Fresno Police Remove Illegal SBR Off The Streets

On September 11th, 2017 the Fresno Police Department posted about their recent accomplishment of arresting a woman on narcotic and firearm charges. The suspect was sitting in front of an illegally parked RV. The two officers approached the suspect to ascertain why the RV was parked illegally. Upon walking up to the suspect the officers discovered a Ruger 10-22 lying on the ground near the entrance of the RV. The stock had been removed from the Ruger 10-22 and the officers determined this constitutes an illegal short barreled rifle.

 

With the stock removed the barreled 10-22 action is no longer a rifle. Rifles are shoulder fired and while the Ruger 10-22 can be fired without a stock, it cannot be fired from the shoulder. Looking at the photo above the overall length is less than 26″ so shouldn’t this be classified as AOW? Actually no, since it is a rifle it will stay a rifle at least according to the ATF. -*

Another concern is the nature of the 10-22 design. The pins that hold the trigger in place can easily fall out from just tilting the receiver to one side.

Are Ruger 10-22 owners in jeopardy every time they remove the stock? Have they made an NFA item? Of course there is one crucial aspect to this Fresno story and normal law abiding citizens. A crime has been committed while in possession of this firearm.

Here is the report that was posted on FPD’s Facebook page.

News Line Update – September 11, 2017
Southwest Patrol Officers Arrest Armed Suspect During Patrol Check

On Monday, September 11, 2017, Southwest Officers Yessie Hernandez and Gilberto Quezada were conducting crime suppression patrol in the area of White and Warren Avenues. They saw a Recreational Vehicle illegally parked in a dirt lot near this intersection and decided to do a patrol check on the vehicle. A female subject was sitting on the ground in front of this vehicle, the officers approached her to determine why the vehicle was parked illegally. The female was identified as Leticia Sept, a 26 year old Fresno Resident. As the Officers approached they saw Leticia had quickly hid a rifle on the ground next to her. The rifle was a Ruger .22 caliber rifle, which had been modified by having the butt stock removed. It was determined that the rifle was an illegal short barreled rifle. Leticia was in possession of this rifle in violation of California gun laws. Leticia also was in possession of composite knuckles and an illegal narcotic. Leticia was booked into the Fresno County Jail for the weapon and narcotic violations. With this arrest the officers removed a dangerous firearm from the streets of Fresno and from an area that has had prior gun violence and is known for Human Trafficking.

The Fresno Police Department would like to remind the public that Crime Stoppers has enhanced the rewards for information related to gang members who are involved in narcotic sales, firearm possession, and human trafficking. The new campaign consists of the following monetary rewards for anonymous tips. If a gang member is arrested for possessing a handgun, the reward is $2,000. If a gang member is arrested for possessing an assault rifle, the reward is $3,000. If a gang member is arrested for human trafficking, the reward is $3,000 and if a gang member is involved in drug sales, the reward is $1,000. Anyone with information is urged to call crime stoppers at (559)-498-STOP (7869) with information. Your information is kept confidential.

Attached is a photograph of the recovered rifle and of Leticia Sept.

Media: Please email Alfonso.Castillo@Fresno.Gov for further information

Alfonso Castillo
Police Sergeant
Fresno Police Department
Southwest Policing District
2323 Mariposa Mall
Fresno, CA 93721
(559)6212-300 ext 3565;
Alfonso.Castillo@Fresno.Gov



Nicholas C

Co-Founder of KRISSTALK forums, an owner’s support group and all things KRISS Vector related. Nick found his passion through competitive shooting while living in NY. He participates in USPSA and 3Gun. He loves all things that shoots and flashlights. Really really bright flashlights.

Any questions please email him at nicholas.c@staff.thefirearmblog.com


Advertisement

  • Realist

    CA is really some kind of special stupid…but hey, what do you expect from a State whose constituency votes in the likes of Pelosi, Feinswine and Boxer?

    • Berryamendmentandcream

      Hey I always vote against them, it just has never mattered

    • BillNyeMadeScienceCry

      It’s all the salt in the water table. After a hundred years of drinking it they’ve all gone batshit. Look at Western Oregon and Washington, they’re not much different. Salt in the water table. It’s gotta be.

