2016 AB 857 Cooper Firearms: identifying information.

[Browneye]

Originally Posted by morrcarr67

OK, here's a question for you.

I know of an 07 FFL that is offering laser engraving on your home built firearms. He is putting your info as the manufacturer, letting you assign the serial number and letting you come up with the model name/number.

I see this as complying with all of the new serial number requirements. What do you think?

IMO that's all we need. Referral please?

A bazillion rifles already exist that are not in any registry other than the manufacturers build inventory list. The new law only addresses guns without a number and if you build one after the stated date.

[dscoduc]

Originally Posted by jwkincal

If your MARKED lower is not REGISTERED when the new law goes into effect, then yes, you will not be able to own it. Hence, if you've marked it, you need to voluntarily register it in order to qualify for the 11106 exemption.

So let me see if i understand this…

If I choose to not put a serial number on my 80% lower then I am breaking the law that says every firearm must have a serial number.

If I choose to put a serial number on my 80% lower then I must register said serial number with the CA DOJ or I am breaking the law that says all serialized firearms must be registered…

How does this make any sense?

[Kate]

If that is true, then it would seem the AB-857 changes would apply to my Daniel Defense AR I bought 2 years ago.

The text from "http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB857" says, "By January 1, 2019, any person who, as of July 1, 2018, owns a firearm that does not bear a serial number assigned to it pursuant to either Section 23910 or pursuant to Chapter 44 (commencing with Section 921) of Part 1 of Title 18 of the United States Code and the regulations issued pursuant thereto, shall do all of the following"

My DD AR does not have a serial number assigned to it pursuant to those laws (although admittedly I did not read all of Chapter 44 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/t...t-I/chapter-44 ), I did read several sections that seemed like they might have been applicable.), so I would think I would have to somehow register my DD AR.

How is this not true?

[jlist]

Assuming federal requirement for "manufacturers" satisfies state requirement, I need to engrave model, caliber, manufacturer's name (or recognized abbreviation), city and state on the firearm. What constitutes a "recognized abbreviation"? Can I use something like first initial and last name?

----------------
The additional information includes:
(A) The model, if such designation has been made;
(B) The caliber or gauge;
(C) Your name (or recognized abbreviation) and also, when applicable, the name of the foreign manufacturer;
(D) In the case of a domestically made firearm, the city and State (or
recognized abbreviation thereof) where you as the manufacturer maintain your place of business; and
(E) In the case of an imported firearm, the name of the country in which it was manufactured and the city and State (or recognized abbreviation thereof) where you as the importer maintain your place of business. For additional requirements relating to imported firearms, see Customs regulations at 19 CFR part 134.

[jwkincal]

Originally Posted by dscoduc

So let me see if i understand this…

If I choose to not put a serial number on my 80% lower then I am breaking the law that says every firearm must have a serial number.

If I choose to put a serial number on my 80% lower then I must register said serial number with the CA DOJ or I am breaking the law that says all serialized firearms must be registered…

How does this make any sense?

Because the intent of the new law is to REGISTER ALL HOMEBUILDS

That's why it is going to be illegal to have an unregistered homebuilt firearm now that the law has passed.

[jcwatchdog]

Originally Posted by jwkincal

Because the intent of the new law is to REGISTER ALL HOMEBUILDS

That's why it is going to be illegal to have an unregistered homebuilt firearm now that the law has passed.

Not exactly. If you change your 80% into a featureless rifle, you can serialize it with all the necessary into. You do not need to register it.

If your 80% is in AW configuration, you will need to register it.

[jwkincal]

Originally Posted by jcwatchdog

Not exactly. If you change your 80% into a featureless rifle, you can serialize it with all the necessary into. You do not need to register it.

If your 80% is in AW configuration, you will need to register it.

Any number you may or may not engrave into your receiver is not a serial number pursuant to Title 18, Chapter 44 of the Federal Code because you are not a manufacturer under the definitions therein.

