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 02-21-2021, 7:22 PM
abinsinia's Avatar
abinsinia abinsinia is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,524
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default AB-1478 Firearms: unsafe handguns.(2021-2022)

In the prior legislative session the morons in Sac town disabled microstamping from a requirement for roster inclusion ..

This bill was queued to fix the mistake and require microstamping in two places till July 2022 (instead of no places till then)

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...02120220AB1478
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-21-2021, 7:25 PM
faris1984's Avatar
faris1984 faris1984 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,360
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

cool
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-22-2021, 8:52 AM
BaronW's Avatar
BaronW BaronW is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: La Palma, CA
Posts: 880
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Wait what? So by the letter of the law, microstamping isn't a requirement again until 2022?

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...r=4.&article=4.
Quote:
31910. As used in this part, “unsafe handgun” means any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person, for which any of the following is true:
(a) For a revolver:
(1) It does not have a safety device that, either automatically in the case of a double-action firing mechanism, or by manual operation in the case of a single-action firing mechanism, causes the hammer to retract to a point where the firing pin does not rest upon the primer of the cartridge.
(2) It does not meet the firing requirement for handguns.
(3) It does not meet the drop safety requirement for handguns.
(b) For a pistol:
(1) It does not have a positive manually operated safety device, as determined by standards relating to imported guns promulgated by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
(2) It does not meet the firing requirement for handguns.
(3) It does not meet the drop safety requirement for handguns.
(4) Commencing July 1, 2022, for all centerfire semiautomatic pistols that are not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 32015, it does not have a chamber load indicator.
(5) Commencing July 1, 2022, for all centerfire or rimfire semiautomatic pistols that are not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 32015, it does not have a magazine disconnect mechanism if it has a detachable magazine.
(6) (A) Commencing July 1, 2022, for all semiautomatic pistols that are not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 32015, it is not designed and equipped with a microscopic array of characters used to identify the make, model, and serial number of the pistol, etched or otherwise imprinted in one or more places on the interior surface or internal working parts of the pistol, and that are transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case when the firearm is fired.
(B) The Attorney General may also approve a method of equal or greater reliability and effectiveness in identifying the specific serial number of a firearm from spent cartridge casings discharged by that firearm than that which is set forth in this paragraph, to be thereafter required as otherwise set forth by this paragraph where the Attorney General certifies that this new method is also unencumbered by any patent restrictions. Approval by the Attorney General shall include notice of that fact via regulations adopted by the Attorney General for purposes of implementing that method for purposes of this paragraph.
(C) The microscopic array of characters required by this section shall not be considered the name of the maker, model, manufacturer’s number, or other mark of identification, including any distinguishing number or mark assigned by the Department of Justice, within the meaning of Sections 23900 and 23920.
(7) The Department of Justice shall, for each semiautomatic pistol newly added to the roster pursuant to Section 32015, remove from the roster exactly three semiautomatic pistols lacking one or more of the applicable features described in paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) of subdivision (b) and added to the roster before July 1, 2022. Notwithstanding those paragraphs, each semiautomatic pistol removed from the roster pursuant to this subdivision shall be considered an unsafe handgun. The Attorney General shall remove semiautomatic pistols from the roster pursuant to this subdivision in reverse order of their dates of addition to the roster, beginning with the semiautomatic pistol added to the roster on the earliest date and continuing until each semiautomatic pistol on the roster includes each of the applicable features described in those paragraphs.
(Amended by Stats. 2020, Ch. 292, Sec. 2. (AB 2847) Effective January 1, 2021.)
Also, is it just me or does 31910 section 7 make no sense? "A handgun is unsafe if it is a pistol and the following is true: the DOJ shall remove 3 pistols for every 1 added."
__________________
I am not a lawyer, the above does not constitute legal advice.

WTB: Savage 99 SN#507612 (buying back grandpa's rifle)
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-22-2021, 9:31 AM
Rivers's Avatar
Rivers Rivers is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Shelley, ID
Posts: 1,549
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronW View Post
Also, is it just me or does 31910 section 7 make no sense? "A handgun is unsafe if it is a pistol and the following is true: the DOJ shall remove 3 pistols for every 1 added."
I'd like to hear the CA AG explain to Judge Benitez how a handgun that was "safe" last year, through no action of its own or its manufacturer, suddenly now becomes "unsafe".
__________________
NRA Certified Instructor: Basic Pistol Shooting
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-22-2021, 9:33 AM
abinsinia's Avatar
abinsinia abinsinia is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,524
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronW View Post
Wait what? So by the letter of the law, microstamping isn't a requirement again until 2022?
Yeah, I agree "Wait what ?"

