Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #3521  
Old 07-11-2018, 12:47 PM
shaocaholica shaocaholica is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 668
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Data point time!

Got a single envelope from DOJ with some approval letters. Some interesting notes:

1)All of my submissions were separate. I ate $15 per gun just so a single gun would not hold up a batch.

2)The individual letters I got (in one envelope) all had a single gun on them, EXCEPT one letter had 2 guns that were submitted separately.

3)They stuffed 8 letters into one envelope so I guess that's efficient.

4)The letters covered submissions ranging from 5/16 through 6/26. So just counting the 6/26 submission, that's quite the quick turn around at only 2 weeks!

However, I still have submissions from within that same range that are still pending. Mostly stuff from manufacturers that were not in the drop down but also a few that were.
Reply With Quote
  #3522  
Old 07-11-2018, 1:09 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is online now
Low-Functioning Genius
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 5,092
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

It's been reported in another thread an FOIA request produced this. Looks like registration is an abject failure (even assuming that there a a lot of open registration applications out there). Remember, they expected and budgeted for 1,500,000 weapons from 250,000 owners:

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by doggie View Post
Someone must put an end to this endless bickering by posting the unadulterated indisputable facts and truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMACA_MFG View Post
Not checkers, not chess, its Jenga.
"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law." - U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez

Reply With Quote
  #3523  
Old 07-11-2018, 1:20 PM
The Tiger's Avatar
The Tiger The Tiger is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Mordor
Posts: 1,176
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Wow! Lot lower than I thought
__________________

NRA Benefactor
CRPA Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #3524  
Old 07-11-2018, 1:26 PM
The Tiger's Avatar
The Tiger The Tiger is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Mordor
Posts: 1,176
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Wait! If the number is that low what's taking so long? And how long would it take with 1 million guns
__________________

NRA Benefactor
CRPA Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #3525  
Old 07-11-2018, 1:34 PM
astro.dude astro.dude is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 35
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

FYI
I have received my approval paperwork some time back. I keep checking the cfars site periodically to see if the status changes from pending to something else ( like approved or gotcha or something). This morning system told me password expired. And the only way to set a new password, is to use the forgot password link and answer the security questions you selected when setting up your account. So make sure to write yours 2 security question responses down somewhere.
Reply With Quote
  #3526  
Old 07-11-2018, 1:37 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
I'm with stupid ☝️
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 14,281
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
It's been reported in another thread an FOIA request produced this. Looks like registration is an abject failure (even assuming that there a a lot of open registration applications out there). Remember, they expected and budgeted for 1,500,000 weapons from 250,000 owners:
Holy hell, that is REALLY low!!!

But that's only the number of "processed and approved" people and firearms, as of the day before deadline day. So that number will be substantially higher, perhaps by 2x to 5x.

Many (most?) people who submitted apps in the last 2 months are still waiting for approvals, and I would venture a guess that the overwhelming majority of registrants waited until the last month to register.

However, like you said, even if the final numbers are 5x or even 20x that number, the registration scheme was an abject failure.
__________________
DOJ has only processed 20% of 69k BBRAW apps. Your pending app will take ... "definitely between 2 weeks and 2 years." -Discogodfather

If DOJ visits you regarding your RAW application: Avoid opening your door if they don't have a warrant. Don't consent to a search. Don't "talk your way out of it". Assert your right to remain silent until you have a lawyer present.

2018 CA Legislation Quick-Reference & Statuses


Last edited by cockedandglocked; 07-11-2018 at 1:42 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #3527  
Old 07-11-2018, 1:40 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
I'm with stupid ☝️
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 14,281
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by astro.dude View Post
FYI
I have received my approval paperwork some time back. I keep checking the cfars site periodically to see if the status changes from pending to something else ( like approved or gotcha or something). This morning system told me password expired. And the only way to set a new password, is to use the forgot password link and answer the security questions you selected when setting up your account. So make sure to write yours 2 security question responses down somewhere.
Good advice - also, the system warns you in advance (2 weeks before, or so, I believe) that your password will expire, and if you change it before it expires then you don't have to go through the whole "forgot password" process.

