PDA

View Full Version : CA complaint AR 15 and AK 47 pistol


plam408
07-31-2016, 11:04 AM
I assume this topic has been discussed recently but need to know. I'm gearing up for all the super great CA laws passed recently. I own a AR pistol and plan on purchasing a AK 47 pistol. What options do I have 1) Register as AW which I'm not going to do or 2) Put a new bullet button? How about for the Ak47 pistol? Thanks for the advice.

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
07-31-2016, 11:27 AM
As of January 1, 2017, a semiautomatic pistol that does not have a fixed magazine but has any one of the following is an assault weapon:
(A) A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer.
(B) A second handgrip.
(C) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel that allows the bearer to fire the weapon without burning the bearerís hand, except a slide that encloses the barrel.
(D) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.

That last one, a magazine outside the pistol grip, means you can't make a featureless pistol AR-15 or AK-47. So register it as an assault weapon, or make it have a fixed magazine. It's a fixed magazine if it requires disassembly of the action to remove. There's options for an AR-15 pistol, such as the ARMagLock (http://www.armaglock.com/), or the Bullet Button Reloaded (http://www.bulletbutton.com/official-bullet-button-blog-news-updates-products-ar15-ak47/2016/7/1/bb-reloaded-announcement). I don't know what options there are for AK-47 pistols.

Kwikvette
07-31-2016, 11:46 AM
^ Correct.

You can also just sell your upper and turn your lower into a rifle and go featureless.

plam408
07-31-2016, 12:12 PM
So if I register as an Assault Weapon can I remove the bullet button? There a guy on YouTube said he will register his Tavor so he can remove the magazine locking device and is now not required to meet overall length. Is this true?

Kwikvette
07-31-2016, 12:27 PM
That question can't be answered until the law is set in stone.

There are 100 threads asking that exact question, we can only wait.

Sent from my SM-G920T1 using Tapatalk

xman1
08-22-2016, 12:35 AM
Can the AR15 pistols or AK47 pistols still be sold via ppt as pistols? Or once is it registered as an assault weapon, it remains under the person in possession forever and cannot be sold?

ifilef
08-22-2016, 1:07 AM
I think it 'unwise' to assume that one can get around the registration requirement for any featured rifle you have possessed with a BB- by making it featureless or 2017 mag compliant this year. I don't believe it will matter one 'hoot'. It was a 'set stage' when you possessed it with a BB. One can't undo it, 'one can't unscramble the egg'.

Never mind the new law doesn't take effect until 1/1/2017. It is only a registration statute that characterizes weapons possessed in the past that need to be registered as AW in the future. Any crime committed would be for the failure to register in 2017 or possession of an unregistered AW, both arising in 2018, not for any conduct in 2016.

The foregoing assumes that you continue to possess the rifle to the registration deadline, e.g. 12/31/2017.

Maybe the regulations will sanction conversion as an 'escape' from registration requirements. That would be great- but we shall have to wait and see. I only comment on my interpretation of the new law(s).

My read of NEW PC 30900(b)(1) strictly construed mandates registration unless it is no longer in your possession by the registration deadline. I see no exceptions to getting around it.

What does it mean?

Featured: to avoid registration, sell it to another by 12/20/2016. You will not be able to sell it featured with a BB beyond that date. Buyer will have to register it.

Converted to Featureless or 2017 mag compliant: to avoid registration, sell it to another by 12/20/2017. Neither seller nor buyer will need to register it. Both seller and buyer should 'CYA' for the sale.

What if seller converts to featureless and just keeps it? Well, if it was possessed (past tense) by you with a BB I interpret it to require registration as an AW by 12/31/2017.

What to do about that?

Consider REGISTERING then DE-REGISTERING it as an AW. That would be the prudent course if you really want to keep it featureless/2017 mag compliant and not have any exposure.

Quiet
08-22-2016, 5:17 AM
Can the AR15 pistols or AK47 pistols still be sold via ppt as pistols? Or once is it registered as an assault weapon, it remains under the person in possession forever and cannot be sold?

If it is registered as a handgun, then it can still be sold via PPT.

If it is registered as an assault weapon, then it can only be sold to a CA FFL dealer with an assault weapons permit or taken out-of-state & sold through an out-of-state FFL dealer.

Quiet
08-22-2016, 5:18 AM
So if I register as an Assault Weapon can I remove the bullet button? There a guy on YouTube said he will register his Tavor so he can remove the magazine locking device and is now not required to meet overall length. Is this true?

Unknown.

CA DOJ BOF has not finished with the regulations that would govern this.
CA DOJ BOF has until the end of this year to finalize and release the regulations.

Quiet
08-22-2016, 5:22 AM
As of January 1, 2017, a semiautomatic pistol that does not have a fixed magazine but has any one of the following is an assault weapon:
(A) A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer.
(B) A second handgrip.
(C) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel that allows the bearer to fire the weapon without burning the bearerís hand, except a slide that encloses the barrel.
(D) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.

That last one, a magazine outside the pistol grip, means you can't make a featureless pistol AR-15 or AK-47. So register it as an assault weapon, or make it have a fixed magazine. It's a fixed magazine if it requires disassembly of the action to remove. There's options for an AR-15 pistol, such as the ARMagLock (http://www.armaglock.com/), or the Bullet Button Reloaded (http://www.bulletbutton.com/official-bullet-button-blog-news-updates-products-ar15-ak47/2016/7/1/bb-reloaded-announcement). I don't know what options there are for AK-47 pistols.

Options for AK style pistols:
A. Register it as an assault weapon.
B. Weld a 10 round magazine into the magazine well.
C. Make it into a manually operated pistol by removing the gas piston and plugging the gas block.
D. Make it into a compliant rifle.
E. Take it out-of-state for storage or to transfer it through an out-of-state FFL dealer.
F. Surrender it to law enforcement for destruction.

Blade Gunner
08-22-2016, 7:31 AM
So if I register as an Assault Weapon can I remove the bullet button? There a guy on YouTube said he will register his Tavor so he can remove the magazine locking device and is now not required to meet overall length. Is this true?

The reading of the law indicates that all the "new AW" will be classified as the existing non named AW already registered. Hence you should not need to leave your bullet button on. However DOJ has a bad habit of issuing regs that Over reach the legislation. Expect DOJ to "create" a third class of AW that requires the removal of the magazine with a tool. Litigation will quickly follow. Injunctive relief will not be granted, the DOJ will eventually lose the court case, but it will give the Sacto tyrants time to amend the law to conform with DOJ regs. As far a minimum overall rifle length, that is not part of the definition of an AW, but covered by another statute that was not changed. So if you removed that ugly barrel extension on your Tavor, you have an illegal length rifle .

fmxmyway
08-22-2016, 7:42 AM
The DOJ and the California DOJ are not the same entity and are not connected. The CA DOJ is a state run institution completely, like the CHP. Ever notice how there is no AZ DOJ or NY DOJ? The feds/DOJ/ATF dont care and are not responsible for state laws. There seems to be much confusion and semantics with the CA DOJ as if its a branch of the U.S. DOJ/Feds, its not.

jcwatchdog
08-22-2016, 9:54 AM
Why in Gods name would you register it and then de register it? I swear some of the madness people are spouting is ridiculous.

