#241
|
|||
|
|||
The following PROPOSED REGULATIONS:-
$5477. Registration of Assault Weapons Pursuant to Penal Code Section 30900(b)(11); Post-Registration Modification of Registered Assault Weapons, Prohibition. (a) The release mechanism for an amnunition feeding device on an assault weapon registeredpursuant to Penal Code section 30900, subdivision (b)(1) shall not be changed after the assault weapon is registered. (b) The prohibition in subdivision (a) does not extend to the repair or like-kind replacement of the mechanism. (c) This prohibition in subdivision (a) does not extend to a firearm that is undergoing the de-registration process pursuant to section 5478. Written confirmation from the Department that acknowledges the owner's intent to de-register his or her assault weapon pursuant to section 5478 shall be proof the de-registration process has been initiated. Note: Authority cited: Section 30900 Penal Code. Reference: Sections 30515, 30680, 30900 and 30950 Penal Code. Will be challenged very simply under the grounds that: Penal Code 30900 Subdivision (b) (1) 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 in Section 30515, including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be readily removed from the firearm with the use of a tool, shall register the firearm before January 1, 2018, but not before the effective date of the regulations adopted pursuant to paragraph (5), with the department pursuant to those procedures that the department may establish by regulation pursuant to paragraph (5). (2) Registrations shall be submitted electronically via the Internet utilizing a public-facing application made available by the department. (3) The registration shall contain a description of the firearm that identifies it uniquely, including all identification marks, the date the firearm was acquired, the name and address of the individual from whom, or business from which, the firearm was acquired, as well as the registrant’s full name, address, telephone number, date of birth, sex, height, weight, eye color, hair color, and California driver’s license number or California identification card number. (4) The department may charge a fee in an amount of up to fifteen dollars ($15) per person but not to exceed the reasonable processing costs of the department. The fee shall be paid by debit or credit card at the time that the electronic registration is submitted to the department. The fee shall be deposited in the Dealers’ Record of Sale Special Account to be used for purposes of this section. (5) The department shall adopt regulations for the purpose of implementing this subdivision. These regulations are exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code). Does not prohibit the alteration, addition or removal of any feature on Registered Assault Weapons. It merely requires that such weapons, legally obtained between 2000 and 2016 (inclusive) be-registered within the allowed time window. Hence, the CA DOJ does not have the legal basis or authority to enact any prohibition to this regard. Specifically, the CA DOJ does not have the legal basis or authority to prohibit the addition, removal or alteration of the magazine release method, pistol grip, adjustable/foldng stock, thumb hole, flash hider, bayonet lug, grenade launcher or forward pistol grip on legally owned and registered assault weapons. Last edited by dwightlooi; 01-03-2017 at 3:55 PM.. |
#242
|
|||
|
|||
That's so they can take once law abiding, tax paying citizens and turn them into hard core felons. All the while releasing the real hardcore nonproductive felons onto the streets to murder and main at their leisure.
|
#243
|
||||
|
||||
This is pretty stupid question. But I assume I can't put my RAW (AR pistol) on my CCW card but what about a non-RAW pistol?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Money is not everything, lack of money is everything |
#244
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I'm not a lawyer, but it seems that the one to ask is the guy that signs your card. Best advice you'll get from me is "don't assume anything". ;-) |
#245
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Not a stupid question. You would almost uselessly waste a slot on your card though, because the "defined destination" requirements for transport of a RAW and the transport condition requirements of a RAW make it impossible to carry one concealed even if you have license to do so... it would be illegal transport while legal possession. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
#246
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#247
|
|||
|
|||
USFS allows them in certain areas, not a blanket ok for all national forests. And remember, NPS (Park Service) runs national parks, a whole separate Agency with separate lands form BLM and USFS (Forest Service).
|
#248
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Handgun transport laws only include specific destination requirements when NOT transported within a motor vehicle. There is nothing illegal about carrying a "trunk gun" 24/7 provided it is unloaded and in a locked container. When the gun is removed from the vehicle, the specific destination requirements come into play. RAW transportation laws include the specific destination requirement at all times. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
- Rich |
#249
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
The existence of a CCW permit with that RAW listed makes ENTIRE STATES within which the CCW is recognized and valid -- with the exception of prohibited places like court houses or "gun free zones" -- a specific location or destination at which the RAW may be legally put to use. There is no legal limits to the size of a specific location. For all intents and purposes that specific location can be the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA if the owner of the RAW has a CCW recognized in 50 states or has multiple CCWs which collectively allows for him to conceal carry in 50 states. |
#250
|
|||
|
|||
[QUOTE=dwightlooi;19438003]The following PROPOSED REGULATIONS:-
I've only just started reading through the new laws in preparation for a move to CA. From my understanding of Assembly Bill No. 1135, what was considered an 'assault weapon' prior to 1/1/17 will continue to be illegal to possess until it is registered in 2017 and then it becomes legal to possess. Can this be correct? |
#251
|
|||
|
|||
Thank you all for contributing. I'm just starting to read up on the laws submitted to the DOJ and am a little unclear on destination requirements though it should be straight forward. I've searched for this but maybe I am phrasing my search poorly.
