PDA

View Full Version : glock 17 gen 4 illegal (not on Roster) in CA. why??


kingfamous
03-19-2012, 7:32 PM
I went to order a glock 17 gen 4 and I was told that it was illegal in CA. can someone tell me why? backstraps, texture is what I was told, really....

kingfamous
03-19-2012, 7:35 PM
sorry, I have been out of the glock loop

scamp62
03-19-2012, 7:36 PM
I don’t think it has been submitted to the state, to be evaluated, and judged to safe or not

scotty99
03-19-2012, 7:39 PM
No magazine disconnect safety. After 2007, all new semi auto handguns require it. Yet another brilliant piece of legislation our northern masters dreamed up, requiring one of the dumbest "features" ever to be added to a gun. You can still get one through a single shot exemption. Where there is a will, there is a way.

003
03-19-2012, 8:02 PM
As mentioned by one of the above posters, it does not meet Calfiornia requirments as it does not have the required magazine disconector. Glock made the decision to NOT submit their 4th generation pistols to Californian for approval. While I do not have any particular insight into the reasons for this decision, it appears to be mainly because it does not have a magazine disconnector as required by California law.

I recently attended the Glock armorer’s course and had a short conversation with one of their senior LE sales representives. While he did not go into specifics, he did say that Glock has no plans to introduce their 4th generation pistols into the California market.

As long as Glock pays the required renewal fee to Californian their 3rd generation pistols will remain on the approved list.

clutchy
03-19-2012, 8:11 PM
Illegal is the wrong word to use. It's non-rostered. Meaning it hasn't been submitted to the state or was rejected.

if it was submitted it would be rejected based on what others have mentioned.

You can still obtain one through private party transfer OR through the single shot exemption process.


just because it's not on the roster doesn't mean it's illegal. Please correct people when they say this b/c it's just not true. It just can't be sold to your through an FFL but it's certainly NOT illegal to own one.

Chaos47
03-19-2012, 8:14 PM
Illegal is the wrong word to use. It's non-rostered. Meaning it hasn't been submitted to the state or was rejected.

if it was submitted it would be rejected based on what others have mentioned.

You can still obtain one through private party transfer OR through the single shot exemption process.


just because it's not on the roster doesn't mean it's illegal. Please correct people when they say this b/c it's just not true. It just can't be sold to your through an FFL but it's certainly NOT illegal to own one.

^This^

There are still plenty of ways to get one in California despite it being off roster...

ke6guj
03-19-2012, 8:28 PM
As mentioned by one of the above posters, it does not meet Calfiornia requirments as it does not have the required magazine disconector. Glock made the decision to NOT submit their 4th generation pistols to Californian for approval. While I do not have any particular insight into the reasons for this decision, it appears to be mainly because it does not have a magazine disconnector as required by California law.no need to submit it for testing as a new model when you know it doesn't have all the items required to be listed.

Now, I do seem to recall that Glock asked CADOJ if they could consider it to just be an exempt variation of the Glocks already listed. CADOJ said no, that it was a new model and that it could not rely on another model that was already rostered.

Chaos47
03-19-2012, 9:05 PM
Since you asked me in a PM how one could get them in CA and I am sure that others will wonder that as well I will answer it here.

There are many ways to get an off roster gun:

People can bring them into the state when they move here and then sell its via a PPT private party transfer.
A cop can buy one and then do a PPT as well.
If you have a parent or child out of state they could do an interfamily transfer to you.
You could do a SSE single shot exemption.

SIGSHOOTR
03-20-2012, 10:16 AM
Riflegear has them..in a CA version-- out of stock though.

http://www.riflegear.com/p-1427-glock-17-gen-4.aspx

littlejake
03-20-2012, 10:26 AM
Riflegear has them..in a CA version-- out of stock though.

http://www.riflegear.com/p-1427-glock-17-gen-4.aspx

Yes -- because they are selling a single shot version that can be converted after DROS to a CA resident.

G-Solutions
03-20-2012, 11:56 AM
That means that
COPS CAN BUY UNSAFE GUNS :eek: :eek: :eek:

Okay - pistols which have not been tested.... just playing libtard :cool:

butch952
03-20-2012, 3:40 PM
Because the great state of CA wants regulate all firearms out of existence,it's for our own good don't you know.