There is NO PAPER TRAIL of how your rifle was configured. If you buy an ar15, there is no where on the dros that says if it has a bullet button or not. It could have been sold as a featureless rifle back in 2013. Or it could have been sold as a featureless rifle yesterday. You won't know the difference by looking at the Dros.

I think it 'unwise' to assume that one can get around the registration requirement for any featured rifle you have possessed with a BB- by making it featureless or 2017 mag compliant this year. I don't believe it will matter one 'hoot'. It was a 'set stage' when you possessed it with a BB. One can't undo it, 'one can't unscramble the egg.

What if seller converts to featureless and just keeps it? Well, if it was possessed (past tense) by you with a BB I interpret it to require registration as an AW by 12/31/2017.

What to do about that?

Consider REGISTERING then DE-REGISTERING it as an AW. That would be the prudent course if you really want to keep it featureless/2017 mag compliant and not have any exposure.

jcwatchdog
08-22-2016, 10:00 AM
That question can't be answered until the law is set in stone.

There are 100 threads asking that exact question, we can only wait.

Sent from my SM-G920T1 using Tapatalk


The law is already set in stone. It cant be changed. Basically, next year, the bullet button will be useless for anything. It won't keep your rifle from being considered an AW. That's basically what the law says.

So to all the people saying "well we don't know yet if you can remove the bullet button yet if you register". My question would be... What LAW am I breaking if I remove it? If I have a registered AW with a useless bullet button and I remove it for a regular mag release, guess what, I still have a registered AW. There is nothing defined in the LAW saying one AW is more of an AW than another.

adam6955
08-22-2016, 10:07 AM
I think...

This is where I stopped reading.

You seem to be making a lot of assumptions, and spewing them as law.

Sheik_Yerbutay
08-22-2016, 10:15 AM
As of January 1, 2017, a semiautomatic pistol that does not have a fixed magazine but has any one of the following is an assault weapon:
(A) A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer.
(B) A second handgrip.
(C) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel that allows the bearer to fire the weapon without burning the bearerís hand, except a slide that encloses the barrel.
(D) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.

That last one, a magazine outside the pistol grip, means you can't make a featureless pistol AR-15 or AK-47. So register it as an assault weapon, or make it have a fixed magazine. It's a fixed magazine if it requires disassembly of the action to remove. There's options for an AR-15 pistol, such as the ARMagLock (http://www.armaglock.com/), or the Bullet Button Reloaded (http://www.bulletbutton.com/official-bullet-button-blog-news-updates-products-ar15-ak47/2016/7/1/bb-reloaded-announcement). I don't know what options there are for AK-47 pistols.
Wow so does my angled fore grip count as a second grip or is it only if its a vertical grip?

ifilef
08-22-2016, 10:17 AM
Read the new statute, Adam. When you have, then you might be competent to agree or disagree with my take on it

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

LeadFarmer74
08-22-2016, 10:20 AM
Wow so does my angled fore grip count as a second grip or is it only if its a vertical grip?

AFG is not considered a second grip.

jcwatchdog
08-22-2016, 10:44 AM
Read the new statute, Adam. When you have, then you might be competent to agree or disagree with my take on it

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk


Your take on it is completely wrong. What's confusing some are the dates listed that single out the owners of bullet buttoned ar15s. Some people take this section to might mean that this defines another class of AW with a bullet button. In a sense that is true. But it defines those rifles in order to both define those type of guns as AWs, and also allowing an exemption to allow AW registration for these guns.

Look at it this way, if you don't register and leave your bullet button on, what law will you eventually be breaking? You will be in possession of an unregistered Aw.

If you register that same rifle as an AW, then take the bullet button off, what law will you be breaking? The doj can't change the law. And even with their overreach at times, as some people have mentioned, they can't overreach into an area that doesnt exist.

Quiet
08-22-2016, 10:59 AM
Wow so does my angled fore grip count as a second grip or is it only if its a vertical grip?

Second handgrip equates to any type of grip.
It can be angled, horizontal, or vertical.

AFG is not considered a second grip.
Incorrect.
It's considered a second handgrip.

jcwatchdog
08-22-2016, 11:13 AM
Second handgrip equates to any type of grip.
It can be angled, horizontal, or vertical.


Incorrect.
It's considered a second handgrip.


An angled "grip" isn't a grip. It just changes the angle you hold the rifle. You can't grasp (grip) it.

Quiet
08-22-2016, 11:16 AM
An angled "grip" isn't a grip. It just changes the angle you hold the rifle. You can't grasp (grip) it.

It's a handgrip when installed on a handgun.

Sheik_Yerbutay
08-22-2016, 11:21 AM
Second handgrip equates to any type of grip.
It can be angled, horizontal, or vertical.


Incorrect.
It's considered a second handgrip.
IIRC it wasnt considered a grip before, which is why I asked. So did the definition change with this latest round of laws or is it your interpretation?

Thanks in advance :)

Quiet
08-22-2016, 11:24 AM
IIRC it wasnt considered a grip before, which is why I asked. So did the definition change with this latest round of laws or is it your interpretation?

Thanks in advance :)

CA DOJ interpretation since 2000.

Second handgrip = any secondary grip; which can be angled, horizontal, or vertical.

Quiet
08-22-2016, 11:26 AM
Example...

Uzi style pistols have a second handgrip (horizontal forward grip).

If they are installed, then the Uzi style pistol needs to operate using a fixed 10 round magazine.

If they are uninstalled, then the Uzi style pistol can operate using detachable magazines.


This Mini-Uzi style pistol needs to operate using a fixed 10 round magazine due to having a second handgrip.
http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i202/tonelar/guns/miniUzipistol.jpg

This Mini-Uzi style pistol can use detachable magazines because it does not have any restricted features (second handgrip is not installed).
http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i202/tonelar/guns/VectorFSandGroupMini.jpg

jcwatchdog
08-22-2016, 11:33 AM
It's a handgrip when installed on a handgun.



No it isn't. That's a vertical grip. You can't add a vertical grip to any ar pistol or handgun without proper registration.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/open-letter/all-ffls-may2006-open-letter-adding-vertical-fore-grip-handgun/download


This is an angled one. 3rd post with the ATF letter. The question is answered on the 2nd part of the letter at the end.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_122/635409_Magpul_Angled_Foregrip_on_a_AR_Pistol.html

With your interpretation, if you even put horizontal rail covers that would be considers a second handgrip. That doesn't hold water.

jcwatchdog
08-22-2016, 11:35 AM
CA DOJ interpretation since 2000.

Second handgrip = any secondary grip; which can be angled, horizontal, or vertical.


Really? Show me the CA DOJ determination letter.

Quiet
08-22-2016, 11:36 AM
CA law is about a "second handgrip".

It does not matter if the handgrip is angled, horizontal, or vertical.

