Don't do business with Cal's Sporting Armory

[rocko]

Just a heads up on these guys - unfortunately, the thread has been deleted from HKPRO, but apparently they have appointed themselves ATF watchdogs. The discussion stemmed from Robert Johnson's ad there for USP hicap magazines. He also posts here periodically and basically sells dirt cheap, preban, unmarked mags. Apparently Cal's questions the legality of his USP mags and admitted that they call the ATF whenever they find someone selling mags they don't think are legit. Apparently, this is anyone who is selling them cheaper than them, as Robert's prices are around 40% less than what Cal's sells for.

I encourage everyone here who considers themselves a "shooter" to avoid Cal's at all cost as well as recommend the same to others as well.

Is there the possibility that these mags are really postban mags intended for non-US markets (and therefore not marked LEO) as Cal's claims? Sure, it is possible, and they quantity they have been appearing in lately is somewhat strange. However, is it Cal's job to be an ATF watchdog? Do you want to buy from a company that thinks they should be? In addition, the law states that LEO marked mags are illegal for civilians to own. The onus is on the manufacturer and/or importer to mark them. If they are unmarked, according to the law, they are perfectly legal for us to own. I'm also pretty sure that Robert is not the importer of these mags, so even if some of them did turn out to have been manufactured after 9/94 (with no way to prove it without markings) he is clear of the law as well - yet Cal's still sees fit to call the ATF down on other's like him.

So... avoid Cal's and buy from Robert- he uses his real name on every board I've seen him advertise on. If you want, feel free to email Cal's and let them know that you do not support ATF stool pigeons.

[email protected]
[email protected]

Rocko

[Foxy]

Maybe there's an issue I don't know about, but I don't have a problem with a company not wanting to partake in potentially (and pretty much assuredly, from what I've ready) illegal business.

[rocko]

IMO, there's a difference between not partaking and calling the ATF - especially when those you call the ATF on happen to be your competitors, and especially when there is no positive proof. As stated, I admit there is the potential that these are unmarked, post 9/94 mags. However, preban mags in each instance did indeed exist, in however limited quantities at the time. As such, it seems that we must go with the current laws, which state that it is illegal for a private citizen to own LEO marked mags. These are not such marked. It also states that the importer must sign an affadavit stating that to their knowledge, they were manufactured prior to 9/94. The importer in turn, is going by what his overseas supplier says. So... basically you are going on the word of the guy in the other country (you know, the one the ATF can't really touch?). If anyone is doing anything illegal, it would be those outside the US, as they are the only ones who would know the true origins of the mags. The final purchaser has, according to the law, a completely legal mag - if it is not marked LEO, and other mags just like it existed prior to 9/94, then it must be assumed to be preban. Thus, what good does it do for CSA to rat out a retailer of these mags, besides trying to scare these retailers into stopping their sale? What good does it do the shooting community besides driving up the prices again?

Rocko

[[email protected]]

I'm curious how there are preban mags for the SOCOM since it came out after the ban, and the US Govt (plus HK IIRC) has written letters stating that any "standard capacity" mags are either stolen US property, or post ban, both of which are illegal.

Last I checked, receiving stolen property is still a crime.

Not that I disapprove someone making a buck, but hell, putting the customer in jeapordy sounds uncool.

Now, the question we should be asking is, are these legal, non "grey market" mags, and if not, what are the consequences for *all of us* if this guy gets caught importing them? You really think the pro-gun movement needs a high profile case where someone is importing post ban mags as pre-ban?

Just my $.02

Kevin

[70-101]

Because the Magazines are most likely Illegal. And they do not want any repercussion's from the ATF or there customer's. I am sure they have weighed there legal options and sought council in this matter. I can't blame Cal's Sporting Armory,for letting the ATF do it's job and decide what is legal, and what is not in this matter.

[rocko]

I'm curious how there are preban mags for the SOCOM since it came out after the ban, and the US Govt (plus HK IIRC) has written letters stating that any "standard capacity" mags are either stolen US property, or post ban, both of which are illegal.

Last I checked, receiving stolen property is still a crime.

Not that I disapprove someone making a buck, but hell, putting the customer in jeapordy sounds uncool.

Now, the question we should be asking is, are these legal, non "grey market" mags, and if not, what are the consequences for *all of us* if this guy gets caught importing them? You really think the pro-gun movement needs a high profile case where someone is importing post ban mags as pre-ban?

