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 > 2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion Discuss California 2A related litigation and legal topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #561  
Old 09-12-2017, 9:38 AM
sbrady@Michel&Associates's Avatar
sbrady@Michel&Associates sbrady@Michel&Associates is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 570
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CAGLS View Post
Can LE still confiscate under the nuesance law?
If that happens to anyone, please let our office know immediately.

We would like to give that agency an education.
Reply With Quote
  #562  
Old 09-12-2017, 10:09 AM
CAGLS's Avatar
CAGLS CAGLS is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Socal SGV
Posts: 3,258
iTrader: 16 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbrady@Michel&Associates View Post
If that happens to anyone, please let our office know immediately.

We would like to give that agency an education.
Thank You.
Reply With Quote
  #563  
Old 09-12-2017, 10:56 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 511
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfwood View Post
The tribesmen in Afghanistan have been beating us with small arms for 15 years.
With a generous helping of IEDs thrown in for good measure.
Reply With Quote
  #564  
Old 09-12-2017, 10:59 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 511
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonestargrizzly View Post
Here's to hoping that this removes all mag restrictions
I would settle for just being able to possess my lawfully acquired (pre-ban) mags.
Reply With Quote
  #565  
Old 09-12-2017, 11:13 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 511
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drivedabizness View Post
Not to put too fine a point on it...but won't Judge Benitez be holding a trial on the merits before this goes to 9CA? Assuming he finds in our favor (which he hinted at strongly when issuing the injunction) this will be tied up for some time - right? Or am I missing something?
There may a bench trial before CA9 gets around to ruling on the appeal of the PI.

I am wishing that a jury trial had been requested - 7th amendment to U.S. Constitution prohibits judicial review of facts found by juries.
Reply With Quote
  #566  
Old 09-13-2017, 10:24 AM
HiND-SIGHT HiND-SIGHT is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 228
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Anyone cover the legality of legally obtained un-assembled magazine kits prior to the ban of the sale of such kits? If such kits weren't ever assembled but fall under "high capacity", are they now covered by the injunction?
__________________
Scrödinger's Gun Case: the serial number inside is in a state of quantum flux and can appear in different random states unrelating to how a person views it.
Reply With Quote
  #567  
Old 09-13-2017, 10:28 AM
p7m8jg's Avatar
p7m8jg p7m8jg is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Modesto
Posts: 1,443
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbrady@Michel&Associates View Post
If that happens to anyone, please let our office know immediately.

We would like to give that agency an education.
Didn't Judge Benitez order AG Becerra to notify law enforcement not to enforce the simple possession ban under the new law?

Haven't see Becerra follow that order.....
Reply With Quote
  #568  
Old 09-13-2017, 10:37 AM
Drivedabizness's Avatar
Drivedabizness Drivedabizness is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Folsom, CA
Posts: 1,848
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by p7m8jg View Post
Didn't Judge Benitez order AG Becerra to notify law enforcement not to enforce the simple possession ban under the new law?

Haven't see Becerra follow that order.....
He did. His office issued a bulletin to all Statewide LEO's
__________________
Proud CGN Contributor
USMC Pistol Team Alumni - Distinguished Pistol Shot
Owner of multiple Constitutionally protected tools
Reply With Quote
  #569  
Old 09-13-2017, 10:38 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 511
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HiND-SIGHT View Post
Anyone cover the legality of legally obtained un-assembled magazine kits prior to the ban of the sale of such kits? If such kits weren't ever assembled but fall under "high capacity", are they now covered by the injunction?
You would have the burden of proof to show the kits were purchased before the ban. Things like purchase receipt would be required. Your word as to when the kits were purchased would probably not suffice.
Reply With Quote
  #570  
Old 09-13-2017, 10:39 AM
Junkie's Avatar
Junkie Junkie is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 4,582
iTrader: 20 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
There may a bench trial before CA9 gets around to ruling on the appeal of the PI.

I am wishing that a jury trial had been requested - 7th amendment to U.S. Constitution prohibits judicial review of facts found by juries.
It's unlikely that a jury trial would go well.
__________________
I will never buy another Spikes Tactical item, as I have a 5.45 marked barrel from them with a 5.56 bore that keyholed at 25 yards, and they wouldn't replace it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CSACANNONEER View Post
A real live woman is more expensive than a fleshlight. Which would you rather have?
Reply With Quote
  #571  
Old 09-13-2017, 10:40 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,069
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
You would have the burden of proof to show the kits were purchased before the ban. Things like purchase receipt would be required. Your word as to when the kits were purchased would probably not suffice.
You have that backwards, the burden of proof is on the accuser.

