PDA

View Full Version : OLL question


donw
04-11-2011, 10:02 AM
OK...so I have a Spike Tactical ST-22 M4 with the lowers marked "22lr", it has the bayonet lug and A2 flashider.

i also have the 5.56 uppers that have bayonet lug and A2 flash hider AND i have a "Bullet button" to install.

it was manufactured in 2011 as far as i know, I purchased it brand new from Spikes Tactical and took delivery thru a licensed FFL as an ST-22 M4. i inquired at the time i took delivery about the "bullet button" and installation of the 5.56 uppers and was assured I'd have no problems...but...i got to thinking about the OLL issues that can arise.

so...

question is: once i install the "bullet button" and the 5.56 uppers, i should have no 'legal' difficulties should i? it will have a bayonet lug, A2 flash hider and pistol grip and, of course, the required 10 round CA approved BD mag, overall length is 31.75" with telescoping stock in collapsed position.)

i checked the AR/AK FAQ here, looking for a OLL list, but found none. did i miss it? :confused:

thanks

wash
04-11-2011, 10:13 AM
A link in the blue bar under the banner adds at the top of the page has a link to the "assault weapon" flow chart.

It sounds like the configuration you want is legal but you should check the flow chart to be sure.

bwiese
04-11-2011, 10:21 AM
OK...so I have a Spike Tactical ST-22 M4
with the lowers marked "22lr", it has the bayonet lug and A2 flashider.
i also have the 5.56 uppers that have bayonet lug and A2 flash hider
AND i have a "Bullet button" to install.

it was manufactured in 2011 as far as i know, I purchased it brand new
from Spikes Tactical and took delivery thru a licensed FFL as an ST-22
M4. i inquired at the time i took delivery about the "bullet button" and
installation of the 5.56 uppers and was assured I'd have no problems...
but...i got to thinking about the OLL issues that can arise.

so...question is: once i install the "bullet button" and the 5.56 uppers,
i should have no 'legal' difficulties should i? it will have a bayonet lug,
A2 flash hider and pistol grip and, of course, the required 10 round CA
approved BD mag, overall length is 31.75" with telescoping stock in collapsed position.)

i checked the AR/AK FAQ here, looking for a OLL list, but found none. did i miss it?


1.) Spike's Tactical receiver, regardless of caliber marking, is truly 'off-list'. California law only lists of *banned* makes and models, it does not list legal models.

2.) Any supposed lists of legal, unbanned off-list makes/models are purely a volunteer compilation and are likely incomplete since market changes over time and new manufacturers and models pop up.

Just because a receiver doesn't appear on this latter list does not mean it's illegal - the only lists that matter are the Roberti-Roos (12276/11 CCR 5495) and Kasler (11 CCR 5499) list of banned AWs. The Calguns AW Flowchart is a good resource on this.


3.) If your rifle is assembled as a rimfire configuration (22LR), it does not require a BulletButton maglock since noncenterfire (i.e, rimfire) rifles are exempt from CA AW laws, and also can be 26" min overall length.


4.) If your rifle is to be assembled as a centerfire rifle (say, 223.) it requires a BulletButton-style maglock [to be used only w/10rd or less magazine] unless there are no evil features on the gun (flash hider, pistol grip, telestock, etc.). It appears your configuration has such features so you need to install the BulletButton maglock FIRST before affixing the centerfire upper to the gun. Also a semiautomatic centerfire rifle must be 30" or more overall length to not be an illegal AW - so it appears you are squared away in that respect as well.

5.) The caliber marking of your lower is irrelevant to what your gun can be.

coverme2
04-11-2011, 12:42 PM
I just read the flow-chart and have a Q: Why is it that active duty military personnel stationed in CA can apply for an AW permit AFTER the deadlines but an active duty law enforcement officer in CA may not apply for an AW permit AFTER the deadlines even though they are qualified with, issued, and carry AR-15s on a daily basis when they are on duty? When I was in the US military years ago I was required to sign-out/check-in my M-16 on a daily basis. I know for a fact that some CA LEOs who are issued AR-15s take them home at EOS. So....back to the gist of my Q: do active CA LEOs have the same opportunity to apply for an AW permit AFTER the deadlines as how active military in CA are allowed...or am I missing something?

Librarian
04-11-2011, 12:45 PM
I just read the flow-chart and have a Q: Why is it that active duty military personnel stationed in CA can apply for an AW permit AFTER the deadlines but an active duty law enforcement officer in CA may not apply for an AW permit AFTER the deadlines even though they are qualified with, issued, and carry AR-15s on a daily basis when they are on duty? When I was in the US military years ago I was required to sign-out/check-in my M-16 on a daily basis. I know for a fact that some CA LEOs who are issued AR-15s take them home at EOS. So....back to the gist of my Q: do active CA LEOs have the same opportunity to apply for an AW permit AFTER the deadlines as how active military in CA are allowed...or am I missing something?

