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 > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-19-2017, 4:25 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,231
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default 2017 California AW Regulations NEWS UPDATE Thread *RAW OPEN * [Updated 11-23-2017]

DISCUSSION of the new AW regs THIS THREAD, Part 2.

This thread updates as news happens.

***LATEST GENERAL UPDATE AS TO WHAT IS GOING ON: Updated 11-23-2017***

BREAKING NEWS:

(1) OAL Approved file and print of Regulations on 7/31/2017. They are no longer listed in the "under review" section. ALL SECTIONS APPROVED
(2) On 8/3/2017 the RAW Period was OPENED. Go to the CFARS website to create an account and register.
(3) Michel & Associates on behalf of plaintiffs and the CRPA and the NRA-IL filed Villanueva v. Becerra, a lawsuit targeting various aspects of the SB 880 regulations, specifically the APA exemption and several illegal underground regulations. The lawsuit seeks immediate injunctions against CA DOJ's registration scheme.
(4) On Wednesday, November 22—the day before Thanksgiving—the California Department of Justice officially notified the public of its intent to adopt a new regulation regarding the definitions of certain terms used to identify “assault weapons” under California law. If adopted, the regulation would take existing illegally adopted definitions of terms relating to “assault weapons” currently being challenged by NRA and CRPA in state court, and apply them to the identification of “assault weapons” under California law.

DOJ Website Information

DOJ Website: (Latest Status)


GUIDES for Registration

AW Registration - The Complete Guide (everything we know so far)

Guide to Avoiding DOJ assigned Serializing for Home Builds (AB 857 and BBAW)

Guide to Retaining Your Gun Rights 2017 – The Options for AW in CA v1.0


TIMELINE OF EVENTS:

Summer 2016: SB880 and AB1135 make bullet buttons the same as standard mag releases, and starting Jan 1st 2017 can not be sold or transferred. BB rifles are essentially Assault Weapons.

December 31st 2016: Copy of the DOJ's proposed "BBAW" regs are intercepted by Michel & Associates/ NRA-IL and reveal a draconian, confusing array of new definitions of AW, requirement to keep the BB on the rifle after registering, photo requirements, home built gun marking requirements, etc. They waited until the last minute of 2016 and sent the regs to the OAL (Office of Administrative Law) with an APA exemption on most regs, meaning that they were "File and Print" and exempt from any public review. A date for the OAL to make a determination on the regs was set for 2/13/17. This was the FIRST round of submissions.

January 10th 2017: STATE OF CALIFORNIA Budget Change Proposal - DF-46 (REV 08/16) is submitted to the legislature. It outlines a specific plan to implement the SB 880 amd AB 1135 registration process. The summary reads:

"The California Department of Justice (Department), Division of Law Enforcement, Bureau of Firearms (Bureau) requests an increase of $2,588,000 and 27.0 positions in FY 2017-18 in Dealers' Record of
Sale (DROS) Special Fund spending authority to implement the provisions Senate Bill (SB) 880 (Hall III) and Assembly Bill (AB) 1135 (Levine)."


and the description of expected registrations:

"The Bureau roughly estimates 1-1.5 million assault weapons will be registered by approximately 250,000 different owners. It is estimated that these registrations will generate roughly $3.7 million dollars, and will be sufficient to cover the costs associated with this proposal."

January 11th 2017: Michel & Associates sends a letter to the DOJ outlining the various overreaches and legal problems with the new regulations and threatens legal action.

February 10th 2017: The DOJ withdrew the regulations from the OAL. No one knows why.

February 23rd 2017: Calguns Foundation files a lawsuit that directly addresses underground regulations and the DOJ's power to make up laws through regulations, Doe, et al. v. Attorney General Xavier Becerra, et al

April 17th 2017: Assembly Budget Subcommittee #5 on Public Safety discusses the budgeting requirements for registration of assault weapons. Watch the VIDEO of the meeting.

April 24th 2017: NRA-IL and CRPA file a second amendment lawsuit challenging California’s newly expanded Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) called Rupp v. Becerra. This suit targets the basic statutory definition CA uses to identity commonly used weapons as "assault weapons". TEXT of Rupp v. Becerra PDF.

May 15th 2017: DOJ submitted draft regulations to the OAL with a new regulatory number but the same section numbers and title. This was the SECOND round of submissions.

May 18th 2017: DOJ released the new draft regulations and cover letter. They are virtually the same as the withdrawn regs and require the same things.

