PDA

View Full Version : OAL question RE: AW


titan
12-26-2009, 12:55 PM
Are the MSAR rifles with a 16" barrel and an OAL of 27" legal if they are disassembled? Sorry for all the questions but I have used seach and could not find an answer directly on point with my question. I read the CA AW flow chart and it say if it's shorter than 30" in it's shortest form capable of firing it would be an issue.

So, if the stock and receiver are shorter than 30" with the barrel assembly removed is this legal or an AW? The plan is to get a 20" barrel at some point but the way I read this there is no constructive possession. So a MSAR with a 16" barrel would not be an AW if the barrel is not attached to the receiver?

Josh3239
12-26-2009, 1:11 PM
I kept mine disassembled untill I got my extention. The truth is the rifle isn't centerfire nor semiautomatic without the barrel so it couldn't possibly be an AW. The reason why I completely disassembled it though, is because I believe there is a line between parts and disassembled AW.

titan
12-26-2009, 1:29 PM
thanks, I wish there was a more clearcut way to ensure you are safe when going to the effort of being legal. What line between parts and a dissembed AW are you referring to? Constructive possession? If I pick one of these up I was thinking if I took the barrel out, and took the gas piston out it could never function as a Semi-auto centerfire rifle. Perhaps I need to speak with an attorney about this.

RP1911
12-26-2009, 1:35 PM
Just buy a Steyr USR and put a Raddlock bullet button and you are good to go.

wash
12-26-2009, 1:42 PM
There is constructive posession on SBR's. That's a federal issue. As long as your rifle would be over 26" and disassembled you're OK in California unless you assemble it in an illegal configuration.

titan
12-26-2009, 1:51 PM
There is constructive posession on SBR's. That's a federal issue. As long as your rifle would be over 26" and disassembled you're OK in California unless you assemble it in an illegal configuration.

Okay, that's what I was looking for. The MSAR with the 16" barrel has an OAL of 27" when assembled so it not considered a SBR and if it's disassembed it's not a AW in CA either. The only reason I was think of going this route is just to hedge my bets on another ban. I also may not live here in CA forever so having one disassembed is just an insurance policy.

I guess I shouldn't muddy the waters about questions on whether I need a Raddlock on the stock in a disassembed state.

Perhaps this is not worth the effort, seems like a lot of hoops to jump through.

6172crew
12-26-2009, 3:05 PM
There is no constructive possesion laws concerning AWs. Unless it's a named receiver.

I have a msar barrel extention that i won't need, I'm going with the 20inch barrel.

titan
12-26-2009, 3:22 PM
I think the 20" barrel is the best option, but there are not many around. I think if I decide to get one I will just keep it disassembled. Until I can get a 20" barrel. I don't shoot firearms in CA anyhow. It's a short drive to AZ.

sac550
12-26-2009, 4:34 PM
There is no constructive possesion laws concerning AWs. Unless it's a named receiver.

I have a msar barrel extention that i won't need, I'm going with the 20inch barrel.

Where do you get that constructive possession applies to named weapon? A stripped named receiver is not a semiautomatic firearm, as 12276 requires.

Cokebottle
12-26-2009, 4:39 PM
Where do you get that constructive possession applies to named weapon? A stripped named receiver is not a semiautomatic firearm, as 12276 requires.
A stripped receiver isn't, but a NAMED receiver is banned by name, and the receiver is the legal firearm. It doesn't have to be semiautomatic/centerfire if it is banned by name.

sac550
12-26-2009, 4:41 PM
Read 12276 it only bans the "following semiautomatic firearms".....