    • Paul Rain

      This is your daily reminder that this is a recent thing- California used to be a state for middle class Americans, many of whom supported guns, before the demographic replacement flipped it over.

      • How soon Kids These Days forget that it was the White Middle Class led by Governor Ronald Reagan who actually started the modern gun control movement in California.

        • Paul Rain

          Lol- A) Not true B) The impetus for such laws comes from the millions of feral cats that cat lady politicians are hoarding within American borders, defecating all over the place and attacking Americans when they come by the cat house to beg these people to sotp.

          • Yeah, no, dude– the modern gun control movement started in Cali under Reagan as a direct (and overtly racist) response to Black Panthers armin’ up and hangin’ out on the front steps of the State House in Sacramento, and showing up at polling places with then-legal open carry rifles and shotguns to counter KKK efforts to intimidate Black voters into staying home during elections. Racist upper middle class suburbanites in the northeast picked up the anti-Second Amendment ball and ran with it because they were terrified by the thought of poor urban Blacks being able to defend themselves and demand equal access to public services like schools and housing. Where do you think “Saturday Night Special” hysteria came from in the ’70s? None of this is new information.

            Maybe learn some actual History and do some actual research before spouting nonsense on the internet next time.

          • Bill Clinton

            Nice try, “Tex.” Revisionism much? The odious Panthers (jailbirds and Communists) exploited California’s open carry law of the time in a publicity stunt by attending the Legislature while armed. There was no KKK suppression of black voters in CA: you flat out lied about that, you fraud. Go to hell, liar.

          • Like I said, anonymous duderanch– none of this is new information, feel free to look it up for yourself, or get someone who knows how to work “Google.com” to do it for you.

          • Paul Rain

            Um, so you’re arguing that black nationalists should be intimidating white voters? Lincoln was right on that one, buddy.

          • “Racist organizations that were specifically formed to disenfranchise Black voters” =/= “White voters”, but nice try anyway.

            You are aware that Reagan’s actions as Governor of California– including his full-throated support for openly unconstitutional gun control measures– are a matter of public record, right?

          • Paul Rain

            Unconstitutional under what Constitution? You’re talking about violent black nationalists- the 14th Amendment was never passed by 3/4ths of the states. It doesn’t apply.

          • It’s pretty sad that someone apparently needs to have “shall not be infringed” explained to them on a gun blog. The Panthers were only violent in response to violence directed at them and their communities, and were originally formed as a local self-defense group explicitly because law enforcement was either looking the other way or actively participating in racial violence; when they weren’t being shot at or attacked, they were handing out free food and medical supplies in impoverished inner city neighborhoods. Also, wow, gg going with an anti-14th Amendment argument, that really puts your position right out there in the light where everyone can see it for what it is.

            People still dump on Bill Ruger for trying to keep his company afloat in the face of federal legislative assault, but Reagan had him beat by 25 years with the “no honest man” argument.

          • Paul Rain

            You’re defending Ruger, but you oppose controlling violent racist criminals? Pathetic

          • You’re the one defending California’s violent racist cops and legislative gun control efforts in the ’60s here, dude, not me.

          • Paul Rain

            It’s racist to protect law abiding citizens? Ok, bro

          • Well, that’s what the Panthers were doing, so…

            Just out of curiosity, how long are you going to keep trying to pretend like institutional racism didn’t exist in California in the 1960s? I mean, you’re already flyin’ your flag with the whole “the 14th Amendment was a bad thing” deal, but this is gettin’ kinda surreal.

          • Paul Rain

            I don’t know, mate. Given you’re the one making the exceptional claim, maybe you should prove that blacks were treated worse than they treated regular folks?

          • hahahahahahahaha

          • Stephen Paraski

            Your are wasting time arguing with a idiot, and a racist idiot to boot.

          • Swarf

            Delusional too. Straight up delusional. It’s weird to try and wrap my head around some of the things people like that convince themselves of.

          • NanoSuitUser059 .

            How about the lack of equal rights in 1960-63, lynching, and all kinds of stuff of that nature. Denying Black people were treated worse makes you a moron. Do you think the Civil Rights movement was over nothing? It’s not like we’re talking about the “Progressives” of today.

          • Paul Rain

            Lol. Lynching, which occurred at similar rates for whites proportional to the amount of crime each racial group committed?