May 31st 2017: In a subcommittee budget hearing, a bill (located on page 9) to extend the registration period by 6 months and spend funds for reopening of the registry over 2 years appeared.

June 9th, 2017: CRPA sends out a news bulletin about the extention of the registration period by the Legislator at the request of the DOJ to June, 30th 2018 because the DOJ dosen't have the funds or the time to make the reg period open for enough time in 2017 to process all applicants.

June 19th, 2017: A KPIX news segment on the AW ban reveals that the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence helped craft the law and are most likely behind the convoluted system the DOJ has come up with.

June 19th, 2017: Michel and Associates sends another letter threatening legal action to the DOJ.

June 26th, 2017:: The OAL denied the file and print of the DOJ BBAW regulations submitted to them on May 18th.

June 27th, 2017:: Governor Brown signs into law AB103 which is an extension of the registration period to July 1st 2018. This was enacted through the gut and amend of AB103, a Budget Act. This means that the reg period will stay open from whenever it is opened (completely unknown date) to July 1st 2018. It also extends the protections for gun owners to legally posses an AW without registering until the date of July 1st 2018.

June 29th, 2017: In an separate but somewhat related piece of news, on 6-29-2017 U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez issued a preliminary injunction blocking a law that requires Californians to dispose of large-capacity ammunition magazines by the first of July or face fines and possible jail time.

June 30th, 2017 An AP News article reported that "Earlier this week, California regulators also temporarily blocked Becerra's proposed new rules on assault weapons, saying he went too far in trying to impose the new regulations without allowing for public comment."

July 17th, 2017: The Trace, an online mouthpiece for the anti-gun movement, wrote an article. It asserts APA exemption as the reason for OAL rejection. Another WFB article also makes the same statement.

July 20th, 2017: The DOJ resubmitted BBAW regs with same section numbers, again file and print with APA exemption. This is the THIRD round of submissions. OAL decision deadline set at 8/30/2017.

July 21st, 2017: OAL Reference Attorney releases round 3 of the BBAW regs. Download HERE. Regs are nearly exactly the same as round 2 submitted on May 15th, but with new dates to accommodate the July 2018 closure of the RAW period. Section 5471 has a different sentence omitting language that says that it is pursuant to PC 30515. Section 5472 that states no featureless weapons shall be registered, added an exception for shotguns.

July 31st, 2017: OAL appears to have approved the file and print of the BBAW 3rd round regulations. They have removed the regs from "under review".

August 3rd, 2017: RAW period OPENED and available online with the CFARS website.

August 15th, 2017: Final BBAW regulations published, look at them on this website. No changes made from 3rd round draft.

September 6th, 2017: Michel & Associates on behalf of plaintiffs and the CRPA and the NRA-IL filed Villanueva v. Becerra, a lawsuit targeting various aspects of the SB 880 regulations, specifically the APA exemption and several illegal underground regulations. The lawsuit seeks immediate injunctions against CA DOJ's registration scheme.

October 15th, 2017: First reports of registration letters being sent to applicants who applied at the beginning of August. Turnaround looks to be 6-8 weeks.

November 23rd 2017: California Department of Justice officially notified the public of its intent to adopt a new regulation regarding the definitions of certain terms used to identify “assault weapons” under California law. Read the new regulation here.

List of News Stories:

PLEASE SEE POST#68 for list of news articles on the registration subject.

Last edited by Discogodfather; 11-23-2017 at 9:30 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-21-2017, 9:07 AM
Jimi Jah's Avatar
Jimi Jah Jimi Jah is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: North San Diego County
Posts: 11,246
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

The delay means they are having trouble figuring how to make it work.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-21-2017, 11:43 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 12,834
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Good to have another thread and please REPORT any posts that start the "thread death spiral" (I am sure you know very well how it starts and how it ends).

SUGGESTION: Update title with the latest date/time stamp so that we can tell at a glance how current the data is. Do this even when there are no updates from the DOJ.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-21-2017, 11:48 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 12,834
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

To everyone posting: If you start discussion on whether BBs can stay and/or on how featureless rifles will be treated, that's the ABSOLUTE SURE way to get this thread locked.

Let's keep ONE thread about just following what the DOJ is doing (without any further discussion of the law itself or how regulations relate to the law). There is a link in the OP to the old thread which contains pages and pages of "analysis."
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-21-2017, 8:30 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 36,285
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Gentlemembers, the discussion thread is here - http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s....php?t=1306120

Unless you have verifiable news on the regulations, please post over there with commentary.
__________________
The Legislature is in recess. We're immune from most further mischief until the next session begins, late December 2017.

