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
  #1  
Old 05-14-2019, 9:24 PM
Tablespoon Tablespoon is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 5
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default DOJ requiring rifles be over 30" to register as BBAR

Hi Everyone, So I registered my BBAR Tavor last July and I received this email from the DOJ:

Your firearm must be 30 inches in length to be in compliance with CCR, title 11, Division 5, section 5471(x). You may permanently attach a longer muzzle device to meet this requirement.Once you have made the changes, resubmit a clear, close up photo of the muzzle device meets the barrel. Refer to Penal Code section 30515(a)(2) at the following link https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...5.&lawCode=PEN

Any one else get this message from the DOJ? I told them that they did not require the manufacturer import the rifle in this configuration when I purchased it back in 2016, so why do I need to pin it now? They did not answer me, they just replied with the exact same message again.

So I did more research and sent them a new message (I have not heard back yet). First, from their own FAQ section:

33. What changes can I make to my assault weapon after I register it?

The AB 1135/SB 880 assault weapons regulations created by DOJ state that the bullet button style release must remain on the firearm. The owner should not shorten a rifle barrel below 16” or the overall length under 26” (Penal Code 33210 and Penal Code 17170). The owner should not shorten a shotgun barrel below 18” or the overall length under 26” (Penal Code § 33210 and Penal Code § 17180). See the “key terms” section of the AB 1135/SB 880 assault weapons regulations.

So why does the rifle need to be 30" now but not after registration!

Second, I told them that in my opinion title 11, Division 5, section 5471(x) is stating a characteristic that makes a rifle an "assault weapon" and it would need to be registered, and that is what i'm doing. It does not say that a BBAW must be >30".

Would love to hear what you guys think. Am I off base? Or can the DOJ not read their own law?

Thanks
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-14-2019, 9:28 PM
SkyHawk's Avatar
SkyHawk SkyHawk is offline
Front Toward Enemy 🔫
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nakatomi Plaza - 30th floor
Posts: 13,068
iTrader: 152 / 100%
Default

It is not legal until it is registered. It would not have ever been legal were it not for this new registration window, but it has to be registered first. And the only feature that the window was opened up for was a BULLET BUTTON and any features that were legal on a bullet button gun before the new AW law went into effect. A centerfire rifle less than 30" WAS NOT LEGAL unless it was an old school registered AW.

Honestly, I am not even sure how you bought that gun in CA. It is legal in other states but not CA. If you moved here with it, that was not legal.

I would fix it and resubmit then you can change it later when it will be legal, after they confirm your registration is complete. And do not give them any more guff about it, just be quiet as a mouse and do it. They are right, you are wrong and you have an illegal AW right now.

You’re lucky they haven’t shoulder rolled in through the front door yet. And I’m only half joking when I say that.

Last edited by SkyHawk; 05-15-2019 at 8:13 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-14-2019, 11:27 PM
AtlasPRK's Avatar
AtlasPRK AtlasPRK is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 41
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyHawk View Post
You’re lucky they haven’t shoulder rolled in through the front door yet. And I’m only half joking when I say that.
This ^^^

The rifle has to be 30" or longer to register; after registration, as a legal AW, it has to be 26" or longer. The fact they are allowing you to add length and correct the app is a blessing in disguise - others have had their firearms confiscated for similar technical violations on their applications.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-15-2019, 7:48 AM
Dirk Tungsten's Avatar
Dirk Tungsten Dirk Tungsten is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: the basement
Posts: 1,251
iTrader: 34 / 100%
Default

All semi-auto centerfire rifles have ALWAYS been required to be 30" or longer in CA. Well, maybe not always, but for a very long time. Take the advice of the gentlemen posting above me.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-15-2019, 10:04 AM
Syntax Error's Avatar
Syntax Error Syntax Error is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: 캘리포니아인민공화국
Posts: 3,437
iTrader: 64 / 100%
Default

You've effectively submitted proof to the DOJ when you attempted to register an illegal "assault weapon" as your rifle was under 30". This was always the case prior to the 2016 AW law, of which having a rifle under 30" OAL was an "assault weapon" feature. This kind of thing was getting knock-and-talks back when RAW registration process was in effect, so you're very lucky you're just getting a kickback email and a request to fix your gun.

