PDA

View Full Version : Unsafe Handgun ?


littlejake
03-10-2012, 7:18 AM
Old PC numbering -- but the language is:

"12125. (a) Commencing January 1, 2001, any person in this state who manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state for sale, keeps for sale, offers or exposes for sale, gives, or lends any unsafe handgun shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year..."

Would removing a feature required when a pistol was placed on the Roster (example -- a magazine disconnect) be unlawful under this statute? Would it be manufacturing an unsafe handgun? If not illegal -- what about any subsequent transfer?

What is the status of Peņa v. Cid?

twoforme2
03-10-2012, 9:22 AM
http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Pena_v_Cid

December 20, 2011 Stay re-imposed for the results of the en banc consideration of Nordyke.

scarville
03-10-2012, 9:32 AM
Would removing a feature required when a pistol was placed on the Roster (example -- a magazine disconnect) be unlawful under this statute? Would it be manufacturing an unsafe handgun? If not illegal -- what about any subsequent transfer?
I've wondered about that too. If there is a legal assumption that any gun on the roster is "safe" only in the tested configuration, then any modification could conceivably be considered as making it "not safe". IIRC, if a manufacturer make two models that are identical except for color, both have to be tested for safety. This prompts me to believe that the law in California does assume even a trivial aftermarket modification will make a gun legally unsafe.

Librarian
03-10-2012, 10:15 AM
I've wondered about that too. If there is a legal assumption that any gun on the roster is "safe" only in the tested configuration, then any modification could conceivably be considered as making it "not safe". IIRC, if a manufacturer make two models that are identical except for color, both have to be tested for safety. This prompts me to believe that the law in California does assume even a trivial aftermarket modification will make a gun legally unsafe.

Fortunately, doesn't work that way in practice.

Gunsmithing is legal.

The testing for similar weapons can be skipped if the manufacturer certifies the differences are minor (there's a list) but the manufacturer still must pay to have the untested weapon on the Roster.

See the wiki -- http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/The_Safe_Handgun_List

And the weapons on the Roster are not 'safe' - they're 'not unsafe'!

littlejake
03-10-2012, 10:42 AM
Fortunately, doesn't work that way in practice.

Gunsmithing is legal.

The testing for similar weapons can be skipped if the manufacturer certifies the differences are minor (there's a list) but the manufacturer still must pay to have the untested weapon on the Roster.

See the wiki -- http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/The_Safe_Handgun_List

And the weapons on the Roster are not 'safe' - they're 'not unsafe'!

Librarian, Do I infer that the answer to the question as originally posted is that a modification that deletes a device that was required to get it on the roster is legal?

Am I correct in assuming that subsequent to such modification, a dealer could not longer take the arm into inventory -- but it could be PPT'ed.

I assume that it would be important to notify a prospective new owner of the modification -- perhaps even in writing with the new owner signing that he/she has read and understood it, to avoid civil liability should the new owner rely on such a feature instead of using good safe handling practices.

Librarian
03-10-2012, 11:08 AM
Librarian, Do I infer that the answer to the question as originally posted is that a modification that deletes a device that was required to get it on the roster is legal?

Am I correct in assuming that subsequent to such modification, a dealer could not longer take the arm into inventory -- but it could be PPT'ed.

I assume that it would be important to notify a prospective new owner of the modification -- perhaps even in writing with the new owner signing that he/she has read and understood it, to avoid civil liability should the new owner rely on such a feature instead of using good safe handling practices.

Yes, yes, and I agree - though just as a courtesy and full disclosure of the condition of the firearm; I would not be worried about the rest.

ElvenSoul
03-10-2012, 11:11 AM
The User is still required to use Safe Handling. Hence the HSC Test.

littlejake
03-10-2012, 11:12 AM
Thank you Librarian; I hold your opinions in high regard.

Jake

littlejake
03-10-2012, 11:17 AM
The User is still required to use Safe Handling. Hence the HSC Test.

Agreed as to the first sentence. The greatest safety device is our brain, not some mechanical feature.

As for the HSC test -- I don't know if you refer to the written HGSC test or the safe handling demonstration; but I believe government has no right to impose either. That we as owners have a duty to voluntarily take whatever train is needed to be safe with our firearms. It's about personal responsibility -- not government imposition.

scarville
03-10-2012, 12:42 PM
Fortunately, doesn't work that way in practice.

Gunsmithing is legal.
That is good to know. Many of my revolvers have been modified. Thank you.

russ69
03-10-2012, 12:56 PM
The handgun roster has nothing to do with safety. If it did, a manufacturer wouldn't have to pay a renewal fee for a gun that is already deemed "safe".

RP1911
03-10-2012, 3:09 PM
I've wondered about that too. If there is a legal assumption that any gun on the roster is "safe" only in the tested configuration, then any modification could conceivably be considered as making it "not safe". IIRC, if a manufacturer make two models that are identical except for color, both have to be tested for safety. This prompts me to believe that the law in California does assume even a trivial aftermarket modification will make a gun legally unsafe.