Microstamping is not required by law till July 2022.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-22-2021, 9:46 AM
Uncivil Engineer Uncivil Engineer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 927
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Is this just an attempt to moot the case before Benitez ? I bet we won't have any of it. But it could give cover to the 9th.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-22-2021, 11:49 AM
NorCalRT NorCalRT is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,231
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Does this not also include chamber indicator and magazine disconnect?

To me there is no reason Glock could not apply to get all gen 5 handguns added...

Last edited by NorCalRT; 02-22-2021 at 11:52 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-22-2021, 12:13 PM
abinsinia's Avatar
abinsinia abinsinia is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,524
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NorCalRT View Post
Does this not also include chamber indicator and magazine disconnect?

To me there is no reason Glock could not apply to get all gen 5 handguns added...
There is another code section 32010 which prevents a gun from getting drop tested which doesn't have LCI, magazine disconnect, and external safety.

The changes didn't change that other code section, so this only effects micostamping.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-22-2021, 1:59 PM
cz74 cz74 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 85
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Seem this person Assembly Member Chiu is obsessed with handgun roster, anyone know why he is so nuts?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-22-2021, 2:57 PM
BaronW's Avatar
BaronW BaronW is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: La Palma, CA
Posts: 880
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

If I were Sig Sauer, I'd get the 320 FCG in a CA-compliant body on the roster ASAP.
__________________
I am not a lawyer, the above does not constitute legal advice.

WTB: Savage 99 SN#507612 (buying back grandpa's rifle)
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-22-2021, 8:13 PM
nick nick is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 18,888
iTrader: 164 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cz74 View Post
Seem this person Assembly Member Chiu is obsessed with handgun roster, anyone know why he is so nuts?
He's a Californian anti-gun leftist.
__________________
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson
"Thou shalt not interfere with the Second Amendment rights of "law-abiding" citizens who want AK-47s only to protect hearth and home." - Paul Helmke finally gets it :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJgunguy24 View Post
Some people are so open minded, their brains have fallen out.


WTB: Galil .308 bolt & extractor, Saiga .223 bolt.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-22-2021, 9:18 PM
abinsinia's Avatar
abinsinia abinsinia is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,524
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

A while ago I asked in the "How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me" section if someone could make a gun with microstamping.

https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1637167

In the thread RickD427 stated that because of the way the law is written a non-FFL can make a gun and submit it for the Roster.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RickD427 View Post
Yes, it would be possible.

But you would have to build at least three copies and submit them for DOJ-certified lab testing. Please refer to Penal Code section 31905 and note the absence of any special provision exempting personal builders.
So it's possible for a private person to make a gun and apply for roster inclusion.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-22-2021, 10:10 PM
seaweedsoyboy seaweedsoyboy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 126
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abinsinia View Post
A while ago I asked in the "How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me" section if someone could make a gun with microstamping.

https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1637167

In the thread RickD427 stated that because of the way the law is written a non-FFL can make a gun and submit it for the Roster.



So it's possible for a private person to make a gun and apply for roster inclusion.
Anyone know how to incorporate a magazine disconnect into a Polymer80 or P320 FCU?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-23-2021, 8:09 AM
Bt Doctur Bt Doctur is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 464
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

The only thing "unsafe" is a democrat on the loose. My gun sits ready for action on a table. in 30 years is has not jumped to attention and has shot no one.
Can you define a "safe" handgun for humans to use?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-23-2021, 10:02 AM
Flintlock Tom's Avatar
Flintlock Tom Flintlock Tom is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Klamath Falls, OR
Posts: 3,294
iTrader: 33 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abinsinia View Post
A while ago I asked in the "How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me" section if someone could make a gun with microstamping.

https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1637167

In the thread RickD427 stated that because of the way the law is written a non-FFL can make a gun and submit it for the Roster.

So it's possible for a private person to make a gun and apply for roster inclusion.
Quote:
If I were Sig Sauer, I'd get the 320 FCG in a CA-compliant body on the roster ASAP.
So, is it ONLY the manufacturer that can submit a gun for testing or can a private citizen submit a gun he did not manufacture?
__________________
"Everyone must determine for themselves what level of tyranny they are willing to tolerate.
I let my 03 FFL expire in 2013 and my CA residency in 2015."
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-23-2021, 4:22 PM
abinsinia's Avatar
abinsinia abinsinia is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,524
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flintlock Tom View Post
So, is it ONLY the manufacturer that can submit a gun for testing or can a private citizen submit a gun he did not manufacture?