            Hoover was right, ‘civil rights’=communist subverison.

            Civil rights is why we aren’t on Mars.

          • NanoSuitUser059 .

            You’re right. Those darn Black people and their wanting to be treated like us White folk. Do us all a favor and off yourself, racist trash.

          • Paul Rain

            Noone expects equal lynching rates. Blacks commit more crime. Go to the NAACP website- the facts are there.

          • Wow!

            In CA people of all races were hung. You seem to confuse the east and the west.

          • Come on, now– it’s not cool to tell people to off themselves online, even if they are the kind of toolbox who upvotes their own comments just so they can pretend to have friends.

          • You’ve already overplayed your hand, dude– sealioning requires a lot more skill than you’ve displayed here so far.

          • Wow!

            Black panthers were not protecting law abiding citizens dude. You are either delusional or a millennial that is just repeating what your high school teacher told you.

          • Son, I have pants older than you. Read a History book sometime, I’m pretty sure they still sell those in a few places.

          • Wow!

            Okay sure. That’s a bald faced lie if I ever seen one. If you are going to choose a hill to die on, at least make it more believable. Only a millennial would believe the black panthers were defending law abiding citizens.

            People forget that in the early parts of the Civil Rights Movement blacks were basically on par with the rest of America. Their families were tight knit and stayed out of trouble, their kids went for education or found employment, and every generation they were occupying better careers. Then mid-part in the movement communism, feminism, atheism, and anti-American ideology penetrated their ranks and destroyed a great deal of progress they made. Close knit families broke up over petty reasons and their children grew up in broken homes, if at all. Their children stopped working and started being activists and taking advantage of social programs like welfare. Then they started actually having pride in poverty and crime, rather than trying to improve their standing. The most successful black families were the ones who rejected this counter culture, but many fell prey to it. You know very little about this period of history if you think the black panthers were the solution. They were and still are part of the problem.

          • I could go take a photo of the pants– which still fit, by the way– but I don’t think they’d hold a candle to the ones you’re obviously wearing on your head.

          • Wow!

            Really? Violent racists cops? lamo. I don’t agree with how Regan handled the situation either. He should have just broken up the Black Panther for unlawful assembly. But what Regan did was not as bad as what the democrats turned CA (among other states) into. Besides, you forget that if you want to talk about racism, that resided and still resides in the democrat party.

          • Yeah, all those border walls and statues to slavery-supporting Confederates the Ds put up, and all the “voter ID” laws the Ds pass, so racially insensitive of them. Have someone look up the word “Dixiecrat” in a dictionary for you. Also maybe have them show you how to spell “Reagan”.

          • Wow!

            Really? You are trying to say that border walls and voter ID’s are racist? Please try to tell me how you can make that jump. Last I could tell, both of those things apply to all races.

            Racism is only an issue today because the Democrats use it as a political tool to divide the country. Welfare has totally destroyed many black families, and democrats champion it. Look at the KKK, few people knew it even still existed until the democrats revived it back into the mainstream politics. And you sure as hell aren’t helping the black communities by rioting in the streets and defending criminals. Crime tends to have roots, so defending black criminals only would help them do more crime often in the black communities that don’t want them back in the first place!

          • Dude, just because all those cheap mass-produced statues put up by racist groups in the 19teens and ’20s were of guys who died on a hill defending racist bullshit doesn’t mean you have to die on the same hill.

          • Wow!

            Exactly, so why are you using race to rewrite history? Gun control is gun control. There isn’t a “modern” division as you say. It is all illegal under the Constitution. Regan was not the first one in this game as your comment tried to imply.

          • James Young

            Just to clarify the Reagan banned open carry of loaded weapons. It was still legal to open carry a handgun as long as it was unloaded. That led to people carrying mags on the opposite hip. Open carry was still legal in this way until Gov Brown signed a full ban in 2011 because of a few highly publicized incidents of 2nd amendment activists having recorded arguments with police.

          • HSR47

            “response to Black Panthers armin’ up and hangin’ out on the front steps of the State House in Sacramento”

            That’s an overly sanitized view of what happened. The way I’ve always heard it told is that they engaged in grandstanding outside, and then moved inside where they went to grandstand in front of politicians. They ended up on the floor of either the senate or the assembly, where (at least from the viewpoint of the legislators) they held everyone hostage while they got their fill of grandstanding, at which point the NBPP people made their exit.