Just my $.02

Kevin

HK USA has stated in the past that the 12 round preban USP mags are stolen government property, and that no preban USP .45 mags exist. They are basing this on the fact that the gun was not released to the civilian market until 1995 and the fact that they apparently did not import any 12 round preban mags. However, HK USA is not HK Oberndorf (who has never commented on the issue one way or the other), which actually manufactured the mags nor do preban mags need to be imported by the "official" US distributor (which is all HK USA basically is - a warehouse with perhaps a couple of smiths to do warranty repairs) of the manufacturer in order to be legal. Furthermore, even though the pistol was not released for sale in the US until 1995, don't you think that HK had been producing them long before? Below is some evidence, both more or less "hard" evidence and anecdotal that preban USP mags do indeed exist, despite what HK USA says:

-In Guns 1997 Combat Annual there is a 4 page artical written by Massad Ayoob with photos by Ichiro Nagata that clearly show a USP .45 with a date code of "KE" (1994)Serial No' 25-015. This photo can be found on page 95.

-In the "Handguns" Magazine September 1995 there is also an article by David W Arnold and photos by Lynne McCready that shows a USP 45 with a date of of "KE (1994) Serial Number' 25-012.

While HK is tight lipped about any codes (if any) stamped on their magazines, the date codes on their firearms are public knowledge. Here we have evidence of two pistols that were manufactured in 1994. If production pistols existed then, certainly the mags did as well. Likely they ran off a ton of them before the pistol was released to meet the demand of this much anticipated pistol.

Perhaps you are familiar with Larry at Capital City Firearms? This is what he had to say about the matter in a post from another board:

A) HK, Jim Schlatz,in an article in Jan 1996 issue of Machine Gun News, made a long statement saying a lot of things about the mags, but never said they were not manufactured prior to 1994. I have pretty good proof they were manufactured in 1992 - in the article Jim Schlatz stated carefully that none had been released to the civilian market but never said that none had been manufactured prior to Sept 1994.

In August of 1994, Greentop's Sporting goods, had USP 45 mags for sale, 12 rounders, I remember because they wanted $75 which back then was a high price and the pistol was not due out until the fall of 1994 - they indicated HK had sent them as they knew people would want them - don't think the first pistols showed up until Dec of 94 or Jan of 95
Another poster on another board indicated the same thing about his dealer in San Francisco which is what reminded me about Greentop's having them and it was strange at the time they would have them in advance of the pistol being released but reason was obviously, at the time, they would be banned in Sept 1994.

2) a couple of my PD customers have called in to purchase some of the few prebans 45 USP mags we have had over the years (total of about 35 - 40) - before selling them the mags I would give them (not knowing who they were in terms of PD) the whole spiel about the debate or confusion about their status so that they knew the debate before they purchased - two of them got angry and stated - "that's crazy - you don't know who I am, Im Sgt so & so in the blank PD up here in anytown USA - we just placed a big order with HK a few months back and told the rep we wanted some preban 45 mags for ourselves personally, and he sent us 12" - I saved their names and tickets - these aren't the kind of people to forget what they said.

So... we also have a respected name in the HK resale community who states that he personally saw 12 round USP mags for sale before the ban even took effect. For all we know, HK Oberndorf made one huge run of hundreds of thousands of mags at the beginning of production. Are all the 12 round HK mags we see all legitimate prebans? Probably not, but being that there is no way to tell for sure, we (and the government) must assume that any unmarked mag is legit.

And no, I don't think the pro-gun movement needs a large, high profile case about illegal hicap mag importation, but how does Cal's pointing the finger when they can't even be sure there is a legal issue help this at all?

Because the Magazines are most likely Illegal. And they do not want any repercussion's from the ATF or there customer's. I am sure they have weighed there legal options and sought council in this matter. I can't blame Cal's Sporting Armory,for letting the ATF do it's job and decide what is legal, and what is not in this matter.

See above. Also, Cal's isn't simply sitting back and letting the ATF do their job, as you say. They are actively trying to cause trouble for their competition. Even if not a single one of these mags we are talking about can be proven to be illegally imported, the importers, sellers, etc. could still be tied up in legal trouble indefinitely. Its like your neighbor calling the cops on you because they saw you loading your "machine gun" (perfectly legal, postban AR15) into your car for a trip to the range. Even if the gun is perfectly legal, depending on the attitudes of the cops, PD, etc., they may (and have, in the past) confiscate the firearm for "investigation". I'm sure we've all heard the stories of legal trouble that gun owners have had to go through to get their perfectly legal firearms back. I belive Cal's is attempting to use scare tactics on others who are selling these preban mags. Funny how they only seem to be pointing the finger at those who are selling the exact same merchandise as them...

