PDA

View Full Version : DOJ procedure to add new AWs....


bwiese
11-21-2005, 02:58 PM
[crossposted, orig thread in Rifleman's Forum but needs to be its own item...]

My brief 'research' into declaring guns as AWs - from PC 12xxx law pulled from DOJ 'Dangerous Weapons Control Laws' webpage. Underline/bold quoted text mine; a few snips/abbreviatons to save space.

12276.5.
(a) Upon request by the Atty General filed in a verified petition in a superior court of a county with a population of more than 1000000, the superior court shall issue a declaration of temporary suspension of the manufacture, sale, distribution, transportation, or importation into the state, or the giving or lending of a firearm alleged to be an assault weapon within the meaning of Sect 12276 because the firearm is either of the following:

(1) Another model by the same mfgr or a copy by another mfgr of an assault weapon listed in subdivision (a), (b), or (c) of Sect 12276 which is identical to one of the assault weapons listed in those subdivisions except for slight modifications or enhancements including, but not limited to {cosmetic features/calibers/bbl length...}. The court shall strictly construe this paragraph so that a firearm which is merely similar in appearance but not a prototype or copy cannot be found to be within the meaning of this paragraph.

(2) A firearm first manufactured or sold to the general public in California after Jun 1 1989, which has been redesigned, renamed, or renumbered from one of the firearms listed in subdivision (a), (b), or (c) of Sect 12276, or which is manufactured or sold by another company under a licensing agreement to manufacture or sell one of the firearms listed in subdivision (a), (b), or (c) of Section 12276, regardless of the company of production or distribution, or the country of origin.

(b) Upon issuance of a declaration of temporary suspension by the superior court and after the Atty General has completed the notice requirements of subdivisions (c) and (d), the provisions of subdivision (a) of Sect 12280 shall apply with respect to those weapons.

(c) Upon declaration of temporary suspension, the Atty General shall immediately notify all police, sheriffs, district attys, and those requesting notice pursuant to subdivision (d), shall notify industry and association publications for those who manufacture, sell, or use firearms, and shall publish notice in not less than 10 newspapers of general circulation in geographically diverse sections of the state of the fact that the declaration has been issued.

(d) The Atty General shall maintain a list of any persons who request to receive notice of any declaration of temporary suspension and shall furnish notice under subdivision (c) to all these persons immediately upon a superior court declaration.... {snip}...

(e) After issuing a declaration of temporary suspension under this section, the superior court shall set a date for hearing on a permanent declaration that the weapon is an assault weapon. The hearing shall be set no later than 30 days from the date of issuance of the declaration of temporary suspension. The hearing may be continued for good cause thereafter. Any manufacturer or Calif. distributor {..snip..}

(f) At the hearing, the burden of proof is upon Atty General to show by a preponderance of evidence that the weapon which is the subject of the declaration of temporary suspension is an assault weapon. If the court finds the weapon to be an assault weapon, it shall issue a declaration that it is an assault weapon under Sect 12276. Any party to the matter may appeal the court's decision. A declaration that the weapon is an assault weapon shall remain in effect during the pendency of the appeal unless ordered otherwise by the appellate court.

(g) The Atty General shall prepare a description for identification purposes, including a picture or diagram, of each assault weapon listed in Sect 12276, and any firearm declared to be an assault weapon pursuant to this section, and shall distribute the description to all law enforcement agencies responsible for enforcement of this chapter. Those law enforcement agencies shall make the description available to all agency personnel.

(h) The Atty General shall promulgate a list that specifies all firearms designated as assault weapons in Sect 12276 or declared to be assault weapons pursuant to this section. The Atty General shall file that list with the Secretary of State for publication in the Calif. Code of Regulations. Any declaration that a specified firearm is an assault weapon shall be implemented by the Atty General who, within 90 days, shall promulgate an amended list which shall include the specified firearm declared to be an assault weapon... {snip...}

(i) The Atty General shall adopt those rules and regulations that may be necessary or proper to carry out the purposes and intent of this chapter.


