#1
|
|||
|
|||
Status out-of-state CA RAW being registered as an SBR
In prior thread, it was clarified that status of a few of my RAWs was still valid as an out of state resident and can still legal to possess/use them in authorized locations when I visit family/friends in CA.
However, due to the new brace ban fiasco, if I register that RAW as an SBR federally, does that impact/change anything to its status as a CA RAW? I would presume that its still ok in CA as long as: 1) I remove the stock/brace 2) Notify ATF of transport across state lines. Honestly, I would just leave there here at home if I do come to visit just due to the hassle of #2 and transport restrictions , but I was just curious as its legal status in CA considering it is a RAW (no change to the firearm besides registering under NFA). |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Additionally please note the following: 1) You may be able to receive a NFA Tax Stamp if the RAW is in another state where SBR's are permitted. 2) Once you convert the weapon into an SBR, it will remain an SBR under California law, even if you later convert it back to rifle with a 16" or longer barrel (refer to Penal Code section 17170). 3) The temporary transportation of an SBR across state lines requires prior BATF approval, following submission of a Form 5320.20. BATF ain't gonna give approval for the transportation to a state where possession is prohibited. There nothing in California law that revokes, or otherwise changes, an Assault Weapon registration simply because the owner has moved out of the state. It remains a felony to import an "Assault Weapon" into California under PC 30600, but persons who possess an Assault Weapon registered to them under section 30900 are exempt (please refer to PC 30675(b)(1)). If you convert the RAW into an SBR, don't plan on bringing it back into California.
__________________
If you build a man a fire, you'll keep him warm for the evening. If you set a man on fire, you'll keep him warm for the rest of his life. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I wouldn't be filing for tax stamp in CA - I'm a resident of a state that allows SBRs. I'm just curious what would happen to the AW registration status of one of my RAWs (AK pistol) if I filed for tax stamp. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Ok that's a good point I overlooked. I thought it was just notification, but didn't realize I needed approval. You're right, they won't give it.
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
There's nothing in the California statutes that would change your RAW registration by virtue of federally registering your weapon under the NFA. But you would create a condition where there would be no advantage to the California registration.
__________________
If you build a man a fire, you'll keep him warm for the evening. If you set a man on fire, you'll keep him warm for the rest of his life. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
What's "legal" depends on who's looking at it. The same object might be considered an sbr by AFT, but a pistol by kali. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Edit. The refusal to issue stamps to CA residents, would also raise an equal protection issue. Last edited by BAJ475; 01-17-2023 at 11:40 AM.. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
If the OP were to register the weapon in the NFA register as an SBR (by getting a "Tax Stamp") and fitting it with a shoulder stock while outside of California, he would be in compliance with federal law, and would be outside the jurisdiction of California law. But if he were to remove the stock and replace it with a legal arm brace and then bring the weapon back into California, he would still be committing a felony by so doing. At first impression, one might think the felony would be the importation of an Assault Weapon (PC 30600), but it would not be. The RAW registration would permit him to do so. The RAW registration is not "undone" by virtue of moving out of state, or by virtue of the NFA registration. The felony would be importation and/or possession of a Short Barrel Rifle (PC 33210). Please note that California's definition of an SBR does not allow one to "UN-SBR" a firearm by restoring it to a legal configuration. I'm not much of an expert on the NFA. We have a frequent poster "Mr. Quiet" who is probably our most learned expert on the NFA. He has previously commented on California statutes that can read to the conclusion that a NFA registered "AOW" can be lawfully possessed in California. I'll invite him to chime in on my last point here, and also ask if an "SBR" is treated the same as an "AOW" for that purpose.
