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 02-04-2013, 3:49 PM
ezmac650 ezmac650 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default single shot conversion

So for the second time in 2 weeks while window shopping a 2 different local gun shop the legality of single shot conversion came up

Store 1: I was told that a gun has been registered as a single shot if converted back to a semi automatic holding more than 1 round is committing a felony.

Shop 2: overheard sales man speaking with a customer and told him getting a single shot pistol is a grey area that if a cop was to find your pistol that is not in its single shot converted state that "your busted" .By this statement also implying that returning a converted pistol back to a semi auto pistol capable of holding more than one round is also illegal

Is there any truth to any of this?

thanks for the input.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-04-2013, 3:57 PM
aklover_91 aklover_91 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 809
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ezmac650 View Post
So for the second time in 2 weeks while window shopping a 2 different local gun shop the legality of single shot conversion came up

Store 1: I was told that a gun has been registered as a single shot if converted back to a semi automatic holding more than 1 round is committing a felony.

Shop 2: overheard sales man speaking with a customer and told him getting a single shot pistol is a grey area that if a cop was to find your pistol that is not in its single shot converted state that "your busted" .By this statement also implying that returning a converted pistol back to a semi auto pistol capable of holding more than one round is also illegal

Is there any truth to any of this?

thanks for the input.
There is no grey area. Dimensionally compliant single shot pistols are specifically exempted from the roster in the penal code.

Once in your possession, there is no law against modifying your gun into any other legal state.

What you heard both times was pure FUD.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-04-2013, 4:00 PM
stix213's Avatar
stix213 stix213 is offline
AKA: Joe Censored
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: San Rafael
Posts: 16,589
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ezmac650 View Post
So for the second time in 2 weeks while window shopping a 2 different local gun shop the legality of single shot conversion came up

Store 1: I was told that a gun has been registered as a single shot if converted back to a semi automatic holding more than 1 round is committing a felony.
There is no law making it a crime to convert a single shot firearm to semi-automatic. There are no law making it a crime to modify a firearm from what it is registered as to something it is not registered as, assuming you end up in a legal configuration. Don't believe any legal advice from this store ever again. Don't ask them for legal advice ever again.

Quote:
Shop 2: overheard sales man speaking with a customer and told him getting a single shot pistol is a grey area that if a cop was to find your pistol that is not in its single shot converted state that "your busted" .By this statement also implying that returning a converted pistol back to a semi auto pistol capable of holding more than one round is also illegal

Is there any truth to any of this?

thanks for the input.
There is no grey area, as the law specifically allows single shot exempt pistols. Also, the law banning the sale of off roster handguns applies only to gun dealers and manufacturing a new firearm at home. There are no provisions that apply to modifying a firearm you've already legally purchased. There is no law banning the ownership or use of off roster handguns, as you can legally buy them through a dealer via a private party transfer anyway (I own several off roster handguns via PPT). Don't believe any legal advice from this store ever again. Don't ask them for legal advice ever again.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-04-2013, 4:06 PM
Fatgunman's Avatar
Fatgunman Fatgunman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Orange County, Commiefornia
Posts: 883
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

So that's what FUD is
__________________
BOOO anti-gun people, HOOORAAAYY GUNS!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-04-2013, 5:11 PM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 9,694
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ezmac650 View Post
Is there any truth to any of this?
Many gun stores will say things like this to prevent you from buying SSE pistols if they are not doing it themselves. Nothing wrong with a store choosing not to do an SSE to fit their risk profile, but they cannot be bitter about those who do it and who are taking business away from them.

So, yes, you will hear this a lot around stores that don't perform SSE. What they say is false, though.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-04-2013, 5:19 PM
chillincody's Avatar
chillincody chillincody is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: el cajon ca 92021
Posts: 2,684
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

o jeez this again no SSE are legal and converting a SSE pistol from single shot to any other LEGAL config (semi auto 10 round Bullet button) = 100% legal

what you encountered was gun shop FUd tell them to cite what law makes it illegal bet you they cant
__________________
Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. Jefferson's "Commonplace Book," 1774_1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-04-2013, 6:30 PM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,764
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

If the transition by an individual owning a given handgun - Rostered, or otherwise exempt into non-Rostered form - is illegal, then any gunsmithing or even much factory warranty work at CA FFLs performing 'warranty station' services with successor parts would also be illegal.