This section sets up process for DOJ/AG allowing temporary declaration of an assault weapon; it also sets up method to get it permanently declared as AW. While burden of proof's on DOJ/AG, given gun similarities and Kasler decision and wording above about "a copy by another manufacturer" or "redesigned, renamed, or renumbered from one of the firearms listed" this would make a court's "walks like a duck, talks like a duck" decision quite easy.

Note the above-cited PC has no mention of AW disposition once it's declared as AW. The last section (i) merely gives DOJ/Firearms its regulatory ability to "do its thing" in this field and establish procedures, standards, etc.

12280.
{snip...}
...
(g) Subdivision (b) [penalties for illegal AW possession] shall not apply to the possession of an assault weapon during the 90-day period immediately after the date it was specified as an assault weapon pursuant to Sect. 12276.5, or during the one-year period after the date it was defined as an assault weapon pursuant to Sec 12276.1, if all of the following are applicable:
(1) The person is eligible under this chapter to register the particular assault weapon.
(2) The person lawfully possessed the particular assault weapon prior to the date it was specified as an assault weapon pursuant to Sect 12276.5, or prior to the date it was defined as an assault weapon pursuant to Sect 12276.1.
(3) The person is otherwise in compliance with this chapter.


Basically says you aren't in violation if you legally own a gun that's subsequently declared as an AW for the 90 days after it's been 'declared' as an AW - as long as you're eligibile to register (no legal disabilities). My brief reading unclear as to when 90 day period starts: at temporary or permanent declaration? - I believe the latter.

Nothing yet's mentioned as to HOW or IF you can register a newly 'declared AW', and how/if you can continue to possess it after 90 day window.

12285. (a)(1) Any person who lawfully possesses an assault weapon, as defined in Sect. 12276, prior to Jun 1 1989, shall register the firearm by Jan 1 1991, and any person who lawfully possessed an assault weapon prior to the date it was specified as an assault weapon pursuant to Sect 12276.5 shall register the firearm within 90 days, with the Dept of Justice pursuant to those procedures that the department may establish. Except as provided in subdivision (a) of Sect. 12280, any person who lawfully possessed an assault weapon prior to the date it was defined as an assault weapon pursuant to Sect 12276.1, and which was not specified as an assault weapon under Sect 12276 or 12276.5, shall register the firearm within one year of the effective date of Sect 12276.1, with the department pursuant to those procedures that the department may establish. The registration shall contain a description of the firearm that identifies it uniquely, including all identification marks, the full name, address, {...snip...} The department may charge a fee for registration of up to twenty dollars ($20) per person... {...snip...}.
{snip}
...
(b)(1) {...big snip...} .... or (B) lawfully possessed a firearm subsequently declared to be an assault weapon pursuant to Section 12276.5, or subsequently defined as an assault weapon pursuant to Sect 12276.1, shall, within 90 days, render the weapon permanently inoperable, sell the weapon to a licensed gun dealer, obtain a permit from the Dept of Justice in the same manner as specified in Article 3 (commencing with Sect 12230) of Chapter 2, or remove the weapon from this state. A person who lawfully possessed a firearm that was subsequently declared to be an assault weapon pursuant to Sect 12276.5 may alternatively register the firearm within 90 days of the declaration issued pursuant to subdivision (f) of Sect 12276.5.

So: if your gun's been recently declared as an AW you've got 90 days to reg it following the DOJ's procedures. Since these are already set up, it'll replay 91 and 2000 AW reg + current 50BMG reg filing formats.

Thus it appears if DOJ adds currently-unlisted AR/AK receivers so they're AWs, as per Harrott mandate, they'll be registerable. New AW additions trigger a 90 day reg period. Once this is over, they're AWs and can have evil features. (However, unsure if these prospective new AWs can be in 50BMG - there's some overlap & differences in AW vs 50BMG laws & dates.)