There is no value at all complaining or analyzing or reading tea leaves to decide what these bills really mean or actually do; any bill with a chance to pass will be bad for gun owners.

The details only count after the Governor signs the bills.

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-22-2017, 8:46 AM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,231
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Some confusing signs on the OAL website: In the under review section the BBAW is listed again. When you go to look at the PDF, it's also listed but the PDF is not labeled correctly and looks to be the "actions taken PDF". Under the actions taken page, it also appears.

This seems like a glitch, we have seen a few like this before. Wrong PDF's listed and wrong info? I will give them a call to ask again.

Also of note is that the DOJ website has now taken to updating the status of the reg process every day for the last few days, were as for the last month they took weeks to update the message. Not sure why this is happening, but if people are calling in more maybe they feel the need to be more "current".
__________________
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
  #7  
Old 02-22-2017, 10:37 AM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,231
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Looks like the listing was just a glitch. OAL's website is sometimes disorganized and they make mistakes by listing "actions taken" in the "under review" section.
__________________
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
  #8  
Old 02-28-2017, 12:58 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,231
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Slow and no news as usual, but this is interesting. Now CA lawmakers can no longer remain anonymous while attacking 2A, maybe some implications here:

http://kron4.com/2017/02/27/californ...ig-court-case/
__________________
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
  #9  
Old 03-27-2017, 2:45 PM
ifilef ifilef is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: North County San Diego
Posts: 5,709
iTrader: 49 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chitwood View Post
Even when full window, text runs off right side of screen and I have to scroll back and forth to read it. Image attached. Win 7, Chrome browser.
Same with mine. Similar to an enlarged post window where a large photo is displayed- forces everything over so that one must scroll horizontally.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-27-2017, 7:09 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,231
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

A Visual Timeline of Registered Assault Weapon (Registration periods) in California History:

__________________
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
  #11  
Old 03-27-2017, 9:10 PM
Sully's Avatar
Sully Sully is online now
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 214
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Those registration periods appear far shorter than I recall,
but I do not doubt you...
__________________
Best, Sully

Contribute to The Coalition for Civil Liberties

America's Rifle is the AR-15, Persistence and patience:
Contributor CGF, member NRA life and CRPA life.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-28-2017, 5:13 AM
Mr. Torgue Mr. Torgue is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 243
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
A Visual Timeline of Registered Assault Weapon (Registration periods) in California History:

Interesting. I'll have to look more into that.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-21-2017, 2:07 AM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,231
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Thanks to calguns member bool1tholz, we have the first news in months about the RAW process. On April 17th 2017 Assembly Budget Subcommittee #5 on Public Safety discussed how the new registration process will be funded. They asked for $2,588,000 dollars to cover the costs of registration. They then explained how this money would be recouped with the $15 registration fee. They discussed tech issues (website) and how the $15 should potentially cover people who want to register multiple RAW, not $15 per RAW. They recommended that for $15 you can register as many as you like.

Text of the agenda:

ISSUE 5: ASSAULT WEAPONS BUDGET CHANGE PROPOSAL

The Department of Justice will present the proposal for $2,588,000 and 27 positions in order to implement provisions of Senate Bill 880 (Hall, Chapter 48, Statutes of 2016) and Assembly Bill 1135 (Levine, Chapter 40, Statues of 2016). The requested DROS funding will be loaned from the Firearms Safety and Enforcement Special Fund, and will be repaid no later than June 30, 2021.

PANELISTS

• California Department of Justice
• Legislative Analyst's Office
• Department of Finance
• Public Comment

GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL

The California Department of Justice (Department), Division of Law Enforcement, Bureau of Firearms (Bureau) requests an increase of $2,588,000 and 27.0 positions in FY 2017-18 in Dealers' Record of Sale (DROS) Special Fund spending authority to implement the provisions Senate Bill (SB) 880 (Hall) and Assembly Bill (AB) 1135 (Levine).