Any number you may or may not engrave into your receiver is not a serial number pursuant to Title 26, Chapter 53 of the Federal Code, because your receiver is not a "firearm" under the definitions therein.

Thus, the only remaining exemptions in the new law are those referencing California's DWC laws, of which the section 11106 applies if you have voluntarily registered and the section 23910 is the case in which you have requested a serial number be assigned by the CA DOJ.

Thus, it simply isn't possible to have a modern home-built firearm in CA which does not bear a serial number appearing in a firearms registry.

[9M62]

Originally Posted by Kate

If that is true, then it would seem the AB-857 changes would apply to my Daniel Defense AR I bought 2 years ago.

The text from "http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB857" says, "By January 1, 2019, any person who, as of July 1, 2018, owns a firearm that does not bear a serial number assigned to it pursuant to either Section 23910 or pursuant to Chapter 44 (commencing with Section 921) of Part 1 of Title 18 of the United States Code and the regulations issued pursuant thereto, shall do all of the following"

My DD AR does not have a serial number assigned to it pursuant to those laws (although admittedly I did not read all of Chapter 44 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/t...t-I/chapter-44 ), I did read several sections that seemed like they might have been applicable.), so I would think I would have to somehow register my DD AR.

How is this not true?

You're not fully understanding what you're reading, which is acceptable since it's so confusing. I'll break it down into basic terms without legalese.

1) Daniel Defense is a federally licensed manufacturer and it has serialized and recorded its products lawfully under Chapter-44 and Section 921. So no California DOJ approved serial number is required.

2) Any firearm that is already registered in California's "centralized registry" (as in, any firearm voluntarily registered, involuntarily registered, or registered as an assault weapon) is also exempt from AB857 / DOJ applied serial numbers.

3) If you own a firearm that has neither #1 or #2, you will have to get a DOJ approved / applied serial number.

Or,

3b) by some peoples interpretation of the law (myself included), you will need to serialize it yourself prior to the law becoming active.

It should be noted that #3b is open for interpretation. Some people believe self-serialization meets the requirement of the law without voluntarily registering the firearm (either AW or regular long gun), and others believe it does not.

What is absolutely known is it is the intent of the legislature to register all 80% lowers, whether you do that with your own number now or whether you do that with their serial number at a later time.

***edit*** jwkincal appears to have answered this as well.

[Kate]

Great answers!

Thanks, All!

[HKRick]

I just checked out the CDOJ Firearms Registration Form and saw something interesting,

"• Serial Number
Usually located on the frame of a handgun, and on the receiver of a long gun. May be all numeric or a combination of alpha and numeric characters."

I know several people, including myself that used only alpha, no numeric characters. Wonder if this would get the volreg kicked back.

On another note, if you built an AR pistol as an SSE, then converted it to Semi Auto and are now going to register it, it seems like you must register as Single Shot, even if the conversion to SA has already occurred, correct?

[Browneye]

If it was reg under SSE nothing further required. What am I missing?

[HKRick]

Originally Posted by Browneye

If it was reg under SSE nothing further required. What am I missing?

Home build. Never registered before converting from Single Shot to Semi Auto.

[9M62]

If you VolReg it they are going to want to see that it's single shot.

[HKRick]

Originally Posted by 9M62

If you VolReg it they are going to want to see that it's single shot.

How do you show that?

I should be able to register it as Semi Auto because I did actually preform all required actions from build/SSE/Semi Auto legally. There was no requirement to register it at the SSE phase prior to converting it, however I can see them kicking it back as Off Roster. Any thoughts?

[9M62]

Originally Posted by HKRick

How do you show that?

I should be able to register it as Semi Auto because I did actually preform all required actions from build/SSE/Semi Auto legally. There was no requirement to register it at the SSE phase prior to converting it, however I can see them kicking it back as Off Roster. Any thoughts?