AR/AK 'series' receivers can merely be 'identified' by DOJ and added to DOJ Roster, thru just their mere regulatory authority with a bit of push by Kasler decision and 'series' terminology. Other listed 'clone' guns whose receivers are currently legal to acquire - like Imbel FAL receivers - seemingly require extended court declaration process to make 'em AWs and may be more work than perceived DOJ budgetary cost/benefit allows.

Bill Wiese
San Jose

blacklisted
11-21-2005, 03:20 PM
This is just what I needed, thanks. I'm curious why they have waited all these years to update the list. I wonder if they are making sure they don't miss anything?

C.G.
11-21-2005, 03:32 PM
Deja vu! :D

bwiese
11-21-2005, 03:34 PM
This is just what I needed, thanks. I'm curious why they have waited all these years to update the list. I wonder if they are making sure they don't miss anything?

Naah. They'll get to it but it's not high priority.

Things are the way they are probably because they haven't received pressure from legislators and have other budgetary priorities. Further pushes here require budgeted money, and AWs in CA are regarded as a "solved problem". On to more 'visible' things like "safe guns" now....

Some further shaping of the law by Kasler (a rather ill-founded lawsuit in the same vein as Silviera that in some ways dug us further into the hole) and Harrott also took place, but this is way below most folks' - even gunnies' - radar.


Bill Wiese
San Jose

bwiese
11-21-2005, 03:38 PM
Deja vu! :D

Yes, sorry, I felt this needed to be its own thread instead of just a reply.

[BTW: it was a real b*tch to get that into 10,000 bytes. That 10K limit plays havoc w/interleaved quotes and detailed discussions...]


Bill Wiese
San Jose

Inoxmark
11-21-2005, 03:48 PM
So did DOJ follow all of these steps when they (sort of) declared Walther P22 pistols AWs? And if they did, why haven't anyone been advised of an option to register it rather than have it permanently altered? Does this "addition to the list" law not apply to pistols, or am I missing something completely?

bwiese
11-21-2005, 04:14 PM
So did DOJ follow all of these steps when they (sort of) declared Walther P22 pistols AWs? And if they did, why haven't anyone been advised of an option to register it rather than have it permanently altered? Does this "addition to the list" law not apply to pistols, or am I missing something completely?

You're missing something, but it's a bit subtle - and it has nothing to do with pistols vs. rifles...

The Walther P22 was already an assault weapon when it was illegally sold to and acquired by California customers and FFL dealers. It was not 'declared' thru a formal procedure to be an AW - it was just noticed that it was in violation of the law.

See, if a gun/receiver is near enough an AW, but is not already an AW, then DOJ can petition a superior court to temporarily - then permanently - declare a given gun/receiver is an AW. Once 'declared', then registration period for existing owners begins.

And DOJ seems to have the power to add to/update the DOJ roster of ARs & AKs - whereas for other guns to be declared as AWs they must go thru this court procedure.
Here, 'declared' means being on the Roster of AR15 and AK Series Weapons; if updated, the existing legal owners of these guns/receivers should be able to register them within the 90 day window.

The P22 situation is much different: these guns, as shipped to CA, were assault weapons as defined by its evil feature(s) (a threaded barrel). These Walther P22s were not plain ordinary legal guns that suddenly became AWs; S&W/Walther screwed up and shipped a different version to CA dealers that wasn't the approved one and that turned out to be an AW.

The situation was a compounded idiocy of both buyers and sellers (customers, CA FFL dealers, distributors, and S&W/Walther).

Not only was this gun an (illegal) assault weapon, it was substantively different enough from the DOJ tested/approved gun that it'd also be regarded as an 'unsafe handgun', too. (I think the DOJ just let that lesser transgression go ignored...)

The DOJ did not 'declare' P22s to be AWs; they already were, by feature, and thus were already illegal. The DOJ cannot open registration period(s) for existing assault weapons, it can only do this for non-AWs when they become AWs, for the first 90 days.

The 'declaration' of a gun being an AW by courts & DOJ applies only to guns/receivers that are currently not AWs. Grandfathered registration, 90-day registration windows, legal possession thereof after registration, etc. only apply to guns that became assault weapons by DOJ and/or court edict.