BACKGROUND

Existing law generally prohibits the possession or transfer of assault weapons, except for the sale, purchase, importation, or possession of assault weapons by specified individuals, including law enforcement officers. Under existing law, "assault weapon" means, among other things, a semiautomatic center-fire rifle or a semi-automatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has any one of specified attributes, including, for rifles, a thumbhole stock, and for pistols, a second handgrip. Existing law requires that, with specified exceptions, any person who, prior to January 1, 2001, lawfully possessed an assault weapon prior to the date it was defined as an assault weapon, and which was not specified as an assault weapon at the time of lawful possession, register the firearm with the Department. SB 880 and AB 1135 require that 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, and including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with the use of a tool, register the firearm with the Department before January 1, 2018, but not before the effective date of specified regulations.

SB 880 and AB 1135 require the registrations to be submitted electronically via the Internet utilizing a public-facing application made available by the Department. SB 880 and AB 1135 require the registration to contain specified information, including, but not limited to, a description of the firearm that identifies unique and specified information about the registrant. These bills permit the Department to charge a fee of up to $15 per person for registration through the Internet, not to exceed the reasonable processing costs of the Department to be paid and deposited, as specified, for purposes of the registration program. SB 880 and AB 1135 revise the definition of "assault weapon" to mean a semiautomatic center-fire rifle or semi-automatic pistol that does not have a fixed magazine but has any one of the specified characteristics. These bills also define "fixed magazine" to mean an ammunition feeding device contained in, or permanently attached to, a firearm in such a manner that the device cannot be removed without disassembly of the firearm action. These bills also require the Department to adopt regulations for the purpose of implementing those provisions and makes exempt those regulations from the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

STAFF COMMENT

The $15 fee associated with assault weapons is assessed per person rather than per weapon, meaning that an individual could come in with several assault weapons at one time and only be assessed a $15 fee. However, if an individual were to register an assault weapon on one day, and come back at a later date with additional weapons to be registered, DOJ has stated that the individual would be responsible for an additional $15 fee on all subsequent visits. The Subcommittee may wish for DOJ to provide further detail as to whether or not the $15 fee would be reduced for individuals who only register one weapon as the actual costs may be lower than $15 per transaction. Alternatively, if an individual were to come in to register multiple weapons, the current fee may be insufficient to cover administrative costs.

Staff Recommendation:

Hold open.

__________________
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


Last edited by Discogodfather; 04-23-2017 at 12:04 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-21-2017, 6:47 AM
Ford8N's Avatar
Ford8N Ford8N is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Northern Rhovanion
Posts: 5,523
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

The big question is will the NRA fight the DOJ if they try the underground regulations.......AGAIN. Or will the DOJ follow what the Rulers voted for and require a simple registration? Just like the last couple of AW registrations...
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-21-2017, 7:34 AM
PoorRichRichard's Avatar
PoorRichRichard PoorRichRichard is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Berdoo
Posts: 1,722
iTrader: 20 / 100%
Default

Tag
__________________
You are the weapon, your firearm is just a tool. It's a shame so many get the two mixed up.

www.jesseshunting.com Great stuff

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Anyone who Threatens it.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-21-2017, 2:03 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,231
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Also new info from member CalAlumnus who pointed out a document that is called "STATE OF CALIFORNIA Budget Change Proposal - Cover Sheet
DF-46 (REV 08/16)
" which was submitted to the legislature on Jan 10 2017. It explicitly states exactly what the DOJ expects in terms of registration:

"The California Department of Justice (Department), Division of Law Enforcement, Bureau of Firearms (Bureau) requests an increase of $2,588,000 and 27.0 positions in FY 2017-18 in Dealers' Record of Sale (DROS) Special Fund spending authority to implement the provisions Senate Bill (SB) 880 (Hall III) and Assembly Bill (AB) 1135 (Levine)."


and

"The Bureau is required to create and administer a registration program for owners of assault weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm without disassembly of the firearm action. The Bureau roughly estimates 1-1.5 million assault weapons will be registered by approximately 250,000 different owners. It is estimated that these registrations will generate roughly $3.7 million dollars, and will be sufficient to cover the costs associated with this proposal."