When I did mine (online) they asked for pictures of the firearm to show both serial information and the firearm as a whole. I assume both for identification purposes and to prove it was in fact SSE.

I've since sold the upper and no longer own a SSE AR pistol.

Just remember, it's not entirely clear if it's okay for you to be both the manufacturer of the SSE AR PISTOL *and* the person who converts it to Semi-Auto. Some believe since the same person made both you are merely manufacturing an unsafe handgun. Others believe that you can. Others think its totally fine if you BOUGHT the lower and modified it, but not if you were the original manufacturer as well.

Just something to think about.

[Browneye]

Yeah, I'm no expert on SSE nor pistol building, but my impression was that all pistols had to be registered. Rifles not.

[VaderSpade]

Originally Posted by HKRick

I just checked out the CDOJ Firearms Registration Form and saw something interesting,

"• Serial Number
Usually located on the frame of a handgun, and on the receiver of a long gun. May be all numeric or a combination of alpha and numeric characters."

I know several people, including myself that used only alpha, no numeric characters. Wonder if this would get the volreg kicked back.

I have heard (from a manufacture) that letters are OK but the SN must end in a number.

Add a -1

[VaderSpade]

Originally Posted by 9M62

Some people believe self-serialization meets the requirement of the law without voluntarily registering the firearm, and others believe it does not.

This is what we really need to get in writing. People seem passionate on both sides but no one (that I have seem) has posted ANY proof one way or another.

Do we even know at this time?
There are a ton of engravers and a few 80% manufactures stating as fact that self-serialization meets the requirement of the law without voluntarily registering the firearm. Most of these people are making a profit and if it's not true what are the consequences?

I'm an engraver and when ask I state "at this point no one knows for sure". I would like to know for sure. (see link below for one example. Read the statement at the bottom of the page.)

http://www.80percentarms.com/collect...r-ca-compliant

[edwardm]

Originally Posted by VaderSpade

This is what we really need to get in writing. People seem passionate on both sides but no one (that I have seem) has posted ANY proof one way or another.

Do we even know at this time?
There are a ton of engravers and a few 80% manufactures stating as fact that self-serialization meets the requirement of the law without voluntarily registering the firearm. Most of these people are making a profit and if it's not true what are the consequences?

I'm an engraver and when ask I state "at this point no one knows for sure". I would like to know for sure. (see link below for one example. Read the statement at the bottom of the page.)

http://www.80percentarms.com/collect...r-ca-compliant

There is really no 'proof' to be had at this point. All arguments are based on interpretation of the legislation, itself poorly written and ambiguous.

Proof may come later as CalDOJ writes some crappy regulations to implement the crappy legislation. However, seeing as how there are technical mistakes in 857 and the new 'AW' law, CalDOJ may have to go back for fixups (unlikely) or just may try to make the oval peg fit the round hole and call it good (likely) by using a bigger hammer.

Government: Taking Messes and Making Them Worse, Since 1789.

[VaderSpade]

^^This is also what I believe.^^
Some of these engravers and vendors may get their asses sued.

I remember guys taking orders they couldn't fill after Sandy Hook. I could have taken thousands of orders but I knew better even though I had large orders in before Sandy Hook. Orders that never got filled.

Sadly I don't think anyone got in any real trouble. They just took 2-3 years to fill the orders.
Put the money in the bank at $100.00-$300.00 per lower and buy them years later at $29.00 to fill the orders. Damn these scruples of mine.

[phdo]

So I have a couple of lowers that I already engraved and anodized with everything except my name as the manufacturer. I don't want to go through the whole anodizing process again. Does anyone know if I can add my name as the manufacturer where the pistol grip goes? I also want to hide my real name. Just to be safe, would it be a good idea to also engrave the date that I built the lowers?

[Browneye]

Originally Posted by Browneye

Would be nice to get a lawyer review on it. I may write Colodny and see if he has already published a review. Or ask if he will. Scratch that, I'm writing him now.