Rather than prosecute a mass of 'innocent' persons and dealers for illegal AW possession, transfer, etc. the DOJ sent out nastygrams telling you how to render P22 guns into a CA-legal form. Aside from prosecuting buyers, they coulda prosecuted and/or administratively shut down every FFL dealer that ever sold a P22 or even held one in its inventory.


Bill Wiese
San Jose

shopkeep
11-21-2005, 04:24 PM
So what this basically means is that... AR-15 lowers like the CTR02, get 'em now while ya can because a ban could come as early as 2006. Personally, I think the list will be added when a new batch of anti-gunners come in to replace old favorites like Perata who's term limits are about to expire in 2006.

bwiese
11-21-2005, 04:34 PM
Shopkeep,

AR-15 lowers like the CTR02, get 'em now while ya can because a ban could come as early as 2006.

Well, gotta get a letter, a cooperating FFL dealer, etc. That is, do what Artherd (Ben) did.


Personally, I think the list will be added when a new batch of anti-gunners come in to replace old favorites like Perata who's term limits are about to expire in 2006.

You're a bit unclear on legislative vs administrative responsibilities for "the list" (Roster of ARs and AKs). See my top-most posting. There appears to be no need for any legislative or court involvement to add new models of ARs & AKs to this Roster; this could happen at anytime - even now.

And the DOJ can go to a court and get nonAR/nonAK weapons added thru temporary & permanent declarations.

Perata, Koretz, Scott & gang are not worried about AWs anymore. They regard that 'problem' as 'solved'. A few ARs from minor getting reclassified doesn't bother them, they've already soaked up the political glory a few years ago.

Smart politicians don't look backwards, they've gotta promise something new to stay in the news. That's why they're pushing on for other very dangerous new things like ammo marking (SB357).

Bill Wiese
San Jose

C.G.
11-21-2005, 04:36 PM
Yes, sorry, I felt this needed to be its own thread instead of just a reply.

[BTW: it was a real b*tch to get that into 10,000 bytes. That 10K limit plays havoc w/interleaved quotes and detailed discussions...]


Bill Wiese
San Jose

Actually you are right about that and thank you, again, for the wealth of info.:)


originally posted by shopkeep
So what this basically means is that... AR-15 lowers like the CTR02, get 'em now while ya can because a ban could come as early as 2006. Personally, I think the list will be added when a new batch of anti-gunners come in to replace old favorites like Perata who's term limits are about to expire in 2006.


Like I said in the other thread, don't count your chickens till you find an FFL that would do the transfer.

blacklisted
11-21-2005, 07:04 PM
I'm going to send a letter (already finished it) this week some time, with my luck I'll get a reply after they have banned it. ;)

bwiese
11-21-2005, 07:12 PM
I'm going to send a letter (already finished it) this week some time, with my luck I'll get a reply after they have banned it. ;)

Blacklisted,

I'm sure Artherd here (as well as myself) would be glad to cast an eye over it via PM before you send it off to DOJ. Just a chance a 3rd eyeball might stop you from digging your own hole (or making it worse for others)!

Send it certified/registered mail, too.

Bill Wiese
San Jose

blacklisted
11-21-2005, 07:14 PM
Blacklisted,

I'm sure Artherd here (as well as myself) would be glad to cast an eye over it via PM before you send it off to DOJ. Just a chance a 3rd eyeball might stop you from digging your own hole (or making it worse for others)!

Send it certified/registered mail, too.

Bill Wiese
San Jose

I basically followed the same format as artherd, but I'd be glad to let someone look it over. It has not yet been finalized anyway. PM Sent. I can't even get my family members to check my spelling/grammar for me on this one (and forget legal matters) ;)

artherd
11-21-2005, 11:42 PM
Bill: NICE work! In the back of my head I remenbered the 90 days, but couldn't find it the other evening. GREAT work!!!