Bwaaah.
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

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

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-04-2013, 6:44 PM
LBDamned's Avatar
LBDamned LBDamned is offline
Made in the USA
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: OC - So Cal - Soon-to-be AZ!
Posts: 9,950
iTrader: 51 / 100%
Default

lemme guess... new legislation against SSE?....

This is a homework thread right?...
__________________

-----------------------------
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-04-2013, 6:52 PM
totus44's Avatar
totus44 totus44 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Escondido
Posts: 675
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Unfortunately it is all to common to encounter SSE FUD. That's actually how I found Calguns and the FFL that was knowledgeable and actively performing SSE transactions. I love my Gen4 G17!
__________________
"Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one."
- Thomas Paine, Common Sense

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead."
- Thomas Paine, The Crisis
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-04-2013, 7:17 PM
USMC VET's Avatar
USMC VET USMC VET is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sacramento Area
Posts: 997
iTrader: 20 / 100%
Default

Just picked up my SSE XDm and love it. I also love that my local shop s informed and not afraid of the mythical "grey area"
__________________
SO MANY GUNS....never enough money

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-04-2013, 7:45 PM
Tincon's Avatar
Tincon Tincon is offline
Mortuus Ergo Invictus
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,067
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

I can't understand why everyone is so completely certain that there is no grey area here, when almost every law ever written has some grey area in it.

The statute reads:

Quote:
Penal Code 32000 (formerly 12125.)
(a) Commencing January 1, 2001, any person in this state who
manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state
for sale, keeps for sale, offers or exposes for sale, gives, or lends
any unsafe handgun shall be punished by imprisonment in a county
jail not exceeding one year.
Now as far as I know there isn't any case law on this (please inform me if there is), so we are left to guess how a court might interpret the word manufacture. There are reasons to believe it probably has a commercial meaning, however that might tend to defeat the intent of the legislature. There are also other common meanings that would include the modification of a pistol into a form that would be an "unsafe handgun".

I don't know of any prosecutions for the activity described here, but it seems reckless to tell people "no law against modifying your gun into any other legal state".
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-04-2013, 9:27 PM
jeffxbr jeffxbr is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 201
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

What gun stores?
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-04-2013, 11:51 PM
chillincody's Avatar
chillincody chillincody is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: el cajon ca 92021
Posts: 2,684
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tincon View Post
I can't understand why everyone is so completely certain that there is no grey area here, when almost every law ever written has some grey area in it.

The statute reads:



Now as far as I know there isn't any case law on this (please inform me if there is), so we are left to guess how a court might interpret the word manufacture. There are reasons to believe it probably has a commercial meaning, however that might tend to defeat the intent of the legislature. There are also other common meanings that would include the modification of a pistol into a form that would be an "unsafe handgun".

I don't know of any prosecutions for the activity described here, but it seems reckless to tell people "no law against modifying your gun into any other legal state".
I still dont see a grey area in what you quoted
__________________
Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. Jefferson's "Commonplace Book," 1774_1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-04-2013, 11:56 PM
Tincon's Avatar
Tincon Tincon is offline
Mortuus Ergo Invictus
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,067
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chillincody View Post
I still dont see a grey area in what you quoted
If you modify an exempt handgun such that it that is becomes an unsafe handgun, you created something with a different legal status. Have you manufactured it? That's the grey area. You would be amazed at the tortured interpretations courts will use to convict defendants. This is nothing.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-05-2013, 1:15 AM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,764
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Tincon,

Former DOJ BoF Deputy AG Firearms has issued multiple letters on this including supporting manufacturing a home built 1911 [and she didn't mention any single-shot conversion, which was in error] and changing parts on a regular Rostered Glock to a non-Rostered 'left handed' variant.

This was the woman in Sen Jack Scott's office who helped write the unsafe handgun bill ;-)

Remember also the DOJ has allowed sales of many handguns that weren't the Rostered variants and had significant changes [in particular, Glock Gen 1/2/3 are treated interchangeably even though substantive multiple structural/mechanical differences exist and differ from exemplar guns submitted for testing].