Johnnyfres
03-20-2012, 3:51 PM
Ugh I was not aware of this. Kalifornia I hate you.

Baconator
03-20-2012, 3:52 PM
because they have a shoulder thing that goes up and automatic feeding high capacity clips.

Oceanbob
03-20-2012, 4:38 PM
That means that
COPS CAN BUY UNSAFE GUNS :eek: :eek: :eek:

Okay - pistols which have not been tested.... just playing libtard :cool:

While I respect the Police I often wondered why they are exempt and special over us.

BTW..OC ARMORY has a GEN4 Glock 17 in stock. Neat weapon.

Bob

mmrx2
03-20-2012, 5:00 PM
Who said it was illegal? Did they say if you ever had one here you'd go to jail?

Oceanbob
03-20-2012, 5:03 PM
Who said it was illegal? Did they say if you ever had one here you'd go to jail?

It's illegal for an FFL or private party to import them in standard form. (unless you're exempt from the roster)

A shame really. Hopefully the lawsuit will fix this.

Be well,

Bob

cdnpuck
03-20-2012, 5:42 PM
Out of curiosity, how can you tell the physical difference between a Glock 17 gen 3 and gen 4 by just looking at them? Is there a difference between gen 2 had gen 3?

dave sac
03-20-2012, 5:58 PM
The state of California wants to harass gun owners to leave the state or give up on gun ownership. Really sucks.

chim-chim7
03-20-2012, 5:59 PM
Only two weeks left.

drifter2be
03-20-2012, 6:00 PM
Since you asked me in a PM how one could get them in CA and I am sure that others will wonder that as well I will answer it here.

There are many ways to get an off roster gun:

People can bring them into the state when they move here and then sell its via a PPT private party transfer.
A cop can buy one and then do a PPT as well.
If you have a parent or child out of state they could do an interfamily transfer to you.
You could do a SSE single shot exemption.

So technically, what you are saying is if my mom, who lives in North Carolina, bought a handgun that is off roster in CA, she could give it to me as an interfamily transfer. But how would that work since the gun is being brought in from out of state/what kind of paperwork and process would be involved in it? Does it still have to be shipped to a CA FFL and have to go through them (10 day wait and DROS)?

civilsnake
03-20-2012, 6:02 PM
Out of curiosity, how can you tell the physical difference between a Glock 17 gen 3 and gen 4 by just looking at them? Is there a difference between gen 2 had gen 3?

Texturing on the grip. Interchangeable backstraps for sizing purposes. Slight dimensional differences at the front.

Oh, and it says "Gen4" right on the slide. ;)

gatesbox
03-20-2012, 6:03 PM
Out of curiosity, how can you tell the physical difference between a Glock 17 gen 3 and gen 4 by just looking at them? Is there a difference between gen 2 had gen 3?

Gen 4 has the adjustable back strap inserts.... pretty easy to spot....
http://img706.imageshack.us/img706/9033/glockframes.jpg

The pic above will help you with the Gen 2 to Gen 3 question...

bwiese
03-20-2012, 6:06 PM
Now, I do seem to recall that Glock asked CADOJ if they could consider it to just be an exempt variation of the Glocks already listed. CADOJ said no, that it was a new model and that it could not rely on another model that was already rostered.

Which is laughable, because there are equally (if not more) substantive differences between Glock Gen 1, Gen 2 and Gen 3 guns than between Gen 3 and Gen 4, and DOJ appears to be allowing all 3 gens earlier to be treated equally.

Which means there are huge Harrott-style issues with the Roster.

paul0660
03-20-2012, 6:12 PM
our northern masters

I am wondering what you mean.

Quiet
03-21-2012, 12:32 AM
Now, I do seem to recall that Glock asked CADOJ if they could consider it to just be an exempt variation of the Glocks already listed. CADOJ said no, that it was a new model and that it could not rely on another model that was already rostered.
Which is laughable, because there are equally (if not more) substantive differences between Glock Gen 1, Gen 2 and Gen 3 guns than between Gen 3 and Gen 4, and DOJ appears to be allowing all 3 gens earlier to be treated equally.

