PDA

View Full Version : a registered AW. Can I modify it?


Patchbunny
08-28-2011, 9:49 PM
Dunno if I should put this under the Rifles forum or here, so let's see how this choice goes.

I own a registered pre-ban AR-15. Am I allowed to swap off the upper receiver for a different configuration? Can I put a collapsing stock on it?

FullMetalJacket
08-28-2011, 9:54 PM
Yep. It's already an AW, you're not going to make it more "assault weapony."

Turo
08-28-2011, 9:56 PM
yep, you don't need to worry about breaking any CA assault weapon laws, so no bullet button is needed and add any evil features you like. just make sure you stay away from federal sbr laws.

Falconis
08-28-2011, 10:01 PM
Yep. It's already an AW, you're not going to make it more "assault weapony."

or more of an assaulty weapon? :)

ke6guj
08-28-2011, 10:04 PM
yup, the above posters are correct, you can mod it as you see fit as long as you don't create an SBR or MG out of it.

In fact, you can even buy a .50BMG upper for it and use it in CA since it is a RAW.

Patchbunny
08-28-2011, 10:05 PM
yep, you don't need to worry about breaking any CA assault weapon laws, so no bullet button is needed and add any evil features you like. just make sure you stay away from federal sbr laws.

Should be good. I was curious about putting a flat top on it, and wasn't sure what my restrictions might be.

G-forceJunkie
08-28-2011, 10:34 PM
I think you just made a new word: Assaulty.

"I think I'm going to put a collapsable stock on my RAW and make it more assaulty."

OP: Change whatever you want, as long as you don't break the normal laws ie make it a machine gun, barrel under 16", etc.

Yep. It's already an AW, you're not going to make it more "assault weapony."

stix213
08-28-2011, 10:38 PM
Anything in PC 12276.1 that would turn a normal rifle into an AW, is your shopping list of what you should do since its already an AW. (not sure about the grenade launcher though)

http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12276.1.html


(a) Notwithstanding Section 12276, "assault weapon" shall
also mean any of the following:
(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to
accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action
of the weapon.
(B) A thumbhole stock.
(C) A folding or telescoping stock.
(D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(E) A flash suppressor.
(F) A forward pistol grip.
(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine
with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length
of less than 30 inches.

wizdumb
08-28-2011, 11:12 PM
Please read this CGF announcement and update your terminology in this thread accordingly.

http://calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=463664

Andy Taylor
08-29-2011, 6:26 AM
Do note that if you were to add such things a bullet button, Monster Man grip etc. that no one here would be your friend. :D

DiscoBayJoe
08-29-2011, 6:35 AM
I think part of the confusion is that when his rifle was most likley purchased, the national Assault Weapons Ban was still in place and the rules that were made "clear" at the time included being VERY careful about configurations. I ended up with the same questions (ie, can I put a collapsable stock and flash hider on my RAW lower Purchased with an A2 Stock during the late 90's).

Within a few weeks of when the national ban expired, I called a few gunstores to ask if I could re-configure my rifle and had 2/3 actually tell me no! It took me about another month to dig thru the FUD to realize I could ditch that A2 and built it up as I wanted.

BannedinBritain
08-29-2011, 6:52 AM
not sure about the grenade launcher though

Grenade launcher = Destructive Device, no go without DD permit...37mm flare launcher is gtg on his RAW.

bwiese
08-29-2011, 8:10 AM
Do note that if you were to add such things a bullet button, Monster Man grip etc. that no one here would be your friend. :D


Speak for yourself.

There are rational reasons for putting a BulletButton-style maglock on a Cat 3 ("by features") gun otherwise described by 12276.1PC.

With a BB'd Cat 3 gun, a device a la the MagMagnet can be used to rapidly and temporarily configure the gun for lawful usage per 12280/12285 restrictions, but the BB maglock with no MagMagnet device attached allows the gun to be in "ordinary rifle configuration" for purposes of transport.

DiscoBayJoe
08-29-2011, 8:21 AM
^ Interesting idea, but that would only work with an Off-List lower, right (hence, your 'by features" comment)?