Still, if you got them before the ban, then it's a good idea to keep evidence showing that, just to quickly shut everyone up and prevent an arrest/trial if you ever do get accused. But either way, a DA is unlikely to get a conviction based purely on speculation.

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 09-13-2017 at 10:44 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #572  
Old 09-13-2017, 10:41 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 511
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
You have that backwards, the burden of proof is on the accuser.
Normally. But this isn't normal. Here, you are guilty unless proven innocent.
Reply With Quote
  #573  
Old 09-13-2017, 10:43 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 511
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Junkie View Post
It's unlikely that a jury trial would go well.
The choice of forum was made with objective of finding a sympathetic hearing. The population (prospective jury pool) in the area is generally more sympathetic than on the coast.
Reply With Quote
  #574  
Old 09-13-2017, 10:47 AM
p7m8jg's Avatar
p7m8jg p7m8jg is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Modesto
Posts: 1,443
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drivedabizness View Post
He did. His office issued a bulletin to all Statewide LEO's
Interesting. I'll have to research where it went!!!
Reply With Quote
  #575  
Old 09-13-2017, 2:03 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,032
iTrader: 2 / 75%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
You would have the burden of proof to show the kits were purchased before the ban. Things like purchase receipt would be required. Your word as to when the kits were purchased would probably not suffice.
So, make up a receipt. I have some receipts from Tabor's gun shop from 1998 for 30 rounders. Let them go CSI on it and get a forensic scientist to carbon date the paper and ink to verify its authenticity.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by doggie View Post
Someone must put an end to this endless bickering by posting the unadulterated indisputable facts and truth.
"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law." - U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez
Reply With Quote
  #576  
Old 09-13-2017, 2:15 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,069
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
So, make up a receipt. I have some receipts from Tabor's gun shop from 1998 for 30 rounders. Let them go CSI on it and get a forensic scientist to carbon date the paper and ink to verify its authenticity.
I'll just show them my diary as proof.

Nov 1st, 1996. Dear Diary, today I purchased a whole bunch of 30rd magazines. Also I have a huge crush on Jenny, I think I want to ask her out for ice cream. I think it would be fun for us to make out. I wish I wasn't grounded for 3 more days. Parents are meanie heads.
Reply With Quote
  #577  
Old 09-13-2017, 6:15 PM
EM2's Avatar
EM2 EM2 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Prather, CA
Posts: 2,031
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
I'll just show them my diary as proof.

Nov 1st, 1996. Dear Diary, today I purchased a whole bunch of 30rd magazines. Also I have a huge crush on Jenny, I think I want to ask her out for ice cream. I think it would be fun for us to make out. I wish I wasn't grounded for 3 more days. Parents are meanie heads.
HEY!, I got her number!

__________________
Quote:
"The 'Spray and Pray' system advances triumphantly in law enforcement. In a recent case in a southwestern city...a police officer, when threatened with a handgun, emptied his 15 shot pistol at his would-be assailant, achieving two peripheral hits. The citizen was charged with brandishing a firearm, but the cop was not charged with anything, lousy shooting not being a diciplinary offense."
--- Jeff Cooper, June 1990

Quote:
Originally Posted by EM2
Put you link where your opinion is.
Reply With Quote
  #578  
Old 09-14-2017, 9:07 AM
darkshire's Avatar
darkshire darkshire is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: San Jose
Posts: 1,018
iTrader: 63 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EM2 View Post
HEY!, I got her number!

whats the area code bro !
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #579  
Old 09-14-2017, 9:30 AM
DASchell DASchell is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 43
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EM2 View Post
HEY!, I got her number!

HA-HA that is some funny chit.