With a letter from the officer's department, YES, LEOs can acquire and register things CA calls 'assault weapons'.

There is some question recently on whether they may keep them as 'assault weapons' after they retire or otherwise are no longer actively employed as sworn LEO.

dantodd
04-11-2011, 12:48 PM
I just read the flow-chart and have a Q: Why is it that active duty military personnel stationed in CA can apply for an AW permit AFTER the deadlines but an active duty law enforcement officer in CA may not apply for an AW permit AFTER the deadlines even though they are qualified with, issued, and carry AR-15s on a daily basis when they are on duty? When I was in the US military years ago I was required to sign-out/check-in my M-16 on a daily basis. I know for a fact that some CA LEOs who are issued AR-15s take them home at EOS. So....back to the gist of my Q: do active CA LEOs have the same opportunity to apply for an AW permit AFTER the deadlines as how active military in CA are allowed...or am I missing something?

No more AW permits for military either. The DoJ recently stopped issuing them for .mil unless the CO will write a letter saying the weapon is for duty.

coverme2
04-11-2011, 1:51 PM
To paraphrase what Lloyd said to Mary in "Dumb & Dumber"...."So yer' saying there's a chance!" LOL Good grief.....CA is soooooooooooooooooo paranoid!!!!!! Can't wait to move to a more 2A friendly state where I can be a good law-abiding, unrestricted, legally armed citizen. Its good to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. What states do you recommend I move to if CA doesn't get its act together....or is the rest of our NATION eventually facing this same type of BS?

wash
04-11-2011, 2:03 PM
There was nothing dumb about the op's question.

California laws are tricky but we have many good people working on things like the flow chart so that it's easier to figure out for people who don't want to find the relevant code and court decisions.

If you want to go to a real paradise, try China, I hear it's great for the working man.

CHS
04-11-2011, 2:05 PM
You keep mentioning the bayonet lug.

The bayonet lug IS NOT a prohibited SB-23 feature in CA.

You would need to move to New York or New Jersey in order to have a problem with your bayonet lug.

Also, as Bweise said, Caliber markings on the receiver mean nothing in the eyes of the law. They aren't even a required federal marking for manufacturing a firearm. They are meaningless. Period.

tonelar
04-11-2011, 2:29 PM
FWIW the two LEOs who I know recently got dept approval (on dept letterhead stationary) werent given an AW Reg ftom DOJ.
Instead they were told by Sac to hang on to their dept letter and show it to their AW permitted FFL.

bwiese
04-11-2011, 2:41 PM
FWIW the two LEOs who I know recently got dept approval (on dept letterhead stationary) werent given an AW Reg ftom DOJ.
Instead they were told by Sac to hang on to their dept letter and show it to their AW permitted FFL.

Unless the letter was insufficient (i.e, not signed by cheif, the Sheriff, or other relevant LE Dept head) this actually sounds correct.

The letter allows acquisition and once the gun make/model/serial number is known it is then registered w/DOJ

coverme2
04-11-2011, 5:36 PM
Unless the letter was insufficient (i.e, not signed by cheif, the Sheriff, or other relevant LE Dept head) this actually sounds correct.

The letter allows acquisition and once the gun make/model/serial number is known it is then registered w/DOJ

So who exactly does the registering of the AW to DOJ...does the FFL automatically foward the buyer's info/AW's info to the DOJ or does it fall upon the officer who bought the AW with his/her own money and department letter-head to forward the info to DOJ? And how does that work, if it even does, for AWs that were bought after 2000 or weren't registered by 2000? And can an LEO (or any non-prohibited citizen for that matter) bring a legal in other states AW into CA if they make it CA legal, ie. bullet-button, 10rd-mag, etc.? Looks freekin' complicated.:eek:

Librarian
04-11-2011, 6:38 PM
1. So who exactly does the registering of the AW to DOJ...does the FFL automatically foward the buyer's info/AW's info to the DOJ or does it fall upon the officer who bought the AW with his/her own money and department letter-head to forward the info to DOJ?

2. And how does that work, if it even does, for AWs that were bought after 2000

3. or weren't registered by 2000?

4. And can an LEO (or any non-prohibited citizen for that matter) bring a legal in other states AW into CA if they make it CA legal, ie. bullet-button, 10rd-mag, etc.?

Looks freekin' complicated.:eek:
It is, when you ask 4 questions in 1 run-on paragraph... Break it down into pieces and it's manageable.

1. I dunno

2. this is for new-purchase 'assault weapons' - the same capability has been there for LEO the whole time, I believe.

3. same as 2 - that is, it's not a 'get out of jail free' program for unregistered 'assault weapons'.

4. If the weapon is out of state, and is modified (if it isn't a 'named' aw) to avoid the 'feature' definition of 'assault weapon', then yes - it isn't an 'assault weapon', so it's just a rifle.