Frank saw the headline and figured it was "just another article." But the first paragraph stated exactly what he'd told the reporter - and has told many patrons of ARM USA. He used to take his AR-7, the first rifle his dad ever bought him, to school to make stocks for it. All I heard was "Holy sh*t! This article is about us!"
ARM USA has been featured in the Orange County Register before. (Dec. 22, 1999, "Looming gun ban is a boon for dealers") But when Register reporter Valeria Godines visited the store a few times, we weren't sure what kind of article was going to be written. Maybe we're just excited about the free publicity. All in all we feel the article was fairly well-balanced (as balanced as could be expected). We do feel compelled, however, to respond to this article, because the laws keep changing daily. Most recently, a California Supreme Court decision and Department of Justice Information Bulletin have shot down all hopes we had of not being legally required to register certain rifles.
SB23, which went into effect January 1, 2000, banned a whole slew of firearms based on characteristics rather than by name, as occurred with the 1989 assault weapons ban (Roberti-Roos Act). Among other types of firearms deemed "evil" (ARM USA terminology), the newest law banned any "semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and...a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon." Now I could get pretty deep into the law and how vague and confusing it is - but that's another forum. Here, I specifically wish to address the law as it applies to our recent advertisements in the newspaper.
July 21 and August 18, 2000, we advertised the 22LR Conversion Kit as a way to avoid registering AR-15 type rifles. We ran the first ad after I spoke with Augie Rodriguez of the California Department of Justice (DOJ) regarding AR-15 type rifles. I specifically and repeatedly asked Augie "If I convert the rifle from .223 to .22LR, then as a rifle chambered to shoot a rimfire cartridge, it is not covered by SB23, correct?" He assured me that was correct and said "As long as you remove the offending characteristic, then SB23 does not apply." I told him of our intent to build AR-15 rifles with a 22LR conversion kit built into it. This way our customers could still own a really cool, fun shooting gun, and save money on ammo while they're at it. Not to mention, the rifle would be rimfire - rather than centerfire - and it wouldn't be required to be registered under SB23.
On July 26, I sent a letter to Augie, via certified mail, to document and clarify our conversation of the previous week. Although we never received the green certified receipt back in the mail, Karen, one of the field reps at the DOJ, called the store on August 16 and spoke with Frank. She acknowledged receipt of my letter and said they would be reviewing it. Two days later, our second ad ran, once again advertising the conversion kit as a way to avoid registering the AR rifle.
Well, the ads worked. We had a run on the kits and promptly ordered more. We've got a few left that we're certain we'll sell, simply because the conversion enables shooters to take the rifle to any nearby indoor range AND save money on ammo. Every customer who purchased a kit was informed that if their rifle was converted to rimfire, it could NOT BE CONVERTED BACK TO FIRE CENTERFIRE .223 UNLESS IT WAS REGISTERED BY December 31, 2000. If the rifle was registered, then it could be switched back and forth between 22LR and .223 without fear of reprisal. My opinion has always been this - if you don't have ANY other firearm that must legally be registered under SB23, then get the conversion kit and keep your name and address off the government's list of gun owners. If you DO have other rifles that need to be registered, then registering ONE MORE isn't going to raise a red flag. Just register them all.
On the evening of Thursday, August 24th, I received a phone call from an anxious sounding gentleman inquiring about a Ruger Mini 14. Seems he had money on a gun at Turners but they couldn't sell it to him because it had just been banned. He had a Kalashnikov (Saiga) Hunter on layaway. I said "Well wait a minute, how come they just advertised that rifle in today's paper?" He said he knew about that, but there were signs posted in the store saying they were sorry but they couldn't sell the rifles any more. I assured the caller we had the Mini 14s in stock - and in fact they were on sale - and he said he'd be coming into the store.
Naturally, Frank and I were intrigued by the call and Frank called Turner's in Orange the next day, August 25. The person who answered the call said they got notice that they couldn't sell the Saiga rifles any more because of the CA Supreme Court ruling a week prior. Frank immediately called the DOJ and spoke with Gordon about the issue. Why had we not received notice yet? Gordon confirmed that the Supreme Court, in Kasler v. Lockyer, had upheld the constitutionality of the 1989 Robert-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) and he faxed us Information Bulletin No. 2000-04-FD, dated 8-22-2000.
Specifically under scrutiny was the provision that allows the Attorney General to "add-on additional weapons which are similar to those listed...." Also under scrutiny was the portion of the law that declares all AK "series" and AR-15 "series" to be assault weapons under the act. Because the Saiga Hunter rifle is an AK "series" rifle, sale of these rifles has become illegal in California after August 16, 2000, the date of the Court's decision. Any DROS initiated on August 17 or after would have to be canceled.
The part that gets me here is this section of the Bulletin:
"Senate Bill (SB) 23, Penal Code section 12276.1, in light of Kasler
Senate Bill 23, Penal Code section 12276.1, does not apply to AK and
AR-15 'series' assault weapons. These assault weapons must be registered. Removal
of a characteristic will not change their status as assault weapons."
Why am I surprised? Half the time the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing. I already knew that! Why am I upset? Because it's just another instance of the government - standing over us with a hammer and chisel, whittling away at our rights.
We've had so many people come to the store and say "There's no way I'm registering my guns! I'll bury 'em in the back yard first." Regardless of whether you bought a conversion kit to avoid registration, or if you're dead set against registering your firearms, we do encourage you to abide by the law. We've let it be known that if a 22LR conversion kit was installed and the gun was not registered, it could NEVER be legally converted back to shoot .223. Nothing "squirrelly" about that. Unregistered weapons will be confiscated and you could wind up in jail. That wouldn't do anybody any good. We've never advocated "skirting the law" and have always encouraged people to register their assault weapons as required by law.
Whether you register your guns is your business. As gun store owners, we have to register ours. We have to be law-abiding so we can stay in business and keep the freedom loving law-abiding citizens of California armed and safe in their homes. You always hear that the next step after registration is confiscation. If and when the day comes that they come knocking on our door, seeking to confiscate our lawfully obtained and possessed firearms, rest assured they'll get them - one bullet at a time.
Email comments to: jogordon@msn.com
Your feedback is always appreciated. Keep in mind though, that because we are a small outfit, it's not always posssible to respond to everyone. We appreciate your patronage and support, without which we wouldn't have lasted these past 16 months.
Thanks again,
Jolynne