If they wanted to limit it to a vertical grip, they would have used the term "forward pistol grip". (like what they did with the assault weapons laws for rifles)

Sheik_Yerbutay
08-22-2016, 11:43 AM
No it isn't. That's a vertical grip. You can't add a vertical grip to any ar pistol or handgun without proper registration.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/open-letter/all-ffls-may2006-open-letter-adding-vertical-fore-grip-handgun/download


This is an angled one. 3rd post with the ATF letter. The question is answered on the 2nd part of the letter at the end.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_122/635409_Magpul_Angled_Foregrip_on_a_AR_Pistol.html

With your interpretation, if you even put horizontal rail covers that would be considers a second handgrip. That doesn't hold water.

The document in your link is exactly what I was thinking of when I asked the question. It also states that a handguard is legal. Where I think the confusion starts is when there may be a difference in what the Federal DOJ and the CA DOJ state as allowable. I havent seen any CA DOJ document referencing these questions...

jcwatchdog
08-22-2016, 11:44 AM
CA law is about a "second handgrip".

It does not matter if the handgrip is angled, horizontal, or vertical.



Ok show me where you see this. There is no determination of "angled foregrip" with the CA doj at all. You posted a couple of pictures of Uzis and somehow everyone is supposed to take your word for it. All we have for determinations right now are what the ATF says. CA DOJ has never said anything about this issue.

Sheik_Yerbutay
08-22-2016, 11:58 AM
So according to the ATF document would having an AFG AND a a floating hand guard still constitute a featureless pistol? This is my ultimate concern but if a legal document for CA states otherwise I would like to see it as well.

jcwatchdog
08-22-2016, 12:42 PM
So according to the ATF document would having an AFG AND a a floating hand guard still constitute a featureless pistol? This is my ultimate concern but if a legal document for CA states otherwise I would like to see it as well.

Honestly the angled grip being allowed is 100% in atf territory. Ca doj, as long as you have a bullet button, would theoretically allow even a vertical grip on an ar pistol. This would be against federal law though so it is not allowed.

Ultimately though, you can't have a featureless ar pistol at all no matter what. There is just no way to configure it. Although the angled grip isn't one of the features that will define an AW. So if you go featureless on a rifle, you can still use an angled foregrip.

Sheik_Yerbutay
08-22-2016, 1:42 PM
Honestly the angled grip being allowed is 100% in atf territory. Ca doj, as long as you have a bullet button, would theoretically allow even a vertical grip on an ar pistol. This would be against federal law though so it is not allowed.

Ultimately though, you can't have a featureless ar pistol at all no matter what. There is just no way to configure it. Although the angled grip isn't one of the features that will define an AW. So if you go featureless on a rifle, you can still use an angled foregrip.
Even with a grip wrap?

skyscraper
08-22-2016, 2:04 PM
The law is already set in stone. It cant be changed. Basically, next year, the bullet button will be useless for anything. It won't keep your rifle from being considered an AW. That's basically what the law says.

So to all the people saying "well we don't know yet if you can remove the bullet button yet if you register". My question would be... What LAW am I breaking if I remove it? If I have a registered AW with a useless bullet button and I remove it for a regular mag release, guess what, I still have a registered AW. There is nothing defined in the LAW saying one AW is more of an AW than another.

Yep. Not sure why people still think a bullet button has to say on if its a RAW.

ifilef
08-22-2016, 2:34 PM
Why in Gods name would you register it and then de register it? I swear some of the madness people are spouting is ridiculous.

There is NO PAPER TRAIL of how your rifle was configured. If you buy an ar15, there is no where on the dros that says if it has a bullet button or not. It could have been sold as a featureless rifle back in 2013. Or it could have been sold as a featureless rifle yesterday. You won't know the difference by looking at the Dros.

Amazing how ill-informed some are. That's what YOU think. Stop talking 2013. Start talking 1/1/2014 and thereafter, and learn about judicial notice of certain facts and law, and presumptions, and that paper trail from the S&W people of their 'CA Compliant' M&P15 to distributor to FFL all the way to your hands. Under the new law, when you took possession of that brand new beauty it became registrable as an AW, even though it was not an AW at pickup.

Besides, I wasn't referring to criminal ways to avoid registration. I was referring to legal ways to avoid it.

jcwatchdog
08-22-2016, 2:53 PM
Even with a grip wrap?


No nothing can be done to an ar pistol for featureless. You can register it as an AW or you can use one of the new compliance devices to not have to register.

jcwatchdog
08-22-2016, 3:03 PM
Amazing how ill-informed some are. That's what YOU think. Stop talking 2013. Start talking 1/1/2014 and thereafter, and learn about judicial notice of certain facts and law, and presumptions, and that paper trail from the S&W people of their 'CA Compliant' M&P15 to distributor to FFL all the way to your hands.

Besides, I wasn't referring to criminal ways to avoid registration. I was referring to legal ways to avoid it.


A CA compliant ar15 in 2015 still isn't identified on the registration or dros. If you buy a SW mp15, it will be dros as to what is listed on the receiver, not on the box. The receiver is stamped the same, and it is shipped with a 10 round mag and has a bullet button.

Also, there are plenty of dealers with AW licenses that buy whatever versions are available and either make them featureless or put on their own bullet buttons.

Those details don't matter to the doj. As long as the rifle is legally configured at time of sale, that's all that matters. And as long as you keep it compliant to either featureless or with bullet button installed, that's all they care about. You can throw around all the legal terms you want, but you're not looking at the facts.


Just because it's 2016, you can still buy a bullet buttoned ar15 now and change it to completely featureless and be legal. To believe that come 2017 any ar15 that was sold with a bullet button after 2014 must be registered as an AW and has no option to go featureless is completely ignorant or the law and devoid of good sense. The same can be said of people who think there is going to be a class of "bullet button AW".

ifilef
08-22-2016, 3:09 PM
Your take on it is completely wrong.

You don't understand the new law. It is a future registration law based on possession of a featured rifle with a BB at any time from 2001-2016. You can't make it into a silk purse by changing it now. Now is irrelevant for that purpose. If you continue to possess it then it's relevant for registration purposes next year. I already stated legal ways around registration.

ifilef
08-22-2016, 3:28 PM
A CA compliant ar15 in 2015 still isn't identified on the registration or dros. If you buy a SW mp15, it will be dros as to what is listed on the receiver, not on the box. The receiver is stamped the same, and it is shipped with a 10 round mag and has a bullet button.

Yeah, has a bullet button installed on the weapon, right?
I thought the make, MODEL, serial number and other things become part of the info that DOJ receives for rifles purchased on or after 1/1/2014. Is that incorrect?

And before that date all that was transmitted was purchase of a long gun, with perhaps serial number? I am not an FFL

Also, there are plenty of dealers with AW licenses that buy whatever versions are available and either make them featureless or put on their own bullet buttons.

Is that so? Not the retailers that I purchase from new. The box has been sealed from the factory and there's a BB on the featured weapons.

Those details don't matter to the doj. As long as the rifle is legally configured at time of sale, that's all that matters. And as long as you keep it compliant to either featureless or with bullet button installed, that's all they care about. You can throw around all the legal terms you want, but you're not looking at the facts.

I am looking at the law as written.

Just because it's 2016, you can still buy a bullet buttoned ar15 now and change it to completely featureless and be legal.

No dispute there...but you must still register it in 2017 if you keep it beyond the end of this year. You can't unscramble an egg.