sac550
12-26-2009, 4:43 PM
12276. As used in this chapter, "assault weapon" shall mean the
following designated semiautomatic firearms:
(a) All of the following specified rifles:
(1) All AK series including, but not limited to, the models
identified as follows:
(A) Made in China AK, AKM, AKS, AK47, AK47S, 56, 56S, 84S, and
86S.
(B) Norinco 56, 56S, 84S, and 86S.
(C) Poly Technologies AKS and AK47.
(D) MAADI AK47 and ARM.
(2) UZI and Galil.
(3) Beretta AR-70.
(4) CETME Sporter.
(5) Colt AR-15 series.
(6) Daewoo K-1, K-2, Max 1, Max 2, AR 100, and AR 110C.
(7) Fabrique Nationale FAL, LAR, FNC, 308 Match, and Sporter.
(8) MAS 223.
(9) HK-91, HK-93, HK-94, and HK-PSG-1.
(10) The following MAC types:
(A) RPB Industries Inc. sM10 and sM11.
(B) SWD Incorporated M11.
(11) SKS with detachable magazine.
(12) SIG AMT, PE-57, SG 550, and SG 551.
(13) Springfield Armory BM59 and SAR-48.
(14) Sterling MK-6.
(15) Steyer AUG.
(16) Valmet M62S, M71S, and M78S.
(17) Armalite AR-180.
(18) Bushmaster Assault Rifle.
(19) Calico M-900.
(20) J&R ENG M-68.
(21) Weaver Arms Nighthawk.
(b) All of the following specified pistols:
(1) UZI.
(2) Encom MP-9 and MP-45.
(3) The following MAC types:
(A) RPB Industries Inc. sM10 and sM11.
(B) SWD Incorporated M-11.
(C) Advance Armament Inc. M-11.
(D) Military Armament Corp. Ingram M-11.
(4) Intratec TEC-9.
(5) Sites Spectre.
(6) Sterling MK-7.
(7) Calico M-950.
(8) Bushmaster Pistol.
(c) All of the following specified shotguns:
(1) Franchi SPAS 12 and LAW 12.
(2) Striker 12.
(3) The Streetsweeper type S/S Inc. SS/12.

RP1911
12-26-2009, 5:01 PM
Please don't confuse semi-auto centerfire with semi-auto rimfire OAL requirements.

ETA: AW flowchart for centerfire: http://www.calguns.net/caawid/flowchart.pdf

sac550
12-26-2009, 5:10 PM
Please don't confuse semi-auto centerfire with semi-auto rimfire OAL requirements.

ETA: AW flowchart for centerfire: http://www.calguns.net/caawid/flowchart.pdf

Exactly, centerfire is not a requirement for the named firearms in 12276. They only have to be semiautomatics rifles or pistols, but they have to be semiautomatics. Receiver isn't a semiautomatic rifle or pistol.

Cokebottle
12-26-2009, 5:11 PM
Read 12276 it only bans the "following semiautomatic firearms".....
Then why, when one finds themselves in the possession of an unregistered assault weapon, do "the right people" advise them to disassemble the gun and contact a lawyer to arrange for surrender of the receiver to LE?

You do not want to be caught in possession of a named lower receiver, assembled or otherwise, in California.

sac550
12-26-2009, 5:20 PM
Then why, when one finds themselves in the possession of an unregistered assault weapon, do "the right people" advise them to disassemble the gun and contact a lawyer to arrange for surrender of the receiver to LE?

You do not want to be caught in possession of a named lower receiver, assembled or otherwise, in California.

If you are in possession of an unregistered assault weapon then I would recommend separating the upper from the lower. But we are talking about just a lower. I can understand many don't want to be in possession of a named lower. But the section reads it has to be a semiautomatic rifle or pistol. A lower is neither. If you think a named lower is a AW then you must think a OLL lower half is a semiautomtic rifle and thus a AW?

Alex$
12-26-2009, 5:20 PM
Odd question cokebottle, can't the receiver just be destroyed or dropped down a deep hole? Or is that illegal?

titan
12-26-2009, 5:21 PM
It's 27" long with the barrel installed.

With the barrel not installed Just the receiver in the stock it's still under 27 actually it's much shorter than 26" but since it's not able to fire without the barrel that = no 12276 violation or Fed. SBR?

If the barrel is not installed it's not a semi-auto centerfire rifle? Correct?

So the million dollar question. Do I need to put a Raddlock on if it's to remain disassembled? Since it's won't meet the OAL requirement of 12276 when assembled, do I need to keep a Raddlock on it it's never to be assembled?

Remember, I am only keeping it for use out of state. Man this is giving me a headache. The AW flowchart does not account for disassembled rifles so even when disassembled, it will pass the OAL requirement as it can't fire, however the next question is about detachable mag, if it's disassembled what does it matter if the mag can detach?

wash
12-26-2009, 5:35 PM
If it's not assembled in a prohibited configuration, it's not an "assault weapon", you don't need a magazine lock unless you want features on your rifle.

The two issues are seperate. You can wait if you want and possibly wait until our "assault weapon" ban gets thrown out.

It wasn't my intention to wait for that with my PS90 but it's looking like it might work out that way.

RP1911
12-26-2009, 5:38 PM
If it is not on the list (MSAR is not), then you are good to go diassembled. There is no constructive possession law in California.

Cokebottle
12-26-2009, 5:40 PM
Odd question cokebottle, can't the receiver just be destroyed or dropped down a deep hole? Or is that illegal?
Destruction of evidence is illegal.
Some have suggested stripping the gun down and selling the lower out of state, but transportation is also illegal.
Both felonies.

