View Single Post
  #57  
Old 03-11-2009, 7:52 PM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 27,604
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wash View Post
Well, hang on, if a small difference makes a pistol not on the list, shouldn't a small difference on a named AW take it off the list?
The laws are constructed differently in relation to the listed items vs what can be done.

Yes, there should be equal standards in clarity. But how the lists operate against the actual codifed laws is a bit different.


Quote:
Originally Posted by wash
If the same standard was applied, the U.S. pistol grip should make it not listed.
You're arguing interesting theory that could possibly have some relevance in a deep court case we don't need to fight.

General consensus is that most all 'listed' semiauto AWs are AWs regardless of features changes or deletion ('characteristic' or otherwise) - and which don't pull it out of that 'listed' category.

The RRA discussion in this thread is specifically a bit different because their entries on the list are, um, 'weird': the gun is banned-by-name for the 'whole named entity' rather than what's marked on the receiver ("LAR15", which is off-list).

Your example about FN FALs likely involves receivers that are listed/marked. There is at least one FN FAL-type rifle from the 60s (?) not marked with "FAL" or "LAR" or "FN Sporter" (whatever) and has some model# that is not listed. Thus that rifle is not a banned FN FAL etc. and can be possessed as long as SB23 evil features are not present.

Quote:
Of course I might have to follow 922(r) after modifying a pre-ban imported rifle, but that would just mean more difference from the listed FN FAL.

Again, irrelevant here. This RRA situation is different than other listing situations - that's why I've been bringing it up for special attention here because even though the receivers are off-list, construction of certain guns with RRA components in certain configurations may not be. It's kinda the "full converse" of a listed AW where features changes are irrelevant.

The RRA list naming is just particularly weird.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wash
Any way, I wish we could make things work that way, perhaps the roster of safe handguns isn't something we want to kill just yet.
No, it's going away.


Quote:
Originally Posted by wash
Lastly, if it did work this way, why would it be illegal to bring in bare named receivers?
It is technically not illegal - or rather better put, 'defendable but not recommended' - to possess listed receivers. These receivers are neither (1) semiautomatic, nor (2) centerfire, nor (3) a rifles or pistol or shotgun, as appropriate. (This was mentioned in a footnote in the legislative analysis to 2006' AB2728, which "froze the lists" starting in 2007.) Certainly these named receivers can't be built up into semiauto firearms in CA. They're pretty radioactive, and there's more competence here on Calguns than in most PD or DA offices and that's something you have to hammer into them - post-arrest, post-bail.

These cases aren't worth fighting given that the whole AW ban is a bigger fatter target, and that plenty of non-listed receivers for most styles of guns are available.


Quote:
Originally Posted by wash
I hope there could be "Assault Weapon" NERF's too.
Yes - they're called OLLs.
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.

Last edited by bwiese; 03-11-2009 at 7:55 PM..
Reply With Quote