To believe that come 2017 any ar15 that was sold with a bullet button after 2014 must be registered as an AW and has no option to go featureless is completely ignorant or the law and devoid of good sense. The same can be said of people who think there is going to be a class of "bullet button AW".

No, not since 2014. That is in regard to more likely to get caught. The time frame is 2001-2016, inclusive.

And you can go featureless whenever you want. That is your choice. But you still have to register it when strictly construing the new statute.

In significant part from the NEW statute: "Any person who,... LAWFULLY POSSESSED (with a BB) during 2001-2016, inclusive,... SHALL REGISTER the firearm before January 1, 2018...". The law was written to require registration for ALL those that POSSESSED one with a BB at any time within those dates (and impliedly continue to possess it into 2017 even if featureless or 2017 mag compliant). NEW PC 30900(b)(1):http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB880.

Perhaps the regulations will hopefully support your view but that is not the way I see it solely looking at the law as written.

GunnerMichael
08-22-2016, 3:41 PM
So if I register as an Assault Weapon can I remove the bullet button? There a guy on YouTube said he will register his Tavor so he can remove the magazine locking device and is now not required to meet overall length. Is this true?

Please spread the word to stop asking this question. Please everyone, stop asking this question. Right now there is nothing in the script of the law that specifically says this cannot be done. If everyone keeps asking, this loop whole will be closed, just like the ATF did with the AR pistol brace. They didn't care if you shouldered the pistol brace until everyone and there moms started asking online about it, then they said NO, you go to jail. So just don't ask the question and there will not be a law against it.

Bear in mind, with firearms, if there is no law prohibiting it then it is legal. But my Liberal brethren are evil and like making prohibitions on firearms.

(I am almost afraid to admit I'm a Dem. :patriot: on firearm forums. Although sometime I feel that I want to switch side. The I remember Republicans are all :devil2: Evil. :owned:)

jcwatchdog
08-22-2016, 3:44 PM
You don't understand the new law. It is a future registration law based on possession of a featured rifle with a BB at any time from 2001-2016. You can't make it into a silk purse by changing it now. Now is irrelevant for that purpose. If you continue to possess it then it's relevant for registration purposes next year. I already stated legal ways around registration.


Yes, the law states that if you have a featured rifle with a bullet button, that rifle is now an AW that must be registered. However, if you change it to featureless and remove the bullet button, then it is no longer a featured rifle with a bullet button (regardless of year acquired).

Where does it say that I can't change the configuration to meet the new legal requirements? If your contention is that the law prevents modification to comply with the new requirements, that's fine, but show me where it says this.

GunnerMichael
08-22-2016, 3:53 PM
One more thing people have been overlooking. You can always remove the gas system and make it a straight pull AR15. They are popular in other places in the world that civilians can't own semi-auto firearms like in the UK. I know this half defeats the purpose of the AR since the semi-auto is part of the enjoyment of shooting the gun, but you would make the rifle legal without needing to be registered and the gun would fall under the same restrictions as any other bolt action rifle. I am going to register mine. I don't care that the Government know I have firearms.

GunnerMichael
08-22-2016, 4:00 PM
Example...

Uzi style pistols have a second handgrip (horizontal forward grip).

If they are installed, then the Uzi style pistol needs to operate using a fixed 10 round magazine.

If they are uninstalled, then the Uzi style pistol can operate using detachable magazines.


This Mini-Uzi style pistol needs to operate using a fixed 10 round magazine due to having a second handgrip.
http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i202/tonelar/guns/miniUzipistol.jpg



This Mini-Uzi style pistol can use detachable magazines because it does not have any restricted features (second handgrip is not installed).
http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i202/tonelar/guns/VectorFSandGroupMini.jpg

If those are yours.... me=jealous :drool5:

Please tell me they have a fun switch.

jcwatchdog
08-22-2016, 4:34 PM
Yeah, has a bullet button installed on the weapon, right?
I thought the make, MODEL, serial number and other things become part of the info that DOJ receives for rifles purchased on or after 1/1/2014. Is that incorrect?
And before that date all that was transmitted was purchase of a long gun, with perhaps serial number? I am not an FFL



Yes, but everything on dros for the identifying info is stamped on the receiver, including model, but not the box the gun came in. If it's a "CA edition", all that means is a 10 round mag and bullet button (and pinned stock etc if necessary). You see the same thing with handguns. They have CA editions (like a CZ SP-01). All that means is a CA compliant lock, 10 round mags and a sticker on the box saying 10 round mag. The serial number and model stamped on the gun is the same as the high capacity mag version.

I bought 1 Spike's tactical lower 2 weeks ago, listed on the Dros that I have right here MAKE: Spikes Tactical MODEL: STLS015 Caliber: 0000 Serial Number NLS01XXXXX Type: Rifle Category: Semi-Automatic. Frame or receiver is marked because it is a stripper lower, but as you can see, no mention of California for a stripped lower. Or if I bought a bullet button or plan to make it featureless. Here is another full rifle from 2016: MAKE: Spikes Tactical MODEL: ST15 CALIBER: 556 Serial Number XXXXXX The only difference between the models is that the STLS is the punisher logo.



Is that so? Not the retailers that I purchase from new. The box has been sealed from the factory and they have BB on the featured weapons.


I'm sure you've seen brokers here on Calguns? They are out of state FFLs that can order whatever gun you want (within CA laws) and change them to either featureless or add the bullet button for you, and then ship to the FFL of your choice in CA?





I am looking at the law as written.


You're adding an awful lot that isn't written. Like the part that says I can't reconfigure my gun to be compliant with the new laws. You're just assuming that on your own as I don't see that written anywhere at all.



No dispute there...but you must still register it in 2017 if you keep it beyond the end of this year. You can't unscramble an egg.



Or change it to featureless and remove the bullet button. I still need to see the exact place in the new law saying this is prohibited.



And you can go featureless whenever you want. That is your choice. But you still have to register it when strictly construing the new statute.


Please see above, point me to the exact portion of the law that says I can't make my rifle compliant with the new law.


In significant part from the NEW statute: "Any one who,... POSSESSED with a BB during 2001-2014, inclusive,... SHALL REGISTER it". The law was written to require registration for ALL those that POSSESSED one with a BB at any time within those dates (and impliedly continue to possess it into 2017 even if featureless or 2017 mag compliant). NEW PC 30900(b)(1).



If you just take out a certain section, you're not giving a clear picture of what is being said.

(b) (1) Any person who, from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2016, inclusive, lawfully possessed an assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine, as defined in Section 30515, including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be readily removed from the firearm with the use of a tool, shall register the firearm before January 1, 2018, but not before the effective date of the regulations adopted pursuant to paragraph (5), with the department pursuant to those procedures that the department may establish by regulation pursuant to paragraph (5).


All this section is doing is identifying what rifles need to be registered and giving the dates. But now, that rifle that I own that has an ammunition feeding device that can be removed with a tool, no longer has feeding device that needs to be removed with a tool. The rifle is now featureless and becomes a whole different animal (no longer in an AW config) and this section doesn't apply. Just because it possibly HAD a bullet button and features at one time, that doesn't really mean much of anything. How would they even know that the gun had a bullet button on it or not when it was purchased? If I bought a stripped lower, maybe I built the gun with a bullet button and then later took it off and made it featureless. Or maybe I made it featureless from the start. Do you really think they care to track this?