WAIT.... I think that is my Sisters phone Number!!!
Reply With Quote
  #580  
Old 09-14-2017, 12:19 PM
wireless's Avatar
wireless wireless is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Los Angeles County
Posts: 3,600
iTrader: 27 / 100%
Default

The most important thing is to keep your mouth shut if you do get arrested/cited. It's the difference between simple possession (misdemeanor) and possibly manufacturing/illegally importing into the state (felony). The burden of proof is on the government that YOU manufactured or imported them.
Reply With Quote
  #581  
Old 09-14-2017, 12:24 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,069
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wireless View Post
The most important thing is to keep your mouth shut if you do get arrested/cited. It's the difference between simple possession (misdemeanor) and possibly manufacturing/illegally importing into the state (felony). The burden of proof is on the government that YOU manufactured or imported them.
Simple possession is not a crime...
Reply With Quote
  #582  
Old 09-14-2017, 12:27 PM
wireless's Avatar
wireless wireless is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Los Angeles County
Posts: 3,600
iTrader: 27 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
Simple possession is not a crime...
Right now, correct. I believe it's still an infraction. Once again simple possession vs. importation/manufacturing jeopardizes one's freedom and right to own a firearm. I believe manufacturing/importing a large capacity magazine doesn't fall under 17(b) and is a "straight felony", not a wobbler.
Reply With Quote
  #583  
Old 09-14-2017, 1:17 PM
PMACA_MFG's Avatar
PMACA_MFG PMACA_MFG is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: California
Posts: 481
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wireless View Post
Right now, correct. I believe it's still an infraction. Once again simple possession vs. importation/manufacturing jeopardizes one's freedom and right to own a firearm. I believe manufacturing/importing a large capacity magazine doesn't fall under 17(b) and is a "straight felony", not a wobbler.
Not an infraction, you do know what thread your in?

On your second point, I don't see how any state can charge anyone, who isn't already a federal felon, with a federally recognized felony for anything that is 2A related(keeping and bearing arms) and not illegal under federal law. Doing so would be a violation of the second amendment.

Maybe it's set up that way on purpose, kind of like walking a tightrope over a pond full of crocodiles. Your fine until you fall.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #584  
Old 09-14-2017, 2:00 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,069
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wireless View Post
Right now, correct. I believe it's still an infraction. Once again simple possession vs. importation/manufacturing jeopardizes one's freedom and right to own a firearm. I believe manufacturing/importing a large capacity magazine doesn't fall under 17(b) and is a "straight felony", not a wobbler.
It's not even an infraction - it's not a crime, at all. We won an injunction in the case that this thread is about. So unless/until the courts say otherwise, it is legal to posses LCMs.

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 09-14-2017 at 2:03 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #585  
Old 09-14-2017, 2:20 PM
naeco81 naeco81 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Atherton, CA
Posts: 1,697
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
It's not even an infraction - it's not a crime, at all. We won an injunction in the case that this thread is about. So unless/until the courts say otherwise, it is legal to posses LCMs.
Bingo!
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch View Post
The architects of the assault weapon bans ... are simply trying to fight the Culture War. And we can't win, not in California anyway because you guys, the ones with the most to lose, refuse to do what you need to do to win the Culture Wars, which is to make Calguns and the gun rights community a truly big tent and stop driving people away simply because they are different from you.
Crime rate per 100k people
General population: 3,817
Police officers: 108
Legal CCW: 18
Reply With Quote
  #586  
Old 09-14-2017, 8:08 PM
Ki6vsm Ki6vsm is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 722
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Forgive me if I'm drifting off the topic, but does anyone know if it will be legal to insert a now-okay-to-possess-again 20-30 rnd Mag in a BB rifle once the rifle is registered as a BB RAW? I would not think it would matter, but I figure I might as well ask. (Assuming it hasn't been asked already a bunch of times and I missed it.) It creates a "fixed high cap mag",which was wholly illegal before unless registered. But of course if registered under the new law...
Reply With Quote
  #587  
Old 09-14-2017, 9:17 PM
PMACA_MFG's Avatar
PMACA_MFG PMACA_MFG is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: California
Posts: 481
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ki6vsm View Post
Forgive me if I'm drifting off the topic, but does anyone know if it will be legal to insert a now-okay-to-possess-again 20-30 rnd Mag in a BB rifle once the rifle is registered as a BB RAW? I would not think it would matter, but I figure I might as well ask. (Assuming it hasn't been asked already a bunch of times and I missed it.) It creates a "fixed high cap mag",which was wholly illegal before unless registered. But of course if registered under the new law...
BB gun is no longer concidered fixed mag, it's now concidered enhanced detachability, at least by the libtards.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #588  
Old 09-14-2017, 9:51 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 511
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ki6vsm View Post
Forgive me if I'm drifting off the topic, but does anyone know if it will be legal to insert a now-okay-to-possess-again 20-30 rnd Mag in a BB rifle once the rifle is registered as a BB RAW? I would not think it would matter, but I figure I might as well ask. (Assuming it hasn't been asked already a bunch of times and I missed it.) It creates a "fixed high cap mag",which was wholly illegal before unless registered. But of course if registered under the new law...
Until CA9 weighs in, you should be able to use a lawfully acquired magazine with a capacity > 10 rounds in a registered BB-equipped AR.
Reply With Quote
  #589  
Old 09-14-2017, 9:55 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 511
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
It's not even an infraction - it's not a crime, at all. We won an injunction in the case that this thread is about. So unless/until the courts say otherwise, it is legal to posses LCMs.
No to be pedantic, but the LCM(s) must have been acquired before the original ban was in force (2000?).
Reply With Quote
  #590  
Old 09-15-2017, 5:24 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,069
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
No to be pedantic, but the LCM(s) must have been acquired before the original ban was in force (2000?).
The law doesn't actually say that magazines you possessed have to have been lawfully acquired, it only says it is illegal to acquire them - a misdemeanor crime which has, iirc, a 2 or 3 year statute of limitations for prosecution. So effectively, if you acquired them before about 2014 then you're in the clear if you haven't already been charged with anything.

