|
California handguns Discuss your favorite California handgun technical and related questions here. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#122
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Thanks ConvertiBee, you brightened my day with your nonsense. And your doing it in multiple threads, nice. http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...8#post14755558
__________________
Vive La Exile Machine!! Link--> CZ 75B -vs- CZ 75 SP-01 Comparison Link--> CGW Type 3 Disco fitting fun Link--> What is a CZ Tactical sport? Will work for CZ Pics! Last edited by Tok36; 10-03-2014 at 5:41 PM.. Reason: Spelling |
#123
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I plan to SAE a Dan Wesson 715 most likely the same procedure. |
#127
|
||||
|
||||
SSE changes do not affect SAE (single-action revolver exemption)
__________________
Jack Do you want an AOW or C&R SBS/SBR in CA? No posts of mine are to be construed as legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer. |
#130
|
||||
|
||||
Take out the hammer dog
|
#133
|
|||
|
|||
Can somebody point me in the right direction for my question. I want to buy a California legal gun that a buddy of mine has in Utah, which is on the CA DOJ List of approved CA guns. Anyways, what would the legal process in buying this gun from my buddy in Utah, and have it transferred to myself her in CA.
|
#134
|
|||
|
|||
be sure that exact model is on the list. if so, have them send it to your local FFL dealer. There you can do the standard paperwork. You will have to pay transfer fee and sales tax, but if it on the list it is like any other registration.
|
#135
|
|||
|
|||
This sounds good to me, but has anyone considered if the DOJ can treat the transaction as the constructive sale of a double action? I am assuming the gun is shipped to the FFL as a DA, the parts are swapped out to convert it to SA only, it is drossed and you go home with both the SA revolver, containing the modified trigger, along with the loose trigger removed from the gun. I don't know if DOJ will try this down the road or if it will fly, but just thinking.
This has some similarities to the Glock single shot exemption. How did that or is it working out? |
#136
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#137
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Last edited by Chewy65; 02-25-2015 at 7:33 PM.. |
#138
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#139
|
||||
|
||||
Chewy,
1) What the heck is a "constructive sale"? Can you identify something in the Penal Code that describes this and indicates illegality? 2) SA conversion does not require swapping parts, new triggers, or loose old triggers. Why are you stating that it does? 3) Why are you posting this here? If you are uncomfortable with the legal, proven process described within this thread then don't do it.
__________________
"Let me guess... This isn't about the alcohol or tobacco?" |
#140
|
|||
|
|||
1. Regarding California criminal law, start your research with Ex Parte McNulty 77 Cal. 164. Also read up on constructive possession, constructive employee discharge, constructive drug sales, constructive breach of contract, constructive breach of fiduciary duty. Now, can you identify any case law, statute, code, ruling, or just a DOJ letter says that such a contrived end run around the roster law does not run afoul of law?
2. I was thinking of the law and not the mechanics, when typing triggers instead of hammers. That was sloppy, but there is no question about the mechanical aspect of the conversion. But you say that a SE conversion does not require swapping parts? Don't most or all of the stories related above involve the swapping of a SA hammer for a DA hammer at the FFL before beginning DROS? 3. You say that this is "a legal, proven process". Great. Is it a test case, a letter from the DOJ, or what? Please cite it. I admit that this surprises me, since my understanding is that many FFL's refuse to do this. Why do they pass on the business when it has a legal, proven process? Last edited by Chewy65; 02-25-2015 at 8:05 AM.. |
#141
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Think of it this way, if the cadoj could have shut down the single shot exception without new legislation they would have. Last edited by shooting4life; 02-25-2015 at 12:59 PM.. |
#142
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
You are assuming that the SSE exception was amended because the DOJ didn't believe it could prosecute FFL holders as it was worded. Do you know that was the reason or is it just a guess? For that matter, was the DOJ laying the groundwork for a prosecution when the decision was made to except conversions from the exemption? Does the fact that a legislative amendment excluding a conversion from the scope of the SAE not suggest that such a conversion is considered prosecutable? I am still waiting for you to document where the SAE under the above contorted facts has been held to be a " legal, proven process". Some would say it sounds very much like a plan to circumvent the law by a strawman conversion when the true intent is the sale of an off roster DA handgun. Last edited by Chewy65; 02-25-2015 at 2:39 PM.. |
#143
|
||||
|
||||
There you go with "constructive sale" again. I would define constructive possession as one possessing the necessary parts to build something illegal like a bomb, SBR, etc. I think you are making up a new legal term called constructive sale that really has no meaning.
The SA conversion is nothing more than converting the mechanical function of a firearm to be fully compliant with the law prior to transferring it to a California buyer.