Rocko

[rocko]

Oh yeah, in case anyone was wondering, I have never bought anything from Robert Johnson, nor do I have any relationship with him beyond seeing his for sale ads here and elsewhere. Nor do I have any relationship with Cal's other than one small order placed maybe 18 months ago, with which I was satisfied. If you do a search on my username here, you will probably actually see me recommend Cal's at one time or another in the past. I also do not sell any firearms or firearms related parts as a business. In fact, I do not even own (nor ever have owned) any of these magazines we are talking about. I do have a USP Tactical, but I am waiting until the November elections until I make a decision to purchase any preban, 12 round mags. I figure if the republicans do good enough, there is a decent chance the 94 crime bill will expire and we'll all be able to get 12 round mags at $40/ea all day long, vs. the $80 they are selling for now.

Rocko

[Marko Kloos]

Moved to Retail Deals & Feedback.

[GunGeek]

Because the Magazines are most likely Illegal. And they do not want any repercussion's from the ATF or there customer's.

Maybe there's an issue I don't know about, but I don't have a problem with a company not wanting to partake in potentially (and pretty much assuredly, from what I've ready) illegal business.

I'm curious how there are preban mags for the SOCOM since it came out after the ban, and the US Govt (plus HK IIRC) has written letters stating that any "standard capacity" mags are either stolen US property, or post ban, both of which are illegal.

Am I reading this wrong? Everyone seems to be saying cal's is calling the feds to prevent them or thier customers from breaking the law. Now the way I read the first post it was Cal's is calling ATF whenever they think THIER COMPITITION is breaking the law "or preceved to be". Cal's seems to sell thier own mags fine so you can't say all mags are illegal.

Is it up to walmart to call the feds if they think kmart is breaking the law? I don't think so. Cal's needs to mind thier own buisness, and everyone needs to reread the first post carefully before they comment again.

[Foxy]

Gungeek and Rocko,

If I suddenly started selling unmarked merchandise of questionable legality at dirt cheap prices, would you have a beef if Rich locked the thread and notified the ATF that there is a potential felony going on? I wouldn't. If K-Mart was selling stolen computers, I don't think I'd have a problem with Wal-Mart calling in the feds.

I don't hold a grudge against Cal's at all. If the ATF says that Robert's mags are legal, I'd consider purchasing them. But I'd really rather not buy from Robert and find out that they're illegal and that I've gotten into a world of hurt.

A 'respected aftermarket dealer' may have one opinion, but I think I'll pay attention to what HK-USA has to say about it.

[rocko]

Please see the full text of the law below. I have bolded the interesting/relevant points - especially interesting points are bolded and italicized. As you can see unmarked = legal by definition. It is somewhat silly to suggest that every reseller of these mags (keep in mind, these are the resellers, not importers) check with the ATF to see if their mags are legal - as if it would be possible to tell the difference between two unmarked mag anyway. What, because someone is selling them cheaper, they must be illegal? That's absurb.

If you don't feel comfortable buying these mags, then by all means don't. My point is, in any case, it is not a retailer's place to play ATF watchdog and stool pigeon and I won't support a company that does. I just wanted to give a heads up to everyone else - I figured most shooters who feel these laws are silly and unconstitutional in the first place would agree with me.

And yes, I would be upset if Rich did the same thing. He certainly can lock, deleted, etc., whatever he wants, but I don't feel it is his job to go to the ATF either. If they want to catch any offenders of these silly laws, at least make them do all the footwork. You say "unmarked" as if it were a bad thing, but it is in fact exactly what makes this stuff legal. The mags in question aren't stolen, FWIW, so I don't think your stolen computer analogy quite works. The only mags Robert offers for sale on HKPRO are the USP 9mm and .40 mags. The mags HK USA claims are stolen are the SOCOM mags. Robert does sell them on other boards (does not on HKPRO per request of Tom) as well as the preban USP .45 mags (NOT the SOCOM mags) that HK USA claims do not exist, despite the two prominently displayed USP .45's with 1994 date codes featured in the magazine mentioned. In light of this evidence, along with the fact that the US Gov't is probably HK USA's biggest customer and we didn't exactly have a pro-gun administration at the time, I'd take whatever they say on the matter with a grain of salt.