I thought the testing's determination that if it passed, it would be 'not unsafe' rather than 'safe'.

Librarian
03-10-2012, 4:19 PM
Fortunately, doesn't work that way in practice.

Gunsmithing is legal.

The testing for similar weapons can be skipped if the manufacturer certifies the differences are minor (there's a list) but the manufacturer still must pay to have the untested weapon on the Roster.

See the wiki -- http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/The_Safe_Handgun_List

And the weapons on the Roster are not 'safe' - they're 'not unsafe'!

Let me expand on this a little - but see the wiki article!

Suppose you buy an on-Roster handgun; let's pick a Sig 220. Nice gun, but you decide you want to splurge and put some Nill wooden grips (http://www.nill-grips.com/Replacement-grips-for-pistols-made-of-exclusive-materials_116.html) on it.

That changes the original configuration-as-sold. It is no longer eligible to be on the Roster. Perfectly legal.

Similarly, getting the trigger worked on, replacing worn springs with Wolff rather than factory, or replacing the ejector with aftermarket are all legal things you can do.

The Roster is a limitation on CA-licensed FFLs, regulating what they are allowed to sell to whom. That limit on them functions to limit what you may buy, but once you have bought it you are free to modify it (but not create illegal weapons via other provisions of PC or USC).

wildhawker
03-10-2012, 5:45 PM
Just a sidebar that a West German P220 with Nills is really a fantastic exercise of one's 2A rights.

bwiese
03-11-2012, 2:08 PM
If you are asking if you are allowed to modify a Rostered 'not unsafe' handgun into non-Rostered form, yes you can.

The Roster was not designed to affect gunsmithing, and furthermore we have a bunch of writings from DOJ Deputy AG stating, amongst other things, in particular:


It's legal to build a 1911 pistol from scratch. [The Deputy AG
forgot about Roster status on this and she should have said it
needs to transition thru an exempt status [single-shot pistol].
.
A (one-armed) individual cannot order/buy a left-handed Glock.
However, said individual can order a Rostered right-handed
Glock and [send it to factory/receive it back directly and have
it modified for lefty use.


Note that a Rostered handgun modified into non-Rostered (and not Roster-exempt) status may not be sold other than via PPT or consignment.

A CA FFL will not really want to buy a non-Rostered gun as an inventoried item he can't sell to CA (except to LEOs or outta state). In such an instance, a currently-Rostered gun that is also currently not in its Rostered configuration should be restored [if it can be] to original status before it can be sold to a CA FFL for CA resale.

littlejake
03-11-2012, 6:08 PM
Thanks Bill. Always appreciated.

Kindest regards,

Jake

dfletcher
03-12-2012, 9:20 AM
I'd like to manufacture a hypothetical as follows.

A few years ago in CA I bought a Colt Defender, new from dealer inventory. Great little gun but I don't care for the firing pin block so I removed it. I visited a friend in OR, he liked the gun so we went to an OR FFL and did the transfer/sale to him. My friend now doesn't want the gun and is offering it back to me. Since we're again crossing state lines he must send it to a CA FFL. Can the CA FFL accept the gun in its present condition for sale to me or do the modifications mean the gun can not be imported via FFL?

ccmc
03-12-2012, 9:42 AM
magazine disconnect

Is this a requirement for all guns on the roster?

bigcalidave
03-12-2012, 10:59 AM
I'd like to manufacture a hypothetical as follows.

A few years ago in CA I bought a Colt Defender, new from dealer inventory. Great little gun but I don't care for the firing pin block so I removed it. I visited a friend in OR, he liked the gun so we went to an OR FFL and did the transfer/sale to him. My friend now doesn't want the gun and is offering it back to me. Since we're again crossing state lines he must send it to a CA FFL. Can the CA FFL accept the gun in its present condition for sale to me or do the modifications mean the gun can not be imported via FFL?

If the gun isn't on the roster in its current state, the dealer can't do a transfer on it legally. If they would even notice that some safety element is missing is another question.

Librarian
03-12-2012, 11:23 AM
Is this a requirement for all guns on the roster?

No.

If a gun was on the Roster already, in this case before Jan 1, 2007, it is fine as it was when placed on the Roster.

To get on the Roster now, the LCI and the mag disconnect are required for semi-autos.

See the Wiki -- http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/The_Safe_Handgun_List#New_Requirements

Wherryj
03-12-2012, 2:06 PM
Fortunately, doesn't work that way in practice.

Gunsmithing is legal.

The testing for similar weapons can be skipped if the manufacturer certifies the differences are minor (there's a list) but the manufacturer still must pay to have the untested weapon on the Roster.

See the wiki -- http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/The_Safe_Handgun_List

And the weapons on the Roster are not 'safe' - they're 'not unsafe'!

The proposed roster for Chicago called them "unsafe handgubs", althogh they seem to have finally caught the typo.

Kodemonkey
03-12-2012, 2:16 PM
Old PC numbering -- but the language is:

"12125. (a) Commencing January 1, 2001, any person in this state who manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state for sale, keeps for sale, offers or exposes for sale, gives, or lends any unsafe handgun shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year..."