Based on what was available in the 90's, i'd guess it's a bushmaster or some other listed lower. My bet is the number of RAW'd OLL AR-15's out there is pretty low

Has there been a test case to prove RAW-paper'd rifle and/or pistol configured with no "evil features" can be transported accordingly? I have a Vector/Group Ind UZI carbine that I would fit this category if appropriate. If so, I also assume that if I remove the evil features (ie, take of the pistol grip, 30 seconds) for transport, the same would be true?

bwiese
08-29-2011, 8:32 AM
^ Interesting idea, but that would only work with an
Off-List lower, right (hence, your 'by features" comment)?

Guns banned per "Category 3" configurations (12776.1PC) are definitionally 'off-list'. There are indeed
some AR-pattern rifles that have been registered as controlled/restricted semiauto rifles, but which are
Category 3.


Based on what was available in the 90's, i'd guess it's a bushmaster or some other listed lower.
My bet is the number of RAW'd OLL AR-15's out there is pretty low


Hmm, maybe 5%? The Kasler list in August 2000 and then finalized at end of 2000 and never updated
afterwards indeed did have some holes in it.

I have two Cat 3 registered ARs myself.

I'll look thru the reg'd AW database tonite or tomorrow to get an idea, but the DOJ data entry is not real good.



Has there been a test case to prove RAW-paper'd rifle and/or pistol configured with no "evil features" can be transported
accordingly? I have a Vector/Group Ind UZI carbine that I would fit this category if appropriate. If so, I also assume that if
I remove the evil features (ie, take of the pistol grip, 30 seconds) for transport, the same would be true

There's no test case needed...
(1) an off-list gun is described by 12276.1 features configuration - so it must be registered.
(2) an off-list gun is not described by 12276.1 features configuration, and registration is irrelevant.

For Category 3, do not confuse registration with actual status. The registration allows the gun to be possessed (i.e, it's eligible
to have all 12276.1PC characteristic features, except grenade launcher). The registration does not say it currently has these
features. A Cat 3 gun is only prohibited/requires special treatment if it indeed is configured as Cat 3 at the time.

A registered Cat 3 gun can have sufficient evil features removed such that it can be treated as an ordinary firearm (pistol, rifle
shotgun or Title 1) under control of regular CA gun laws. With those features removed, it's not a Category 3 gun [regardless of
registration status] and transport/specific destination requirements do NOT apply.

Your specific Uzi-clone carbine example fails, however. Any (off-list) Cat 3 Uzi carbine I can think will likely be regarded as having
a pistol grip such that even if the cosmetic trim is removed is still gonna be regarded as a pistol grip "by structure" and per regulatory
definition in 11 CCR 5469.

Now, if you were to put some kind of BulletButton/RaddLock etc. on your Vector Uzi carbine clone and then had "something else"
(a la MagMagnet, etc.) screw on top of it while at the range you could have the best of both worlds: legal use of detachable mags
at the range but once the attachment to the BulletButton/Raddlock is removed, the maglocked gun can be transported as a non-AW.

bohoki
08-29-2011, 9:47 AM
yea if you have one of the during ban ones this is the perfect opportunity to use the featureless upper on an oll (since you must have hi-caps) and go to town on the registered one(no nfa though)

my registurd is the non pantherarms dpms a-15 heck i dint know anything back then

FullMetalJacket
08-29-2011, 10:13 AM
or more of an assaulty weapon? :)
:D
I think you just made a new word: Assaulty.

"I think I'm going to put a collapsable stock on my RAW and make it more assaulty."
I like it!

Probably shouldn't let that catch on given our recent embrace of terms like "semi-auto ban" and "license to carry."

sixtringr
08-29-2011, 11:02 AM
Interesting discussion. I had always thought once an RAW always to be treated that way. Although since the end of the ban my pre-ban Olympic is much more "assaulty". Thanks for the word.

bwiese
08-29-2011, 11:38 AM
Interesting discussion. I had always thought once an RAW always to be treated that way. Although since the end of the ban my pre-ban Olympic is much more "assaulty". Thanks for the word.

Here's a simple way of thinking:
- Registration: allowance to be configured per 12276/12276.1PC.
- Configuration and/or listed name: reflects actual current legal status

If you look at the wording in 1999-2000 of various DOJ publications, the old 'regagun' website, etc. this is also inferrable.