__________________
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


Last edited by Discogodfather; 04-21-2017 at 3:40 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-21-2017, 2:35 PM
Wiz-of-Awd's Avatar
Wiz-of-Awd Wiz-of-Awd is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Where I'm at ;)
Posts: 3,558
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
Also new info from member CalAlumnus who pointed out a document that is called "STATE OF CALIFORNIA Budget Change Proposal - Cover Sheet
DF-46 (REV 08/16)
" which was submitted to the legislature on Jan 19 2017. It explicitly states exactly what the DOJ expects in terms of registration:

"The California Department of Justice (Department), Division of Law Enforcement, Bureau of Firearms (Bureau) requests an increase of $2,588,000 and 27.0 positions in FY 2017-18 in Dealers' Record of Sale (DROS) Special Fund spending authority to implement the provisions Senate Bill (SB) 880 (Hall III) and Assembly Bill (AB) 1135 (Levine)."


and

"The Bureau is required to create and administer a registration program for owners of assault weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm without disassembly of the firearm action. The Bureau roughly estimates 1-1.5 million assault weapons will be registered by approximately 250,000 different owners. It is estimated that these registrations will generate roughly $3.7 million dollars, and will be sufficient to cover the costs associated with this proposal."

A.W.D.
__________________
Quote:
Seven. The answer is always seven.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-22-2017, 4:23 PM
CalAlumnus's Avatar
CalAlumnus CalAlumnus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 691
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowdrop View Post
Mid-April they finally ask to hire the 27 people required for the registration? Sigh.
No, they're just following the standard budget process. Governor releases the proposed budget in January, it works its way through the Legislature, including consideration of all change requests, and then gets passed and signed in June.

The only thing it tells us is that the funding required to accept AW registrations will come out of the 2017-18 budget.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-24-2017, 7:04 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,243
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

NRA-ILA/CRPA (Chuck Michel) filed suit today against CA DOJ (Rupp V. Becerra), seeking a declaration that the Assault Weapon Control Act of 1989 (and its subsequent amendments, including 1999's AB23 and 2016's SB880) is unconstitutional, and seeking injunction against the enforcement of all laws contained therein.

This isn't directly related to the AW registration regulations, but it could have a huge impact on it.

Just an FYI. For questions and comments about the case, use the thread for the lawsuit, or for discussion about how it may relate to the AW registration regs use the AW regs discussion thread, not this thread please.

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 04-24-2017 at 7:11 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-27-2017, 8:24 AM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,231
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

CBS Sacramento just aired a good solid story without any slant on the reg process. Frustration is mounting!

Article and Video


__________________
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
  #21  
Old 05-05-2017, 8:56 AM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,231
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default





__________________
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


Last edited by Discogodfather; 05-12-2017 at 2:13 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05-12-2017, 4:05 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,231
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

I missed this Chuck Michel interview from last month, it's really well stated. Michel & Associates have a great grasp on the issues and I am glad they are the tip of the spear. Play the audio of the full interview:

Chuck Michel Interview
__________________
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
  #23  
Old 05-15-2017, 10:02 AM
CreamyFettucini's Avatar
CreamyFettucini CreamyFettucini is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 456
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

OAL website shows regs submitted https://oal.blogs.ca.gov/files/2017/...eview-0515.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05-15-2017, 10:26 AM
JackRydden224's Avatar
JackRydden224 JackRydden224 is offline
Single stack pistol guy
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Irvine
Posts: 7,035
iTrader: 82 / 100%
Default

Interesting...where can we find what was submitted?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CreamyFettucini View Post
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 05-15-2017, 10:29 AM
CreamyFettucini's Avatar
CreamyFettucini CreamyFettucini is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 456
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

The section numbers adopted and section numbers of the amended regs are the same as the previous regs
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05-15-2017, 11:00 AM
laurelpark's Avatar
laurelpark laurelpark is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,039
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Looking forward to an analysis and summary of what's changed and what's the same.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05-15-2017, 11:21 AM
CreamyFettucini's Avatar
CreamyFettucini CreamyFettucini is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 456
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

I sent an email to DOJ, here is the response:
Quote:
The subject regulations are in draft format and are therefore not available to the public at this time.

Thank you,

Bureau of Firearms Staff
So if they are in draft maybe this was another glitch on the OAL site?
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05-15-2017, 11:27 AM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,231
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

BREAKING NEWS:

DOJ has submitted new regs to the OAL as of 5-15-2017. They have identical section numbers to the nixed regs, but are submitted under a new regulatory number: 2017-0512-02. They are file and print and have a deadline for 6-26-2017.




Hold tight, hopefully the reg draft will be available soon. It does not bode well that they are in fact the same section designations, but it could still have been modified heavily.

Keep your eyes peeled and hopefully a PDF will pop up soon.
__________________
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


Last edited by Discogodfather; 05-15-2017 at 11:33 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05-15-2017, 11:27 AM
nicky c nicky c is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 281
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JackRydden224 View Post
Interesting...where can we find what was submitted?

