[Tincon]

Originally Posted by bwiese

Former DOJ BoF Deputy AG Firearms has issued multiple letters on this including supporting manufacturing a home built 1911 [and she didn't mention any single-shot conversion, which was in error] and changing parts on a regular Rostered Glock to a non-Rostered 'left handed' variant.

Despite what certain CGF board members have implied many times, a letter from Alison Merrilees is not a get out of jail free card. This is not legal advice, but it MAY be possible to rely on an opinion of a government official/officer if ALL of the following are true: (1) they are directly charged with the duty of enforcing the law against, for example, unsafe handguns (MAYBE THE AG/deputy M, maybe not) (2) if one of her duties had been determining if handguns should be added to the roster (3) she gave an official opinion that certain specific handguns were exempt from the roster, AND (4) did so in no uncertain terms. People v. Ferguson, 1933, 134 Cal.App. 41.
BUT the law prohibiting unsafe handguns is a part of the Penal Code, enacted by the state Legislature in its exercise of the general police power of the state and in obedience to a constitutional mandate found in section 26, article 4 of our State Constitution. It takes a lot for a court to say that some Deputy AG (how many of those are there?) can on her own nullify that law with some privately issued letter. I would not count on this.
In fact I’d be willing to bet that these letters, do not concretely state that there is no risk of prosecution. It probably has all sorts of weasel language that renders it effectively meaningless, like many other letters of hers that I have seen.
AG letters may have some meaning in some contexts, but I doubt very much that they would in a case like this. Again, it normally takes a lot more than the act of one un-elected person to undermine a criminal statute drafted and approved by the entire elected legislature and signed by the elected governor. Think about it, The Legislature can override a governor's veto by a two-thirds majority vote, to make a criminal law effective. Do you really believe a junior person in the AG's office can nullify it so easily?

Originally Posted by bwiese

Remember also the DOJ has allowed sales of many handguns that weren't the Rostered variants and had significant changes [in particular, Glock Gen 1/2/3 are treated interchangeably even though substantive multiple structural/mechanical differences exist and differ from exemplar guns submitted for testing].
Also, every handgun taken for gunsmithing would be illegal (no longer has parts in tolerance/surface details, etc.) or with upgrade/replacement parts (outside grips or sights).

Incorrect.

PC 32030 (formerly 12131.5.)
(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.

Nothing they did creates a position incompatible with prosecution, nor does it trigger collateral estoppel.

Originally Posted by bwiese

This is a battle they don't want. This is also an only-DOJ issue, no DA deals with this trivia. DOJ is well aware of these matters and they have *****ed & moaned at worst; this has been running for 2-3 years now (since AR/AK pistols etc.) and can't/won't be stopped.

So in other words you know they have taken a different position than the former deputy AG? Seriously, you may or may not be right, but giving the blanket legal advice that it is "totally legal" to modify these guns in any way, especially given the clear intent of the legislature, is in my opinion reckless at best.