It was also told directly to me by DOJ Firearms Div Asst Dir./Deputy AG Tim Rieger (with Dir. Randy Rossi looking on) in response to my question about transport of a broken-down, properly registered Imbel FAL clone. [There were multiple witnesses, too - as this was a public event ("Meet the DOJ" dinner meeting) run by Golden State 2nd Amend. Council in Spring 2004. The audience included gun lawyer Don Kilmer and Jess Guy (fomer ATF guy now a public defender, and Don's old law partner) and many other folks.

bohoki
08-29-2011, 12:37 PM
i think the only exception is the sks

where if you have a registered assault sks you still cant put a detachable mag on it(yes people registered an sks remember those fixed chinese 20 roundershttp://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=460971&stc=1&d=1250551061


i had one for about a week and it would jam putting in more than 15 and then it wouldnt hold the bolt back so i went back to the 10

bwiese
08-29-2011, 12:45 PM
i think the only exception is the sks

where if you have a registered assault sks you still cant put a detachable mag on it(yes people registered an sks remember those fixed chinese 20 rouners


Depends.

If you registered that SKS during Roberti-Roos (1990, or cleanup period in 1992) yes you could have/add a detachable mag.

Now, it is unclear about weirdness if an ordinary SKS were registered as an AW in 2000 due to SB23. They could not accept the registration if they found out it had a detachable magazine, but if it were registered for some other SB23 reason (over-10-rd fixed magazine or under 30" length) - then that SB23 registration filing/issuance would be valid.

Now, once that SKS is registered as an AW, it's an AW. The only crime relevant is (besides illegal transportation etc.) "possession of an unregistered AW". It's already registered, so how can you make it distinctly more evil?

This is likely a nonissue for various reasons, but an interesting thought experiment.

bohoki
08-29-2011, 12:49 PM
Depends.

If you registered that SKS during Roberti-Roos (1990, or cleanup period in 1992) yes you could have/add a detachable mag.

Now, it is unclear about weirdness if an ordinary SKS were registered as an AW in 2000 due to SB23. They could not accept the registration if they found out it had a detachable magazine, but if it were registered for some other SB23 reason (over-10-rd fixed magazine or under 30" length) - then that SB23 registration filing/issuance would be valid.

Now, once that SKS is registered as an AW, it's an AW. The only crime relevant is (besides illegal transportation etc.) "possession of an unregistered AW". It's already registered, so how can you make it distinctly more evil?

This is likely a nonissue for various reasons, but an interesting thought experiment.

the only analogious situation to that

is the 50 bmg registration they said you couldnt register a 50 bmg that would fall under the roberty ruse or general features

so if you removed the grip off of a barret 82 then registered it as a 50 bmg you could not now put the grip back on because it would have been banned back in 2000

ke6guj
08-29-2011, 12:55 PM
so if you removed the grip off of a barret 82 then registered it as a 50 bmg you could not now put the grip back on because it would have been banned back in 2000you could if you put a maglock on it. Assualt Planet makes a Bullet Button for the M82.

bwiese
08-29-2011, 1:07 PM
is the 50 bmg registration they said you couldnt register a 50bmg
that would fall under the roberty ruse or general features

Yes, but not quite relevant. The SKS transitions I wrote of still were dealing with being (or not being) one single category of gun.

But remember "50BMG rifle" is a completely separate entity from the specific entity "assault weapon" that is defined in 12276/12276.1PC.

They are separate bodies of law and only collide in a particular exemption.

so if you removed the grip off of a barret 82 then registered it as a 50 bmg you could not now put the grip back on because it would have been banned back in 2000

Correct.

OleCuss
08-29-2011, 1:36 PM
Complexity to the point of being bizarre.

G-forceJunkie
08-29-2011, 6:06 PM
Its for the children :chris:Complexity to the point of being bizarre.

ar15robert
08-29-2011, 6:18 PM
I thought about changin my upper to my at the time post ban armalite when the fed aw law sunsetted to a shorty upper and a collapsable stick just for the heck of it.

But the gun shoots so damn goo i left it alone.Guess i can build a neutered OLL and use the armalite upper for that and go tacticool on the registered lower.

ODJR1
09-11-2011, 10:39 PM
Here's a simple way of thinking:
- Registration: allowance to be configured per 12276/12276.1PC.
- Configuration and/or listed name: reflects actual current legal status

If you look at the wording in 1999-2000 of various DOJ publications, the old 'regagun' website, etc. this is also inferrable.