Fix. Your. Gun.

Don't submit photo evidence to CFARS of an illegally-configured gun, which it was when you attempted to register your Tavor which was under 30" and demonstrably so.

You can unpin the flash hider only after you get your rifle confirmed as a RAW as long as the rifle is overall over 26".
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-15-2019, 1:52 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,030
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirk Tungsten View Post
All semi-auto centerfire rifles have ALWAYS been required to be 30" or longer in CA. Well, maybe not always, but for a very long time. Take the advice of the gentlemen posting above me.
The 2000 AW registration allowed bullpups with OAL <30" as long as the barrel was >16", a loophole that was remedied with the 2016 BBAW registration.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-15-2019, 4:28 PM
mej16489 mej16489 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,308
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

It used to be that an unpinned muzzle device could be included in the overall length calculation. When they made the regulations for registration they came up with a legally unsubstantiated reg that required the muzzle device to be pinned if it was being included in the overall length calculation.

When I registered mine I included a note indicating that the muzzle device was pinned. Basically the regulations made allot of bull-pups illegal to register even though the were perfectly legal to own; but were also required to be registered due to evil features.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-16-2019, 8:55 AM
Syntax Error's Avatar
Syntax Error Syntax Error is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: 캘리포니아인민공화국
Posts: 3,437
iTrader: 64 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
The 2000 AW registration allowed bullpups with OAL <30" as long as the barrel was >16", a loophole that was remedied with the 2016 BBAW registration.
You mean for purposes for registration for the 2000 AW law, correct?

Because all semi-auto centerfire rifles regardless of normal rifle or bullpup design had to be over 30" OAL in order for it not to be an unregistered "assault weapon", a felony.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-16-2019, 8:57 AM
Syntax Error's Avatar
Syntax Error Syntax Error is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: 캘리포니아인민공화국
Posts: 3,437
iTrader: 64 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mej16489 View Post
It used to be that an unpinned muzzle device could be included in the overall length calculation. When they made the regulations for registration they came up with a legally unsubstantiated reg that required the muzzle device to be pinned if it was being included in the overall length calculation.

When I registered mine I included a note indicating that the muzzle device was pinned. Basically the regulations made allot of bull-pups illegal to register even though the were perfectly legal to own; but were also required to be registered due to evil features.

Also note that you can mention in CFARS that your muzzle device is pinned, and they've never asked for photographic evidence of said muzzle device pinning, so take it for what you will.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-16-2019, 12:08 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,030
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Syntax Error View Post
You mean for purposes for registration for the 2000 AW law, correct? - Yes

Because all semi-auto centerfire rifles regardless of normal rifle or bullpup design had to be over 30" OAL in order for it not to be an unregistered "assault weapon", a felony.
Further, I don't recall a requirement for the 2000 AW registration that the AW had to have OAL > 30". It didn't trip up the application I submitted on my bullpup. In fact, the 2000 registration process for my bullpup was lightning fast (1 month turnaround from submission of registration application to receipt of registration letter) compared to the 2016 BBAW process.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 05-16-2019, 12:22 PM
SkyHawk's Avatar
SkyHawk SkyHawk is offline
Front Toward Enemy 🔫
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nakatomi Plaza - 30th floor
Posts: 13,068
iTrader: 152 / 100%
Default

The reason that <30" OAL semi auto centerfire was allowed during the 2000 AW reg, is because that is precisely one of the new characteristics of SB23 passed in 1999 which created PC12276.1 and made any such rifle an AW.

Before that, your <30" OAL centerfire semiauto rifle was perfectly legal. When that passed, you had to register those. So of course those rifles were accepted, it was the whole point of the registration.

Quote:
12276.1 (a) Notwithstanding Penal Code section 12276, “assault weapon” shall also mean the following:
Rifles
(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of
the following:
(A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon.
(B) A thumbhole stock.
(C) A folding or telescoping stock.
(D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(E) A flash suppressor.
(F) A forward pistol grip.

