PDA

View Full Version : Colt AR Legality in CA


BlackGuns
08-25-2007, 10:43 AM
I'm currently living in Indiana and own a Colt AR-15. Preparing to relocate to CA within the next month or so.

I've read and read and read and read threads all over this forum and the CA DOJ firearms website - still thoroughly confused though.

My gun is on the list of banned "assault weapons".

My question is this - what does the following quote from the CA DOJ's firearm summary booklet mean...

AB 2728 (Stats. 2006, ch. 793) (Klehs)
- Repeals DOJ's authority under Penal Code §12276.1 to identify Colt AR-15 and AK-47 type
“series” assault weapons by name, or to seek a judicial declaration that a firearm is identical to
an assault weapon listed in Penal Code section 12276.

Is the Colt AR on the list or is it not? If it's not I'm assuming I can install a bullett button and it will be legal. Correct?

Ed

Diablo
08-25-2007, 10:46 AM
The colt AR15 is on the list, therefore banned...:mad:

Builder
08-25-2007, 11:15 AM
AB 2728 prevents the CA DOJ from listing any more firearms to the banned list. The Colt AR-15 is already on the banned list and is illegal here. As you have read, there are many Off List Lowers that are legal. An OLL with a 10 round fixed magazine (bullet button) with evil features (pistol grip, etc) OR a MM grip and no evil features is ok.
Hope this helps,
Builder

SemiAutoSam
08-25-2007, 11:30 AM
One of those off list lowers is a colt and you are correct AB2728 will keep the DOJ for placing this colt on the list as well as all of the other lower receivers that are not at this moment on the list.

Here is a pic of the COLT that is not on the Kasler or Roberti Roos Lists.
http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j184/mag-lock/colt3nj.jpg


AB 2728 prevents the CA DOJ from listing any more firearms to the banned list. The Colt AR-15 is already on the banned list and is illegal here. As you have read, there are many Off List Lowers that are legal. An OLL with a 10 round fixed magazine (bullet button) with evil features (pistol grip, etc) OR a MM grip and no evil features is ok.
Hope this helps,
Builder

hoffmang
08-25-2007, 11:36 AM
Your colt is probably on the list. Your best option is to buy a new lower that isn't listed from any of the long list of available suppliers. You can then configure that as either a fixed magazine rifle or remove any of the banned California features and use a Monsterman grip to use detachable magazines.

-Gene

JawBone
08-25-2007, 11:41 AM
If it is a listed Colt, the solution is to build a new Lower Assembly OLL + parts kit (with your choice of Bullet Button/Mag Loc/MM/U-15) and attach it to your Colt Upper.

Just bring the Colt Upper ONLY with you to CA. (EDIT: you can bring the buttstock and parts, just not the lower receiver)

**If your Colt has the large front pivot pin you will need a "Reverse Offset Front Pivot Pin" from Bushmaster to adapt it to the small front pivot pin OLL.

lorenolson888
08-25-2007, 1:13 PM
It should be the least permanent thing... and it would be very argueable that you tried to be in compliance...

If you glue the mag shut or something that would be a shame...

If you bring it in...

Then don't brandish it around at the range..

I take my pre-2000 registered armalite to the range... and people comment that it is nice but that is it... it obviously has a CA compliant compensator..

If you put a more recent upper with a CA legal flash hider... knowone will ever really know... and there are a lot of legal one of those oned..

CA firearms Law say in the DOJ paperwork these colts are banned by name... I think that there was a follow up law that says that all AR-15 "Style guns are listed"... CAR-3 is not listed... but it may be a AR-15 style...

Colt
* AR-15 (all)
Law Enforcement (6920)
Match Target (all)
Sporter (all)

* Required to be registered on
or before March 31, 1992

I am note sure what the asterisk implies... maybe they mean you had to reg with CA at that time...

That said, if you get pulled over and the police think it is probablem cause to search find a possible assault weapon and then I am sure there could be trouble...

maybe if you keep it in a legal config (cut off pistol grip and try to fix the mag in a sort of reversible way then if anything did happen the law would be more hard pressed to pursue action, it would be very argueable that you tried to be in compliance...

Also depends on how permanent the move to CA is...

LO

AJAX22
08-25-2007, 1:21 PM
It should be the least permanent thing... and it would be very argueable that you tried to be in compliance...

If you glue the mag shut or something that would be a shame...

If you bring it in...

Then don't brandish it around at the range..

