PDA

View Full Version : Has a CA-Legal "FAB-10, Vulcan or otherwise" Pistol been discussed yet?


Stanze
12-07-2005, 4:25 PM
A California legal break open, non-detachable 10-rd fixed magazine, .223 Rem, or 7.62 x 39mm pistol sounds fun. :)

I know this is in the Rifleman's forum, but there's not much discussion of the lowers in question in the Handgun forum.

bwiese
12-07-2005, 4:33 PM
A California legal break open, non-detachable 10-rd fixed magazine, .223 Rem, or 7.62 x 39mm pistol sounds fun. :)

I know this is in the Rifleman's forum, but there's not much discussion of the lowers in question in the Handgun forum.

Simply stated, homebuilt handguns are illegal. They violate the PC 12125 "Unsafe handgun" laws which require safety testing and certification.



12125. (a) Commencing January 1, 2001, any person in this state who manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state for sale, keeps for sale, offers or exposes for sale, gives, or lends any unsafe handgun shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year.


The only exception is for single-action revolvers holding 5 or more rounds with a 3" or longer bbl, and 7"? 7.5"? overall length. In 2006, single-shot pistols (with similar size/form-factor requirements) will also also not require safety testing, and will also not appear (or be required to appear) on the approved handgun list.

There are very limited exceptions for LEO-related stuff, creating preapproved prototypes for getting DOJ approval, etc. But for all intents & purposes you can't make your own pistol except for single-action revolver.

So don't even try to make 1911s from 80% frames, etc.

Stanze
12-07-2005, 4:36 PM
Doh, forgot about the testing BS.

scorpionusa
12-07-2005, 10:06 PM
What about something like this
http://www.bushmaster.com/shopping/Carbon15/Images/AZ-C15P97.jpg
but with Cali config (fixed 10rnd internal mag). If Bushmaster submit it for the drop test and sell it as a complete pistol, we might be able to get it if it gets on the approved list. I would get one just for the cool factor and the ability to shoot rifle rounds in a pistol. The FN FiveSeven can do that too, but it's just not the same as a Bushmaster Carbon 15 pistol.

JHC
12-08-2005, 4:36 AM
In california, pistols have to have the magazine in the pistol grip.

TonyM
12-08-2005, 5:40 AM
In california, pistols have to have the magazine in the pistol grip.

Not 100% sure, but I don't think that applies to non-removable magazines.

Gunner1
12-08-2005, 8:02 AM
Well, I had given up on the idea of an AR type pistol. Now look what you guys have gone and done now. I guess we need to get this project going.
I sure hate the damned safety testing, No more home built 1911's and no FAB 10 style pistols (If shoeless ventures would even bite).
Does anyone have any pull with any manufacturers rep's? Maybe we need to start a letter writing campaign to get one submitted for approval. Well I doubt that would fly, but then I thought we would never get stripped lowers again either.

Gunner

bwiese
12-08-2005, 10:17 AM
I sure hate the damned safety testing, No more home built 1911's and no FAB10 style pistols (If shoeless ventures would even bite).

Does anyone have any pull with any manufacturers rep's? Maybe we need to start a letter writing campaign to get one submitted for approval. Well I doubt that would fly, but then I thought we would never get stripped lowers again either.

Prob not a good chance -expensive gun, small market. It's hard enough getting bare AR lowers into CA right now.

Plus 223 pistols are ballistically fairly useless. Gotta have 10.5" or more bbl to really get enough oomph to stop a 223 from being a fast 22LR...

Gunner1
12-08-2005, 10:24 AM
I agree that ballistically the 223 pistol isnt that hot, but that doesn't mean that I wouldn't buy one. I love my 10"bbl T/C Contender. A fab 10 pistol would be fun for plinking and well the cool factor is also worth it alone.


Gunner

Ericthenorse
12-08-2005, 10:35 AM
That part of CA law does not make sense.... Under those guidelines, my Gold Cup, which is not on the "list" and has not been drop tested or any of that other crap, would be a "dangerous handgun" and I am in violation of the law. :D

Ericthenorse
12-08-2005, 10:51 AM
This might be a little closer to what laws might be broken here...

(f) Nothing shall prevent a device defined as a "handgun," "pistol," "revolver," or "firearm capable of being concealed upon the person" from also being found to be a short-barreled shotgun or a short-barreled rifle, as defined in Section 12020.

So.. the doj could look at your gun and say...."hmmmm...looks like a short barreled rifle to me......" :D

bwiese
12-08-2005, 11:00 AM
That part of CA law does not make sense.... Under those guidelines, my Gold Cup, which is not on the "list" and has not been drop tested or any of that other crap, would be a "dangerous handgun" and I am in violation of the law. :D

Irrelevant, as existing owners are allowed to retain their untested/off-list "unsafe" handguns and buy/sell/trade them via PPTs. And folks moving into CA are allowed to bring them in.

This is about creation/manufacturing...

scorpionusa
12-08-2005, 11:03 AM
Just read the AW Identification Guide again and Bushmaster pistol is on the Roberti Roos AW list (category 1). So I guess Bushmaster pistol is a no-go. But if FAB 10 or other makers decided to make a Cali AR pistol and submit it for the safety test then there maybe a chance