Which means there are huge Harrott-style issues with the Roster.

AFAIK...
CA DOJ rejected the Gen4 Glocks because the internal changes (reversable mag release & dual-recoil system) to the Gen4Glocks "altered the dimensions, material, linkage, or functioning of the magazine well, the barrel, the chamber, or any of the components of the firing mechanism of the firearm".

Glock ran into this issue earlier when they used the exemption to get the Glock 21SF on the approved list.
Only the Glock 21SF with the standard magazine release was approved and the Glock 21SF with ambi-magazine release was not approved because the ambi-mag release system "altered the functioning of the magazine well".

Penal Code 32030
(a) A firearm shall be deemed to satisfy the requirements of subdivision (a) of Section 32015 if another firearm made by the same manufacturer is already listed and the unlisted firearm differs from the listed firearm only in one or more of the following features:
(1) Finish, including, but not limited to, bluing, chrome-plating, oiling, or engraving.
(2) The material from which the grips are made.
(3) The shape or texture of the grips, so long as the difference in grip shape or texture does not in any way alter the dimensions, material, linkage, or functioning of the magazine well, the barrel, the chamber, or any of the components of the firing mechanism of the firearm.
(4) Any other purely cosmetic feature that does not in any way alter the dimensions, material, linkage, or functioning of the magazine well, the barrel, the chamber, or any of the components of the firing mechanism of the firearm.
(b) Any manufacturer seeking to have a firearm listed under this section shall provide to the Department of Justice all of the following:
(1) The model designation of the listed firearm.
(2) The model designation of each firearm that the manufacturer seeks to have listed under this section.
(3) A statement, under oath, that each unlisted firearm for which listing is sought differs from the listed firearm only in one or more of the ways identified in subdivision (a) and is in all other respects identical to the listed firearm.
(c) The department may, in its discretion and at any time, require a manufacturer to provide to the department any model for which listing is sought under this section, to determine whether the model complies with the requirements of this section.

ridersblock
02-05-2013, 8:15 PM
So technically, what you are saying is if my mom, who lives in North Carolina, bought a handgun that is off roster in CA, she could give it to me as an interfamily transfer. But how would that work since the gun is being brought in from out of state/what kind of paperwork and process would be involved in it? Does it still have to be shipped to a CA FFL and have to go through them (10 day wait and DROS)?

:oji: :confused: :shrug:

67goat
02-05-2013, 8:33 PM
Which is laughable, because there are equally (if not more) substantive differences between Glock Gen 1, Gen 2 and Gen 3 guns than between Gen 3 and Gen 4, and DOJ appears to be allowing all 3 gens earlier to be treated equally.

Which means there are huge Harrott-style issues with the Roster.

Once a gun is on the roster it can stay on as long as the company keeps paying the fee. A new gun submitted to the roster must meet the requirements at the time of submission. So gens 1-3 (that are already on the list) do not need to meet the same requirements.

Gen 4 also does not have a chamber load indicator as defined by California. That is the newest requirement for the list. So there are two things that prevent them from being rostered.

Bug Splat
02-05-2013, 9:36 PM
I'm actually glad they did not submit it. :hide:

Before you all hang me by my toes let me explain why. I don't want to buy a glock with all that safety crap. Yes, its crap. A glock is awesome because of its simplicity. Adding more features takes away from what I love about glocks. I'd rather have to go through a SSE then buy a glock with DOJ mandated "safety features" shoved up its butt.

reznunt
02-06-2013, 1:34 AM
^This^

There are still plenty of ways to get one in California despite it being off roster...

"There are still plenty of LEGAL ways to get one in California despite it being off roster..."

;)

Apec
02-06-2013, 2:05 PM
The DOJ sure is great at nitpicking.

Then again they're the same clowns that think a gun with green, silver, or black paint is an entirely different gun, safety feature (or lack therof)-wise.

edgalang
02-06-2013, 3:14 PM
...
A glock is awesome because of its simplicity. Adding more features takes away from what I love about glocks. I'd rather have to go through a SSE then buy a glock with DOJ mandated "safety features" shoved up its butt.