__________________
If you build a man a fire, you'll keep him warm for the evening. If you set a man on fire, you'll keep him warm for the rest of his life. |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
The wife will be pissed, but Jesus always forgives. |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
As used in this part, "short-barreled rifle" means any of the following: (a) A rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length. (b) A rifle with an overall length of less than 26 inches. (c) Any weapon made from a rifle (whether by alteration, modification, or otherwise) if that weapon, as modified, has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length. (d) Any device that may be readily restored to fire a fixed cartridge which, when so restored, is a device defined in subdivisions (a) to (c), inclusive. (e) Any part, or combination of parts, designed and intended to convert a device into a device defined in subdivisions (a) to (c), inclusive, or any combination of parts from which a device defined in subdivisions (a) to (c), inclusive, may be readily assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person.(Pen. Code, § 17170.) And CA law defines a rifle in Penal Code section 17090 which states: "As used in Sections 16530, 16640, 16650, 16660, 16870, and 17170, Sections 17720 to 17730, inclusive, Section 17740, subdivision (f) of Section 27555, Article 2 (commencing with Section 30300) of Chapter 1 of Division 10 of Title 4, and Article 1 (commencing with Section 33210) of Chapter 8 of Division 10 of Title 4, “rifle” means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed cartridge to fire only a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger." Thus, braced pistols are not rifles and thus cannot be SBRs, under CA law. Quote:
Last edited by BAJ475; 01-17-2023 at 12:20 PM.. Reason: added under CA law. |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
A weapon can be a "Short Barrel Rifle" under California law without presently being a "Rifle" through the provisions of PC 17170(c). The only requirement is that weapon be made from a "Rifle." In other words, if I take a "Rifle" as defined by PC 17170 and I chop off the stock, and I cut the barrel to less than 16", the weapon produced would no longer be a "Rifle" because it lacks a stock that would enable it to be fired from the shoulder, but it would still be a "Short Barrel Rifle" under the above definition because it was made from a rifle. California's laws can be really nutso and counter-intuitive at times.
__________________
If you build a man a fire, you'll keep him warm for the evening. If you set a man on fire, you'll keep him warm for the rest of his life. |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
[*] Nothing you did by moving to or getting new ID in another state invalidates your CA RAW registration.
However, CA RAW, CA SBR and Fed SBR are all different. A RAW status does not allow SBRing. [*] If you SBR your RAW in another state, fine, but you won't be able to bring it back to CA in SBR status. [*] A concern would also be that if it were converted back to 'normal' non-SBR status it would still be a problem in CA (if the history were examined, esp with an NFA # marked on receiver) given language in CA's own SBR law. [*] If you NFA AOW'd the gun instead of SBRing you could bring it back into CA with a brace as it would be exempt from CA SBR laws. [*] It is VERY unclear what ATF will do with braced guns - early days yet. Will they become a separate type of SBR (i.e, to prevent a real stock going on?) And if SBR'd Federally for whatever reason that won't be good for CA. Yes, you might win in a CA court on SBR charges after a long appeal but it's risky. [*] Anyone in CA with an AR pistol (RAW or nonRAW) with a 'brace' even before recent ATF action is silly unless they first NFA AOW'd the gun so as to be exempt from CA's own separate SBR laws. Otherwise it's too easy for a court and its 'experts' to say a 'brace' is a stock under CA law, esp as the latter is not defined in statute nor regulation. [There is a limited definition in CA AW law of folding etc. but that won't serve to protect here.] [/LIST]
__________________
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. |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks all for the discussion here - really good and I appreciate it..
What's confusing is that the AK pistol started out here in CA as a "pistol" on the DROS and then I registered it as a RAW. It never started out from the factory as a "rifle". So if I restored it to non-SBR status (take off brace, still has BB) if I travel back here, shouldn't it still be considered a pistol as was registered? Or did the act of SBRing it through NFA changes its CA registered status from pistol to rifle? NFA markings don't come into play here as the ATF noted you can keep the original markings during the 120 day period FINAL RULE 2021-08F. Again, really appreciate the discussion here. Just wanted to understand the legal impacts and pros/cons as I do travel back here to visit and shoot w/ family/friends and making sure I keep up with all the laws/restrictions. |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
Going back to a 50,000 foot view, I would not take an AK pistol back into California even if it could be done legally. Local PD is not going to carefully work through the statutes above if they suspect it is illegal. I would leave it out of state. When I go visit relatives in California I don’t take any guns. My relatives can fire them here when they come visit me.
|
#17
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
If you take a pistol in CA and use it in a rifle config, it cannot return to 'pistol' status without some risk of flouting CA's own separate SBR law. Remember what happened to Mr Rooney for following exsiting Federal overall length standards.
__________________
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. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|