Rocko


One Hundred Third Congress of the United States of America
AT THE SECOND SESSION
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, the twenty-fifth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-four
An Act To control and prevent crime. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994'.



SEC. 110103. BAN OF LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICES.
(a) PROHIBITION- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, as
amended by section 110102(a), is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
`(w)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful
for a person to transfer or possess a large capacity ammunition
feeding device.
`(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer
of any large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise lawfully
possessed on or before the date of the enactment of this subsection.
`(3) This subsection shall not apply to--
`(A) the manufacture for, transfer to, or possession by the
United States or a department or agency of the United States or
a State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a
State, or a transfer to or possession by a law enforcement
officer employed by such an entity for purposes of law
enforcement (whether on or off duty);
`(B) the transfer to a licensee under title I of the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954 for purposes of establishing and maintaining
an on-site physical protection system and security organization
required by Federal law, or possession by an employee or
contractor of such licensee on-site for such purposes or
off-site for purposes of licensee-authorized training or
transportation of nuclear materials;
`(C) the possession, by an individual who is retired from
service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise
prohibited from receiving ammunition, of a large capacity
ammunition feeding device transferred to the individual by the
agency upon such retirement; or
`(D) the manufacture, transfer, or possession of any large
capacity ammunition feeding device by a licensed manufacturer
or licensed importer for the purposes of testing or
experimentation authorized by the Secretary.'.
`(4) If a person charged with violating paragraph (1) asserts
that paragraph (1) does not apply to such person because of
paragraph (2) or (3), the Government shall have the burden of proof
to show that such paragraph (1) applies to such person. The lack of
a serial number as described in section 923(i) of title 18, United
States Code, shall be a presumption that the large capacity
ammunition feeding device is not subject to the prohibition of
possession in paragraph (1).'.
(b) DEFINITION OF LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICE-
Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, as amended by
section 110102(b), is amended by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
`(31) The term `large capacity ammunition feeding device'--
`(A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar
device manufactured after the date of enactment of the Violent
Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 that has a
capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to
accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; but
`(B) does not include an attached tubular device designed to
accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire
ammunition.'.
(c) PENALTY- Section 924(a)(1)(B) of title 18, United States
Code, as amended by section 110102(c)(1), is amended by striking
`or (v)' and inserting `(v), or (w)'.
(d) IDENTIFICATION MARKINGS FOR LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING
DEVICES- Section 923(i) of title 18, United States Code, as amended
by section 110102(d) of this Act, is amended by adding at the end
the following: `A large capacity ammunition feeding device
manufactured after the date of the enactment of this sentence shall
be identified by a serial number that clearly shows that the device
was manufactured or imported after the effective date of this
subsection, and such other identification as the Secretary may by
regulation prescribe.'.

[Gary H]

I've purchased from Cal's and there has always seemed to be an interest in keeping things legal. He gets a bit behind on some backorders, but no real complaints. Perhaps this issue should be taken up with C.S.G. directly.

[Quartus]

rocko, this seems perfecly clear to me.


Clear as mud.


Can you go through it again, ABC style, for those of us who are slow learners?

[[email protected]]

For something like this, I'd hate to be the person having to prove that they *we're* pre-ban mags. This should be simple - can Mr. Johnson provide notorized statements saying they are? That should settle the matter to everyone's satisfaction.

Kevin

[rocko]

(w)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful
for a person to transfer or possess a large capacity ammunition
feeding device.

Means mags capable of holding more than 10 rounds are illegal to own or sell.

(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer
of any large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise lawfully
possessed on or before the date of the enactment of this subsection.

Means that the above does not apply to mags manufactured prior to 9/14/94.

(4) If a person charged with violating paragraph (1) asserts
that paragraph (1) does not apply to such person because of
paragraph (2) or (3), the Government shall have the burden of proof to show that such paragraph (1) applies to such person.con't

Means that, contrary to what many people say, it is up to the government to prove that the mags are postban. It is not up to you to prove they are preban.

con'tThe lack of a serial number as described in section 923(i) of title 18, United States Code, shall be a presumption that the large capacity ammunition feeding device is not subject to the prohibition of possession in paragraph (1).'.