So while you still have apps pending, I'd recommend logging in at least once a week to see if oyur password is set to expire soon. (And while you're there, check your CFARS order history to see if any guns were marked "incomplete").
__________________
DOJ has only processed 20% of 69k BBRAW apps. Your pending app will take ... "definitely between 2 weeks and 2 years." -Discogodfather

If DOJ visits you regarding your RAW application: Avoid opening your door if they don't have a warrant. Don't consent to a search. Don't "talk your way out of it". Assert your right to remain silent until you have a lawyer present.

2018 CA Legislation Quick-Reference & Statuses

Reply With Quote
  #3528  
Old 07-11-2018, 1:51 PM
Gnote's Avatar
Gnote Gnote is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: LA
Posts: 869
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
Holy hell, that is REALLY low!!!

But that's only the number of "processed and approved" people and firearms, as of the day before deadline day. So that number will be substantially higher, perhaps by 2x to 5x.

Many (most?) people who submitted apps in the last 2 months are still waiting for approvals, and I would venture a guess that the overwhelming majority of registrants waited until the last month to register.

However, like you said, even if the final numbers are 5x or even 20x that number, the registration scheme was an abject failure.
Agreed cockedandglocked. In a way, the DOJ is being disingenuous I think by splitting hairs and defining what registration means. They should have answered how many individual and primary registrants there were up to the deadline and as of the deadline how many total weapons were submitted by all said registrants.
Reply With Quote
  #3529  
Old 07-11-2018, 1:55 PM
Dirk Tungsten's Avatar
Dirk Tungsten Dirk Tungsten is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: the basement
Posts: 1,029
iTrader: 34 / 100%
Default

The person or organization submitting that PRAR should have asked how many total applications have been received through 7/1/18. That would have given us a better idea of what the true numbers are.
Reply With Quote
  #3530  
Old 07-11-2018, 2:18 PM
Sig556swat Sig556swat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Bay area
Posts: 420
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

So there is a few million new felons in California.
Reply With Quote
  #3531  
Old 07-11-2018, 2:28 PM
Xerxes Xerxes is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,475
iTrader: 61 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
It's been reported in another thread an FOIA request produced this. Looks like registration is an abject failure (even assuming that there a a lot of open registration applications out there). Remember, they expected and budgeted for 1,500,000 weapons from 250,000 owners:


Dang, as of June 30th only 6,213 individuals and 13,159 firearms registered.

I was guessing on 30% compliance (~500,000) based upon the last two big registrations.

Now if you subtract the 6,212 Calgun members who used this thread to help them with registration that leaves only ONE person who has been successful navigating through the registration process on there own.

So .... I do remember on some of the mini AW registrations (the added 5, the SKS detachable magazine, the 50 Cal, and one or two more I forgot the details) had a low <2.5% reported compliance rate but they were not well known-advertised and easily overlooked/missed by owners of these firearms. The last big one had something ~>20% compliance. So now with Internet, Facebook, Youtube, God Google and the whole shebang we are at <1% compliance. Either something was wrong with the process, or the state counter ran out of government employee fingers and toes to count with and lost count (good excuse to hire more government workers so they can have more fingers and toes to count with), or this is a huge act of quiet civil disobedience. I am too much of a coward for the latter as I wish to keep my 2A rights and not give an excuse to the gun-grabbers.

Looks like the state will have a good revenue stream to tap and another whole big bureaucracy to buildup and appoint a czar and a bunch of loyal Democrats for patronage to check all those semi-automatics sold since 2001 and fining anyone with a AW $10,000 per firearm. Should be able to raise $15 Billion this way and put a big dent in the over bloated and jacked up price bullet train that all the Dems are using to enrich themselves with. Maybe that was the plan all along back in 2001-its a rather clever scheme I might add.
Reply With Quote
  #3532  
Old 07-11-2018, 2:40 PM
shaocaholica shaocaholica is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 668
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

The next FOIA request should ask for names, addresses and weapon details just to see if DOJ will do it. Better one of ours does it first than not.
Reply With Quote
  #3533  
Old 07-11-2018, 3:02 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
I'm with stupid ☝️
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 14,281
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