Alex$
12-26-2009, 5:43 PM
So the only real options are pucker up and hope a named receiver once again becomes legal or turning it in to LE?

What are the chances the AW ban will be lifted in the next year?

Cokebottle
12-26-2009, 5:44 PM
A lower is neither. If you think a named lower is a AW then you must think a OLL lower half is a semiautomtic rifle and thus a AW?
I agree that a lower is neither, but if what you were saying were true, then someone could have a Colt AR15 and make it legal by installing a single-shot sled and a P50 maglock, rendering it an auto-ejecting bolt-action rifle.

From everything the CGF has said, the possession of the listed lower is a problem, assembled or not.
If it were not a problem, then it would not be a problem to strip the gun and sell the lower out of state.

Cokebottle
12-26-2009, 5:51 PM
So the only real options are pucker up and hope a named receiver once again becomes legal or turning it in to LE?

What are the chances the AW ban will be lifted in the next year?
Next year? Zilch.

If we're lucky, we'll see shall-issue and maybe elimination of the roster before the end of 2010. There are currently two cases pending that are being held in suspense pending the resolution of MacDonald, which is not expected until June.
A challenge to the AW ban will require another case that has not yet been filed, and likely won't be filed until after favorable rulings on MacDonald, Sykes, and Nordyke (why "waste your time" on a challenge of the AW ban if you're already batting 0-2 on CCW and the roster?).

Optimistically? Late 2011?

Alex$
12-26-2009, 5:54 PM
Thanks again cokebottle for putting up with the questions.

And thus, with apologies to OP, I cease the derailment of this thread.

(but seriously, informative as ever)

sac550
12-26-2009, 5:56 PM
I agree that a lower is neither, but if what you were saying were true, then someone could have a Colt AR15 and make it legal by installing a single-shot sled and a P50 maglock, rendering it an auto-ejecting bolt-action rifle.

From everything the CGF has said, the possession of the listed lower is a problem, assembled or not.
If it were not a problem, then it would not be a problem to strip the gun and sell the lower out of state.

In my opinion you could have a colt AR15 described as you have, because it doesn't meet the definition in 12276 as a semiautomatic. I think everyone has to do what they are comfortable with, and I don't fault anyone for playing it safe. But I feel the law is clear that the rifle has to be a "semiauto" if it is a named 12276 gun.

Again if you think otherwise then you would also have to feel a OLL lower half (non bb) is an AW. Yet, you will see thread after thread saying a OLL lower is NOT an AW b/c it isn't a semiauto rifle yet. Therefore it is legal. I agree, that the OLL lower half doesn't have to be reg'd. And if you feel the same then you have to use the same theory when talking about a named lower half. It is just a paper weight at that point and not rifle or pistol.

Rooftop Voter
12-26-2009, 6:06 PM
what about a Sterling 9mm carbine sporter made by Wiselite Arms for Century Arms... Its OAL is 27 with the stock folded - so one would need to keep it disassembled until an extention & a bullet button could be found right?

sac550
12-26-2009, 6:25 PM
what about a Sterling 9mm carbine sporter made by Wiselite Arms for Century Arms... Its OAL is 27 with the stock folded - so one would need to keep it disassembled until an extention & a bullet button could be found right?

Nope, semiauto, centerrifle less then 30" OAL is an AW. Doesn't mater if it has a BB or not. The rifle you described above would have to have OAL 30" or more and a fixed magazine, holding less then 10 rounds.

ke6guj
12-26-2009, 6:26 PM
I agree that a lower is neither, but if what you were saying were true, then someone could have a Colt AR15 and make it legal by installing a single-shot sled and a P50 maglock, rendering it an auto-ejecting bolt-action rifle.that may be legal, but not recommended at this time.

From everything the CGF has said, the possession of the listed lower is a problem, assembled or not.
If it were not a problem, then it would not be a problem to strip the gun and sell the lower out of state.I think the CGF position is more that posession of a listed lower is defendable as not being an AW, but that it isn't worth the legal exposure and cost to defend it if it isn't necessary to do so. Since there is question to as if a listed lower could be considered an AW by itself, it isn't worth the $100-200 that you could get by selling it out-of-state to deal with the potential felony that you could be charged with for the transportation and sale of an unregistered AW.

titan
12-26-2009, 7:13 PM
Nope, semiauto, centerrifle less then 30" OAL is an AW. Doesn't mater if it has a BB or not. The rifle you described above would have to have OAL 30" or more and a fixed magazine, holding less then 10 rounds.

If it's not assembled and can't be fired I don't think it's in violation of 12276, it would not be classifed as a SA Centerfire rifle.