Ah...but that is essentially what the Ruger SR series of pistols are. It has all the internal workings of a Glock...but with removable safeties if the user so chooses. I'm pretty sure Glock can design a pistol the same way with optional removable safeties.

SMR510
02-06-2013, 3:35 PM
So technically, what you are saying is if my mom, who lives in North Carolina, bought a handgun that is off roster in CA, she could give it to me as an interfamily transfer. But how would that work since the gun is being brought in from out of state/what kind of paperwork and process would be involved in it? Does it still have to be shipped to a CA FFL and have to go through them (10 day wait and DROS)?

Your mom could send you a Gen 4 glock or any other non rostered pistol that is not illegal to sell here for other reasons as a gift. She would have to send it to your FFL with a letter stating that she is giving it to you and that no money has changed hands. You go down, do DROS and your 10 days and it is yours. Be sure to check with your FFL because some do not like doing these transactions, check before she ships it and select another one if they wont do it.

Bug Splat
02-06-2013, 7:39 PM
Ah...but that is essentially what the Ruger SR series of pistols are. It has all the internal workings of a Glock...but with removable safeties if the user so chooses. I'm pretty sure Glock can design a pistol the same way with optional removable safeties.

True. If Glock could make a pistol with all these "features" removable I'd be OK with that. The reason I bought an M&P was because I could pull the mag disconnect and stupid take-down lever out and still have a working pistol.

I guess I just don't like the idea of the DOJ dictating what is produced in the name of Public Safety. As we all know these are just an excuse to ban more firearms. How this is legal just blows my mind. We need our 2nd amd rights back.:mad:

uhlan1
02-06-2013, 8:38 PM
While I respect the Police I often wondered why they are exempt and special over us.

BTW..OC ARMORY has a GEN4 Glock 17 in stock. Neat weapon.

Bob

They created an upper or patrician class of gun owner to get support from the LE interests groups to support their inane laws. One of those 'I got mine, sucks to be you" kind of things.
The "Safe" Roster is a total sham, simply gun control through an agenda-driven administrator's edicts.
Same as Cowboy Action, in return for their support (treason) they were exempted.

gorenut
02-06-2013, 9:08 PM
If Glock ever came out with a version of the Gen 4 that didn't have the finger grooves, I'd be willing to pay the premium to single shot em.

As it stands now though.. even though I do like the overall feel and the mag release of the Gen 4s.. its just not enough for me to justify replacing my Gen 3s.

Apec
02-07-2013, 2:47 AM
True. If Glock could make a pistol with all these "features" removable I'd be OK with that. The reason I bought an M&P was because I could pull the mag disconnect and stupid take-down lever out and still have a working pistol.

I guess I just don't like the idea of the DOJ dictating what is produced in the name of Public Safety. As we all know these are just an excuse to ban more firearms. How this is legal just blows my mind. We need our 2nd amd rights back.:mad:

In the guise of public safety. Any idiots that need bells and whistles to know if a gun is loaded or prevent themselves from getting shot in the foot shouldn't be around guns in the first place.

Magix
02-07-2013, 9:18 AM
I have the G17 and G21 in Gen4. Not illegal. Just need to find alternative ways to buy them as others have mentioned above. Cheers

JeremyS
02-07-2013, 10:09 AM
You know for sure it has nothing to do with safety when they exempt the class of guns MOST likely to actually fail a drop test; single action revolvers. You know it has nothing to do with safety when 99.99% of modern pistols will pass the drop test and firing test without issue. It has to do with extorting fees from gun manufacturers ("sin industry") and making it difficult and scary for citizens to acquire guns. This thread started out asking why Gen 4's are illegal in CA. They are NOT illegal! As has been mentioned. But, the point is that the Roster creates so much fear and confusion that some people are turned off from even attempting to purchase a gun. Limiting available guns and discouraging ownership is the point.