I can't say for certain, but I think you have to be the manufacture.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-23-2021, 4:47 PM
Scratch705's Avatar
Scratch705 Scratch705 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 11,846
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronW View Post
If I were Sig Sauer, I'd get the 320 FCG in a CA-compliant body on the roster ASAP.
only issue is will CA recognize that only the FCG is the "firearm"
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by leelaw View Post
Because -ohmigosh- they can add their opinions, too?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoCalSig1911 View Post
Preppers canceled my order this afternoon because I called them a disgrace... Not ordering from those clowns again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrepperGunShop View Post
Truthfully, we cancelled your order because of your lack of civility and your threats ... What is a problem is when you threaten my customer service team and make demands instead of being civil. Plain and simple just don't be an a**hole (where you told us to shove it).
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-23-2021, 5:24 PM
abinsinia's Avatar
abinsinia abinsinia is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,524
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scratch705 View Post
only issue is will CA recognize that only the FCG is the "firearm"

It has to be a complete gun with all the features required, less microstamping.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 02-23-2021, 5:32 PM
BaronW's Avatar
BaronW BaronW is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: La Palma, CA
Posts: 880
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

They'd need a grip frame and slide combination with a LCI and magazine disconnect safety to sell it in CA. Maybe a .22lr version to keep it cheaper. You could then pop out the FCG and build whatever 320 you want.
__________________
I am not a lawyer, the above does not constitute legal advice.

WTB: Savage 99 SN#507612 (buying back grandpa's rifle)
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 02-24-2021, 5:54 AM
franklinarmory's Avatar
franklinarmory franklinarmory is offline
Vendor/Retailer
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: San Benito County
Posts: 1,846
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

It is a trap ladies and gentlemen. The first company that does get their model on the list will create a need for three pistols to be removed. However, those manufacturers that had their pistols removed can reinstate their pistols by retesting. As each one does, then 9 more pistols come off the list. The insideously unconstitutional process is designed to exponentially eat our options away from within until there is nothing left.

I do not care to be the one to start the chain reaction. I would not encourage any other manufacturer to do so either. Other options are en route. Hang on.
__________________

www.franklinarmory.com
info@franklinarmory.com
ONLINE STORE: http://franklinarmory.com
Franklin Armory - Manufacturer of Quality, California Legal AR's, the F17 Series rimfire rifles in 17 WSM, the Drop-in Fixed Magazine (DFM), and the CA7, CA11, and CA12 Rostered AR Pistols!
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 02-24-2021, 8:00 PM
cire raeb cire raeb is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Democratic People's Republic of Kalfornia
Posts: 974
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

SIG should not give an inch by making a roster compliant P320 to appease Kalifornia. Instead they should support the average gunowners behind the line by promoting the 80%, by making slides and frames more readily available. God bless America and f**k Gavin Newsom.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 02-24-2021, 8:14 PM
M1NM's Avatar
M1NM M1NM is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: West Covina
Posts: 7,603
iTrader: 53 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rivers View Post
I'd like to hear the CA AG explain to Judge Benitez how a handgun that was "safe" last year, through no action of its own or its manufacturer, suddenly now becomes "unsafe".
Or how a gun becomes unsafe because the manufacturer doesn't pay an annual extortion fee.
__________________
Ruger No1 - 1A-7x57 1B-300WinMag 1H-458WinMag 1RSI-30-06 1S-7mmRemMag 1V-.223 K1V- 22-250Rem
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 02-24-2021, 9:19 PM
seaweedsoyboy seaweedsoyboy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 126
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by franklinarmory View Post
Other options are en route. Hang on.
You people really know how to blue ball a guy
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 02-25-2021, 6:33 AM
franklinarmory's Avatar
franklinarmory franklinarmory is offline
Vendor/Retailer
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: San Benito County
Posts: 1,846
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by seaweedsoyboy View Post
You people really know how to blue ball a guy
LOL! Sorry. That was a breadcrumb for CADOJ. Think of it as FUD for their consumption (except we are sincere and always follow through.) Its kind of like saying "check" before you're done moving your pawn.
__________________

www.franklinarmory.com
info@franklinarmory.com
ONLINE STORE: http://franklinarmory.com
Franklin Armory - Manufacturer of Quality, California Legal AR's, the F17 Series rimfire rifles in 17 WSM, the Drop-in Fixed Magazine (DFM), and the CA7, CA11, and CA12 Rostered AR Pistols!
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 02-25-2021, 1:06 PM
CandG's Avatar
CandG CandG is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 16,281
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by franklinarmory View Post
It is a trap ladies and gentlemen. The first company that does get their model on the list will create a need for three pistols to be removed. However, those manufacturers that had their pistols removed can reinstate their pistols by retesting. As each one does, then 9 more pistols come off the list. The insideously unconstitutional process is designed to exponentially eat our options away from within until there is nothing left.
Yep. If a democrat in CA is trying to pass a law that, on it's face, seems to be pro-2A, it's a trap. This bill is no exception. It's a backdoor scheme to further cripple our handgun availability as much as they can. Hopefully, every manufacturer will see this for what it is, and none of them submit anything new for the roster.
__________________
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 6:51 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, 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 2002-2020, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.
Tactical Pants Tactical Boots Tactical Gear Military Boots 5.11 Tactical