            It was a colossally stupid move, and anyone with an IQ above room temperature should be able to see why the legislature turned around and passed anti-gun laws: They’d just had the fear of God put into them by a group of political extremists, and they wanted to make sure that the situation was not repeated.

            The NBPP was certainly the target of those laws, but I think it’s entirely reasonable to view that more as a result of what they did (OC long guns in the capitol as an overt threat to legislators) than who they were. Not only that, but the legislative intent was to apply it equally to everyone from the start, which is another key difference from many other examples of truly racist gun control laws (which were largely understood to apply only to people who had the wrong skin tone, religious affiliation, and/or political affiliation).

            To expound on the above, I think it’s important to note that our own recent history with the public reaction to the open carry of long guns seems to drive this point home: Lately, most of the people attracting bad press for openly carrying long guns have had much lower dermal melanin content, and it STILL terrifies/horrifies huge numbers of people, and results in calls for anti-gun legislation.

            There are PLENTY of examples of gun control statutes that are purely racist in origin; There’s no need to try to stretch definitions to try to add to that list.

            As for your assertion that this all started in California, I’m not sure that I buy that. The history of “modern” gun control largely dates back to the southern states in the aftermath of the Civil War: These states did their damnedest to avoid recognizing the personhood of “blacks” and gun control was one aspect of that. In many cases, it is the LAST (or very nearly) remaining aspect of those laws.

        • ilhunter

          New York had Sullivan law way before Reagan was gov.

        • Wow!

          No, gun control in CA dates all the way back to the mid 1920’s in an effort to disarm the Chinese and Hispanics.

          • And gun control in America goes back to the town charters of the first English colonists making it a crime to give a musket to an Indian– I’m talking about The Modern Gun Control Movement as standalone issue separate from the wide slate of overtly racist laws and Jim Crow control of state and local governments that came before. Much of the impetus for them was to continue denying Blacks and Latinos the ability to defend themselves as Jim Crow was dismantled and the Civil Rights Movement began tearing down institutional racism.

          • Wow!

            There isn’t a differentiation. Gun control is gun control. Saying that Regan started this in CA is blatantly deceptive. You democrats always keep making up your own terms to try and ignore or change history. Using your logic, I could say something like Obama started “modern” war in Iraq, despite the fact that the conflict in the middle east existed before Obama. If something existed before someone’s actions, then that person is not the one who started something.

          • I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of the Democrat Party.

    • James Young

      Fresno used to be very conservative, but it has turned along with everything else in CA. Mass immigration into CA by people who have no idea what the constitution even is and mass immigration out of CA by those who value the constitution who are sick of this stuff (sorry TexasUberAlles for all the CA people coming to your state).

      • Wow!

        Well TexasUberAlles probably is happy with that, considering he tends to be left on the political spectrum.

  • Aaron

    Just to keep it clear Jim Costa is the duly elected US Rep for Fresno (16th District). Boxer has been traded out for Harris. Pelosi represents the 12th District which is San Francisco.

  • Joe

    I know this is incorrect under Federal law, but is there some Fresno-specific law that I don’t know about?

    • Chatterbot

      California Code, Penal Code – PEN § 17170

  • Patrick Reginald

    Good, illegal guns should be illegal

    • The_Real_Charlie_Horse

      It’s not an illegal weapon, though. Notice the barrel is not cut down. The varrel is 16.5 inches, so it is not legally a short barrel rifle. Their reasoning is false and easily disproven and it opens them up to a huge lawsuit for false charges.

      • Patrick Reginald

        False

        • Alex Agius

          No it isn’t false, it is not an SBR by the letter of the law or by the ATFs opinion on the law.

          • Chatterbot

            It’s (could be) SBR by California law.

          • Patrick Reginald

            False.

          • Alex Agius

            Gonna need some proof boi.

          • Patrick Reginald

            You’ll find it in your dad’s nether region, boyo.

          • Alex Agius

            Just like where you pulled it from, your own ass.

          • Patrick Reginald

            Again false, you’re an idiot.

        • The_Real_Charlie_Horse

          No, not false.

        • The_Real_Charlie_Horse

          Prove it.