Also, every handgun taken for gunsmithing would be illegal (no longer has parts in tolerance/surface details, etc.) or with upgrade/replacement parts (outside grips or sights). This is a battle they don't want. This is also an only-DOJ issue, no DA deals with this trivia. DOJ is well aware of these matters and they have *****ed & moaned at worst; this has been running for 2-3 years now (since AR/AK pistols etc.) and can't/won't be stopped.
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

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

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-05-2013, 1:35 AM
Tincon's Avatar
Tincon Tincon is offline
Mortuus Ergo Invictus
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,067
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwiese View Post
Former DOJ BoF Deputy AG Firearms has issued multiple letters on this including supporting manufacturing a home built 1911 [and she didn't mention any single-shot conversion, which was in error] and changing parts on a regular Rostered Glock to a non-Rostered 'left handed' variant.
Despite what certain CGF board members have implied many times, a letter from Alison Merrilees is not a get out of jail free card. This is not legal advice, but it MAY be possible to rely on an opinion of a government official/officer if ALL of the following are true: (1) they are directly charged with the duty of enforcing the law against, for example, unsafe handguns (MAYBE THE AG/deputy M, maybe not) (2) if one of her duties had been determining if handguns should be added to the roster (3) she gave an official opinion that certain specific handguns were exempt from the roster, AND (4) did so in no uncertain terms. People v. Ferguson, 1933, 134 Cal.App. 41.
BUT the law prohibiting unsafe handguns is a part of the Penal Code, enacted by the state Legislature in its exercise of the general police power of the state and in obedience to a constitutional mandate found in section 26, article 4 of our State Constitution. It takes a lot for a court to say that some Deputy AG (how many of those are there?) can on her own nullify that law with some privately issued letter. I would not count on this.
In fact I’d be willing to bet that these letters, do not concretely state that there is no risk of prosecution. It probably has all sorts of weasel language that renders it effectively meaningless, like many other letters of hers that I have seen.
AG letters may have some meaning in some contexts, but I doubt very much that they would in a case like this. Again, it normally takes a lot more than the act of one un-elected person to undermine a criminal statute drafted and approved by the entire elected legislature and signed by the elected governor. Think about it, The Legislature can override a governor's veto by a two-thirds majority vote, to make a criminal law effective. Do you really believe a junior person in the AG's office can nullify it so easily?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwiese View Post
Remember also the DOJ has allowed sales of many handguns that weren't the Rostered variants and had significant changes [in particular, Glock Gen 1/2/3 are treated interchangeably even though substantive multiple structural/mechanical differences exist and differ from exemplar guns submitted for testing].
Also, every handgun taken for gunsmithing would be illegal (no longer has parts in tolerance/surface details, etc.) or with upgrade/replacement parts (outside grips or sights).
Incorrect.
Quote:
PC 32030 (formerly 12131.5.)
(a) A firearm shall be deemed to satisfy the requirements of
subdivision (a) of Section 32015 if another firearm made by the same
manufacturer is already listed and the unlisted firearm differs from
the listed firearm only in one or more of the following features:
(1) Finish, including, but not limited to, bluing, chrome-plating,
oiling, or engraving
.
(2) The material from which the grips are made.
(3) The shape or texture of the grips, so long as the difference
in grip shape or texture does not in any way alter the dimensions,
material, linkage, or functioning of the magazine well, the barrel,
the chamber, or any of the components of the firing mechanism of the
firearm.
(4) Any other purely cosmetic feature that does not in any way
alter the dimensions, material, linkage, or functioning of the
magazine well, the barrel, the chamber, or any of the components of
the firing mechanism of the firearm.
Nothing they did creates a position incompatible with prosecution, nor does it trigger collateral estoppel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwiese View Post
This is a battle they don't want. This is also an only-DOJ issue, no DA deals with this trivia. DOJ is well aware of these matters and they have *****ed & moaned at worst; this has been running for 2-3 years now (since AR/AK pistols etc.) and can't/won't be stopped.
So in other words you know they have taken a different position than the former deputy AG? Seriously, you may or may not be right, but giving the blanket legal advice that it is "totally legal" to modify these guns in any way, especially given the clear intent of the legislature, is in my opinion reckless at best.
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 2:38 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, 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 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.