And that implied part? Yeah, that won't fly. I'm not sure how you think something like that can just be implied without actually being written out in the law.

ifilef
08-22-2016, 4:47 PM
The new law angers me because it requires registration as an AW what is not an AW presently. But it is a registration law only.

What evil there really is lies in 1446- what essentially amounts to confiscation of previously and lawfully owned LCM. It is extremely important that California gun owners do NOT surrender these pre-ban previously 'grandfathered' magazines to the authorities. That is the worst that could happen and would be a 'heads up' to the antis to try to confiscate our RAWs and other weapons in the future, unconstitutional as it is.

Come up with other alternatives listed in the new statute. Here are the listed lawful alternatives:
(1) Remove the large-capacity magazine from the state.
(2) Prior to July 1, 2017, sell the large-capacity magazine to a licensed firearms dealer. NO! THE SECOND WORST ALTERNATIVE
(3) Destroy the large-capacity magazine.
(4) Surrender the large-capacity magazine to a law enforcement agency for destruction. NO! ABSOLUTE WORST ALTERNATIVE

or, BLOCK to 10 rounds consistent with PC 16740 (doing so does not make it subject to the new law because it will no longer be characterized as a LCM); or,

Of course, and contrary to the statute, there will be those who simply will not comply because they are of the opinion the law is on many grounds unconstitutional, and unjust. The downside is that it's unlawful, and many will choose not to shoot in public with them but relegate them as the new 'safe queens', only to be visible to the owner at home or other secure places, on and after 7/1/2017.

ifilef
08-22-2016, 6:23 PM
Yes, the law states that if you have a featured rifle with a bullet button, that rifle is now an AW that must be registered. However, if you change it to featureless and remove the bullet button, then it is no longer a featured rifle with a bullet button (regardless of year acquired).

Where does it say that I can't change the configuration to meet the new legal requirements? If your contention is that the law prevents modification to comply with the new requirements, that's fine, but show me where it says this.

Current condition of the firearm is irrelevant. Read the plain language of the statute. Have you really read the statute? The law by its very language is stating that if you possessed it any time 2001-2016 with a BB that it must be registered. The word 'possessed' is in past tense. If the word weren't in the past tense you might have a better argument against a plain reading of the statute.

Do you think that a leopard can change its spots or rocks are not hard?.

I can't help you any further.

I already told you that you can do whatever you want to make featureless, whatever. That does NOT make you in compliance with the new REGISTRATION law. If it were it would be listed as an exception from the duty to register as an AW. Do you see any exceptions to the mandatory duty to register in the law? I see one- that if it never had a BB while in your possession. No others. If the legislature wanted to exempt conversions from featured with BB to featureless or 2017 mag compliant they would have so stated in 30900. They could have used language similar to: "Weapons that are featured with BB will not be subject to mandatory registration if converted to featureless by March 31, 2017" or "if converted they comply with the provisions of new PC 30515 so as not to constitute an assault weapon by March 31, 2017".

And if some guy in another state does a conversion for you and sends to your FFL as featureless and you take POSSESSION of it without a BB you do not have to register it. That is different than possessing it with a BB and then converting it to featurelss.

And making a featured BB weapon compliant does not make it compliant with registration, it may make it compliant with NEW PC 30515. It's apples and oranges. I hope that you understand the distinction between making a SACF featured weapon compliant in 2017 but how you can't legally skirt around the registration requirement because at one time you possessed it with a BB.

Don't let your 'wishful thinking' interfere with a plain reading of the new statute PC 30900(b)(1).

The legislature is not as stupid as you might think.

They want to know for sure who now has, or had had SACF featured weapons with newly defined detachable magazines so they can use it for investigative purposes, and for other reasons that have been cited by the anti-gun legislature. But behind it all is mostly politics.

Cokebottle
08-22-2016, 6:52 PM
Can the AR15 pistols or AK47 pistols still be sold via ppt as pistols? Or once is it registered as an assault weapon, it remains under the person in possession forever and cannot be sold?
Last day to transfer will be Dec 31, 2016.

Jan 1 they become AW, there is a 1 year grace period for registration.

Cokebottle
08-22-2016, 7:00 PM
Current condition of the firearm is irrelevant. Read the plain language of the statute. Have you really read the statute? The law by its very language is stating that if you possessed it any time 2001-2016 with a BB that it must be registered. The word 'possessed' is in past tense. If the word weren't in the past tense you might have a better argument against a plain reading of the statute.
:facepalm:

If it is not an AW it is not an AW.

Just because it WAS an AW at one time, even if in violation of the 2000-2016 law, does not mean that continued possession in a compliant form prior to the end of this year is a violation.

If it is in a compliant form today, it is not an AW, with or without a bullet button.
If it is not an AW, it can be converted to a different form TODAY that is still not an AW (fixed magazine other than BB or featureless), and won't BE an AW in 2017, and next year, will not require registration because it's NOT AN AW.

Applying the 2017 standards to a rifle possessed in 2016 AND requiring registration as an AW, regardless of what form it is modified to PRIOR TO Jan 1 2017 would be the exact definition of ex-post-facto.

The wording of the law is to LIMIT registration to those that were possessed between 2000 and 2017. They don't want to reopen the registry to those that SHOULD have registered prior to 2001.

The law states that if you LAWFULLY POSSESSED it... meaning that something that should have been registered prior to 2001 (or 50BMG) would not be eligible for registration in 2017.


Basically what you are saying, with your "plain reading" is that if I owned a BB'd AR in 2009 and sold it in 2010, I would be required to register it next year.
After all, I POSSESSED it in 2009.

Cokebottle
08-22-2016, 7:04 PM
CA law is about a "second handgrip".

It does not matter if the handgrip is angled, horizontal, or vertical.

If they wanted to limit it to a vertical grip, they would have used the term "forward pistol grip". (like what they did with the assault weapons laws for rifles)
Also known as "shoulder thing that goes up".... Barrel shroud.

ifilef
08-22-2016, 7:22 PM
Last day to transfer will be Dec 31, 2016.

Jan 1 they become AW, there is a 1 year grace period for registration.

Last day I compute to DROS as Dec 20 or Dec 21 dependent on FFL hours. I don't believe that any FFL familiar with the new law will be able to sell featured with BB beyond such date because it would be unlawful to newly possess after 12/31/2017.

So expect to see the shelves devoid of featured BB weapons for sale after 12/21/2016, the latest.

Cokebottle
08-22-2016, 7:29 PM
Last day I compute to DROS as Dec 20 or Dec 21 dependent on FFL hours. I don't believe that any FFL familiar with the new law will be able to sell featured with BB beyond such date because it would be unlawful to newly possess after 12/31/2017.

So expect to see the shelves devoid of featured BB weapons for sale after 12/21/2016, the latest.
DROS is the point that ownership changes hands.