Oh... sorry... while I'm on the rant here, it was also created as a de facto ban on "Saturday Night Specials" and other cheap guns. Many of these weren't reliable enough to pass the shooting test, which requires going through hundreds of rounds without a stoppage. Why does a "safety" test require that a gun can fire hundreds of rounds without a failure to eject or feed or fire? No clue. Oh yeah, because it's not about safety. It was about banning certain guns.

Ronin2
02-07-2013, 1:11 PM
Illegal is the wrong word to use. It's non-rostered. Meaning it hasn't been submitted to the state or was rejected.



Hey hey... its not "illegal", its "undocumented" and we should be talking "amnesty" for the Glock 4th gen guns... ROFL :D

Ronin2
02-07-2013, 1:15 PM
In the guise of public safety. Any idiots that need bells and whistles to know if a gun is loaded or prevent themselves from getting shot in the foot shouldn't be around guns in the first place.

^^^^^^^^^^^ ++++++++++++++1

230infantry
07-07-2014, 10:01 PM
so if i buy a gen 4 glock in louisiana where im stationed can i legally bring it back and do the 10 day wait?

uhlan1
07-07-2014, 10:05 PM
I went to order a glock 17 gen 4 and I was told that it was illegal in CA. can someone tell me why? backstraps, texture is what I was told, really....

Because we are ruled by idiots.

Chaos47
07-08-2014, 12:14 AM
so if i buy a gen 4 glock in louisiana where im stationed can i legally bring it back and do the 10 day wait?

That's not how it works.
A resident generally (there are some exceptions, that I won't go into for clarity/simplicity of this topic) can not purchase a firearm out of their home state without the use of an FFL. If you do do it at an FFL the FFL has to send it to an FFL in your state. In other words you can not take possession of it. All state laws are then in effect when the FFL receives it.

So no you can not "bring it back" and no you can not "do the 10 day wait" because you cannot just walk into a shop and DROS a pistol already in your possession to yourself.



So are you a resident of CA or LA?


If you are a resident of CA then if you purchase it at an FFL out of state the FFL would ship it to a FFL in CA and it would have to be DROS'd and do the 10 day wait. Problem is that this is not an exempt method from the Roster so it would still cause the Roster to come into play. So thats not really going to work out unless you're receiving FFL does a SSE or you are an exempt person.

If you are a resident of LA and you purchase it there then you will have no problem bringing it into CA when you move back as long as it is not an assault weapon (threaded barrel, etc) and do not bring in magazines with the capacity to hold over 10 rounds that you did not possess in CA prior to Jan 1st 2000.
You would just fill out the new resident form when you moved here and pay the fee.

JohnCCW
07-08-2014, 12:32 AM
That means that
COPS CAN BUY UNSAFE GUNS :eek: :eek: :eek:

Okay - pistols which have not been tested.... just playing libtard :cool:

Yes-
AND they can sell those dangerous weapons to YOU! ;)

230infantry
07-08-2014, 7:04 AM
That's not how it works.
A resident generally (there are some exceptions, that I won't go into for clarity/simplicity of this topic) can not purchase a firearm out of their home state without the use of an FFL. If you do do it at an FFL the FFL has to send it to an FFL in your state. In other words you can not take possession of it. All state laws are then in effect when the FFL receives it.

So no you can not "bring it back" and no you can not "do the 10 day wait" because you cannot just walk into a shop and DROS a pistol already in your possession to yourself.



So are you a resident of CA or LA?


If you are a resident of CA then if you purchase it at an FFL out of state the FFL would ship it to a FFL in CA and it would have to be DROS'd and do the 10 day wait. Problem is that this is not an exempt method from the Roster so it would still cause the Roster to come into play. So thats not really going to work out unless you're receiving FFL does a SSE or you are an exempt person.

If you are a resident of LA and you purchase it there then you will have no problem bringing it into CA when you move back as long as it is not an assault weapon (threaded barrel, etc) and do not bring in magazines with the capacity to hold over 10 rounds that you did not possess in CA prior to Jan 1st 2000.
You would just fill out the new resident form when you moved here and pay the fee.

im technically a CA resident but since im in the military and im stationed out of state all i need is my orders saying im stationed in louisiana and i can buy a weapon. so since i come back to california in 3 months can i buy a gen 4 glock in louisiana and register it in california when i get out?