I don't recall how or who intercepted the last set of proposed regulations. With any luck somebody does know how to get them...
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-15-2017, 11:36 AM
Sousuke Sousuke is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,305
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nicky c View Post
I don't recall how or who intercepted the last set of proposed regulations. With any luck somebody does know how to get them...
It was a scanned PDF link on the OAL website, I'm sure CRPA will have it published by tomorrow.
__________________
WTB: Chronograph
WTB: T Series Hi Power
WTB: Bisley Revolver (Uberti type)
WTB: Pietta 45lc conversion cylinder

Last edited by Sousuke; 05-15-2017 at 11:44 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 05-15-2017, 11:53 AM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,231
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

I just spoke with the OAL contact and she says that the regs submitted will not be released in draft form, she did not know when they would be released.

I asked if the regs were different from those submitted and she said yes, things have been changed a little bit. It is beyond clerical changes and is changes to content.
__________________
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


Last edited by Discogodfather; 05-15-2017 at 11:56 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 05-15-2017, 2:28 PM
SmallShark's Avatar
SmallShark SmallShark is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Sacramento 95834
Posts: 1,100
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
I just spoke with the OAL contact and she says that the regs submitted will not be released in draft form, she did not know when they would be released.

I asked if the regs were different from those submitted and she said yes, things have been changed a little bit. It is beyond clerical changes and is changes to content.
i dont understand the word "clerical "
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 05-15-2017, 2:57 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,231
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmallShark View Post
i dont understand the word "clerical "
Meaning page numbers and such. You got to see it from a bureaucrat's POV, if you ask them if their are changes they might say yes but mean that some ID numbers, etc, have changed. They told me that there were changes to the content.
__________________
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


Last edited by Discogodfather; 05-15-2017 at 3:16 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 05-15-2017, 6:17 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,231
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Yeah, we need to get back on track here. Latest news is that new regs have been submitted with the same section numbers but different regulatory number. They are scheduled for a 6/26 date (end of review).

OAL contact said there were substantive changes made to the regs, it's not the same regs, but she said it was a "little different". OAL also said they would not release the draft regs for 30-60 days.

We have no idea when a copy will appear, but hoping that our friends will get a hold of a copy soon.

From here on, go to this thread to discuss.
__________________
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
  #35  
Old 05-15-2017, 10:15 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,231
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

NRA-IL Article
__________________
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
  #36  
Old 05-16-2017, 2:17 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,243
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Just want to give this thread a quick for, again, the first place to break big news about the regulations. Thanks to CreamyFettucini (great username!) for spotting this on the OAL website.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 05-16-2017, 8:05 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,231
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

I submitted a request for the draft regulations to DOJ and OAL. Let's see if anything comes of it, I don't want to bog anyone down or make life harder, but this is a single request and I was very pleasant and courteous.

Chances are other organizations have also submitted the same request, but I agree with cocked, don't flood them with anything. Especially tons of overly specific requests for information.
__________________
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
  #38  
Old 05-17-2017, 3:25 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,243
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick123 View Post
They need to turn over the hidden public documents or face more FOIA . Hers another sample of what to send them Staff@oal.ca.gov . Hiding documents for as much as 30 days from the public is downright criminal. According to the government, the average FOIA takes 2-3 hrs of work


https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.ne...pdf?1494979084

https://foiamapper.com/how-to-make-a-foia-request/
If you don't want to take anyone's advice to let it go, fine, please just stop crudding up this thread. There's a different discussion thread where you're welcome to argue your case for harassing the OAL to your heart's content.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 05-18-2017, 4:40 PM
Jedediah Munroe Jedediah Munroe is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 226
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

From right winger just posted in discussion thread

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.ne...pdf?1495148516
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 05-18-2017, 4:57 PM
voit's Avatar
voit voit is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 113
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default CA DOJ AW update on FPC website

New DOJ AW regs have just been posted on the FPC website. It is dated 5/18/17, and is not good for you folks who wanted to see some positive changes, but still has some exemptions as to the definition of an AW. You cannot remove the BB after registration, you must still register by 12/31/17, you still must include many digital photos with your life and gun history. Featureless rifles are still exempt, upper and lower separated is still considered NOT an AW. Lots of other mumbo jumbo about serialization, joint registration, etc. Blah blah blah...I just bought a place in Prescott, AZ, so F*** Off CA!
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 5:32 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, 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.