(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10
rounds.

(3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches.
It is pretty unbelievable that OP sent pics of a Post-1999 AW to DOJ and then tried to argue with them about it
__________________
.


Last edited by SkyHawk; 05-16-2019 at 1:03 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-16-2019, 1:48 PM
Syntax Error's Avatar
Syntax Error Syntax Error is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: 캘리포니아인민공화국
Posts: 3,437
iTrader: 64 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyHawk View Post
It is pretty unbelievable that OP sent pics of a Post-1999 AW to DOJ and then tried to argue with them about it
It's like trying to register a gun that didn't have a bullet button, which some people have gotten dinged for.

OP is lucky he didn't get a knock on the door. Just fix the application with an over 30" OAL gun and move on. Don't even argue about it.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-16-2019, 2:06 PM
BONECUTTER BONECUTTER is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 1,843
iTrader: 21 / 100%
Default

I had someone ask if I could put a pin and weld "mark" on a muzzle device.

I said no.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-16-2019, 2:44 PM
Steve1968LS2's Avatar
Steve1968LS2 Steve1968LS2 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 8,451
iTrader: 75 / 99%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirk Tungsten View Post
All semi-auto centerfire rifles have ALWAYS been required to be 30" or longer in CA. Well, maybe not always, but for a very long time. Take the advice of the gentlemen posting above me.
They had to be 30-inches before but the extension didn't have to be permanent..

And example would be a PS90 with the fake can attached to make it 30 inches.. that can could be held with a set screw before.

Now it has to be permanent..

Right?

Not sure CA laws could be any more confusing for people..
__________________
“There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.”
― Ayn Rand

Member: Patron member NRA, lifetime member SAF, CRPA, Guardian Front Sight
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-16-2019, 4:08 PM
code_blue's Avatar
code_blue code_blue is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Sack-O-Tomatos
Posts: 3,199
iTrader: 124 / 100%
Default

Just add spacers to the buttpad to achieve the correct length.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 06-01-2019, 10:48 AM
Tablespoon Tablespoon is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 5
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Thanks for all your feedback! No word back from DOJ yet...but I think steve1968 nailed it. No muzzle devices were pinned to reach overall length prior to 2017. That's how all bullpups were imported and sold with bullet buttons, to my knowledge. I think some folding stock rifles did the same. So like some of you have said, evidently they changed the rules for this latest registration and want us to pin the muzzle devise for the new rules. That's BS! your telling me ca doj had no idea how gun manufacturers and retailers were bringing these in? Now it's my responsibility to change the gun?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06-01-2019, 11:02 AM
Tablespoon Tablespoon is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 5
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Mej16489, yes exactly! Doj allowed a non pinned muzzle device to count tward oal in the 2000-2017 time period. Now they have changed their mind and made it my problem. This is unreasonable, even by their standards. I don't want trouble obviously, but come on!
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 06-01-2019, 11:27 AM
G-forceJunkie's Avatar
G-forceJunkie G-forceJunkie is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: SCV, So. Cal
Posts: 4,635
iTrader: 33 / 100%
Default

Hahha, you actualy think this was an error or mistake? They know exactaly what they did and did it on purpose. Caught you off guard and made you send them evidence of a felony, didn't it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tablespoon View Post
your telling me ca doj had no idea how gun manufacturers and retailers were bringing these in? Now it's my responsibility to change the gun?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 06-01-2019, 11:28 AM
morthrane morthrane is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 805
iTrader: 31 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tablespoon View Post
Mej16489, yes exactly! Doj allowed a non pinned muzzle device to count tward oal in the 2000-2017 time period. Now they have changed their mind and made it my problem. This is unreasonable, even by their standards. I don't want trouble obviously, but come on!
The entire thing is pretty ugly, and sucks that you got trapped in the classic "I am altering the deal. Pray I do not alter it any further."

I was pretty sure that the muzzle device did not have to be pinned in CA-- having run rifles with muzzle devices to make up OAL in the shortest folded position-- but perhaps worth consideration: the feds also maintain that non-permanent muzzle devices do not count towards OAL.