Okay, finally got a call back from Bruce Colodny, gun lawyer.

It is amazing how you can talk with a lawyer for a half hour and not get any clearer picture of the situation.

Well it is somewhat more clear, but the bottom line is that politicians keep writing and passing gun laws to the point where no one really understands them anymore, not the people that write them, not the LEO's that enforce them, not the judges that try them, and not the lawyers that argue them and defend the citizens against them. He said the gun laws are now some 300 pages in the penal code and even if you read all the way through them all there's no guarantee you'll completely understand them.

So, on serializing 80% lowers. Yes, you can number them per BATF and vol-reg them, but he suggested we wait 'till DOJ sets up the registration process and then get your number and register them, either as rifles are AW's. All AW's - new classification - are going to be required to be registered as such anyway. They want all firearms to be registered in the central database - so they are writing laws to ensure this.

However there are dozens of ways that a firearm is not registered. Up 'till about thirty years ago you could bring a gun in from out of state, or buy one from a private party, without any sort of registration with DOJ. And up until 2015 there was no registration process for long guns.

As of this month all AR's with BB's are unlawful to transport or possess without having them registered with DOJ. However currently there is no way to register them so if you're acting unlawfully in some manner and have a run in with a LEO and you are in possession of a AW, all he can do is confiscate it at this time and allow you to fight it out in court.

So yes, the bottom line is also that all of these laws don't do anything to help reduce gun violence or crime because bad people don't follow the law anyway. It just makes it harder and harder for the common citizen to stay above the law. But they don't care about that, it's a huge drag net.

If you want to convert your 80% lower to featureless and apply numbers you can vol-reg it now: https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/a...ms/volreg.pdf?

If you don't want to you can take your chances by not conforming to any of the laws and hope you won't get caught. Or take your guns out of state. Or wait 'till DOJ lets all the ghost guns get registered without issue. But if you wait 'till this window of opportunity passes then you're totally out of compliance without a way to get in compliance. He suggested not to wait 'till the last minute on this.

Oh, and law enforcement is very unhappy with this burden having to know what's legal and what isn't. My biggest confusion is how can a LEO know when a firearm was built or bought and whether it needs to be registered in the central database or not - like pre-2014 long guns. We now know all AR's are now assault weapons and DO have to be registered. It's the old long guns and homebuilts that are featureless that fall under this gray area. The easiest solution is to simply have everything registered. Which is the exact opposite of why everybody built those ghost guns in the first place.

So we're back where we started.

[curtisfong]

Originally Posted by Browneye

Oh, and law enforcement is very unhappy with this burden having to know what's legal and what isn't.

Good thing they're helping us in the legislature and the courts whenever we try to fight these laws.

[nagzul]

There was no registration of long guns before 2014. How the hell are they going to know your rifle is a homebuild if it is done well?

I don't have any, but if I did, I sure wouldn't say I built it myself. In the interest of not seeming like an *******, I'd say I owned the rifle for years. It's mine and legal. Let him prove otherwise.They can run the numbers and it won't come up stolen. I think people worry too much sometimes.

80% handguns, might be a different story though. That gets run and doesn't come up , depending on the situation, could end badly.

If if had any 80% rifles, I wouldn't worry untill they tried to register ALL long guns. Or ban them.

They will probably drop that stink bomb on us with in 5 years. By than, we should know if trump got a second term and if we have any hope of appeals to SC.

But I've never had a gun inspected. My nightmare scenerio is an anti gun cop here in LA with a hard on for gun grabbing. That **** keeps me up at night.

[bababoris]

Does a 80% received have to be a. finished first and b. assembled into a firearm before a DOJ issued serial # can be requested? Or if hypnotically I have a bunch of unfinished 80s that I want to register with DOJ, can I just request X # of serial #s to have them engraved onto my unfinished lowers?