It's late, so I'm not quite sure how you arrived at the conclusion that a trial court is not nessecary to add an AR type 'series' weapon to the Roster but I will review it tommorow. (I thought I read in the Harrott decision that specifically CPC 12276.5 must be followed to add even a 'series' gun.)

BL: I'll be happy to look your letter over, feel free to PM or attach it in e-mail to ben@cdglobal.net.

blacklisted
11-21-2005, 11:51 PM
Bill: NICE work! In the back of my head I remenbered the 90 days, but couldn't find it the other evening. GREAT work!!!

It's late, so I'm not quite sure how you arrived at the conclusion that a trial court is not nessecary to add an AR type 'series' weapon to the Roster but I will review it tommorow. (I thought I read in the Harrott decision that specifically CPC 12276.5 must be followed to add even a 'series' gun.)

BL: I'll be happy to look your letter over, feel free to PM or attach it in e-mail to ben@cdglobal.net.


Thanks, Bill looked it over for me a little while ago, and even "upgraded it a bit". He brought up the good point that I should ask more directly for confirmation of legality instead of asking whether or not it is legal.




http://www.assaultweaponwatch.com/

bwiese
11-22-2005, 01:10 PM
OK, my source for Harrott decision is: LAW.COM California citation (http://www.law.com/regionals/ca/opinions/jun/s055064.shtml)

Due to 10KB limits per forum postings here, I won't be able to multiply quote large amounts of text interspersed with my commentary.

But it indeed does appear that Harrott v. Kings County confirms authority of DOJ to identify and add new AR15 & AK "series" items to the Roster of AR15 and AK Series Weapons - as opposed to the DOJ/Attorney General having to get a temporary, then permanent declaration from certain superior courts for other types of assault weapons.

Here's some key Harrott snippets, interspersed w/my commentary. Bold/underline effects are mine alone.

Our construction of the statute, holding that a trial court may not find a semiautomatic firearm to be 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), best serves the legislative goal we have just described. A contrary interpretation would be inconsistent with the legislative goal because owners of unlisted weapons would still be unsure whether they had to comply with the registration requirement.
... and ....
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.
These statements are the overall key to Harrott decision - aside from ban of Type III 'by features' configurations, if it's not named on the Roster, it's not banned by name. And a trial court cannot determine if something is an AW or not - that's solely determined at trial (or pretrial?) by gun being on or off list (and/or by configuration of evil features, which is separate from/irrelevant to Harrott).
... Although we hold the Attorney General has the authority to determine that certain semiautomatic firearms are assault weapons by simply identifying them as such in the list published by the Attorney General in the California Code of Regulations, that authority applies only to the two types of firearms defined in section 12276 by the use of the term series, namely, the AK47 series and the Colt AR-15 series. (See fn. 3, ante.)
OK, here we go, summarizing: AR & AK recievers can be added by DOJ to the Roster without court approval. (Usual promulgation, 90 day reg window, etc. required as per law.)

In order to have any other semiautomatic firearms declared assault weapons within the meaning of section 12276, the Attorney General must utilize the add-on procedure set forth in section 12276.5.
Thus, summarizing again: "clone" receivers of 'named' guns like FN-FAL (say, from Imbel, DSA, Coonan), Uzi (Group Industries, Vector?), HK-9x (PTR91, 'Speshul Wepunz', etc.) must go thru the superior court determination and declaration procedure. Once this is done, then the promulgation, 90 day window reg period, etc. takes place.

And, of course, the Attorney General' s identification of a particular firearm as a series assault weapon would, in an appropriate case, be subject to challenge on the ground the firearm in question did not satisfy the standard set forth in section 12276, subdivision (e), namely that the variations between it and the AK47 series or the Colt AR-15 series were more than "minor."
This means that DOJ's adding ARs/AKs to the Roster is challengable in court if differences were substantial and nontrivial. What these more-than-minor differences are, I'm not sure, and it'd prob take a trial to resolve what true AR-ness is; weight would be given to DOJ's 'expert' opinion in its field of regulation.