This one is the important one: it says, as you can see, that if the magazine lacks a "serial number" (date code, "Law Enforcement Use Only" markings, etc.), then it is assumed to be preban. So, if all the mags in question here are not marked with any sort of date coding or LEO stamps, they are perfectly legal to own or transfer. Plain and simple.

(d) IDENTIFICATION MARKINGS FOR LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICES- Section 923(i) of title 18, United States Code, as amended by section 110102(d) of this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following: `A large capacity ammunition feeding device manufactured after the date of the enactment of this sentence shall be identified by a serial number that clearly shows that the device was manufactured or imported after the effective date of this subsection, and such other identification as the Secretary may by regulation prescribe.'.

Just clarification on the "serial number" requirement here. Refering back to (w)(2), if it doesn't have these markings, it is assumed to be a preban for the purposes of ownership and transfer once it is in the country. The onus is on the manufacturer or importer to mark postban mags as such. If they don't they are breaking the law, but once they are here on the market, according to (w)(2), they are legal to own or sell.

Rocko

[Mylhouse]

I agree with you 100%! I just can't put together as good an argument as you have just done.

I, for one, will never do business with Cal's, and he can stick it where the sun don't shine.

I have personally met and bought from Robert. I can attest to his character and legitimacy. He met with me in person with his real name, real car, and didn't try to hide anything or sidestep any questions I had.

Robert sells them at GREAT prices! I think that some of you, in some sick, twisted way, want our 'benevolent' gov't to tell you that these mags are illegal because you think the deal is too good to be true and you're too chicken $%#@ to take a chance and buy some of these mags. So you want someone to step in and reassure you that the mags are bunk. Kind of like when you're waffling over a gun purchase that you KNOW is a good deal, but for some reason you're afraid that you're going to get buyer's remorse or something....and then you just hope that someone else will hurry up and buy the gun first so the 'choice' will be made for you already...and you can stop worrying about it.

Why are you idiots that always assume that Robert's mags are illegal so quick to cry foul? And publicly? You keep shouting this crap from the rooftops like it's gospel, and one day you're going to bring down the wrath of the ATF on this matter.

Stand back for a second and let's assume that the mags are legal (even though I already believe them to be). All this fussing over these mags will draw the attention of the JBT's and gun-grabbing polititians. They will see where they left a possible 'loophole' and close it.....quick! Is that what you want to see? More restrictions? Fewer handguns that we can own FULL capacity mags for?:barf:

[VictorLouis]

Ditto, Mylhouse.

[[email protected]]

I see, so those of us who are skeptical of this "manna from heavan" are idiots for being skeptical?

Whatever. Some of you are incredibly naive. I've got a USP and though I'd love some more high-caps for it, 2 rounds isn't worth $$$$$ & prison time for me.

Just remember what the ATF did to Bob Stewart and his kits - 8 hours in a machine shop to turn his kit into a rifle, and he was found guilty. You expect them to play by the "rules" if they can make a high profile example of someone given the chance? Especially during an election year? Especially when some gun-grabber needs an excuse not to let the ban lapse? Puh-leeeze.

Wake up.

Kevin

[Wolf226]

Mylhouse said it better that I probably could.
It is just NOT COOL to rat out someone that is doing you no harm.
It is especially UNCOOL for someone in the firearms business to rat out anyone else in the firearms business as long as they are not hurting anyone.

The rest of you sound like 'church ladies' that should spend less time looking in your neighbors windows to see if they are doing anything wrong.

Ooopss - you're the ones that are hoping that the 'TIPS' program comes through, aren't you???

[Mylhouse]

Thanks to those that 'got my back'.

Arguing with some of you is like arguing with a liberal. I'm never going to change your closed mind.

There's too much estrogen in this room for me. I'm outta here!:barf:

[rocko]

I see, so those of us who are skeptical of this "manna from heavan" are idiots for being skeptical?

Whatever. Some of you are incredibly naive. I've got a USP and though I'd love some more high-caps for it, 2 rounds isn't worth $$$$$ & prison time for me.

Just remember what the ATF did to Bob Stewart and his kits - 8 hours in a machine shop to turn his kit into a rifle, and he was found guilty. You expect them to play by the "rules" if they can make a high profile example of someone given the chance? Especially during an election year? Especially when some gun-grabber needs an excuse not to let the ban lapse? Puh-leeeze.

