Glock 19/17 RAW?

[zmreg]

Was thinking of registering a CA compliant Gen3 Glock 19 and 17 as AWs next year. My purpose is to enable each to accept a threaded barrel mostly just for aesthetics and also maybe for using a compensator as I please. Any thoughts? Pros....cons

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[deckhandmike]

I like the idea. A glock can be a cheap range toy so no big loss in registering a gun they already know you have.

[zmreg]

I like the idea. A glock can be a cheap range toy so no big loss in registering a gun they already know you have.

Exactly my thoughts, my only concern is the added restrictions on AWs as far storage and transportation, etc. But like you said glocks are cheap and people own multiples.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[jdben92883]

How did AW registering suddenly allow for threaded pistol barrels on magazine-in-grip handguns? The AR pistols have to have their muzzle devices welded on.

[zmreg]

How did AW registering suddenly allow for threaded pistol barrels on magazine-in-grip handguns? The AR pistols have to have their muzzle devices welded on.

I'm not sure I understand. ...are you saying registering a Glock pistol as an AW will not allow it to have a threaded barrel.


AW definition


A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following: 1) a threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer; 2) a second handgrip; 3) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel allowing the bearer to fire the weapon without burning his or her hand, except a slide that encloses the barrel; or 4) the capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip;

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[Turo]

How did AW registering suddenly allow for threaded pistol barrels on magazine-in-grip handguns?Because it's always been that way? The AR pistols have to have their muzzle devices welded on. Since when?

Emphasis mine.

A threaded barrel on a pistol with a magazine in the grip is, and has been since the 90s, an "assault weapon" in california. The registry is going to open (as far as we understand it) and people are going to register guns so that they don't have to worry about creating an "assault weapon" in doing what they want to the gun.

AR pistols have never required their muzzle devices to be welded on, unless you're creating a >26" OAL "Long gun" with a barrel less than about 11 inches or so. Or unless you're creating a rifle out of one, in which case it wouldn't be an AR "pistol" anymore.

[radicalray]

have been thinking about it too, like some I have plenty of Glocks so not worried about restrictions on AW, won't be my ccw etc

[jdben92883]

So to clarify...using the handgun flowchart, once the gun reaches #12, nothing below it applies? Don't remember the source/thread, but I recall several knowledgeable members reaching a consensus that once a bullet-buttoned pistol was registered, it couldn't have a threaded muzzle. I understand that they can have a threaded muzzle now, but that's due to the fixed magazine.

I'll definitely make the concession that my memory is shot...particularly with this sea of new regulations.

[zmreg]

So to clarify...using the handgun flowchart, once the gun reaches #12, nothing below it applies? Don't remember the source/thread, but I recall several knowledgeable members reaching a consensus that once a bullet-buttoned pistol was registered, it couldn't have a threaded muzzle. I understand that they can have a threaded muzzle now, but that's due to the fixed magazine.

I'll definitely make the concession that my memory is shot...particularly with this sea of new regulations.

As long as it's a registered AW, then yes. I remember before the 2000 AW ban, HK came out with a Tactical version of the USP with a threaded barrel. Those we're perfectly legal to buy before 2000 but had to be registered as an AW post 2000. I'm not sure if you're referring to the SSE rules for AR pistols. Unless they change the definition of AWs next year during the open registration then I should be able to own a AW glock.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[John Browning]

I'll be doing the same thing with a competition Glock if possible so that I can run a compensator.

[Cokebottle]

Can't legally do it unless you install a mag lock and configure it as such this year.

You can not legally manufacture an AW in 2016 or 2017.
The definition of AW does not change, what changes is the definition of fixed magazine.

Can you get away with it? Most likely.
That's what DOJ wants... they would be happy if you registered ALL of your guns. I don't think they are going to question any registration.

At that point, they can never be sold, given, lent, or transferred to anyone in California ever, and when you die, it goes out of state or TO the state.

[jdben92883]

That sounds correct. It would seem at odds that CA would allow a bazillion "new" assault weapons be registered.

Can't legally do it unless you install a mag lock and configure it as such this year.

You can not legally manufacture an AW in 2016 or 2017.
The definition of AW does not change, what changes is the definition of fixed magazine.

Can you get away with it? Most likely.
That's what DOJ wants... they would be happy if you registered ALL of your guns. I don't think they are going to question any registration.

At that point, they can never be sold, given, lent, or transferred to anyone in California ever, and when you die, it goes out of state or TO the state.

[zmreg]

Can't legally do it unless you install a mag lock and configure it as such this year.

You can not legally manufacture an AW in 2016 or 2017.
The definition of AW does not change, what changes is the definition of fixed magazine.

Can you get away with it? Most likely.
That's what DOJ wants... they would be happy if you registered ALL of your guns. I don't think they are going to question any registration.

At that point, they can never be sold, given, lent, or transferred to anyone in California ever, and when you die, it goes out of state or TO the state.

I guess these are the key points that needs clarification on this thread:


1. Is there anything in the books that would prohibit me from trying to register an otherwise common glock 17 as an AW?

2. If I successfully register a CA compliant Glock as an AW, would putting a threaded barrel after the fact be considered manufacturing?



Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[Cokebottle]

Once it is an AW, there appears to be nothing in the law that prohibits a change to another AW configuration (or non-AW configuration, and the original law from 2000 has a procedure for de-featuring and de-registering a RAW)

The issue is whether or not something not currently in a configuration that will be considered an AW in 2017 may be legally registered.

The law simply states that it must have been lawfully possessed from 2001-2016 inclusive, which prevents late registration of 1989 and 1999 weapons, and prevents registration of an AW that is assembled in 2017.

But...

The law does not state that the gun had to be in AW-form in 2016 (that would be illegal in 2016). The legislative intent is that the gun be in a form that will transition from legal to AW on Jan 1, but as usual, the laws are so poorly worded that we can't say with any certainty.

[Redeyedrider]

Was thinking of registering a CA compliant Gen3 Glock 19 and 17 as AWs next year. My purpose is to enable each to accept a threaded barrel mostly just for aesthetics and also maybe for using a compensator as I please. Any thoughts? Pros....cons

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

I think you may run into an issue, because the gun is illegal to possess before you register it (a threaded barrel semi-auto pistol). Hence, you can not register something you don't legally possess.

edit to add -

There is a grace period for our BB rifles that allows us to posses them for 1 year before we must register them. This situation is not present for threaded barrel pistols.