#82
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Though the new definition creates AW's out of currently bullet-buttoned featured builds on Jan 1, there will be no prosecution during 2017, therefore, you actually have until Jan 1 2018 to transfer the rifle to someone out of state (but I would NOT want to get caught with a featured build without a BB before it is registered). I would not advise option 4.... 4-6-8 years and lifetime firearms prohibition. Which brings me to a thought that I had a few days ago.... Someone recently posted the potential financial impact of either Prop 63 or the BB law and pointed out how costs to the state could potentially be significant due to the number of new felons at a cost of some 200k/year per prisoner. It will never come to that. Barring the commission of a REAL crime, being in possession of an AW is a non-violent offense. The state will take you in, release you on bail or your OR, and at your trial, it will be 6 years probation and time served... and they will be smug in the knowledge that they have created yet another felon who will carry a lifetime firearms prohibition in ANY state of the union (and with a felony, you will have a difficult time moving to a different country... won't even be able to VISIT Canada!) French Foreign Legion will be the only way you will ever have a gun again.
__________________
- Rich |
#83
|
||||
|
||||
It isn't that difficult. A rifle is either an AW or it isn't. DOJ does not and cannot know how your rifle isn't an AW, just that it isn't. If next year, the rifle you have that wasn't an AW today, would be under the new law, you can register it and keep it, or do those other things. If that doesn't describe your rifle, you can't register. When you register, you won't have to prove anything, you just fill it out truthfully and sign at the bottom. Every firearm form from the 4473 to new resident registration has a line that says "I declare under penalty of perjury...". If you didn't build the rifle until june 2017 but lie on the form and put a date in 2016, that's two crimes, perjury and manuf. an AW. ifilef's point of view claims that in 2018 you could be arrested for your featureless rifle and charged with AW violation because the assumption will be made that in some point in the rifle's past it must have been configured as an AW under the new law but before the new law existed, and therefore should have been registered. Also, currently registering rifles online as new residents specifically allows for "home built" as a selection, so here's to hoping they basically reuse the same form...
|
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Doesn't it have to be semi-auto to RAW?
I think there was some debate about that. Some argued that conversion from single-shot to semi-auto could be considered manufacturing. Consensus appears to agree with you.
__________________
1st Generation Gun Owner After all the times I've been wrong when I thought something was illegal, I sure hope I'm right when I think something's legal! |
#85
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
It does have to be semi-auto. Once registered, I will convert it
__________________
NRA Life Member Glock Armorer Colt Armorer FFL 03 + COE |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Also, if you sell it featured by 12/21/2016, or featureless by 12/21/2017, you will not need to register as AW. With the former, last buyer in 2016 has duty to register as AW in 2017. With the latter neither you nor buyer need to register as AW if sale takes place by 12/21/2017. Current possessor would need to register it if they purchased it featured with BB by end of this year and continue in possession through 2017, no matter the configuration. Can't put the genie back into the lamp if possessed featured with BB. Last edited by ifilef; 11-06-2016 at 1:27 PM.. |
#88
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
of an AW as used here in CA.
__________________
NRA LIFE (1974) Psalm 46:10 I had a commission/USNR from 71-77 but never consider myself a Vet MyDad+4uncles/USMC/WW2/Korea/Vietnam. My Grandfather US Army WW1. No heroes,just regular folks--they were Veterans. “Do not be deceived.God is not mocked. You will reap what you sow.” |
#89
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I've been involved in and interviewed for a number of news stories related to my profession. I no longer make ANY statement to the media, even if they are doing a friendly PR piece. EVERY single situation, by the time it was edited and broadcast or printed, it came out grossly incorrect, to the point that no accurate information was shared with the public. It's their job to share information, but it goes through their filter and the result is no different than if I were to attempt to do a news story on brain surgery. I've talked to several people who have built up ARs or purchased in the last year, one from an 80%, and knowing the guy who has it, I'm 90% sure that he did not machine or assemble it himself. None of them have any CLUE as to the changes next year. It'll be the same as 1990 and 2000. There might be 10% compliance (registration or removal from the state) among those who actually know the law, 10% refusal to comply, and 80% will become unwitting felons. One of my bosses some 15 years ago had a Bushmaster that should have been registered and was not. He had no clue that California had a ban, he only knew that the 1994 federal bad did not apply to a gun that he already owned. That gun now lives in a safe at his condo in AZ.
__________________
- Rich |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Also not answered, if you have a BB rifle, register it, since it is now classified as an AW, is there any reason to retain the BB once it is registered? |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
AW for registration purposes vs. new definition of AW eff. 1/1/2017
Quote:
As to the former, if one ever possessed it with a BB during the applicable period it is considered an AW, no matter what you later do to it. IOW, current configuration is not relevant for purposes of that statute. With the latter, current configuration is relevant. So, one should understand the distinguishing characteristics of each statute. 30900(b)(1) applies retrospectively during the applicable period from 2001 to 2016, whereas 30515 applies prospectively from 1/1/2017 forward. |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
I would feel fine shooting with BB next year without registering as AW (but do register it as AW by 12/31/2017), yet would feel mighty uncomfortable shooting with a standard magazine release and an unregistered AW...could very likely lead to a felony arrest. Why? Because shooting with a standard mag release with a SACF featured weapon is presently unlawful, while presently shooting with a BB IS lawful, which makes it a firearm eligible to be registered under the new statute. So, given the grace period, it would apply to BB weapons but not to ones with a standard magazine release. Last edited by ifilef; 11-06-2016 at 2:13 PM.. |
#93
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Do I really think they want you to register guns that you don't own (or never owned)? No. But ifilef claims his interpretation of the law is the right one, even though it requires assuming they don't mean exactly what they say. 90% of people here seem to think that if it's no longer featured/BB'd that you don't need to register it, which also requires assuming they don't mean exactly what they say. ifilef hasn't given a good explanation for why his interpretation of what part of the law isn't what they mean is the right one. Quote:
__________________
|
#94
|
||||
|
||||
Registering 80% AR Rifle build as AW?