Bottom line: DOJ has ability to directly promulgate/add new AR15 and AK 'series' weapons to the Roster and does not have to use the superior court proceeding required to declare other (non AR/AK) guns as assault weapons.

And from CA AW law (not from Harrott), if a gun becomes an AW - by declaration or addition to Roster - it will indeed be eligible for registration as an AW and continued possession when registration properly filed within the registration 'window' and DOJ administrative procedures are complied with.


Bill Wiese
San Jose

C.G.
11-22-2005, 02:03 PM
Bill, thanks again for your dilligence. Good work!:)

bwiese
11-22-2005, 02:10 PM
Bill, thanks again for your dilligence. Good work!:)

No problem. There's a method to my madness for similar reasons to Artherd's ;)


Bill W.
San Jose

bg
11-22-2005, 05:58 PM
Wonder where this will put the Ruger Mini-14 ? True trying
to hit the side of the barn with a stock one is a trial, but
it's still one of VERY few semi's that one can by here in Crapfornia.

I have mine shooting sorta straight, but it wasn't cheap.
Hate to see it fall under the reins of the Cali Gestapo.
http://pic14.picturetrail.com/VOL544/713502/1204867/54977209.jpg

bwiese
11-22-2005, 06:13 PM
Wonder where this will put the Ruger Mini-14 ? True trying to hit the side of the barn with a stock one is a trial, but it's still one of VERY few semi's that one can by here in Crapfornia.

I have mine shooting sorta straight, but it wasn't cheap. Hate to see it fall under the reins of the Cali Gestapo.

Your Mini-14 (as well as similarly configured M1As) is safe in its configuration.

If you read my original post in detail, non-AR/non-AK guns need the Atty General to go thru a special court procedure to declare them as assault weapons. It seems to be a reasonably high bar. AG can't just add Mini 14s or M1As to the list - that's only for AR/AK 'series' guns. He's probably lost interest in this anyhow - they've moved on to 'safe guns' stuff.

The only ban on your gun is that you can't add folding stock or flash hider.

I don't expect this to change.

Bill Wiese
San Jose

blacklisted
11-22-2005, 06:22 PM
Any idea why this version is different?

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/harrott_v_kings.txt

bwiese
11-23-2005, 12:08 AM
Any idea why this version is different?

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/harrott_v_kings.txt


Um, I believe this was a preceding (appeal?) court case leading up to the CA Supreme Court appeal. This case took a long time. Final Harrott resolution at Supreme Court level was in 2001, IIRC.

Some of these national gun law websites don't have up-to-date state-level information.

Bill Wiese
San Jose

artherd
12-10-2005, 10:16 AM
Bottom line: DOJ has ability to directly promulgate/add new AR15 and AK 'series' weapons to the Roster and does not have to use the superior court proceeding required to declare other (non AR/AK) guns as assault weapons.
Sonofa! You're absolutely right, there it is plain as day in Harrott So basically we're dealing with a challengable action the DOJ can undertake at any time. It'd be real nice if we could hammer down some furthur procedure. The 90day window for registration is pretty clear, however what happens in the instant of promogulation? What sort of 'warning interval' if any do we get, and what happens to guns that have started the DROS process?

(this is from the top of my head right now, but dosen't the actual firearms transaction occur at the start of the 10-day period when the 4473/DROS is filled out? The remaining 10days is simply a holding of your firearm right?

shopkeep
12-10-2005, 05:58 PM
I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see the DOJ go after all the M-14 mods out there right now involving 18 and 16 inch barrels. Afterall just look at how evil the SOCOM II looks with its rails and everything.

This would be at some future time after they've stopped pursuing handguns and consider that "solved". If there were to be a surge in violence, they might go after the M-14 mods, Cali-FALs and M-96 at that time in a publicity grab.

I have no doubt at this point though that they'll add the unlisted lowers at some point in the future... whether it's near future or further out who knows. It's just too easy for them not to add them, lets just make it as hard as possible in the meantime by not giving out too much info!