          • Patrick Reginald

            Done

          • The_Real_Charlie_Horse

            Yes, without any proof, your lies are done.

          • Patrick Reginald

            You’re done

          • The_Real_Charlie_Horse

            Yeah… You’re just a troll.

          • The_Real_Charlie_Horse

            Yeah, you’re a troll.

      • Cymond

        Small technicality, 18 inches is the standard length for a 10/22 barrel.

        Of course, that just makes this “SBR” bull S even stupider.

        • Sam Damiano

          Ruger sells rifles with and separate 16 and 1/8 inch long barrels. That is their Compact series. They also sell 18.5 and 20 inch barrels and rifles with those barrels installed.

          • Cymond

            Yeah, I know they exist, and there used to be a 24″ Walmart special, but 18.5″ is the standard
            (not 18, my bad)

        • The_Real_Charlie_Horse

          I stand corrected, they are 18 inches standard. I agree.

  • aweds1

    So taking the action out of the stock for cleaning or for simply changing to a different stock constitutes an illegal act??? I’m confused. How is this in any way a SBR? If you can start claiming that a barrel action is a complete rifle, what’s next?

  • Dan Goodwin

    I forwarded this to Sgt. Castillo in hopes he might learn a little bit about guns before he puts his name to a totally false charge applied by officers and Comm staff who know nothing about guns.

    Her lawyer will have fun and probably sue for defamation.

    • Patrick Reginald

      I don’t think so

      • Corey

        Yeah she probably can’t afford a private attorney so she’s screwed.. Cali needs to be gutted of unconstitutional hacks at all levels of gubment.

        • Wow!

          No, even if she has the best lawyer she isn’t getting out of the drug possession. The weapon charges are just backups.

    • Bill

      Her lawyer will probably deal it off while eating the drug and brass knuckle charges. and maybe the parking ticket.

      Defamation? Really?

  • Fffgll

    I’m just a humble country lawyer trying to do the best I can against this brilliant prosecutor from the big city of Fresno. (Hooks thumbs under suspenders) But it seems like to me that a short barrel rifle should have to have a short barrel.

    • Budogunner

      They are going for the 26″ OAL requirement, but this is very clearly a disassembled firearm so I have no idea why the officers tbought this would stick.

      • nadnerbus

        I’m guessing that they know their arrestee is not going to get much more than a public pretender. They could probably call it a grenade launcher and get it to stick.

        • That depends– is the grenade launcher of sufficient caliber to load a ham sandwich?

      • Wow!

        I agree with nadnerbus, but of course, your comment’s point would be especially critical if it was in that configuration loaded or she tried to threaten officers with the rifle as is. But according to this article, that doesn’t seem to be the case. Drug possession is likely the target.

        • Budogunner

          Search Youtube for the clip of Niel DeGrasse Tyson talking about his Jury duty selection process for a case involving a drug charge. It is hilarious.

          • Wow!

            That video is actually one of the reasons I don’t like NDT. He is more of a political commentator than an actual scientist. Take his cocaine example. Yes, 3000mg equals 3 grams. However, what he deliberately never mentioned was that many crack addicts only need 0.1g for a line, and half a gram line for a long term addicts to keep them high for hours. So yes, even though it is only 3 grams, not taking it into context is like saying 1 kilo of comp B is the same threat as a kilo of black or smokeless powder.

            Remember that his only claim to fame was controversy in the Hayden Planetarium by removing Pluto as a planet. In my younger days I was a fairly avid astronomer (then again, most people were), and the IAU’s revised definitions for a planed based on NDT’s opinions are ridiculous, which is why many groups refused to comply with it. There are three components to the IAU’s definition:
            1. Object has to orbit sun
            2. Object has to have sufficient mass and consequentially gravity to assume a nearly round shape
            3. Object has to clear orbit of debris.

            1.- okay that makes sense in line with the conventional definition
            2.- subjective, considering that we cannot measure concentricity on a distant object very accurately, and the amount of gravity doesn’t currently have boundaries since not all planets are solid masses, but also even gasses, but that is a reasonable component for defining a planet.
            3.- Here is the kicker. Under this definition Earth isn’t a planet. That is right. Earth doesn’t clear its orbit. Meteorites are evidence of this fact. And practically it doesn’t make sense. Under this third component of the definition you would have to wait and observe a celestial body throughout its entire orbit before you could call it a planet, and that can easily take longer than any of our natural lives.

