PDA

View Full Version : Mauser C96 Not SBR but AW?


Vipersx911
04-20-2011, 1:45 PM
Originally posted on CNR forum, but hit kind of a block with the responses. I understand the Mauser C96 is not a NFA weapon due to the specific exemption, it is not considered a CA SBR due to the CNR status, yet is it an AW due to the ban based on Characteristics? I understand it has an attachable shoulder stock and therefore doesnt meet the OAL of atleast 30"... Anyone have specific experience on this one or able to cite if the AW characterisitics do not apply cause of the CA SBR exemption for the CNR. Thank you guys much appreciated.

robcoe
04-20-2011, 2:03 PM
I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong here, but as long as you dont attach the stock(california, AFAIK, does not have a constructive possession law), and it is not a model with a removable magazine or able to hold more than 10 rounds, it should be perfectly legal

jrr
04-20-2011, 2:05 PM
It depends on how it is configured. With the shoulder stock attached you have to worry about the overall length, as well as what features it has. Even without the stock attached you have to worry about whether your model uses a detacheable magazine or is fed from the top with stripper clips.

If your mag is fixed and it uses stripper clips then you are good to go. If it uses detachable magazines then it is an assault weapon under the pistol regs because it accepts a detachable magazine outside of the pistol grip. Was intended to get rid of Tec-9s and similar, but the later Mausers with removable mags woud fit the AW definition also.

Vipersx911
04-20-2011, 2:15 PM
It depends on how it is configured. With the shoulder stock attached you have to worry about the overall length, as well as what features it has. Even without the stock attached you have to worry about whether your model uses a detacheable magazine or is fed from the top with stripper clips.

If your mag is fixed and it uses stripper clips then you are good to go. If it uses detachable magazines then it is an assault weapon under the pistol regs because it accepts a detachable magazine outside of the pistol grip. Was intended to get rid of Tec-9s and similar, but the later Mausers with removable mags woud fit the AW definition also.

It does have the fixed mag, and therefore is stripper clip fed. In regards to the stock the OAL issue refers to SBR, yet it is exempt from SBR I just need to make sure that the OAL issue does not refer to something different from the SBR issue...

robcoe
04-20-2011, 2:19 PM
It does have the fixed mag, and therefore is stripper clip fed. In regards to the stock the OAL issue refers to SBR, yet it is exempt from SBR I just need to make sure that the OAL issue does not refer to something different from the SBR issue...

SBR, there is no minimum length for a handgun.

Vipersx911
04-20-2011, 2:26 PM
SBR, there is no minimum length for a handgun.

Sorry should have added that with the broomhandle case/stock attached to the pistol than OAL would apply to it since it now has a shoulder stock attached to a pistol, also it wouldnt meet 16" barrel length...

Librarian where are you? I need PC #'s

Quiet
04-20-2011, 4:22 PM
C&R firearms are not exempt from CA's assault weapons laws.

The BATFE and CA state laws [PC 12020(b)(7)] does not consider a Mauser C96 with shoulder stock to be a SBR.

However, a Mauser C96 with shoulder stock attached meets CA's definition of a rifle. [PC 12020(c)(20)]

Which causes the Mauser C96 with the shoulder stock attached to meet the definition of a semi-auto centerfire rifle with an overall length less than 30", which makes it an assault weapon. [PC 12276.1(a)(3)]

Since there is no constructive possession laws for assault weapons and it is not considered a SBR, it is legal to own/possess a Mauser C96 and a shoulder stock in CA. But, while in CA, it is not legal to attach the shoulder stock to the Mauser C96.

This also applies to other C&R handgun/shoulder stock combos that the BATFE no longer considers SBRs.

Alan Block
04-20-2011, 4:22 PM
a Mauser C96 was legal IF the gun was originally enabled for one. Even replica stocks were allowed. Also applied to the Inglis HP35 (Browning HiPower). My Colts Dragoon has one too.

ke6guj
04-20-2011, 5:19 PM
C&R firearms are not exempt from CA's assault weapons laws.

The BATFE and CA state laws [PC 12020(b)(7)] does not consider a Mauser C96 with shoulder stock to be a SBR.

