PDA

View Full Version : AK Series Question


Gottlieb
06-17-2010, 6:42 AM
I have always been under the impression that AK series rifles not listed by name are legal to own, so long as they meet accepted standards: bullet-button, overall length of 30 inches or more, etc. However, I was reading the 2008 Dangers Weapons Control Law this morning, and section 12276 (the part of the law that lists "assault weapons" by name) says this:

An assault weapon shall mean the following designated semiautomatic firearms: "All AK series including, but not limited to, the models identified as follows . . . "

The language then goes on to identify a short list of manufacturers, designations, etc.

My question is this: because the language for AK series rifles uses the words "including, but not limited to" does this mean that ANY AK series rifle is an assault weapon, no matter whether or not bullet buttons are installed?

69Mach1
06-17-2010, 7:37 AM
That AW guide on the DOJ's website is outdated, incorrect, and misleading.

http://www.calguns.net/a_california_arak.htm
Harrot ended that all.

Gottlieb
06-17-2010, 7:41 AM
I was reading the actual law, not the guide (I think):

http://www.ag.ca.gov/firearms/dwcl/12275.php

On this webpage, which I believe exhibits the law as written, it says the following:

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.

I don't want my interpretation to be true, but I can't read it any other way. They did not use "but not limited to" in any other category but AK rifles, but it is there, isn't it?

CSACANNONEER
06-17-2010, 7:45 AM
Taken from the original Calgun's rifle AW guide:



Harrott v. County of Kings (2001)

...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)

So, although the language is still in the written law, case law trumps it.

CHS
06-17-2010, 7:55 AM
My question is this: because the language for AK series rifles uses the words "including, but not limited to" does this mean that ANY AK series rifle is an assault weapon, no matter whether or not bullet buttons are installed?

Nope. Harrott case law nullifies that part of the PC entirely.

All AW's must be listed by specific make and model in order to be banned outright regardless of bullet button status.

If it's not listed, it's legal.

Gottlieb
06-17-2010, 8:16 AM
Well, that's good to hear. I was a still a little concerned, but the cited case satisfies me, especially since it dealt specifically with AK style weapons. It would make a good read for anyone who cares to do so:

http://web.mit.edu/~joncox/www/docs/harrott_v_kings.shtml

The reasons that the "AK Series" language did not stand are interesting, and worth a read. I think I understand it, but don't want to offer a less-than-perfect summary. Maybe one of our "Legal Eagles" could summarize for us?

CSACANNONEER
06-17-2010, 8:21 AM
Even Big5 is now selling real, off list, AK style, semi-auto rifles now!

CHS
06-17-2010, 8:49 AM
Well, that's good to hear. I was a still a little concerned, but the cited case satisfies me, especially since it dealt specifically with AK style weapons. It would make a good read for anyone who cares to do so:

http://web.mit.edu/~joncox/www/docs/harrott_v_kings.shtml

The reasons that the "AK Series" language did not stand are interesting, and worth a read. I think I understand it, but don't want to offer a less-than-perfect summary. Maybe one of our "Legal Eagles" could summarize for us?

The Harrott decision was absolutely key to us being able to have AK's and AR's in California. Before then, it said any AR/AK series rifles, period.

The Harrott decision basically said that that's too vague and unenforceable, so the state can only ban by features and/or specific make and model.

It's the entire base of law upon which was built the "off list" phrase and phenomena.