The action of possessing LCMs is legal, regardless of how you got them. It's the action of acquiring them which is illegal. It's a little like cuban cigars in that way.

Not that I'm suggesting people try to commit a crime or anything, just clarifying how the system works.

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 09-15-2017 at 7:25 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #591  
Old 09-15-2017, 8:17 AM
HiND-SIGHT HiND-SIGHT is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 228
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
The law doesn't actually say that magazines you possessed have to have been lawfully acquired, it only says it is illegal to acquire them - a misdemeanor crime which has, iirc, a 2 or 3 year statute of limitations for prosecution. So effectively, if you acquired them before about 2014 then you're in the clear if you haven't already been charged with anything.

The action of possessing LCMs is legal, regardless of how you got them. It's the action of acquiring them which is illegal. It's a little like cuban cigars in that way.

Not that I'm suggesting people try to commit a crime or anything, just clarifying how the system works.
thanks
__________________
Scrödinger's Gun Case: the serial number inside is in a state of quantum flux and can appear in different random states unrelating to how a person views it.
Reply With Quote
  #592  
Old 09-17-2017, 3:37 PM
426cuda 426cuda is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
I would settle for just being able to possess my lawfully acquired (pre-ban) mags.
As someone who could not purchase magazines before the ban I would love to be able to buy a normal magazine.
Reply With Quote
  #593  
Old 09-17-2017, 4:20 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 511
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 426cuda View Post
As someone who could not purchase magazines before the ban I would love to be able to buy a normal magazine.
Quickest path to achieving your aspiration would be move out of the Democratic Peoples Republic of Kalifornia.

I would love to be able to buy a pistol that is off roster, too. But the only way that is going to happen near-term (maybe even long-term) is to move out of state.
Reply With Quote
  #594  
Old 09-18-2017, 11:07 AM
Adobe Adobe is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 39
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
Quickest path to achieving your aspiration would be move out of the Democratic Peoples Republic of Kalifornia.

I would love to be able to buy a pistol that is off roster, too. But the only way that is going to happen near-term (maybe even long-term) is to move out of state.
Or use the roster loop hole.
Reply With Quote
  #595  
Old 09-18-2017, 11:08 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 511
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adobe View Post
Or use the roster loop hole.
What loop hole?
Reply With Quote
  #596  
Old 09-18-2017, 11:13 AM
slayer61's Avatar
slayer61 slayer61 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Norcal
Posts: 1,033
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
What loop hole?
__________________
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Paul

tiocfaidh ár lá
Bobby Sands
Reply With Quote
  #597  
Old 09-18-2017, 11:51 AM
Bogart's Avatar
Bogart Bogart is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 299
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Loophole: They may have been referring to the single shot exemption. Which is no longer a route to off list roster handguns.
Reply With Quote
  #598  
Old 09-22-2017, 1:16 PM
wolfwood's Avatar
wolfwood wolfwood is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 848
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Today the opening brief gets filed by the state.

never mind they got another extension

Last edited by wolfwood; 09-22-2017 at 4:26 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #599  
Old 09-23-2017, 1:54 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 511
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfwood View Post
Today the opening brief gets filed by the state.

never mind they got another extension
Why am I not surprised?
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 11:13 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, 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 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.