I suspect that the failure at getting any substantial numbers to register was due to a number of different reasons, probably broken down roughly as follows:
  • 33% did not even know about Registration, or simply forgot all about it during the 13 months between the law passing and the registration opening.
  • 33% were people who knew about it, but never once actually considered registering.
  • 17% were people who originally planned to register, but then DOJ's draconian regulations changed their minds.
  • 15% were people who tried to register, but gave up after they realized how obscenely difficult and complicated it was.
  • 1% were people who tried to register, but "OMG is it June 30th already?!? AHHHH the website isn't working!"
  • 0.99% successfully registered.
  • 0.01% successfully submitted registrations for something they shouldn't have, that ended in rejection and/or confiscation and/or arrest

In other words, DOJ has nobody to blame but themselves; for over-complicating the process and taking away most of the benefits that would've come with doing so.
__________________
DOJ has only processed 20% of 69k BBRAW apps. Your pending app will take ... "definitely between 2 weeks and 2 years." -Discogodfather

If DOJ visits you regarding your RAW application: Avoid opening your door if they don't have a warrant. Don't consent to a search. Don't "talk your way out of it". Assert your right to remain silent until you have a lawyer present.

2018 CA Legislation Quick-Reference & Statuses


Last edited by cockedandglocked; 07-11-2018 at 3:12 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #3534  
Old 07-11-2018, 3:03 PM
bigbully bigbully is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Whittier, CA
Posts: 1,883
iTrader: 36 / 100%
Default

I wonder what percent of those firearms is actually AR15s since those were the easiest to make compliant. Also, how many are shotguns that really should never have been part of the registration.
Reply With Quote
  #3535  
Old 07-11-2018, 4:04 PM
mshill's Avatar
mshill mshill is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,713
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
I suspect that the failure at getting any substantial numbers to register was due to a number of different reasons, probably broken down roughly as follows:
  • 33% did not even know about Registration, or simply forgot all about it during the 13 months between the law passing and the registration opening.
Based on my experience I would have put this number more like 70%. A vast majority of gun owners in this state don't pay any attention to what's going on around them (eg. situational awareness) let alone what is going on in the capitol.
__________________
Quote:
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.
Reply With Quote
  #3536  
Old 07-11-2018, 4:30 PM
beanz2's Avatar
beanz2 beanz2 is online now
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 6,397
iTrader: 34 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shaocaholica View Post
Data point time!

Got a single envelope from DOJ with some approval letters. Some interesting notes:

1)All of my submissions were separate. I ate $15 per gun just so a single gun would not hold up a batch.

2)The individual letters I got (in one envelope) all had a single gun on them, EXCEPT one letter had 2 guns that were submitted separately.

3)They stuffed 8 letters into one envelope so I guess that's efficient.

4)The letters covered submissions ranging from 5/16 through 6/26. So just counting the 6/26 submission, that's quite the quick turn around at only 2 weeks!

However, I still have submissions from within that same range that are still pending. Mostly stuff from manufacturers that were not in the drop down but also a few that were.
Snap. What a smart move. I thought about doing that, but at the end, me Mr. Tightwad prevailed and registered the guns in 4 batches.
__________________

The wife will be pissed, but Jesus always forgives.
Reply With Quote
  #3537  
Old 07-11-2018, 4:36 PM
BagelBites's Avatar
BagelBites BagelBites is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 237
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xerxes View Post
Dang, as of June 30th only 6,213 individuals and 13,159 firearms registered.

I was guessing on 30% compliance (~500,000) based upon the last two big registrations.