Noonanda
07-08-2014, 1:35 PM
im technically a CA resident but since im in the military and im stationed out of state all i need is my orders saying im stationed in louisiana and i can buy a weapon. so since i come back to california in 3 months can i buy a gen 4 glock in louisiana and register it in california when i get out?

Yes you can.

230infantry
07-08-2014, 4:00 PM
what are the stipulations on that?

Dvrjon
07-08-2014, 5:22 PM
im technically a CA resident but since im in the military and im stationed out of state all i need is my orders saying im stationed in louisiana and i can buy a weapon. so since i come back to california in 3 months can i buy a gen 4 glock in louisiana and register it in california when i get out?

Yes you can.

what are the stipulations on that?

See second entry, here:http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/Federal_residency_requirements

Dvrjon
07-08-2014, 5:40 PM
Information on the Roster of Not Unsafe Firearms can be found here: http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/FAQ#What_is_the_.22Safe_Handgun_Roster.3F.22

4th Generation Glocks changed the pistol to have ambidextrous (switchable) magazine releases. DOJ determined this, and other manufacturing changes constituted a new model. New models have to be tested to be placed on the roster, but before testing, they must have incorporated into their design the following features:
Loaded Chamber Indicator; magazine disconnect. Penal Code 31910. http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/31910.html

State regs have defined requirements for the LCI which requires new design elements. (CCR 4060(d)(1):
(d)(1) A functioning chamber load indicator must meet all of the following conditions:
(A) Explanatory text and/or graphics either incorporated within the chamber load indicator or adjacent to the chamber load indicator is/are permanently displayed by engraving, stamping, etching, molding, casting, or other means of permanent marking.
(B) Each letter of explanatory text must have a minimum height of 1/16 inch.
(C) The explanatory text and/or graphics shall be of a distinct visual contrast to that of the firearm.
(D) The “loaded” indication, that portion of the chamber load indicator that visually indicates there is a round in the chamber, shall be of a distinct color contrast to the firearm.
(E) Only when there is a round in the chamber, the “loaded” indication is visible on the firearm from a distance of at least twenty-four inches. When there is no round in the chamber, the “loaded” indication must not be visible.
(F) The text and/or graphics and the “loaded” indication together inform a reasonably foreseeable adult user of the pistol, that a round is in the chamber, without requiring the user to refer to a user's manual or any other resource other than the pistol itself.https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Document/I7E186930380011E18024FEFE7CFA98B6?viewType=FullTex t&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default)

The Glocks do not have magazine disconnects. Since they fail to meet the two standards, they cannot be tested. If not tested, then not on Roster and not to be directly sold to the general (non-exempt) population.

They can be sold through the SSE process (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=383692) or though Private Party Transfer. (http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/Private_Party_Transfer).

More info here: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=81127
And here: http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Buying_and_selling_firearms_in_California#Roster_r equired

Best.

tonelar
07-08-2014, 6:16 PM
While I respect the Police I often wondered why they are exempt and special over us.

BTW..OC ARMORY has a GEN4 Glock 17 in stock. Neat weapon.

Bob

When the original Caliban was proposed (including the later ban on magazines) Sacramento got the peace officers on board by exempting them. Otherwise no LE agency would back their proposed laws.

T6pilot
07-08-2014, 6:57 PM
FYI the gen 3 Glocks made in USA are not on roster, cause there made here go figure.
Get a gen 4 via SSE while you can

tacticalcity
07-08-2014, 7:09 PM
It's illegal for an FFL or private party to import them in standard form. (unless you're exempt from the roster)

A shame really. Hopefully the lawsuit will fix this.

Be well,

Bob

IMPORT? No it's not. It is illegal for an FFL to sell them in standard form. But they can import them that way and then install a single shot exemption compliance kit and sell them...at least for now. The compliance kits do not need to be installed before they are brought into the state. The FFLS doing SSE transfers make their own compliance kits. They keep and reuse them after the DROS is completed. There have been several attempts by the legislature to change this, but for now it is still legal.

To Joe citizen the difference might seem like semantics, but to an FFL researching this it matters a great deal.