I have a few AR-15 rifles that I have built from 80% lowers that I intend to register as assault weapons come next year. They are currently configured with bullet buttons. I do not wish to go the featureless route at this time for most of them (I will have one set up featureless). My understanding is that before January 1st, 2017 I should have them engraved as per ATF guidelines in order to have a manufacturer, model, and serial number. My question is this: For the registration form how will I specify how I acquired the weapon? Will there be an option to specify that the firearm was homebuilt, and if so how will I prove that the firearm was built prior to 2017? Will I be using my name as manufacturer and the serial number I make up on the AW registration forms? Any advice would be appreciated.
|
#95
|
||||
|
||||
I didn't think they had to be engraved before the end of the year, but I guess if they aren't it's difficult to show that they were AWs in time.
I'm not sure how you'd prove it, that's a concern I have as well. Even if you do a VolReg that doesn't prove that the gun exists.
__________________
|
#97
|
||||
|
||||
80% lower with maglock. Serial #?
I found an engraving shop that will mark all my 80% lowers. The 80s are all AR pistols with fixed mags. After marking, am I required to submit any paperwork cal DOJ? Or anybody?
I read through all the threads. I'm just double and triple checking for confirmation. I called cal DOJ but they didn't know yet and told me to call back Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Money is not everything, lack of money is everything Last edited by tokyodrftr; 11-11-2016 at 9:39 PM.. |
#98
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
You are not required to report/register the firearms. |
#99
|
||||
|
||||
Thanks for confirming Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Money is not everything, lack of money is everything |
#100
|
||||
|
||||
We do not need to pay the $19 and send in the ownership form? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Money is not everything, lack of money is everything |
#101
|
|||
|
|||
80% lowers
I have a question for our more knowledgeable members. I apologize in advance if my questions have been asked and answered. Many times it is a lot of work to phrase the search to receive an answer that is viable. It is a multipart question.
So here goes, If I buy two 80% lowers for an AR-15 & AR-10 prior to Dec.31st, 2016 and use a Thordsen stocks for each, do I have to register them as an assault rifles, or are they considered a featureless rifle because they do not have a pistol grip? Am I under any obligation to the state to finish both of these rifles prior to Dec. 31st, 2016? Do I need to have a serial number on these rifles if I do all the work? Thank you for any info you might shed on my questions. All the best, Ray
__________________
Best regards, Ray Last edited by RPC56; 11-13-2016 at 10:32 PM.. Reason: grammar |
#102
|
||||
|
||||
My kung-fu not so strong, but this should answer at least part of your question:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s....php?t=1225675 |
#103
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
If you intend to register them as assault weapons, then they need to be made before 01-01-2017. Quote:
If you mark them before 07-01-2018, then you can use your own information to do so and they do not have to be registered with CA DOJ. After 06-30-2018, you will need to obtain CA DOJ approval and marking information to mark them. This process will register them with CA DOJ. Starting 01-01-2019, it will be illegal to possess home made firearms without any marking information. |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...201520160AB857
Because for polymer you will be required to permanently add metal into them as per compliance measures in the link above. Sounds painful. Generally speaking, just read the sections of the bill above. Specifically, 29180 and 29181 have the meat of how this law affects you, 80's, and you and 80's. Apply as needed to your situation and act accordingly. Pay attention to the dates, those play a factor too. make sure you cross reference those dates with the AW bill to make sure your plans are consistent with the storm that is coming. http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...201520160SB880 |
#114
|
||||
|
||||
i understand that for now it doesn't need to be registered. However, if I intend to register a home build as an AW, would I need to register it first to advise of its existence and then register as AW? Or would it be a one shot deal?
|
#115
|
||||
|
||||
Completed 80% AR Pistol Transfer
I am not sure if this thread belong here or another so please move as appropriate.
If one wants to buy or sell a home made AR pistol lower (with full ATF marking) then I think it should go thru FFL to comply with the law. In doing so, the lower would be considered registered and can be register as AW next year if need be. Right or wrong?
__________________
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed Last edited by SweetPotato; 11-17-2016 at 9:11 AM.. |
#116
|
||||
|
||||
Yes, it has to go through an FFL just like any other firearm.
Yes, it would be registered to the buyer. Yes, it should be eligible for AW registration next year. IANAL though, and contact the FFL first to make sure they're willing to transfer a homebuild.
__________________
|
#117
|
||||
|
||||
Wouldn't it also have to be marked with the required stuff as well?
__________________
NRA Lifer |
#118
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Yes, I updated the post just before you reply.
__________________
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed |
#119
|
||||
|
||||
Wait? What?
Unless I'm mistaken, I thought %80 lowers turned into self-manufactured firearms are fine for personal use but if you plan to sell them/transfer them then you require approval from the ATF in accordance with 27 CFR 478.92. [18 U.S.C. 923(i), 26 U.S.C. 5822]. In which case if you become a firearm manufacturer the whole 80% lower thing is moot, you can just go ahead and manufacture completed receivers. Please correct me if I'm wrong here but the impression given is 80% lowers [self made firearms] is personal use only. Or is this something where the powers that be wasn't specific enough, and you could be in a situation where you changed your mind later and wanted to sell 1. Has there been a case where there has been a 80% finished to 100% lower been transfered? Last edited by Geared Hub; 11-17-2016 at 10:24 AM.. |
#120
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|