30945 states that a RAW maybe possessed "on property owned by another with the owner’s express permission". To be clear as it is a destination, is there any issue with leaving the RAW on location locked up appropriately. (eg. going to father-in-law's ranch for the week and leaving it behind locked up in a Pelican case while heading into town for groceries) Additionally, If I recall correctly when you stay in a hotel, your room becomes your domicile. If you were to take a shooting course on the other side of the state which necessitated staying in a hotel for a few days, would that be considered your residence per 30945 and qualify as a destination? I'm guessing this is a no-go. Thank you in advance for any light that can be shed on the matter. |
#252
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
#253
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Because of the specific destination requirements for RAWs, RAWs can not be listed on a CA LTC permit. If you have a handgun that is listed on your CA LTC permit and it then becomes a RAW, the issuing agency will remove it from your permit. |
#254
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Unless a permit allowing additional uses is first obtained under Section 31000, a person who has registered an assault weapon or registered a .50 BMG rifle under this article may possess it only under any of the following conditions: (a) At that person's residence, place of business, or other property owned by that person, or on property owned by another with the owner's express permission. . . " The language referring to 'property owned by another with the owner's express permission' would likely be interpreted to apply to both the hotel room near the training range and your father-in-law's ranch, but we need to see final regs and interpretations to see what distortions of the English language the DOJ can come up with.
__________________
"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." (Thomas Jefferson) |
#255
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Here are the regs: https://d3uwh8jpzww49g.cloudfront.ne...egulations.pdf There never has been, and continues to not be, a regulatory condition explaining the plain text of possession of RAWs. |
#256
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
The file name is "proposed," and the DOJ/BOF says that the regs aren't final yet. |
#257
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
They aren't "final" until filed by OAL with the Secretary of State. (Similarly, Legislation signed by the Governor is not final until filed by the SoS). Usually, OAL conducts a review of the reg and whether it meets the requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act and OAL regulations. In this case, the legislation exempted the regulations from the APA. OAL is undertaking an administrative review of the regs, but cannot apply any APA constraints to them. The posted checklist gives you an idea of how non-substantive this review is. "File and Print" is the instruction. |
#258
|
|||
|
|||
Sorry if this has been brought up already but what if you just put a regular magazine release on your BBv1 gun prior to taking photos and submitting photos with a regular magazine release hence locking in your configuration as a regular magazine release gun. The DoJ has pretty much said all of 2017 is amnesty for unregistered assault weapons so...it would technically be legal to do so right?
|
#259
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Changing the bullet button to a standard release in 2017 makes your gun different from what you possessed prior to 1/1/2017, so you can't register it. If you try to register it, sending in pictures of your gun with a standard mag release, you are representing that you possessed that assault weapon prior to 1/1/2017. This will create difficulties for you because if you installed the standard BB between 2000 and 2017, you created an unregistered assault weapon...which is seriously ungood. |
#260
|
|||
|
|||
Yeah. Pretty vague. The key word being 'that' assault weapon. Actually, it's not technically an assault weapon until 1/1/2017 so a technical reading could mean that it needs to be an unregistered AW prior to 1/1/2017.
|
#261
|
||||
|
||||
No, it's not vague. It's plain English.
|
#262
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#263
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The statute is written in the current day. That means the pre-1/1/17 non-AW BB gun is now an assault weapon and is referred to as an assault weapon. But, you got this. Do what you want to do, and swap out the BB for a standard mag release, photograph it and send it to DOJ. |
#264
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Just throwing it out there. Glad I could help |
#265
|
||||
|
||||
Of course it was written last year. However, not one word of it had any standing until the effective date of the legislation. That was 1/1/17.
|
#270
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
However, once registered as an assault weapon - going by the Department of Justice's not-yet-published regulations, you cannot change the magazine release after registration. So, if the regs stay in place - I would say you cannot change the magazine release even if you went featureless after it is registered as an assault weapon. You can, however, go featureless, de-register it as an AW and then change the magazine release. |
#272
|
|||
|
|||
Why convert to temporary featureless? The DOJ has already stated that any BBv1 guns from 2016 will have amnesty until registration for all of 2017.
|
#273
|
||||
|
||||
You can not register a featureless build.
__________________
- Rich |
#274
|
|||
|
|||
This guy was able to voluntarily register his builds; some of which were featureless.
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s....php?t=1293289 |
#276
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#277
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
DOJ has not provided a way for us to do that yet.
__________________
- Rich |
#278
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
No he was not, he only received approval of the serialization he applied to them. Those are not registered assault weapons yet, and he even says so in the thread. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
#279
|
||||
|
||||
Folks, this thread is NOT about 'how to register' or 'what may be registered'.
This thread is about 'what you are allowed to do, or must do, or must not do' with whatever you have that is registered, either already or later in 2017. ETA - those laws exist; they did not change for 2017.
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.” Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs. Last edited by Librarian; 01-22-2017 at 5:33 PM.. |
#280
|
|||
|
|||
Some of you have gone anal, on the upcoming guessing of the RAW "can / cannot do's".
Just look over the past published RAW ownership requirements, from the past registrations and follow them.
__________________
* NRA Life Member since 1978 CRPA Life Member since 1978 Last edited by Tankhatch; 01-22-2017 at 6:22 PM.. Reason: Added "RAW ownership" to my sentence |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|