Dumb question, and maybe this is because it is not in context, but wouldn't that mean off roster PPT are a problem?

Also, wouldn't that mean loaning an off roster gun also be a problem?

Or is this only in the context of FFL01s?

newbee1111
03-12-2012, 2:36 PM
Dumb question, and maybe this is because it is not in context, but wouldn't that mean off roster PPT are a problem?

Also, wouldn't that mean loaning an off roster gun also be a problem?

Or is this only in the context of FFL01s?

There is some other exclusion because the roster doesn't apply PPT. A cop can legally sell you a non-roster gun they can buy with their LEO roster exemption. You can also legally PPT non-roster guns that were single shot exempted. At least that's how I understand it.

ccmc
03-12-2012, 2:45 PM
No.

If a gun was on the Roster already, in this case before Jan 1, 2007, it is fine as it was when placed on the Roster.

To get on the Roster now, the LCI and the mag disconnect are required for semi-autos.

See the Wiki -- http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/The_Safe_Handgun_List#New_Requirements

Appreciate that info. I recently bought a Ruger LC9 which is my only semi-auto with a mag disconnect. A Ruger rep told me that was so it could get on the CA roster unlike the LCP which has no mag disconnect and is not on the roster.

Librarian
03-12-2012, 3:07 PM
Dumb question, and maybe this is because it is not in context, but wouldn't that mean off roster PPT are a problem?

Also, wouldn't that mean loaning an off roster gun also be a problem?

Or is this only in the context of FFL01s?

It's a limitation on what handguns and to whom an FFL may transfer.

Kodemonkey
03-12-2012, 3:13 PM
It's a limitation on what handguns and to whom an FFL may transfer.

Okay. Thanks. I did a search but you get a cartesian product when you search for "borrow off roster handgun" on Calguns.

scarville
03-12-2012, 6:43 PM
I thought the testing's determination that if it passed, it would be 'not unsafe' rather than 'safe'.
If it fails then is it "not not unsafe"? A triple negative only a lawyer could love. Or even utter in civilized company.

quiet-wyatt
03-20-2012, 4:45 PM
The handgun roster has nothing to do with safety.

Exactly - Single-action revolvers are exempt, and there's many that wouldn't pass the drop test. It's all about politics...

mrdd
03-21-2012, 12:48 AM
Dumb question, and maybe this is because it is not in context, but wouldn't that mean off roster PPT are a problem?

Also, wouldn't that mean loaning an off roster gun also be a problem?

Or is this only in the context of FFL01s?

There are specific exceptions which cover this. In the new penal coding scheme, we have:

32000. (a) Commencing January 1, 2001, any person in this state who
manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state
for sale, keeps for sale, offers or exposes for sale, gives, or lends
any unsafe handgun shall be punished by imprisonment in a county
jail not exceeding one year.

and the cite for the requirement for PPT between unlicensed parties:

27545. Where neither party to the transaction holds a dealer's
license issued pursuant to Sections 26700 to 26915, inclusive, the
parties to the transaction shall complete the sale, loan, or transfer
of that firearm through a licensed firearms dealer pursuant to
Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 28050).

First exception allows transfers of unsafe handguns via PPT:

32110. Article 4 (commencing with Section 31900) and Article 5
(commencing with Section 32000) shall not apply to any of the
following:
(a) The sale, loan, or transfer of any firearm pursuant to Chapter
5 (commencing with Section 28050) of Division 6 in order to comply
with Section 27545.

Second exception allows transfers of unsafe handguns via direct loans:

32110. Article 4 (commencing with Section 31900) and Article 5
(commencing with Section 32000) shall not apply to any of the
following:
(b) The sale, loan, or transfer of any firearm that is exempt from
the provisions of Section 27545 pursuant to any applicable exemption
contained in Article 2 (commencing with Section 27600) or Article 6
(commencing with Section 27850) of Chapter 4 of Division 6, if the
sale, loan, or transfer complies with the requirements of that
applicable exemption to Section 27545.

These are the general PPT exceptions which allow direct loans:

27880. Section 27545 does not apply to the loan of a firearm
between persons who are personally known to each other, if all of the
following requirements are satisfied:
(a) The loan is infrequent, as defined in Section 16730.
(b) The loan is for any lawful purpose.
(c) The loan does not exceed 30 days in duration.
(d) If the firearm is a handgun, the individual being loaned the
handgun shall have a valid handgun safety certificate.

27885. Section 27545 does not apply to the loan of a firearm if all
of the following conditions exist:
(a) The person loaning the firearm is at all times within the
presence of the person being loaned the firearm.
(b) The loan is for a lawful purpose.
(c) The loan does not exceed three days in duration.
(d) The individual receiving the firearm is not prohibited by
state or federal law from possessing, receiving, owning, or
purchasing a firearm.
(e) The person loaning the firearm is 18 years of age or older.
(f) The person being loaned the firearm is 18 years of age or
older.