SSE expiration ran right up to Dec 31, and some shops remained open until midnight... though with the DROS system being more finicky than the Star Trek Transporter, anyone wanting to buy under SSE and waiting until 10pm Dec 31 was pushing their luck.

ifilef
08-22-2016, 7:38 PM
:facepalm:

If it is not an AW it is not an AW.

Just because it WAS an AW at one time, even if in violation of the 2000-2016 law, does not mean that continued possession in a compliant form prior to the end of this year is a violation.

If it is in a compliant form today, it is not an AW, with or without a bullet button.
If it is not an AW, it can be converted to a different form TODAY that is still not an AW (fixed magazine other than BB or featureless), and won't BE an AW in 2017, and next year, will not require registration because it's NOT AN AW.

Applying the 2017 standards to a rifle possessed in 2016 AND requiring registration as an AW, regardless of what form it is modified to PRIOR TO Jan 1 2017 would be the exact definition of ex-post-facto.

The wording of the law is to LIMIT registration to those that were possessed between 2000 and 2017. They don't want to reopen the registry to those that SHOULD have registered prior to 2001.

The law states that if you LAWFULLY POSSESSED it... meaning that something that should have been registered prior to 2001 (or 50BMG) would not be eligible for registration in 2017.


Basically what you are saying, with your "plain reading" is that if I owned a BB'd AR in 2009 and sold it in 2010, I would be required to register it next year.
After all, I POSSESSED it in 2009.

I don't think so.

I don't see ex post facto at all, after careful consideration.

Basically, they are passing a registration law. They are saying, we KNOW that your current weapon is not an AW. But when this new law is effective we are going to say that it is a newly defined AW for registration purposes only.

So, guys and gals, you need to register it in 2017, that is all you need to do. And we, as the legislature, have the power to redefine AW at any time. We know that we can't prosecute you for any alleged acts in 2016.

But if you don't register it in 2017, we can prosecute you for failing to register it in 2017. Charges will be brought in 2018 for possession of an unregistered AW, not for anything you did or did not do in 2016, but for your failure to register it, which is mandatory under the new law.

Coke- I will try to address some of your other comments as I have time.

ifilef
08-22-2016, 8:01 PM
:facepalm:

If it is not an AW it is not an AW.

Legislature and AG would argue it is an AW for the limited purpose of registration of it in 2017. It's constitutional provided it is registered and one can keep it. Old AWCA BANNED future sales of certain weapons. Hasn't it been held constitutional in this State? And people got to keep their newly defined AW provided they registered them under old law. No harm, no foul, you can keep it in present configuration (or perhaps better) so long as you register it by end of 2017.

Just because it WAS an AW at one time, even if in violation of the 2000-2016 law, does not mean that continued possession in a compliant form prior to the end of this year is a violation.

Violative of what law? The registration law?

Doesn't matter if one strictly construes language of the statute. No exceptions are provided. They don't care. As I have stated in another post: "Do you see any exceptions to the mandatory duty to register in the law? I see one- that if it never had a BB while in your possession. No others. If the legislature wanted to exempt conversions from featured with BB to featureless or 2017 mag compliant they would have so stated in 30900. They could have used language similar to: "Weapons that are featured with BB will not be subject to mandatory registration if converted to featureless by March 31, 2017" or "No registration shall be required if converted to comply with the provisions of (new) PC 30515 so as not to constitute an assault weapon by March 31, 2017".

If it had a BB in your possession you need to register it. Otherwise, everyone would just say they converted it so 'bug off'..I ain't registering it.
I don't believe that will fly at all unless the regulations address the issue according to your view.

If it is in a compliant form today, it is not an AW, with or without a bullet button.
If it is not an AW, it can be converted to a different form TODAY that is still not an AW (fixed magazine other than BB or featureless), and won't BE an AW in 2017, and next year, will not require registration because it's NOT AN AW.

They don't care if it's an AW today. It's not. They are saying effective 1/1/2017 we now define it as an AW for registration purposes only. But you have nothing to fear possessing it in 2016, it would be ex post facto to prosecute you for possession of an unregistered AW (e.g., your featured rifle with BB in 2016). And the law newly defining AW that are registrable covers the period of possession within 2001-2016, only.

Register it and you get to keep it in current configuration with BB. Don't register it and that's a new crime or crimes, arrest and charges would be brought on or after 1/1/2018 for failure to register it in 2017.

The statute is worded so that if it HAD a BB while in your possession you 'shall register the firearm' (which assumes that it is still in your possession). Unfortunately, that is pretty straightforward. They are saying if it had that BB in your possession the die has been cast, we don't care what you do with the weapon but you must register it in 2017.

If you don't want to bother with all of this just sell it featured with BB before the end of this year and your buyer will have to register it, you won't and shouldn't. After all it was a legal transfer and sale and it is out of your hands, and now in the buyer's. Duty to register it passes to him as he is now the possessor.

Basically what you are saying, with your "plain reading" is that if I owned a BB'd AR in 2009 and sold it in 2010, I would be required to register it next year.
After all, I POSSESSED it in 2009.

But you don't possess it now so no duty to register it because as I have stated elsewhere they don't want multiple owners with different addresses registering a AW. They only want the current possessor to register if he/she possessed it with a BB. Anything else would be chaos. You are reading too much into the statute. Following that reasoning, a person who does not possess an unregistered AW could be charged with unlawful possession of an unregistered AW. Doesn't make any sense. You can't be charged with the mandatory duty of registration unless you keep it through 2017. Sell it featureless in 2017 or mag compliant (the only permissible ways to sell in 2017) and neither you nor buyer need register it, but CYA. Nevertheless, NO FFL in his right mind would permit a transfer of anything other than featureless or 2017 mag compliant next year. All (meaning seller, buyer, and FFL) could be arrested for a felony.

ifilef
08-22-2016, 8:52 PM
DROS is the point that ownership changes hands.

SSE expiration ran right up to Dec 31, and some shops remained open until midnight... though with the DROS system being more finicky than the Star Trek Transporter, anyone wanting to buy under SSE and waiting until 10pm Dec 31 was pushing their luck.

According to the statute, never mind SSE, e.g, a different scenario, firearm has to be POSSESSED in 2016 in order for your buyer to be entitled to register it. Argument is that with the mandatory 10-day wait your buyer does not possess it until pickup. If he picks it up after 12/31/2016 I doubt if the FFL will cooperate, until special exception is made by DOJ again.

As things stand, the prudent course is to buy or sell featured with BB with DROS commencing no later than 12/20/2016, unless your FFL remains open on New Year's Eve and you don't fall too ill to pick up.

Cokebottle
08-22-2016, 8:57 PM
But you don't possess it now so no duty to register it
And if I remove the BB and convert to a 2017-compliant format, then I no longer possess what WILL BE considered an AW.

Then there's the issue that the state has to prove their case.

Even images posted online, the state can not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that those images are of a centerfire, semiautomatic rifle.

You've referred to original configuration... the originally-DROSed configuration of all 3 of my rifles was bare lower.
Even for complete assemblies, DOJ has no records dating back prior to 2014.

There's not an AG in this state that is going to put that in front of a jury.

ifilef
08-22-2016, 9:13 PM
And if I remove the BB and convert to a 2017-compliant format, then I no longer possess what WILL BE considered an AW.