1919_4_ME
12-10-2005, 07:14 PM
I'm awaiting a response from an FFL if he can get these type of lowers first.:D

bwiese
12-11-2005, 09:29 PM
I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see the DOJ go after all the M-14 mods out there right now involving 18 and 16 inch barrels. Afterall just look at how evil the SOCOM II looks with its rails and everything.


Irrelevant. Please read the law.

Changing barrel lengths as long as they're longer than 16" has no bearing on assault weapon-ness. The only issue is a flash hider, and all M1As legally sold in CA have muzzle brakes.

Furthermore, DOJ can't "go after" M1As directly. They'd have to go thru a 12276.5 'add on' proceeding in a superior court. Don't think they've ever done that for ANY gun in the last 15 years. Besides, it'd be very difficult for a non-pistol gripped rifle to be declared as AW due to some language written in the intent area of the law...

Even 'evil looks' has little bearing. The primary configuration of the rifle has no pistol grip.


This would be at some future time after they've stopped pursuing handguns and consider that "solved". If there were to be a surge in violence, they might go after the M-14 mods, Cali-FALs and M-96 at that time in a publicity grab.

There likely won't be any more AW laws in CA. They regard that as 'solved'.

More likely will be more attempts at SB357-like laws - ammo marking, not of the gun, but of the ammo.

madkiwi
12-12-2005, 12:05 PM
Although I don't want to close off opportunities for future gun owners in this state, and I would hate to see it happen, but I would laugh if they added DSA FAL receivers to the list.

Then I would be able to unpin my 10 round magazines, add standard dustcovers etc. and have real clones. My Franken-STG58 will look like an STG58, my Franken-G1 will become a G1.

In reality they have had a long time to add these rifles to the AW list and have not yet. Don't expect any changes.

bwiese
12-12-2005, 01:31 PM
Madkiwi Although I don't want to close off opportunities for future gun owners in this state, and I would hate to see it happen, but I would laugh if they added DSA FAL receivers to the list.

Damn, I've gone over this a zillion times now in multiple threads.

The DOJ itself can only add AR/AK "series" members it identifies. That was confirmed by Harrott decision.

Harrott also confirms that for any other gun to be declared as an AW, the DOJ must go thru a special 'add on' procedure in specific superior courts (as detailed in PC 12276.6). This takes a lot more effort than updating the AR/AK list....

shopkeep
12-12-2005, 02:38 PM
I guess the real question is "How quickly can the list be published?". Well, according to the DOJ the answer is, "two weeks". The only real answer of course will come with time, but I'm open to speculation. My estimate is January 5th for publishing of the list and 12:01am January 6th for day one of the 90 day registration.

So what do you guys think?

bwiese
12-12-2005, 03:49 PM
I guess the real question is "How quickly can the list be published?". Well, according to the DOJ the answer is, "two weeks". The only real answer of course will come with time, but I'm open to speculation. My estimate is January 5th for publishing of the list and 12:01am January 6th for day one of the 90 day registration.

So what do you guys think?

Well there's a few gotchas that may run in both sides' favor.

The DOJ gets dispensation from having to obey certain aspects of civil administrative code - in fact, PC 12276.5(h) specifically says that CCR gov't code in Chapter 3.5, Title 2, Division 3 (beginning w/sec 11340), pertaining to adoption of rules and regulations, shall not apply to "any list of assault weapons promulgated pursuant to this section".

However Sec'y of State's office is responsible for publishing updates to CCRs, and they may have their own time delays before going 'live'. I believe that only the "live" CCR update - and not a DOJ bulletin or any 'notice of proposed rulemaking'-like document actually kicks in the ban....

jdberger
12-14-2005, 12:14 AM
I'd be curious to see what the over/under on time for listing is.

Anyone know Jimmy the Greek?

CAVEAT: I am aware that gambling is illegal and I am neither encouraging nor soliciting any such activity - I am just making a reference to popular culture that may or may not be legal in some jurisdictions.





-phew-

living in fear is such work!