            NDT is like the Justin Bieber of the scientific community. He has his niche supporters due to his claims, and lots of kids like him because they grew up watching him on Nova, but he is substituting controversy for actual discovery, and hoping the general public is not educated enough to know the difference.

    • Larry Thomas

      First they have to figure out which end is the barrel.

    • Marcus D.

      Same here, and having read the actual Penal Code statutes, I have a hard time seeing this particular charge stick. Just because the rule for the ATF is “once a rifle always a rifle” does not mean that that is the law in California. Yes, they are going for the OAL, because these cops wanted to charge her with a gun crime and this was the best they could come up with. Given the complexity of the involved statutes, not a bad choice. However, the law requires that for it to be a rifle it must be capable of being fired from the shoulder, and which this stockless gun clearly is not.

  • JamesG3

    There are all kinds of bolt action barreled actions sold without a stock (Howa, for example). What are they at the point of sale? I’d assume they are rifles, processed as the same, many here could certainly clarify that for me. If that is the case, why would this be different?

    • PK

      …bolt action barreled actions sold without a stock… What are they at the point of sale?

      Title 1 “firearms”.

  • R. Kenneth Thorstenson

    As long as you don’t carry a loaded, stockless rifle, you’ll never have any issues.

    If the ATF or police have a habit of checking out your safe, either keep the stock on it while secured or remove the trigger group.

  • Chatterbot

    Fresno PD is probably wrong, but not as wrong as you think. California has its own SBR law, which includes “any rifle with overall length of 26” or less “. While a stockless rifle will probably not fall under that definition, it is entirely possible that a judge will sustain it.

    • aweds1

      That’s insane. That’s like saying an engine by itself is a complete car.

      • Nicholas C

        I would equate it more to a rolling chassis with engine. It technically runs but with out seats it makes it hard to control.

      • Chatterbot

        Previous court rulings applied the law to rifles which are shorter than 26″ with stock folded. To go from “stock folded” to “stock removed” is not that far fetched.

        • aweds1

          A folded stock is still a stock attached to the barreled action to create a complete firearm. Stock removed would mean that any rifle could be considered an SBR on the basis of the dimensions of disassembled parts. Even for a CA judge, I think that would be a step too far.

          • Chatterbot

            Check out People vs Nguyen (2013). Mr. Nguyen went away to the big house for owning an assault weapon – despite the fact that the “weapon” in question was an unassembled AK-47 parts kit. If a parts kit could be an assault weapon, why can’t an disassembled rifle be an SBR?

          • MeaCulpa

            Well I’d say a disassembled SBR could be considered a SBR but without the actual folding/cut stock laying about it seems unlikely.

    • Marcus D.

      Look, this whole thing was merely the only viable basis they could come up with to seize the gun.

    • Wow!

      I don’t think they expect the weapon charge to stick. The prize is the narcotics, and they will probably get that. The weapon charges are last ditch backups for court.

  • Sua Sponte

    Yeah, 10/22’s without a stock is your problem……”Removed a dangerous firearm from the streets”…….*Ahem*…..Bwhahahahahahahahahahahahahha……It would be more dangerous used as a bat…

    • MeaCulpa

      I think the SBR part is stupid as all h3ll but who leaves the best part of a rifle on the ground?

      • Sua Sponte

        Oh who knows, it is all silly, but not as silly as the PD elevating this and making themselves look stupid…

        • Swarf

          Making themselves look silly and likely ruining the life of a person who was already pretty low to begin with.

          • Sua Sponte

            It would be nice to believe saner minds would prevail in California, but I don’t hold out a lot of hope..

  • Westwood

    I think it was considered an SBR by California law and not federal law

    • JSmath

      One more reason why the Fed might just step in and beat down California on their gun laws, actually.

      The Cali gun laws use the same terms as national level to define a rifle: “… intended to be fired from the shoulder …” – ie this is not a rifle.

      • Chatterbot

        >One more reason why the Fed might just step in and beat down California on their gun laws, actually.
        If state gun laws start getting treated with the same federal scruitiny as laws on race/gender/voting discrimination etc – they could.