However, a Mauser C96 with shoulder stock attached meets CA's definition of a rifle. [PC 12020(c)(20)]

Which causes the Mauser C96 with the shoulder stock attached to meet the definition of a semi-auto centerfire rifle with an overall length less than 30", which makes it an assault weapon. [PC 12276.1(a)(3)]

Since there is no constructive possession laws for assault weapons and it is not considered a SBR, it is legal to own/possess a Mauser C96 and a shoulder stock in CA. But, while in CA, it is not legal to attach the shoulder stock to the Mauser C96.

This also applies to other C&R handgun/shoulder stock combos that the BATFE no longer considers SBRs.
:iagree:



a Mauser C96 was legal IF the gun was originally enabled for one. Even replica stocks were allowed. Also applied to the Inglis HP35 (Browning HiPower). My Colts Dragoon has one too.
Yes, they were legal in CA as being exempt C&R SBRs. then, in 2000, the AW ban was passed and there wasn't a C&R exemption included in that ban. After 2000, it became an AW violation to attach the shoulder stock to that broomhandle Mauser.

bwiese
04-20-2011, 6:01 PM
Wholly separate from the buttstock vs 30" limit of CA AW laws, many longtime FFLs selling classic & collectible guns do not realize that a the detachable magazine variant of the Mauser Broomhandle pistol is an AW.

Some of these guys even insist that CA AW laws have a C&R exemption - they're wrong. (The separate but similar 50BMG ban, does have one, however.)

Vipersx911
04-20-2011, 7:19 PM
Wholly separate from the buttstock vs 30" limit of CA AW laws, many longtime FFLs selling classic & collectible guns do not realize that a the detachable magazine variant of the Mauser Broomhandle pistol is an AW.

Some of these guys even insist that CA AW laws have a C&R exemption - they're wrong. (The separate but similar 50BMG ban, does have one, however.)

Ok, I get the point on the shoulder stock issue. I still dont understand why there is not an exemption on the characteristics issue there should be or it should simply be reworded to state that under 30" it is an SBR which would give that exemption without it actually being written into the law.

ke6guj
04-20-2011, 7:36 PM
Ok, I get the point on the shoulder stock issue. I still dont understand why there is not an exemption on the characteristics issue there should be or it should simply be reworded to state that under 30" it is an SBR which would give that exemption without it actually being written into the law.why there isn't an exemption for C&R AWs? Because apparantly they didn't feel it neccessary to include that exemption. They had the votes needed to pass it without the exemption. There wasn't a C&R AW group that they could buy off with an exemption like they did for the cowboy crowd with regards to the Roster.

Vipersx911
04-20-2011, 11:00 PM
why there isn't an exemption for C&R AWs? Because apparantly they didn't feel it neccessary to include that exemption. They had the votes needed to pass it without the exemption. There wasn't a C&R AW group that they could buy off with an exemption like they did for the cowboy crowd with regards to the Roster.

I would have gladly fought it, yet when the state made all of these decisions I was not old enough to do anything about it. However since I became a firearms owner I have been effected by every one of these laws.

KracknCorn
04-21-2011, 12:12 AM
If you get a 100+ yr old c96, it's an antique. Antique aren't considered firearms and you can have that buttstock on.

ke6guj
04-21-2011, 12:16 AM
In CA, "antique firearms" are still considered firearms, but are exempt from some sections of the PC. In this case, they are exempt from the AW regs, but they have to be at least 112 years old, made before 1899.

Vipersx911
04-21-2011, 12:20 AM
If you get a 100+ yr old c96, it's an antique. Antique aren't considered firearms and you can have that buttstock on.

Ok, so than AW laws still apply to me, the one I am inheriting was manufactured in 1909, which puts it at 103...

ke6guj
04-21-2011, 12:25 AM
Ok, so than AW laws still apply to me, the one I am inheriting was manufactured in 1909, which puts it at 103...yup, still an AW.

12276.1(c) "Assault weapon" does not include either of the following:
(1) Any antique firearm.
(d) The following definitions shall apply under this section:
(3) "Antique firearm" means any firearm manufactured prior to January 1, 1899.

Vipersx911
04-21-2011, 11:03 AM
yup, still an AW.

12276.1(c) "Assault weapon" does not include either of the following:
(1) Any antique firearm.
(d) The following definitions shall apply under this section:
(3) "Antique firearm" means any firearm manufactured prior to January 1, 1899.

Well that's a bummer, but once again this is why I am glad to be on Calguns, otherwise never would have known that fact. Which of course would be no good...

Thanks to everyone who responded.