I take my pre-2000 registered armalite to the range... and people comment that it is nice but that is it... it obviously has a CA compliant compensator..

If you put a more recent upper with a CA legal flash hider... knowone will ever really know... and there are a lot of legal one of those oned..

CA firearms Law say in the DOJ paperwork these colts are banned by name... I think that there was a follow up law that says that all AR-15 "Style guns are listed"... CAR-3 is not listed... but it may be a AR-15 style...

Colt
* AR-15 (all)
Law Enforcement (6920)
Match Target (all)
Sporter (all)

* Required to be registered on
or before March 31, 1992

I am note sure what the asterisk implies... maybe they mean you had to reg with CA at that time...

That said, if you get pulled over and the police think it is probablem cause to search find a possible assault weapon and then I am sure there could be trouble...

maybe if you keep it in a legal config (cut off pistol grip and try to fix the mag in a sort of reversible way then if anything did happen the law would be more hard pressed to pursue action, it would be very argueable that you tried to be in compliance...

Also depends on how permanent the move to CA is...

LO

This is HORRIBLE advice.

If you have a banned rifle there is no way to legally posess it in CA (we are working on figuring out ways around the law, but as of right now the answer is if its on the list DO NOT BRING IT, it can not be reconfigured to a CA legal status)

the receiver itself is an assult weapon.

swap the receiver for a different one (stag, doublestar mega, LAR, POF, LMT, etc) and then wory about configuring it to CA legal status.

don't screw around with even thinking about having an unregistered AW in CA, you could loose your ability to own firearms compleatly, not to mention the loss of cash and freedom.

BlackGuns
08-25-2007, 2:11 PM
Thanks for all the advice even though the answer pretty much sucks. The lower is going to find a place in my dads safe (maybe the whole rifle).

It's amazing how a US citizen can be a good guy in one state and a felon in another just because of something he owns.

Thanks again.

Ed

blkA4alb
08-25-2007, 2:57 PM
It should be the least permanent thing... and it would be very argueable that you tried to be in compliance...



Do not advocate illegal activity. "Attempting" to be in compliance does not make it legal. They are not going to say "Oh, well he tried really hard. We will let him off this time."

Life doesn't work like that.

bwiese
08-25-2007, 3:21 PM
Please completely disregard user lorenolson's advice above.

Rest of guidance is pretty on spot.

You likely have a 'named' receiver that should be left out of CA.

Take the upper and get a new 'off-list lower' that is not listed as banned (Stag, DSA, GunSmoke, RRA LAR-15, a zillion others) and build up a fixed mag rifle (using a fixed mag holding no more than 10rds) or get a special MonsterMan grip or U15 stock to comply with CA laws/regulations.

Do not bring in hicap mags.

lorenolson888
08-25-2007, 6:36 PM
Sorry I did not mean to imply that the original poster break the law or that bringing it in was not illegal.

To the original poster, if you have an option to leave it at home with your folks you should do that... You may not being CA forever... as my original post suggested...

Also there are some clearly legal guns that are cool that you can get at the gunstores, Socom etc.

The laws are vague and the DOJ is leaning towards prosecuting everything...
The armed populace is looking for loopholes vagueries to ride that ragged edge of what is legal or not...

Right now the grey area of the law... that's the battlefront... and sorry to say guys... we are in retreat!!! :43:

Somewhere it all gets decided in courts... but the DOJ has been pretty clear... many people are in violation according to DOJ and no amnesty or rereg will be provided to them... if they brought stuff in post 2000

These laws are illegal... these laws are an infrigment on our rights to own and bear arms... period... So if that is a distant memory then it is all worse than I feared...

hoffmang
08-25-2007, 6:38 PM
Right now the grey area of the law... that's the battlefront... and sorry to say guys... we are in retreat!!! :43:


Where do you get that idea from? It looks like we're making quite a bit of progress. You do know that OLLs are a new phenomenon, right?

-Gene

lorenolson888
08-25-2007, 7:01 PM
I think the off list receivers list is great!!! Anything that limits the mayhem in anyway I am for... but still it is a tug of war against the state... DOJs summary and "interpretation" of the penal code is more what I am refering to... it devil is in the interpretation... all the loopholes are essentially our interpretation and the DOJ has their own...

I though laws against killing people was enough...

this microstamp thing for hand guns is probably a good indicator of how ridiculous and sneaky the lawmakers are getting... so is that a done deal? is 2010 the drop dead date?