Now if you subtract the 6,212 Calgun members who used this thread to help them with registration that leaves only ONE person who has been successful navigating through the registration process on there own.
lol!
Reply With Quote
  #3538  
Old 07-11-2018, 6:04 PM
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,680
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
CA PEN 30900(b)(1): https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...ctionNum=30900.
Quote:
(b) (1) Any person who, from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2016, inclusive, lawfully possessed an assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine, as defined in Section 30515, including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be readily removed from the firearm with the use of a tool, shall register the firearm before July 1, 2018, but not before the effective date of the regulations adopted pursuant to paragraph (5), with the department pursuant to those procedures that the department may establish by regulation pursuant to paragraph (5).
11 CCR 5469: https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Doc...ta=(sc.Default)
Quote:
Any person who, from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2016, inclusive, lawfully possessed an assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine, as defined in Penal Code section 30515, including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be readily removed from the firearm with the use of a tool (commonly referred to as a bullet-button weapon) must register the firearm before July 1, 2018.
OAG Website: https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/bullet-b...assault-weapon
Quote:
REMINDER: ASSAULT WEAPON REGISTRATION ENDS AT 11: 59: 59 P.M. ON JUNE 30, 2018.
All applications for assault weapon registration must be submitted by this deadline. No applications will be accepted thereafter (see Penal Code section 30900(b)(1) and California Code of Regulations, title 11, division 5, chapter 39, section 5469).
According to the letter,
Quote:
An application being processed is not considered registered.
OOOOps.

DOJ appears to have no (ZERO) legal authority to approve anything after 06/30/2018.
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.”
"Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool."
"The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first."
Reply With Quote
  #3539  
Old 07-11-2018, 6:37 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
I'm with stupid ☝️
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 14,281
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dvrjon View Post
CA PEN 30900(b)(1): https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...ctionNum=30900.
11 CCR 5469: https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Doc...ta=(sc.Default)

OAG Website: https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/bullet-b...assault-weapon
According to the letter,

OOOOps.

DOJ appears to have no (ZERO) legal authority to approve anything after 06/30/2018.
I've been saying from the beginning - we're at their mercy, they have no obligations to do anything. Luckily it appears they're playing nice about that so far, and I don't think the law forbids them from issuing registrations after 7/1, and also DOJ takes the position that the word of law doesn't apply to them anyways.

They also, startlingly, had no legal requirement to approve anything at all, ever. Frankly I'm shocked they didn't play that game.
__________________
DOJ has only processed 20% of 69k BBRAW apps. Your pending app will take ... "definitely between 2 weeks and 2 years." -Discogodfather

If DOJ visits you regarding your RAW application: Avoid opening your door if they don't have a warrant. Don't consent to a search. Don't "talk your way out of it". Assert your right to remain silent until you have a lawyer present.

2018 CA Legislation Quick-Reference & Statuses


Last edited by cockedandglocked; 07-11-2018 at 6:48 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #3540  
Old 07-11-2018, 6:45 PM
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,680
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
Yep, I've been saying that from the beginning - we're at their mercy. Luckily it appears they're playing nice about that so far.
They have no legal authority under statute or their owns regs to register anything after 06/30/2018. The registration must be done before 07/01/2018. Applications don’t count, and now they’ve issued a letter stating an “in process” application is not registered. If they issue a registration after 6/30/2018, they are violating the statute, and undermining their regulatory scheme they sold to the judge.

The PRA response is damning.
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.”
"Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool."
"The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first."
Reply With Quote
  #3541  
Old 07-11-2018, 6:47 PM
shaocaholica shaocaholica is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 668
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

It's unrealistic to have all applications processed by the submission deadline regardless if its firearms related or not. There's no legal or otherwise precedent for that.
Reply With Quote
  #3542  
Old 07-11-2018, 6:57 PM
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,680
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shaocaholica View Post
It's unrealistic to have all applications processed by the submission deadline regardless if its firearms related or not. There's no legal or otherwise precedent for that.
the statute doesn’t set a submission deadline; it sets a registration deadline.

The DOJ regs affirm the registration deadline.

The DOJ letter clearly shows that submitted is not registered.

There’s a lot of precedent against government contravening statute with policy.

Expect a really quick change to the regs separating submission from registration and allowing what they’re doing.
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.”
"Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool."
"The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first."

Last edited by Dvrjon; 07-11-2018 at 7:01 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #3543  
Old 07-11-2018, 6:59 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
I'm with stupid ☝️
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 14,281
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dvrjon View Post
the statute doesn’t set a submission deadline; it sets a registration deadline.

The DOJ regs affirm the registration deadline.

The DOJ letter clearly shows that submitted is not registered.