        >The Cali gun laws use the same terms as national level to define a rifle: “… intended to be fired from the shoulder …” – ie this is not a rifle
        Ah, but don’t forget – “Once a rifle, always a rifle”.

      • Marcus D.

        Bingo.

    • gunsandrockets

      Bingo. Commiefornia law, though it contains similar provisions to the Federal 1968 GCA, differs in very important details.

      In fact I believe the crazy California law predated and trailblazed the legislative campaign for the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968.

    • Marcus D.

      No, I was considered by these cops to be a SBR, which doesn’t mean that a court will see it that way.

  • Jay Ross

    This is dumb and I’m trying to wrap my head around it. So by this logic you can’t take your stock off at all then unless it’s a registered sbr or the barrel is ridiculously long?

    • Swarf

      It’s no dumber than New York’s “gravity knife” laws, which would make a felon out of probably 95% of the people who comment on this blog for their Spyderco.

      If a cop wants you to be in prison, they can pretty much do it. We are all “criminals” walking around, one cop’s bad mood away from prison and a felony rap.

      • Wow!

        You are completely forgetting about the narcotics.

  • codfilet

    *cough* AR-7 *cough*………..

  • Cymond

    I really hope you follow up with this to see how it shakes out. This can’t be right. It’s gotta be a case of know it all cops who don’t understand a barreled receiver.

  • Michael Gallagher

    If Ruger does not have lawyers making arraignments to meet and work with the accused and her defense to this charge they are making a big mistake.

    Whether this support is public or in private, they need to squash this in a hurry. The ramifications of a conviction could be problematic for them and others.

    • Bill

      Ruger probably isn’t thrilled that a customer is holding narcotics and non-brass knuckles while attracting the attention of the police.

  • Skeptik

    She still had drugs and composite Knuckles on her (brass knuckles, maybe?)
    This is still a drug and weapons charge, 10/22 aside.

    • pvw20

      They’d be brass knuckles if they were made out of brass.

      • Wow!

        In most states brass knuckles don’t have to be made of brass to be “illegal”. It is just a definition for the commonly known weapon. Just like how a baton can also include saps. I don’t agree with that weapon restriction, but I do agree throwing the book at her for narcotics possession.

    • Are you one of the arresting officers?

    • Wow!

      This is the part people seem to forget. When you prosecute someone, you throw the book at them because you never know when legitimate crimes are ignored under some BS technicality.

  • Christian Hedegaard-Schou

    Not to defend the actions of the officers, but CA has its own set of legal definitions/penal code for things like SBR’s, AOW’s, etc that aren’t necessarily copies of federal law.

    I can guarantee that this is being charged under CA PC and NOT Federal Law (NFA).

  • Maxpwr

    When it comes to gun laws in California I’m like forget it, Jake. It’s Chinatown…Or Fresno.

  • Corey

    Wow what a waste of tax dollars. I hope her lawyer has a field day with these unconstitutional crumpets…

    • Swarf

      She’s a homeless drug addict living in an illegally parked RV. I don’t think she’s going to have top tier representation.

    • Wow!

      Stopping drug abuse is not a waste of tax dollars. Did you read the full article? The weapon charges are backups in case the defense pulls a fast one. Doesn’t help she has knuckles too.

  • Meat

    Nothing to see here………..
    Move along

  • Father Gary

    California for you, truely a different country

  • USMC03Vet

    No magazine, no pistol grip, no thing that goes up.
    California lawmakers should be praising this gun owner right?

    • nadnerbus

      I am not familiar with the state code, but considering this makes me a felon every time I clean my 10/22 or mini14, I don’t think it is correct even for California law.

      I could see maybe charging with carrying a loaded weapon in a vehicle or something. Still stupid, but at least a well known California law.

  • FirstLanguage:Sarcasm

    Not many 10/22’s out there, so really no big deal.

  • James

    While I have mixed feelings on a tax payer funded snitch program, what really blew me away was that the seriousness of having an “assualt rifle” is on par with human trafficking. CA has proven uet again how outta wack their legal/law enforcement priorities are.

    • RealitiCzech

      That’s why I don’t have a gun. I smuggle in child soldiers from the Congo to defend me.

      • MeaCulpa

        That my friend was solid gold!