It was also told directly to me by DOJ Firearms Div Asst Dir./Deputy AG Tim Rieger (with Dir. Randy Rossi looking on) in response to my question about transport of a broken-down, properly registered Imbel FAL clone. [There were multiple witnesses, too - as this was a public event ("Meet the DOJ" dinner meeting) run by Golden State 2nd Amend. Council in Spring 2004. The audience included gun lawyer Don Kilmer and Jess Guy (fomer ATF guy now a public defender, and Don's old law partner) and many other folks.

So if one was to remove the upper from their registered AR-15 lower, it does not have to be locked in a recognizable hardcase to trasnport correct?

bwiese
09-11-2011, 11:14 PM
So if one was to remove the upper from their registered AR-15 lower, it does not have to be locked in a recognizable hardcase to trasnport correct?


The answer is mushy - it kinda-sorta depends.

If it's a registered AR which is not describable as a "Colt AR15" nor one of the dozen or two formally identified "AR series members" (Colt Match Target, Bushmaster XM15, Armalite M15, etc.) in the 11 CCR 5499 "Kasler list", then it's a "Category 3" gun -- and what I wrote above applies.

The receiver is thus off-list, and the gun is only prohibited by certain combinations of configured features and is exactly a direct parallel to the Imbel FAL situation I related above (and which you quoted).

But there are very very few "off-list" ARs that are Category 3 registered guns. The Kasler list was a reasonably passable effort at the time (fall of 2000) and only a few items at the time were missed. I happened to acquire some ASA ASA-15 receivers in 1999 and this make/model combination never got listed.

Now, if your registered AR's lower receiver is listed as banned by name - either it's a Colt AR15 or the make/model etc matches one of the dozen or two AR-pattern entities in the "Kasler list", it's considered 'listed' or 'banned by name' -- andthere is risk of that named lower still being regarded as an AW regardless of upper or stock etc. being present.

However, this technically isn't true because such a 'listed' lower is not semiautomatic [that's determined by upper!!] and the lack of barrel etc and inability to fire questions its status as a rifle. So what happens is you could easily get into a situation resulting in a case "having the ability to be defended", but is in no way "recommended conduct'.

If you have a registered banned-by-name lower, you should (for sheer practicality of grief avoidance) treat it like a reg'd AW.

ODJR1
09-12-2011, 12:28 PM
The answer is mushy - it kinda-sorta depends.

If it's a registered AR which is not describable as a "Colt AR15" nor one of the dozen or two formally identified "AR series members" (Colt Match Target, Bushmaster XM15, Armalite M15, etc.) in the 11 CCR 5499 "Kasler list", then it's a "Category 3" gun -- and what I wrote above applies.

The receiver is thus off-list, and the gun is only prohibited by certain combinations of configured features and is exactly a direct parallel to the Imbel FAL situation I related above (and which you quoted).

But there are very very few "off-list" ARs that are Category 3 registered guns. The Kasler list was a reasonably passable effort at the time (fall of 2000) and only a few items at the time were missed. I happened to acquire some ASA ASA-15 receivers in 1999 and this make/model combination never got listed.

Now, if your registered AR's lower receiver is listed as banned by name - either it's a Colt AR15 or the make/model etc matches one of the dozen or two AR-pattern entities in the "Kasler list", it's considered 'listed' or 'banned by name' -- andthere is risk of that named lower still being regarded as an AW regardless of upper or stock etc. being present.

However, this technically isn't true because such a 'listed' lower is not semiautomatic [that's determined by upper!!] and the lack of barrel etc and inability to fire questions its status as a rifle. So what happens is you could easily get into a situation resulting in a case "having the ability to be defended", but is in no way "recommended conduct'.

If you have a registered banned-by-name lower, you should (for sheer practicality of grief avoidance) treat it like a reg'd AW.

Thanks Bill, I keep them locked up, the cases are just kinda inconvienant, I was hoping to get around the hard case.
Thanks
OD

bwiese
09-12-2011, 1:12 PM
Thanks Bill, I keep them locked up, the cases are just kinda inconvienant, I was hoping to get around the hard case.
Thanks
OD

OD, yeah the stuff I mentioned above about listed receivers is gonna be a valid defense but it's generally "don't try this at home, kiddies".

Defending such a case would not buy us much at all and would just be to stop us from 'going backwards'.