__________________
"Let me guess... This isn't about the alcohol or tobacco?" |
#144
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#145
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Why not provide us the code section which makes the transfer of a dimensionally complient single action revolver illegal? Everything that is not specifically illegal, either by code or case law, is legal. Based on this framework it is impossible to prove that anything is legal since everything is assumed to be legal unless state otherwise. |
#146
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Last edited by Chewy65; 02-25-2015 at 4:38 PM.. |
#147
|
||||
|
||||
I'm thinking about doing a single action exemption
conversion on a S&W model 14. Here's an interesting point. Most model 14's came DA. However, SA was an option. So what's the difference? A hammer sear. The DA has one and the SA doesn't. Not sure I see what the issue is. The SAE is for single action revolvers that meet certain criteria. Barrel length, number of cylinders etc. Remember, in CA. this same revolver is legal to PPT in SA and DA. So if I buy the SA factory version, who's to say I can't change the hammer and make it DA? Just a side note: This was my duty revolver back in the 60's. Seemed ok to carry it then. Same handgun. Just my 2 cents.
__________________
|
#148
|
||||
|
||||
I guess we can agree to disagree. And while it has been a lively discussion, I would rather not build this molehill up internally into a mountain, giving antis more reasons to restrict our freedoms.
At the end of the day, keep in mind we are discussing firearm enthusiasts, purchasing and enjoying mostly older revolvers! Not machine guns, grenades, shoulder fired rockets, dynamite, etc.
__________________
"Let me guess... This isn't about the alcohol or tobacco?" |
#149
|
|||
|
|||
I am with you ColdDeadHands. If I may just add, I am not licensed to practice law in this state and nothing I have said should be taken as legal advice. I offer it only for entertainment and educational value and in hope of preserving my own Constitutional rights, including but not limited to the Firtst Amendment Freedom of Speech and the 2nd's Right to Bear Arms. Anyone needing legal advice should seek counsel with their attorney. I believe that somewhere CalGuns suggests that one should not post any specifics that may subject themselves to criminal prosecution and potential liability.
One last point regarding the legal issues and I will NOT give you my take on it; which is whether or not the buyer of a DA that may or may not need to be rostered due to the SSE has any criminal liability, even if we were to assume for argument's sale that the transaction will be treated as the sale of a non-exempt DA. In that case the FFL holder has a problem, but does the buyer? I am not saying and wish you all good luck should you make any purchases that you believe to qualify for the SA Exemption. |
#151
|
||||
|
||||
in 2015, the practice of taking a semi-automatic handgun and converting to a dimensionally-compliant single-shot handgun (SSE) has been blocked by new laws. this thread is not talking about SSE, but is talking about SAE instead.
__________________
Jack Do you want an AOW or C&R SBS/SBR in CA? No posts of mine are to be construed as legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer. |
#152
|
||||
|
||||
I've seen a few rhinos sold out of my local gun shop using SSE. Pretty cool but of course they charge to convert then convert back
__________________
Work hard! Twerk hard! |
#153
|
||||
|
||||
Yes I do! Sorry. How I wish I can SSE again.... owell, just gotta get more wheel guns! Gold would be cool. Would it match my ksg?
__________________
Work hard! Twerk hard! |
#154
|
|||
|
|||
WARNING: DON'T LOSE THE D.A. SEAR SPRING when you convert your revolver to single action only. It is a very small part mounted between the DA sear and the hammer. You will need it if you ever decide to convert it back to double action.
Last edited by Art66; 08-19-2015 at 6:19 PM.. Reason: Better title |
#155
|
|||
|
|||
Another middleman for transfers to California
I just happened to read the fine print on a seller online. He will ship to California AND he says he can assist in transferring a gun from a seller that will NOT ship to California. $30 + shipping. Here is the info:
http://www.gunsinternational.com Seller: barrybrowning State: North Carolina Phone: (919) 539-6098 |
#156
|
|||
|
|||
Can anyone direct me to a SAE friendly FFL in the Bay Area (East Bay preferred) or Sacramento region?
__________________
No politician has the right to prevent me from protecting myself and my family. It is time to flush the toilet in Sacramento and DC. 'Nuff said. |
#157
|
||||
|
||||
Rob Blank in Milpitas. Right off 680 at Jacklin Rd.
__________________
"Let me guess... This isn't about the alcohol or tobacco?" |
#158
|
||||
|
||||
Sorry folks for the dumb question, but I'm totally confused about the roster.
There are a lot of DA revolvers on the Cal roster. S&W 629-6, etc. that are DA/SA. I thought only in terms of standard sized handguns (not micros), all revolvers were allowed on the list and that it is mainly semi-autos that aren't allowed. What part of the law says a DA revolver is not qualified for the roster? Also, of the semi-autos, if they're on the list, I thought they can still be newly acquired by stores from distributors & manufacturers and sold without having microstamping. A dealer in Reno told me that Calif. stores can only sell previous models they have, and can't refill their stock with new orders from out of state because nothing has microstamping. Is that correct?? |
#159
|
||||
|
||||
I'm confused folks. The S&W 686, Colt Python and many other DA/SA revolvers are on the DOJ Roster, but you are talking about how they aren't and need to be SA exempted. Are you talking only about very specific submodels of revolvers? What am I missing?
|
#160
|
||||
|
||||
A brand new 686 or Python may be on the roster but the classics of the last 40 years most certainly are not. The SA conversion process is used to import these classic wheelguns into this terrible state, controlled by our liberal democrat, tyrannical masters.
__________________
"Let me guess... This isn't about the alcohol or tobacco?" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|