commie!




.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:49 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy