PDA

View Full Version : For those that still have doubts...


Charliegone
06-02-2005, 2:39 PM
Ok, so I was bit worried whether it was legal or not so I asked the California DOJ for info on this and I got some great news for you plinker heads!

Heres what the Cali DOJ rep told me:
Dear Mr. XXXXXX:

In response to your correspondence, you are correct. If a .22 cal is an AK or AR "series" firearm it is banned pursuant 12276. If however a .22 cal firearm is not a "series" firearm, it is not banned since the "characteristics" law (SB 23) restricts semi-automatic centerfire rifles.

Sincerely,
Mr. XXXX XXXXXX
Field Representative
Firearms Division
XXXXXXXXXXXXX

So basically as long as its not an ak or ar you can buy an .22 rifle with folding stock, flash suppressor etc because they are not banned!

Hello,
I had some questions regarding the legality of some weapons in the Roberti-Roos Act and SB 23 assault weapons ban. I notice in the Roberti-Roos act, those weapons are completely banned, but in the SB 23 it specifically states in:

"12276.1. (a) Notwithstanding Section 12276, "assault weapon" shall also mean any of the following:
(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following"

It continues on with what an "assault weapon" is. Now my question is does this apply to rimfire rifles, specifically in .22 caliber? I understand that in the Kasler vs. Lockyer decision ak copies and ar copies weapons in .22 caliber are still banned correct?, but other weapons (even look alikes not copies) are not as long as they are not in the Roberti-Roos act, correct?

Any help would be most appreciated as I wish to stay in good standing with the law.

Sincerely,

XXXXX XXXXX

icormba
06-02-2005, 4:25 PM
that would be really cool if you could post the Field Rep's name http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

SOG has a really cool looking .22 AK looking training rifle in their sales catalog for around $200!

imported_Telpierion
06-02-2005, 5:00 PM
Originally posted by icormba:
that would be really cool if you could post the Field Rep's name http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

SOG has a really cool looking .22 AK looking training rifle in their sales catalog for around $200!

I doubt you will convince SOG to sell you one. Here is another option for you:AK 22 (http://www.turners.com/engage/displayad3.php?H=1&m1=June&m2=June&d1=2&d2=8&img=ads/05-26-05/armscorak22.gif) SOG has these as well but they say no sales to CA. And those trainers have hi cap mags any way, I'm guessing. I don't know if you would be able to find 10 round mags for them.

icormba
06-02-2005, 6:11 PM
If a .22 cal is an AK or AR "series" firearm

so what the hell is a "series" anyway? and how is it different from a "copy"? I'm so confused, again! http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif http://www.calguns.net/banghead.gif http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

imported_Skammy
06-04-2005, 1:53 PM
Originally posted by icormba:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">If a .22 cal is an AK or AR "series" firearm

so what the hell is a "series" anyway? and how is it different from a "copy"? I'm so confused, again! http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif http://www.calguns.net/banghead.gif http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It doesn't exist anymore.. courts struck it down..

basically they were saying anything that was an AR or AK was banned but its bull****..

Here is a letter I wrote with info.. aimed at the DOJ don't remember if I sent this out..

Harrott V. County of Kings: "Our decision today—upholding the Attorney General’s
authority to identify series assault weapons pursuant to section 12276, subdivision (e),
but holding that a trial court may not find a semiautomatic firearm a series assault
weapon under section 12276, subdivision (e), unless the firearm has first been included
in the list of series assault weapons promulgated by the Attorney General pursuant to
section 12276.5, subdivision (h)—is compelled by our examination of the legislative
history of the AWCA.

Section 12276.5, subdivision (h):

h) The Attorney General shall promulgate a list that specifies all firearms designated as assault weapons in Section 12276 or declared to be assault weapons pursuant to this section. The Attorney General shall file that list with the Secretary of State for publication in the California Code of Regulations. Any declaration that a specified firearm is an assault weapon shall be implemented by the Attorney General who, within 90 days, shall promulgate an amended list which shall include the specified firearm declared to be an assault weapon. The Attorney General shall file the amended list with the Secretary of State for publication in the California Code of Regulations. Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code, pertaining to the adoption of rules and regulations, shall not apply to any list of assault weapons promulgated pursuant to this section.

Per Harrott V. County of Kings a rifle must be listed by name under the Kasler vs. Lockyer
assault weapon list by name or it cannot be considered a AR-15 or AK series weapon.

...

Thus, because the Clayco rifle was not specifically included
in section 12276, subdivision (a), has not been declared to be an
assault weapon by virtue of a section 12276.5 proceeding, and is
therefore not listed as an assault weapon in the list of assault
weapons prepared by the Attorney General pursuant to the directive
of section 12276.5, subdivision (h), the trial court was precluded
as a matter of law from concluding the Clayco rifle was an assault
weapon within the meaning of section 12276.

The "Clayco" rifle in the above case is an AK type rifle. Per the courts ruling the Clayco rifle would be legal if it does not violate 12276.1 as it does not violate 12276(a) as it cannot be declared to be an
assault weapon by virtue of a section 12276.5 proceeding, and is therefore not listed as an assault weapon in the list of assault weapons prepared by the Attorney General pursuant to the directive of section 12276.5, subdivision (h).