Wake up.

Kevin

You're missing the point here... Your personal decision whether or not to buy these mags is a completely different issue than one retailer ratting out another to the ATF, when, according to the letter of the law, that retailer absolutely has done nothing illegal. What makes it worse is that CSA sells the exact same mags they were complaining about - so... they are not even arguing the existence of the preban mags in general, but only that of their competitor's.

Your argument states that the anti-gunners want a high profile case. Please explain how you think that Cal's ratting out other dealers does not play right into their hands in this regard?

Your argument also brings up the Bob Stewart case. You don't say it outright, but you seem to be hinting that you think Bob should not have been guilty. FWIW, I agree - any professional machinist can probably turn a solid block of steel into something capable of firing a blank in 8 hours. So, in your comparision, you have a guy, who we agree did nothing illegal, convicted of selling unserialized firearms with an FFL. In the current topic, we have retailers who are selling these mags, who according to the law have done nothing illegal. Cal's calling the ATF on them does nothing but increase their chances that they will become the next Bob Stewart. How exactly do you not think this hurts the firearms community? Policing our community from within is one thing - I think people giving a heads up to others when they see an illegal firearm/mag/etc. sale is one thing (as long as they have the proof to back it up - which IMO, Cal's doesn't). This prevents someone from unknowingly buying an illegal item. Calling in the authorities is something completely different, and plays right into the anti's hands.

You also basically say "you're damned if you do, you're damned if you don't" in your argument - that the ATF will "find" something if they get a big enough burr in their ass. Once again, how does Cal's calling the ATF's attention to other retailers in our community help this? Even if the ATF cannot prove these mags are illegal, according to your argument, there is the possibility that they will "find" something else wrong - basically screwing people like Robert regardless of whether or not they did anything wrong.

Once again, my argument is not really trying to convince you to go out any buy these mags, although the legal issues, by nature of the charges did need to be explored. My argument is that it is wrong for one retailer to call down the wrath of the authorities on another dealer (especially when it appears they aren't really doing anything illegal, and even more especially when their motive of eliminating their competition seems so transparent). To do such just increases the chances of what you are saying we should avoid - that is a high profile case and more bogus convictions.

Brian

[Ovoid]

With friends like these...

If ATF chooses to hassle Mr. Johnson, retrieve whatever customer records he may have, and follow up by paying a visit to said customers, these customers will likely be forced to voluntarily abandon these mags without compensation. ATF is doing just this sort of thing with Cole's UZI kits. As far as I know, the contraband nature the UZI kits has only been adjudicated administratively. The same would be likely to happen in the case of any mags the ATF ITSELF determines to contraband. No ruling on the legal status of the mags (unless the unhappy customer wanted to hire a lawyer and pay the big bucks to get his $80 mags back) in court, just more ATF blurring of the line between the law as written and judged and the "real world" law that ATF gets to make up administratively as it goes along. Way to go Cal's!

Again, I say, with friends like these...and their puritanical busy-body supporters...

[[email protected]]

Maybe I should clarify my position - I'm not saying anything either way on whether Cal should be contacting the ATF. I'm just saying that as an end user - I'm highly skeptical of this deal and worried of the consequences if something untoward is going on or happens.

Kevin

[GunGeek]

If K-Mart was selling stolen computers, I don't think I'd have a problem with Wal-Mart calling in the feds.

I would, lets phrase this another way.....

"Would you have a problem with your neihbor calling the feds because they believe you have illegal assault weapons?"

I am willing to quess every single one of you would be upset if this happened to you!


What does Wal-Mart know about what K-mart does? Unless a company has solid proof of a compititers illegal practices they need to mind thier own buisness.

[CSA1]

The sale of current production European hi-cap unmarked magazines to the general public is illegal. You doubt this? Contact HK, Inc. directly at (703)450-1900. We do report the sale of such magazines (when we find them or customers report them to us) to HK, Inc. in Sterling , VA., they (HK, Inc.) take whatever steps they see fit, and it is they who contact BATF regarding such sales of these magazines. We try to educate the general public as well as other dealers about the selling of such product so they don't get ripped off because of some peoples $greed$.

HKPro.com has new posting rules due to sales of these types of magazines. They have taken the "good guy stance" as well. We support there move to prevent the sale of these types of magazines to the general public.

CSA Customer Service
www.calssportingarmory.com