There’s a lot of precedent against government contravening statute with policy.
The deadline is for us, it says WE must register before 7/1. There are no statutory deadlines on when DOJ must stop processing and issuing them. Obviously they understand that, as they've issued many registrations after 7/1.
__________________
DOJ has only processed 20% of 69k BBRAW apps. Your pending app will take ... "definitely between 2 weeks and 2 years." -Discogodfather

If DOJ visits you regarding your RAW application: Avoid opening your door if they don't have a warrant. Don't consent to a search. Don't "talk your way out of it". Assert your right to remain silent until you have a lawyer present.

2018 CA Legislation Quick-Reference & Statuses

Reply With Quote
  #3544  
Old 07-11-2018, 7:02 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
I'm with stupid ☝️
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 14,281
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

To me, the letter pretty clearly is saying that their count does not include guns that weren't registered before 6/30 simply because they don't know how many will be registered after that date. It does not, to me, imply that no weapons will be registered after 7/1, proven by the fact that dozens of people have reported theirs being registered after 7/1.
__________________
DOJ has only processed 20% of 69k BBRAW apps. Your pending app will take ... "definitely between 2 weeks and 2 years." -Discogodfather

If DOJ visits you regarding your RAW application: Avoid opening your door if they don't have a warrant. Don't consent to a search. Don't "talk your way out of it". Assert your right to remain silent until you have a lawyer present.

2018 CA Legislation Quick-Reference & Statuses

Reply With Quote
  #3545  
Old 07-11-2018, 7:05 PM
shaocaholica shaocaholica is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 668
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Ok so if you want to play the semantics game then all submissions are registrations until rejected. They said it themselves.
Reply With Quote
  #3546  
Old 07-11-2018, 7:19 PM
solidfreshdope solidfreshdope is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 599
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shaocaholica View Post
Ok so if you want to play the semantics game then all submissions are registrations until rejected. They said it themselves.


Technically what they say would mean that submissions are not considered registered until they are approved / send letter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
__________________
Welcome to the United Snakes.
Reply With Quote
  #3547  
Old 07-11-2018, 7:39 PM
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,680
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Look. What’s going on appears inconsistent with the requirements of the language of the statute and regs, since, in the words of DOJ, “An application that is being processed is not considered ‘registered’,” and the deadline for registration has passed

It’s not to DOJ’s benefit to shut down, so they won’t.

And,

It’s not to the gun community’s benefit to protest the advantage it provides, so they won’t.

But, this continues to be a monumental Cluster f....
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.”
"Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool."
"The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first."
Reply With Quote
  #3548  
Old 07-11-2018, 7:42 PM
DoctorLove DoctorLove is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: San Diego
Posts: 289
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I received an incomplete notice for my anderson am15. the picture i submitted clearly shows "am15" on the receiver, yet the message i received reads something like "based on your photos, the model is "mp-15". please correct your application." Should i just change it to the incorrect model?
Reply With Quote
  #3549  
Old 07-11-2018, 8:04 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
I'm with stupid ☝️
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 14,281
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dvrjon View Post
Look. What’s going on appears inconsistent with the requirements of the language of the statute and regs, since, in the words of DOJ, “An application that is being processed is not considered ‘registered’,” and the deadline for registration has passed

It’s not to DOJ’s benefit to shut down, so they won’t.

And,

It’s not to the gun community’s benefit to protest the advantage it provides, so they won’t.

But, this continues to be a monumental Cluster f....
I would agree with those points, especially the last one hahaha

DOJ knows they'll face a losing lawsuit if they deny registration for people who sent in their apps before the deadline (and in some cases, many months before the deadline)

I submitted mine in early April, so if my app gets denied because they dragged their feet for 3 months, I'll be the first one in line to be a plaintiff, and considering my apps have zero errors and many people who submitted after me got their letters before July, I'd say DOJ would stand zero chance of winning that lawsuit
__________________
DOJ has only processed 20% of 69k BBRAW apps. Your pending app will take ... "definitely between 2 weeks and 2 years." -Discogodfather

If DOJ visits you regarding your RAW application: Avoid opening your door if they don't have a warrant. Don't consent to a search. Don't "talk your way out of it". Assert your right to remain silent until you have a lawyer present.