Then there's the issue that the state has to prove their case.

Even images posted online, the state can not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that those images are of a centerfire, semiautomatic rifle.

You've referred to original configuration... the originally-DROSed configuration of all 3 of my rifles was bare lower.
Even for complete assemblies, DOJ has no records dating back prior to 2014.

There's not an AG in this state that is going to put that in front of a jury.

No, strictly speaking from a legal point of view, it doesn't matter if you removed the bullet button. It had it, you removed it, you can't undo the fact that it had one while in your possession. That BB made it a mandatory registrable firearm in 2017. Recommend that one register it near the end of 2017, then de-register it a week later to avoid any potential issues, unless you want to keep it in original configuration or possibly even better. Otherwise, convert to featureless or 2017 mag compliant when you deregister it.

I will leave it to each person as to what course to take in their situations. I don't want to waste time trying to argue proof, but the State will hire a firearm's expert and said expert will testify that it was a SACF featured weapon. The court will take judicial notice of how such firearms are obtained new from retailer- with a BB attached. The judicial notice taken may even go so far as to state as fact that ALL new 'CA COMPLIANT' SACF featured weapons had to be sold at retail with a BB in, for instance, 2016. Evidence will be provided showing how S&W shipped the firearm in that configuration and a presumption will arise that it had a BB when you picked it up- the time you picked it up gave rise to the duty to register it in 2017.

Frankly, I'd like to shoot in public in 2018 without looking over my shoulder. That's just the way I am.

The State already knows who lawfully has what handguns and that people have long guns and some readily id'd since 2014.

If there were ever a confiscation, which I sincerely doubt would ever occur, unless the 2nd were repealed (ain't going to happen), they'd want them all.

No sense in worrying. The way I look at it, they already have your number up, especially if you purchased featured with BB from retailer new after 1/1/2014.

Good luck.

Cokebottle
08-22-2016, 10:09 PM
Sorry.

Not an AW = Not an AW = No requirement to register

The wording of the law is to prohibit registration of a gun that was not registered prior to 2001, or assembled/acquired after 2016.

ifilef
08-22-2016, 10:35 PM
Okay, good conversing. Not an AW=AW if legislature deems it so later on. That is what happened long ago.

I do agree that a by-product of the law is as you stated in your last sentence. i don't know about guns that were classified as AW before 2001 except to state that registration for those I believe expired long ago. I also agree the new law bans future sales or manufacturing of BB featured weapons after 12/31/2016.

Cheers,

Cokebottle
08-22-2016, 10:49 PM
Okay, good conversing. Not an AW=AW if legislature deems it so later on. That is what happened long ago.
And if they do that they do that... but simply redefining "fixed magazine" to exclude the bullet button does not render a 2017-compliant rifle an AW if it was made compliant before the ban.

This law does not do that.
It does not redefine what an AW is, it simply redefines what constitutes a fixed magazine, which results in a 2016-compliant featured build becoming an AW as of 2017.

It will not be an AW on Dec 31, and converting it to a form that is compliant in 2017 will continue the non-AW status.

Not an AW in 2017 = Not an AW in 2016

ifilef
08-22-2016, 11:15 PM
And if they do that they do that... but simply redefining "fixed magazine" to exclude the bullet button does not render a 2017-compliant rifle an AW if it was made compliant before the ban.

This law does not do that.
It does not redefine what an AW is, it simply redefines what constitutes a fixed magazine, which results in a 2016-compliant featured build becoming an AW as of 2017.

It will not be an AW on Dec 31, and converting it to a form that is compliant in 2017 will continue the non-AW status.

Not an AW in 2017 = Not an AW in 2016

It's later deemed an AW for purposes of registration only:

(b) (1) Any person who, from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2016, inclusive, lawfully possessed an assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine, as defined in Section 30515, including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be readily removed from the firearm with the use of a tool, shall register the firearm before January 1, 2018, but not before the effective date of the regulations adopted pursuant to paragraph (5), with the department pursuant to those procedures that the department may establish by regulation pursuant to paragraph (5).

They're saying that your featured BB or other qualifying weapon any time during the period 2001-2016 is a lawfully possessed AW as newly defined. Since it was lawfully possessed then it can now (1/1/2017) only be lawfully possessed if registered by the end of 2017 under the new legislation.

rumrunner102
08-23-2016, 9:19 AM
IF (and this is a big IF) the definition of an AW strictly construed for purposes of mandatory registration includes those AR's at any point in time that were previously equipped with a bb and at least one evil feature (no matter its current configuration), and the owner wants to go featureless and not register, buy a stripped lower and transfer every part over to the new receiver, sans the evil features.

Sell the old AR stripped receiver.

You now possess an AR that is not an AW under the new definition, which ostensibly includes previously bb'd AR's.

If one does not want to DROS the receiver, buy an 80% receiver and assemble it using the old parts.

ifilef
08-23-2016, 9:36 AM
IF (and this is a big IF) the definition of an AW strictly construed for purposes of mandatory registration includes those AR's at any point in time that were previously equipped with a bb and at least one evil feature (no matter its current configuration), and the owner wants to go featureless and not register, buy a stripped lower and transfer every part over to the new receiver, sans the evil features.

Sell the old AR stripped receiver.

You now possess an AR that is not an AW under the new definition, which ostensibly includes previously bb'd AR's.

If one does not want to DROS the receiver, buy an 80% receiver and assemble it using the old parts.

Yes, quite clever workaround, but in my view that stripped lower should be sold on or before 12/20/2016 to get one off the mandatory registration hook. IMO, neither you nor the buyer would have to register, but CYA with detailed photos depicting stripped lower and photos clearly showing serial number, along with documentation.

However, I've read that some FFL or FFLs have hassled people wishing to PPT their stripped lowers. One guy here on calguns said they had to put together a rifle in order to complete the transaction. Post #23 here: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=1222724

Any comments?

Blade Gunner
08-23-2016, 9:55 AM
The law is already set in stone. It cant be changed. Basically, next year, the bullet button will be useless for anything. It won't keep your rifle from being considered an AW. That's basically what the law says.

So to all the people saying "well we don't know yet if you can remove the bullet button yet if you register". My question would be... What LAW am I breaking if I remove it? If I have a registered AW with a useless bullet button and I remove it for a regular mag release, guess what, I still have a registered AW. There is nothing defined in the LAW saying one AW is more of an AW than another.

The Michel Law group made a presentation discussing the new AW laws. They are of the opinion that once registered as an AW, there is not a requirement for a "fixed magazine that can be released with a tool" ie no requirement for a bullet button. CPRA has the presentation on their website.

ifilef
08-23-2016, 10:03 AM
The Michel Law group made a presentation discussing the new AW laws. They are of the opinion that once registered as an AW, there is not a requirement for a "fixed magazine that can be released with a tool" ie no requirement for a bullet button. CPRA has the presentation on their website.

That sounds encouraging if what you say is true and correct.

Kindly provide a link to it. Does one have to be a member of CRPA to gain access to the CRPA link?

Is there also a link to it on a Michel site?

Thanks.