Always hate to say it, but maybe this is a time to start contacting lawyers. IANAL but it sure reeks of some ex post facto bs...
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 06-01-2019, 12:10 PM
Tablespoon Tablespoon is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 5
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Perfect quote for this situation! Thanks for the levity. Im ginuinly baffled as to what crime i could be charged with.
I purchased a CA version of the Tavor before 2017 from a ca FFL. I registered by the 7/1/ deadline. What law did I violate. I'm not financially able to take this to court, but don't we have lawyers in this state currently trying to prove this law unreasonable?
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 06-01-2019, 10:08 PM
beanz2's Avatar
beanz2 beanz2 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 7,575
iTrader: 34 / 100%
Default

I had my Tavor barrel extensions pinned and welded too. Fortunately they came out relatively easily with some grinding and dremeling after I got the letter.

I can't see how those regulations from DOJ could have withstood the scrutiny of a court if someone were caught and charged. But, pinning and welding those extensions cost way less than an hour of my attorney's time. so...


.
__________________

The wife will be pissed, but Jesus always forgives.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 06-02-2019, 1:20 AM
Tablespoon Tablespoon is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 5
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Yeah, probably the route I'll be forced to go. Just chaps my ***. And I still don't know what statute they are using. Obviously a statute that was not in force for 16 years. Totally crazy.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 06-02-2019, 9:31 AM
mej16489 mej16489 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,308
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by morthrane View Post
but perhaps worth consideration: the feds also maintain that non-permanent muzzle devices do not count towards OAL.
Incorrect. At the fed level muzzle devices only need to be pinned to contribute to barrel length. For example, the SIG MPX Carbine The barrel is only about 13 inches in length but has a 'permanently' attached flash hider to overcome the 16" minimum.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-02-2019, 9:43 AM
edgerly779 edgerly779 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: canoga park, ca
Posts: 12,266
iTrader: 89 / 100%
Default

Pin stock at full extenison or put 20" upper on it.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-04-2019, 4:30 PM
morthrane morthrane is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 805
iTrader: 31 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mej16489 View Post
Incorrect. At the fed level muzzle devices only need to be pinned to contribute to barrel length. For example, the SIG MPX Carbine The barrel is only about 13 inches in length but has a 'permanently' attached flash hider to overcome the 16" minimum.
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/at...ter-2/download

There's the 16" barrel minimum for rifles and 18" for shotguns, but there's also 26" OAL minimums. And per that link, measurement is "between the muzzle of the barrel and the rearmost portion of the weapon measured on a line parallel to the axis of the bore." The muzzle of the barrel is not the detachable muzzle device.

Last edited by morthrane; 06-05-2019 at 5:17 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 06-05-2019, 6:12 AM
Dirk Tungsten's Avatar
Dirk Tungsten Dirk Tungsten is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: the basement
Posts: 1,251
iTrader: 34 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by morthrane View Post
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/at...ter-2/download

There's the 16" barrel minimum for shotguns and rifles, but there's also 26" OAL minimums. And per that link, measurement is "between the muzzle of the barrel and the rearmost portion of the weapon measured on a line parallel to the axis of the bore." The muzzle of the barrel is not the detachable muzzle device.
Not to be pedantic, but Shotguns must be over 18" in length, not 16.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 06-05-2019, 8:52 AM
Syntax Error's Avatar
Syntax Error Syntax Error is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: 캘리포니아인민공화국
Posts: 3,437
iTrader: 64 / 100%
Default

For the Tavor, just get some kind of stock extender or something to screw onto the back of the stock for registration purposes instead of pinning and welding your muzzle attachment. It should also be noted that as far as I know CFARS has never asked actual photographic evidence of said pin/welding.

Up to you whatever route you would like to take, but I would take the route of least financial cost and easily reversed once you have your RAW paperwork.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 06-05-2019, 5:16 PM
morthrane morthrane is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 805
iTrader: 31 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirk Tungsten View Post
Not to be pedantic, but Shotguns must be over 18" in length, not 16.
Technically correct is the best correct!
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 7:36 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.