2018 CA Legislation Quick-Reference & Statuses


Last edited by cockedandglocked; 07-11-2018 at 8:08 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #3550  
Old 07-11-2018, 8:42 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 680
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
Good advice - also, the system warns you in advance (2 weeks before, or so, I believe) that your password will expire, and if you change it before it expires then you don't have to go through the whole "forgot password" process.

So while you still have apps pending, I'd recommend logging in at least once a week to see if oyur password is set to expire soon. (And while you're there, check your CFARS order history to see if any guns were marked "incomplete").
Any idea how long the password is good for (before the password expire flag is set)? 2 months? 3 months? Or?
Reply With Quote
  #3551  
Old 07-11-2018, 8:43 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 680
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shaocaholica View Post
Data point time!

Got a single envelope from DOJ with some approval letters. Some interesting notes:

1)All of my submissions were separate. I ate $15 per gun just so a single gun would not hold up a batch.

2)The individual letters I got (in one envelope) all had a single gun on them, EXCEPT one letter had 2 guns that were submitted separately.

3)They stuffed 8 letters into one envelope so I guess that's efficient.

4)The letters covered submissions ranging from 5/16 through 6/26. So just counting the 6/26 submission, that's quite the quick turn around at only 2 weeks!

However, I still have submissions from within that same range that are still pending. Mostly stuff from manufacturers that were not in the drop down but also a few that were.
Congratulations! I wish I could post something remotely like what you just posted.
Reply With Quote
  #3552  
Old 07-11-2018, 8:46 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
I'm with stupid ☝️
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 14,281
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
Any idea how long the password is good for (before the password expire flag is set)? 2 months? 3 months? Or?
2 or 3 months, I forget which. Kind of ridiculous that they're that paranoid about our passwords while simultaneously sharing all our info on accident with unauthorized people multiple times.
__________________
DOJ has only processed 20% of 69k BBRAW apps. Your pending app will take ... "definitely between 2 weeks and 2 years." -Discogodfather

If DOJ visits you regarding your RAW application: Avoid opening your door if they don't have a warrant. Don't consent to a search. Don't "talk your way out of it". Assert your right to remain silent until you have a lawyer present.

2018 CA Legislation Quick-Reference & Statuses

Reply With Quote
  #3553  
Old 07-11-2018, 8:50 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 680
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
2 or 3 months, I forget which. Kind of ridiculous that they're that paranoid about our passwords while simultaneously sharing all our info on accident with unauthorized people multiple times.
This whole process has been a yuuge cluster****.
Reply With Quote
  #3554  
Old 07-11-2018, 9:13 PM
Ford8N's Avatar
Ford8N Ford8N is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Northern Rhovanion
Posts: 5,937
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
This whole process has been a yuuge cluster****.
Yup, also the data collected in the registration is wrong. Maybe mistakes were made by the software in the drop down menu and by the DOJ personnel who checked it. Any attorney worth their salt will be able to shred this registration scheme.
Reply With Quote
  #3555  
Old 07-11-2018, 9:17 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is online now
Low-Functioning Genius
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 5,092
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
Any idea how long the password is good for (before the password expire flag is set)? 2 months? 3 months? Or?
For me it was 6 months.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by doggie View Post
Someone must put an end to this endless bickering by posting the unadulterated indisputable facts and truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMACA_MFG View Post
Not checkers, not chess, its Jenga.
"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law." - U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez

Reply With Quote
  #3556  
Old 07-11-2018, 9:31 PM
G-forceJunkie's Avatar
G-forceJunkie G-forceJunkie is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: SCV, So. Cal
Posts: 4,292
iTrader: 28 / 100%
Default

I would take a super clear hig res close up of the engraving and submit it. The paperwork should match the engraving.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctorLove View Post
I received an incomplete notice for my anderson am15. the picture i submitted clearly shows "am15" on the receiver, yet the message i received reads something like "based on your photos, the model is "mp-15". please correct your application." Should i just change it to the incorrect model?
Reply With Quote
  #3557  
Old 07-11-2018, 9:54 PM
broscheanu's Avatar
broscheanu broscheanu is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Fremont / Santa Clara
Posts: 26
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default CA DOJ Withdraws Proposed Regulations Expanding Application of Assault Weapons Def.