  • Swarf

    Well. It’s all worth it because California is virtually crime free, right?

  • Bill

    We aren’t doing context anymore, people?

    You’d be amazed how much trouble you don’t get into if you aren’t in possession of illegal drugs and impact weapons, or try to hide something when the heat shows up.

    You aren’t going to get jammed up disassembling the worlds most popular .22 because presumably there isn’t any criminal intent, unless you’ve decided that role-playing Walter White in your Winnebago is a good idea.

    • Swarf

      So if I’m doing nothing wrong, I have nothing to fear? It’s only bad people who are tripped up by technicalities and BS felony adds? And clearly this woman is a bad person because she got caught up in this and was there in the first place?

      Good to know.

      • Bill

        Is this really the test case you want?

        It’d be different if it were gramps at the gun club getting braced whilst cleaning his carbine at the workbench. But it wasn’t.

      • Wow!

        Lamo. Having illegal narcotics is one hell of a “technicality”. But I’m sure she “didn’t do nothing”.

  • MB

    Are cops in California really that stupid? I can see a big judgement law suit and a few officers looking for jobs painting houses after this nonsense. I bet the drugs were “Advil” based on what the cops seem to know about guns. Good God !!

    • Wow!

      Advil isn’t an illegal narcotic buddy, it is over the counter. Cops in CA are smart, it is the politicians that are dumb. Chances are the weapon charges (aside from the knuckles) will be dropped, but the key is to have backups in case the defense pulls a fast one on the narcotic charges.

  • gg, ca

  • Stuki Moi

    More Tales from the Dumb Side….

  • QuadGMoto

    I think they might be able to legitimately stretch the definition of SBR to cover this IF:

    1) It was loaded.

    2) It was being used to threaten someone.

    3) Something had been done to keep the pins from falling out so it would not spontaneously disassemble itself as it was being fired.

    But what I see is:

    1) In the picture of it laying under the steps, there is clearly no magazine attached.

    2) The person who had it put it down when she saw the police, something any reasonable person do. There’s no sign of intended use as a functioning rifle given in the descriptions I’ve seen.

    3) There is no sign of any modification, not even tape, to hold the pins in place.

    So, the person arrested was guilty of other crimes. Fine, charge her with those crimes. If she is a felon, she could reasonably be charged with illegal possession. But this? This is excessively stupid, stretching the law beyond the breaking point.

    • Wow!

      No, it still would not be an SBR. It would just be a crime while in possession of a firearm. There is a whole set of state laws for that. With how silly the law is interpreted these days, LEA’s have to throw the book at people as backup in case the suspect is for whatever reason acquitted.

  • robert57Q

    I’d like to say this charge would never survive any competent defense, but it IS in the People’s Republic of Fruits, Nuts and Flakes, so there is that.

  • Royce Williams

    Sounds like the left coast version of what we call “hog law” here in East Texas, which translates to making up law on the fly to justify the desired outcome.

  • BryanS

    The problem we have here (other than gun laws being outside of what the feds might enforce…) si that mandatory sentencing just makes stupid charges get added to avoid actual trials.

    “Guy smoking pot who happens to have an unloaded and beat to hell iver johnson pistol buried in the back of a toolbox of a van” turns into “man harboring drugs, with intent to distribute, armed and dangerous, with serial numbers removed” so department budgets can increase, and congress critters can talk about how they are hard on crime next election cycle.

  • Congo Rick

    It’ll never fly in court.
    By that account you could classify possessing any handgun as constructive possession of a AOW.
    Drug charges might stick though.

    • Wow!

      Exactly my take. Basically as backup in case the drug charges are dropped for some silly reason.

  • datimes

    The comment section is very informative today. Some of the incidents I recall and others I was unaware. Still a bit of a puzzle as the issues need to be weighted. However making better sense of the historical basis now. Thanks for the many thoughtful comments.

  • Jim_Macklin

    Don’t clean your guns while in California. seems to be te new rule.

  • Wow!

    Exactly. The key target is the narcotics. Everything else is basically backup.

  • Broz

    This case is going nowhere – at least as far as an SBR is concerned…the other charges are gonna be a problem for this idjit, though. Rampant stupidity on both sides…NEVER rely on a cop to know firearms laws completely…or firearms themselves…most cops are not ‘gun guys’…