[VaderSpade]

Originally Posted by bababoris

Does a 80% received have to be a. finished first and b. assembled into a firearm before a DOJ issued serial # can be requested? Or if hypnotically I have a bunch of unfinished 80s that I want to register with DOJ, can I just request X # of serial #s to have them engraved onto my unfinished lowers?

If you wanted to register your builds as AWs they needed to be built into an operational firearm before Dec. 31, 2016. You have a year to register them.

From Jan. 1st 2017 on you can not build an AW. You may build NON AW guns just as before. The new law has not yet gone into effect. When it does you will need to get a number before you build. Since the law is not yet in effect it may change before the final bell.

[bababoris]

Originally Posted by VaderSpade

If you wanted to register your builds as AWs they needed to be built into an operational firearm before Dec. 31, 2016. You have a year to register them.

From Jan. 1st 2017 on you can not build an AW. You may build NON AW guns just as before. The new law has not yet gone into effect. When it does you will need to get a number before you build. Since the law is not yet in effect it may change before the final bell.

Thank you!

[krking51]

I have an 80% already built into featureless configuration. It has already been marked per federal rules. Will I need to request number from DOJ in the near future or is it good to go?

[VaderSpade]

Originally Posted by krking51

I have an 80% already built into featureless configuration. It has already been marked per federal rules. Will I need to request number from DOJ in the near future or is it good to go?

At this time the consensus is NO as long as it's already marked. I would not place a bet that it won't change before all is said and done.

[Browneye]

Originally Posted by VaderSpade

At this time the consensus is NO as long as it's already marked. I would not place a bet that it won't change before all is said and done.

My take as well.

Aren't you the one that engraves? Wanna do a lower?

[VaderSpade]

Originally Posted by Browneye

Aren't you the one that engraves? Wanna do a lower?

If it's still 80% I can engrave it.

[familyfarm]

I listened to the Michel Law webinar yesterday hoping to get a clear answer to this question (serial numbers added by non-licensed manufacturers), but they made it sound like both the AW requirements AND the Ghost Gun bill requirements would result in all home built firearms needing new DOJ numbers. Clearly the DOJ is not accepting any made up serials for "AWs." He mentioned no exemption for non-DOJ serials, even if the firearm is not an AW. Those requirements are in 2018 I think.

[Browneye]

Originally Posted by VaderSpade

If it's still 80% I can engrave it.

Stripped lower.

[Browneye]

Originally Posted by familyfarm

I listened to the Michel Law webinar yesterday hoping to get a clear answer to this question (serial numbers added by non-licensed manufacturers), but they made it sound like both the AW requirements AND the Ghost Gun bill requirements would result in all home built firearms needing new DOJ numbers. Clearly the DOJ is not accepting any made up serials for "AWs." He mentioned no exemption for non-DOJ serials, even if the firearm is not an AW. Those requirements are in 2018 I think.

I kind of thought this was what they were getting at as well, however it just doesn't make sense if the gun has already been legal. Either register it as a AW, or if it has a serial number on it (any legal serial number) before 7-2018 and it's not AW you don't have to do anything. OTOH unless it's a registered manufacturer then it has to get a DOJ number. So any home-built has to get a doj number and vol-reg it.
They want every gun in CA to be in the central database.

It's no wonder people aren't going to comply. [shrug]

[Ford8N]

Originally Posted by familyfarm

I listened to the Michel Law webinar yesterday hoping to get a clear answer to this question (serial numbers added by non-licensed manufacturers), but they made it sound like both the AW requirements AND the Ghost Gun bill requirements would result in all home built firearms needing new DOJ numbers. Clearly the DOJ is not accepting any made up serials for "AWs." He mentioned no exemption for non-DOJ serials, even if the firearm is not an AW. Those requirements are in 2018 I think.

And clearly another example that the DOJ has been reading Calguns and that long silly thread about what a person would put on their receiver when they register. The DOJ studies everything that is posted here.