Got this from NRA this evening:
On Monday the California Department of Justice, Bureau of Firearms (“CA DOJ”) officially withdrew the proposed regulations that would have expanded the improperly adopted “assault weapon” definitions, to apply in all circumstances. This withdrawal comes after NRA and CRPA’s joint opposition letter, and the day before the Office of Administrative Law’s deadline to render a decision.

This isn’t the first time CA DOJ has withdrawn a proposed regulation. It was previously forced to withdraw its illegal “assault weapon” registration regulations following NRA and CRPA’s joint-opposition, regulations which were later officially rejected by OAL. Those regulations are now the subject of a lawsuit titled Villanueva v. Becerra, which challenges the regulations as a violation of California’s Administrative Procedures Act and will soon be briefed before the California Court of Appeal.

This latest withdrawal of a proposed regulation expanding the application of DOJ’s illegally adopted regulations is welcome news for all California gun owners. At the very least, the withdraw shows CA DOJ does not get a free pass to adopt regulations outside the scope of its authority.

Continue to check your inbox and the California Stand and Fight web page for updates on issues impacting your Second Amendment rights and hunting heritage in California.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #3558  
Old 07-11-2018, 9:59 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is online now
Low-Functioning Genius
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 5,092
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by broscheanu View Post

"This latest withdrawal of a proposed regulation expanding the application of DOJ’s illegally adopted regulations is welcome news for all California gun owners. At the very least, the withdraw shows CA DOJ does not get a free pass to adopt regulations outside the scope of its authority. "
That's fine and I want it to be true but they withdrew the old regs and we all celebrated last year and then a few days latter they were back in and approved shortly after that, so.............

It's interesting to remember that the difference between the second and third round of reg submissions in 2017 were basically the same clause that was resubmitted as the newer 2018 regulations- about the "pursuant" SB880/SB23 language.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by doggie View Post
Someone must put an end to this endless bickering by posting the unadulterated indisputable facts and truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMACA_MFG View Post
Not checkers, not chess, its Jenga.
"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law." - U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez

Reply With Quote
  #3559  
Old 07-11-2018, 10:02 PM
bigbully bigbully is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Whittier, CA
Posts: 1,883
iTrader: 36 / 100%
Default

Reply With Quote
  #3560  
Old 07-11-2018, 10:07 PM
Syntax Error's Avatar
Syntax Error Syntax Error is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: West LA
Posts: 2,850
iTrader: 59 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by broscheanu View Post
Got this from NRA this evening:
On Monday the California Department of Justice, Bureau of Firearms (“CA DOJ”) officially withdrew the proposed regulations that would have expanded the improperly adopted “assault weapon” definitions, to apply in all circumstances. This withdrawal comes after NRA and CRPA’s joint opposition letter, and the day before the Office of Administrative Law’s deadline to render a decision.

This isn’t the first time CA DOJ has withdrawn a proposed regulation. It was previously forced to withdraw its illegal “assault weapon” registration regulations following NRA and CRPA’s joint-opposition, regulations which were later officially rejected by OAL. Those regulations are now the subject of a lawsuit titled Villanueva v. Becerra, which challenges the regulations as a violation of California’s Administrative Procedures Act and will soon be briefed before the California Court of Appeal.

This latest withdrawal of a proposed regulation expanding the application of DOJ’s illegally adopted regulations is welcome news for all California gun owners. At the very least, the withdraw shows CA DOJ does not get a free pass to adopt regulations outside the scope of its authority.

Continue to check your inbox and the California Stand and Fight web page for updates on issues impacting your Second Amendment rights and hunting heritage in California.
I couldn't find anything super clear on these "proposed regulations" that were just withdrawn, but of course, CA DOJ can just come out with new regulations tomorrow.

I don't think it means we can suddenly start having normal mag releases on our RAWs, which is what the law should allow us to do as all they've changed was adding the bullet button as another evil feature on a gun. That would be too easy.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:36 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.