LO

hoffmang
08-25-2007, 7:13 PM
DOJ had their derrier handed to them in trying to re-interpret "detachable magazine." Last year no anti-gun bill passed and a couple of pro gun ones did.

The only two things left alive that are anti are microstamping and lead ammo bans. And note that the legislative year is far from over leaving us plenty of room to stop those too.

It's California so it's a fight, but it's a fight we're finally generally winning.

-Gene

BlackGuns
08-26-2007, 8:50 AM
blackrazor - I did send off a note to the DOJ about trying to register my Colt (a month or so ago). I received a very informative email that simply said I may not legally bring an assault weapon into the state of California.

Actually, here's the text from the email...

Your request for information has been received and reviewed. There is no way to lawfully own an assault weapon in California.

This was directly from the CA DOJ.

Go figure.

Thanks for all the help. I'm currenly looking at off-list lowers (and planning on leaving my mags back here in the land of the free).

Ed

bwiese
08-26-2007, 1:07 PM
Blackguns,

Please send a *letter* (not email) to DOJ requesting an AW permit so that your right to continue to own your property when you move to CA continues.

Get this in writing from a non-desk clerk, and please let us know what they say. The law says it's at least possible to get a permitted AW when moving into CA.

PC 12285(b)(2) A person moving into this state, otherwise in lawful possession of an assault weapon, shall do one of the following: (A) Prior to bringing the assault weapon into this state, that person shall first obtain a permit from the Department of Justice in the same manner as specified in Article 3 (commencing with Section 12230) of Chapter 2.

(B) The person shall cause the assault weapon to be delivered to a licensed gun dealer, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 12290, in this state in accordance with Chapter 44 (commencing with Section 921) of Title 18 of the United States Code and the regulations issued pursuant thereto. If the person obtains a permit from the Department of Justice in the same manner as specified in Article 3 (commencing with Section 12230) of Chapter 2, the dealer shall redeliver that assault weapon to the person. If the licensed gun dealer, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 12290, is prohibited from delivering the assault weapon to a person pursuant to this paragraph, the dealer shall possess or dispose of the assault weapon as allowed by this chapter.

BlackGuns
08-27-2007, 1:04 PM
Thanks for the suggestion Bill. I looked up 12230 and it seems pretty straight forward. Worth a shot anyway. I'll let you know how it goes.

What are your guys' thoughts about bringing the weapon into the state without the lower? Meaning I'll just leave the stripped lower behind and bring the rest of the parts with me. It sounds like the lower is the only part that's illegal. Then I could just purchase a legal lower (and pin the mag) and reassemble?

Ed

SemiAutoSam
08-27-2007, 1:05 PM
That IMHO is 100% legal in fact if you like you can run my MAG-LOCK©®.

Check my sig line for sales thread and contact information.


What are your guys' thoughts about bringing the weapon into the state without the lower? Meaning I'll just leave the stripped lower behind and bring the rest of the parts with me. It sounds like the lower is the only part that's illegal. Then I could just purchase a legal lower (and pin the mag) and reassemble?

Ed

JawBone
08-27-2007, 2:30 PM
What are your guys' thoughts about bringing the weapon into the state without the lower? Meaning I'll just leave the stripped lower behind and bring the rest of the parts with me. It sounds like the lower is the only part that's illegal. Then I could just purchase a legal lower (and pin the mag) and reassemble?

Ed

One problem you might run into is that some Colts have a large hammer and trigger setup and the Colt parts may not fit into the new OLL, (Not sure if that is the case with you, but something to check out) so you may need a new lower parts kit in addition to the new receiver (usually runs about $40-$60 for a basic kit.)

This thread (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=65683)was helpful to me.

blkA4alb
08-27-2007, 5:41 PM
Do yourself a favor, find a job in another state. This state sucks, the traffic is unbearable, and the law makers are complete idiots. Take your talents and tax dollars to any state but this one.

You're right, we should turn away fellow gun enthusiasts and another pro-gun vote from this state.

Think of this on a large scale. What if enough pro-gun people moved here to affect the vote? Every vote counts.

SemiAutoSam
08-27-2007, 5:44 PM
LOL right but the state isn't that big where would all of the liberal democrats relocate to to make room for the conservative republicans that might want to relocate here?

Think of this on a large scale. What if enough pro-gun people moved here to affect the vote? Every vote counts.