Cokebottle
08-23-2016, 6:09 PM
The Michel Law group made a presentation discussing the new AW laws. They are of the opinion that once registered as an AW, there is not a requirement for a "fixed magazine that can be released with a tool" ie no requirement for a bullet button. CPRA has the presentation on their website.
Have they given an opinion on ifilef's claim that a 2017-compliant rifle needs to be registered simply because at some time, no matter how briefly, during the prior 16 years it was not compliant with the 2017 law?

ifilef
08-23-2016, 10:32 PM
The Michel Law group made a presentation discussing the new AW laws. They are of the opinion that once registered as an AW, there is not a requirement for a "fixed magazine that can be released with a tool" ie no requirement for a bullet button. CPRA has the presentation on their website.

That sounds encouraging if what you say is true and correct.

Kindly provide a link to it. Does one have to be a member of CRPA to gain access to the CRPA link?

Is there also a link to it on a Michel site?

Thanks.

Have they given an opinion on ifilef's claim that a 2017-compliant rifle needs to be registered simply because at some time, no matter how briefly, during the prior 16 years it was not compliant with the 2017 law?

You are oversimplifying and misrepresenting what I said, Coke, and at least I provide support for my take by citing the statute itself, which is what we now have without more from DOJ, etc. and I don't think that you, also, understand the statute.

So I will digress from the main reason for this post and try to break it down with one of many possible hypos so that you understand my take on the statute: Same possessor throughout, purchased/possessed new featured AR with BB in 2010, converted it to featureless in 2016. Mandatory duty to register it as AW by the deadline if retain possession through 2017. The 'die was cast' in 2010 when possessor received the weapon with the BB, continued to possess weapon through 2017.

Irrelevant for registration purposes if he converted it to featureless in 2016, or at any time 2010-2016. As of 1/1/2017 it will be deemed a legally possessed AW when purchased/possessed in 2010 with a BB, but can't be legally possessed AW after 2017 unless registered as AW in 2017. If it had a BB attached to a featured SACF weapon that you POSSESSED you SHALL REGISTER it according to the statute, strictly construed, assuming it remains in your possession.

By using such language a significantly larger number of possessors will HAVE TO register than if they let people slip by/skirt around by 'claiming' they converted it to featureless or 2017 mag compliant. And as I stated, if the intent was to allow your and many other posters 'workaround' the statute would have provided that one could do so and be exempted from registration. Exemptions abound in the Penal Code. I see no such language in the new laws. They don't care if you comply with the 2017 fixed mag or go featureless purported workarounds if your weapon was possessed by you prior to December 31, 2016 with a BB and remains possessed by you no matter the present configuration. By registering the firearm it ENTITLES one to retain possession of it merely by doing the act of registering it, because such weapons are otherwise banned if purchased or manufactured on or after 1/1/2017.

Therefore, it constitutes grandfathering of those firearms if they are timely registered, no matter the current configuration. And I see no reason to make featureless or 2017 mag complaint unless you intend to part ways with it in 2017.

If not registered, and caught with it in 2018 or thereafter, and they check the serial number and realize it is not registered or they just do a comparative search of DROS vs. RAW and you are flagged, you may be subject to felony arrest, may be convicted of a misdemeanor first time out, you will have to pay a fine and weapon will be destroyed.

So, best advise I can give is REGISTER, then DEREGISTER it (if you can and you want to sell or bequeath it featureless or mag compliant), if the weapon was possessed by you with a BB on or before 12/31/2016.


================
Lookit, that guy Blade Gunner hasn't even provided a link to the claimed opinion attributed to Michel & Associates as represented in the first quote, above.

Why am I not surprised by such hearsay (upon hearsay, possibly) statements contained in posts here?

Blade Gunner- you should not be making such statements without supporting proof. It reflects poorly on you. You should have provided the requested links as a courtesy and without someone having to request them in the first place.

I spent about an hour trying to locate the links on crpa and one of the michel sites and other searches and did not find anything. Thanks for nothing!

I do hope that Blade Gunner's remarks are based on a legal memorandum or statement of opinion by Michel & Associates, and I do hope he (Blade Gunner) is correct.

But I take his post, without more, with a grain of salt. His failure to provide links to the claimed presentation statements are irresponsible, in my opinion, and may not be fair to Michel & Associates if such opinions were not actually given by them, and if given, were made with due respect to the law(s) passed and later signed by the Governor on July 1, if they would bear any relevance to said purported opinion.

So, before one asks the question posed by CokeBottle we should not rely at all on Mr. Blade Gunner's remarks, unless proven otherwise.

Most posters here believe that we must wait and see if the regs or directives of the DOJ address the subject matter in the first post quoted, above. Now this poster, Blade Gunner, says otherwise based on what he reports that a respected law firm has opined. As I said in the second post, quoted above, that is really 'encouraging' but requested, and did not receive in the past 14 or so hours, a link substantiating the Blade Gunner comments. There it is...

Blade Gunner
08-23-2016, 11:49 PM
I made the effort to listen to the webinar by Michel and Associates on August 19 at noon. I did not record expectecting any gun owner that has been paying attention would also participate. Several thousands of people were in attendance. Evidently very few people on this board attended, including the some of above commentators, (but Id guess at least a few CADOJ employee where listening). Michel indicated the webinar would be posted on the CRPA website. Perhaps there is some time lag. If you read in great detail, as Mitchel and Associates, the legislation and read every single cross reference, you may come to the same opinion. As far as legal memorandum or legal opinions, Law firms get paid big bucks for these. Don't expect a free ride. Stop attacking the messenger. I'll post links to register for the next webinars (if commentators herein can refrain from counter productive personal attacks).

32blownhemi
08-24-2016, 12:51 AM
TAGG...

ifilef
08-24-2016, 1:21 AM
I made the effort to listen to the webinar by Michel and Associates on August 19 at noon. I did not record expectecting any gun owner that has been paying attention would also participate. Several thousands of people were in attendance. Evidently very few people on this board attended, including the some of above commentators, (but Id guess at least a few CADOJ employee where listening). Michel indicated the webinar would be posted on the CRPA website. Perhaps there is some time lag. If you read in great detail, as Mitchel and Associates, the legislation and read every single cross reference, you may come to the same opinion. As far as legal memorandum or legal opinions, Law firms get paid big bucks for these. Don't expect a free ride. Stop attacking the messenger. I'll post links to register for the next webinars (if commentators herein can refrain from counter productive personal attacks).

Blah blah blah. Sorry if I took your post literally. You clearly stated the 'presentation' was on the CRPA website and I took you at your word. You wasted my time and probably that of others. :mad:

And I have seen plenty of opinion letters from Michel and Associates on the web and Michel websites, so don't try to weasel out that they cost big bucks because those opinion letters or memoranda were free to the public, though I am sure they were compensated handsomely for such letters by various clients to whom I and others have donated money.

Where did the several thousands of people attend? Did they pay to attend? Was the webinar free or you had to pay? What do you mean you made the effort to listen. Did you listen to the webinar in the entirety? Are you basing your comment on your recollection only? Did you take notes on the webinar?

I just don't understand you. And this is an important issue for many in determining whether to register early 2017 or wait until the end of next year.