[edwardm]

Originally Posted by Ford8N

And clearly another example that the DOJ has been reading Calguns and that long silly thread about what a person would put on their receiver when they register. The DOJ studies everything that is posted here.

Except in that same webinar, they also discuss the present 'workaround', which is volreg. Unclear if that works for AW issues, but it should work for some other things.

What's also unclear (after looking at recent threads) is how DOJ will react to pistols built pre-SSE 2.0 in a compliant manner, and then converted to semi-auto afterwards. They seem to be kicking back AR pistols, but the question is applicable to non-AR and non-AK stuff, i.e. 1911's that are pre-SSE 2.0. Seems a shame to waste the $20 on a volreg, only to be denied.

The only upside I see here is US v Haynes. The way AB-857 is written, it applies to "any person" and does not distinguish between that and lawful manufacturers or lawful possessors. They avoided this issue with AB-1135/SB-880 (likely by accident), but they failed to do so with AB-857.

[Browneye]

Per the latest Michal law webinar all homebuilt firearms will be required to be issued a DOJ serial number which enters it into the central database. User applied serial numbers are not compliant, although I would like to hear if anyone has tried to vol-reg one as of late - with their own number.

AW registration is an entirely different topic.

If you have a self-applied serial that is not in the database and a LEO challenges you and decides to confiscate it, you'll have to prove through DOJ that you can legally own it and get it properly serialized and registered. What a can of worms that would be huh? Figure you'll be hiring one of these lawyers to defend you.

The effort of the law is to have all firearms serialized and all entered into the central database.

CA DOJ is asking to have all firearms vol-reg'd. I can't imagine all those millions of long guns before 2014 are now going to come forward and register them. Some of this new law just doesn't make any sense to me at all.

[potguts]

Originally Posted by edwardm

...What's also unclear (after looking at recent threads) is how DOJ will react to pistols built pre-SSE 2.0 in a compliant manner, and then converted to semi-auto afterwards. They seem to be kicking back AR pistols, but the question is applicable to non-AR and non-AK stuff, i.e. 1911's that are pre-SSE 2.0. Seems a shame to waste the $20 on a volreg, only to be denied. ...

Are there documented instances of the DOJ refusing to volreg an AR pistol that was built as SSE and later converted to semi auto? I think I read one guy on here who said the DOJ responded to him and asked for proof that it was single shot, but I hadn't heard of straight out denials.

I would imagine there are many people who built 80% AR pistols as SSE in 2014, and subsequently converted them to semi auto, but didn't retain (or have now lost) proof or documentation of the build process. Now in order to go RAW, these people first have to request a serial from DOJ and engrave it. If the DOJ refuses or starts inquiring into the SSE validity, that could get very messy.

[9M62]

The made up requirement to get a DOJ serial number for simple AW registration single handily made me go fixed mag or featureless on every single rifle I own.

Their loss.

[edwardm]

Originally Posted by potguts

Are there documented instances of the DOJ refusing to volreg an AR pistol that was built as SSE and later converted to semi auto? I think I read one guy on here who said the DOJ responded to him and asked for proof that it was single shot, but I hadn't heard of straight out denials.

I would imagine there are many people who built 80% AR pistols as SSE in 2014, and subsequently converted them to semi auto, but didn't retain (or have now lost) proof or documentation of the build process. Now in order to go RAW, these people first have to request a serial from DOJ and engrave it. If the DOJ refuses or starts inquiring into the SSE validity, that could get very messy.

I have heard the same, but I can't get enough details out of anyone to reach any sort of reasonable conclusions - it's all guesswork right now. And it's not even necessarily about going RAW. It could be the path, or it could just be AB-857 + non-RAW status that people want.

It could indeed be messy, but I still think there is an escape hatch if, and only if, those in that pre-SSE 2.0 boat wait until the mandate kicks in, and then go with a DOJ-assigned number. DOJ has to assign the number and accept the registration into the central registry, and what they can do with the submitted information is limited.