2017 AR pistol thread (master)

[9mmContagion]

Where do we stand, in case I missed it, on AR pistols that were purchased as "single-shot," and are still single shot?

A.W.D.

#11 on the Handgun Flow Chart- Is the firearm a semi-automatic? ---> No ---> LEGAL

[marausch]

Hey, Quiet, I thought that the SSE went away 1/1/16.

[Quiet]

Hey, Quiet, I thought that the SSE went away 1/1/16.

The single-shot pistol exemption was amended and that change went into effect on 01-01-2015.

The original single-shot pistol exemption was given the abbreviation of "SSE" and was allowed from 01-01-2001 to 12-31-2014.

SSE only required the pistol to have a minimum 6" barrel length and a minimum 10.5" overall length and operated via single-shot.

The current single-shot pistol exemption was given the abbreviation of "SSE2" and has been allowed since 01-01-2015.

SSE2 requires the pistol to have a minimum 6" barrel length and a minimum 10.5" overall length and operate via bolt-action or break-top and can never have been semi-auto. [PC 32100(b)]

Because SSE2 can not apply to a "semiautomatic pistol that has been temporarily or permanently altered so that it will not fire in a semiautomatic mode", pistols made to comply with SSE2 can not be made from an existing semi-auto pistol or have a functional semi-auto operating system.

AFAIK...
There were no laws/regulations that prohibited a SSE pistol to be made into a semi-auto pistol.
Because of the non semi-auto part of SSE2, some argue that it may be illegal to convert a SSE2 pistol into a semi-auto pistol.
Because of part of the "home built (80%)" firearm laws going into effect, starting 01-01-2017, it may now be illegal to change a SSE2 into a semi-auto pistol due to new definitions that affect "building" firearms going into effect.

[IAmTheReaper]

I've said it before and will say it again. As a law abiding gun owner, I am not going to live my life in fear of some overzealous LEO interpreting the law in his own manner. If it happens it happens, but I'm going to continue to live my life and continue to legally configure and shoot my guns. I'm also not going to be intimidated by this states unconstitutional politicians and their anti 2A laws.

Exactly this.
I'm not going to live paranoid or be fearful or overly suspicious. I'm an equal citizen of this country and state, certainly no less than anyone else.

- In 2016 I legally bought firearms.
- In 2016 I legally bought what will be considered AW firearms.
- In 2016 I legally built 80% firearms that will be considered AW firearms.

I bought these specifically to be in compliance ahead of the 12/31/2016 deadlines. I intend to keep these configured as they are, registering again/serializing the 80%s, paying the additional fees, limiting the transporting, etc. I have dotted every "I" and crossed every "T" so far and will continue to do so. I have not Volreg, called the DOJ, or any other activity to serialize-register the 80%-register the AW firearms because there is no clear path and no published application of new laws. When the state has done their job, I'll make my decisions and proceed from there. I might make a mistake at some point in the process, but I'm trying not to. This is all I can do.

[marausch]

Thanks for the clarity.

[Cokebottle]

IIRC, a pistol is a pistol, there are no centerfire/rimfire differences for pistols. Therefore, following the flow chart, once the BB was deemed "NOT a fixed magazine device," you move to not being allowed a shroud or threaded barrel.

Yes, if you remove the handguard, you should be G2G

The detachable magazine outside of the pistol grip is a "feature"

There is some question as to whether the BB is still valid for eliminating this "feature" but I would not want to be the test case.

Until a test case is settled, I maintain that is is not possible to build a featureless AR or AK pistol.

It MUST be fixed magazine or break-top.

[biglou]

So let see if I understand this. I have a registeted AR pistol with a bullet button, all I have to do is make it break action open to load it with say the ARmaglock and I'm good ? No need to do the AW registration?

[Cokebottle]

So let see if I understand this. I have a registeted AR pistol with a bullet button, all I have to do is make it break action open to load it with say the ARmaglock and I'm good ? No need to do the AW registration?

Correct.

But when they ban the ARMaglock next year, you'll still have to register and you'll be stuck with breaking the top open forever.

Register this year and you can continue to drop your mags using the BB.

[NPFreedom]

Thanks for the write up. Tagged for reference.

[Oc plumber]

So I built an ar pistol back in 13 with some friends , did the 0 end sled and then ran it and have ever since as a semi , I've never registered or anything like that cause I never thought I needed to until now & we can't even do that right? am I misssing something?

[DrjonesUSA]

So would it be a bad idea to try to get one onto my CCW permit?

I heard there are a few people who actually did this.

[Cokebottle]

So would it be a bad idea to try to get one onto my CCW permit?

I heard there are a few people who actually did this.

It WAS possible (in some counties), but with the current laws, you would not be able to carry a RAW due to the locked container and specific destination requirements.

A non-RAW would be either not approved at all due to it being a single shot, or if break-top semi auto, would likely get a serious lecture from the IA about the inappropriateness of such an unpractical defensive weapon.

[HighRoad308]

First issue... (making a CA legal AR style pistol)

The handgun needs to be made into a dimensionally compliant bolt-action single-shot pistol or a dimensionally compliant break-top/open single-shot pistol.

Because the firearm can never had been semi-auto prior to creation, you will most likely need to build your own upper, instead of buying an existing upper and modifying it. This is because existing uppers are typically test fired by the manufacturer as a semi-auto.

...

Second issue... (conversion from exempt handgun to unsafe handgun)

Because of definition changes relating to CA's "home built firearm" laws, it may no longer be legal to convert a dimensionally compliant bolt-action single-shot pistol or dimensionally complaint break-top single-shot pistol into a semi-auto pistol.
{wait and see, while lawyers do battle}

...

That said, due to CA's "home built (80%)" firearm laws, starting 01-01-2017, it may no longer be legal to make an exempt pistol (dimensionally compliant bolt-action/break-top single-shot pistol) and convert it to semi-auto because it would be considered making an unsafe handgun.

Because "manufacturing" is now legally defined as: [PC 29180(a)]
A. Fabricating or constructing a firearm.
B. Fitting together parts to construct a firearm.

It can now be argued that converting the firearm from single-shot to semi-auto, is making a new firearm.

{wait and see mode, while lawyers do battle}

Ok, so let's say I hypothetically wanted to make an AR Pistol in 2017, started from an 80% lower. I wouldn't want to register it, so I would go the BB2 route. That would make it so that I can choose to engrave a serial number, or not. So I think I have that part understood, but there's a couple points above that I'm still not sure about though.

First is the part about making it SSE2 first. Quiet states that you wouldn't want to use a completed upper as it has likely been test fired as a semi auto. Most parts can be bought in a state that you can assume it's never been used in a semi auto (e.g. barrel without a gas tube on it), however I'm curious about a bolt/bcg. I was looking at BCM bcg as they come highly recommended, but they say this:

Prior to shipping, all BCM Bolt Carrier Groups are test fired for function. As such, the Bolt Carrier Group will show handling marks consistent with these quality control procedures.

There's no way to really know if it was fired in a single shot firearm or what, and I would say it's best to err on the side of caution assume it was used semi/full auto and not use it at all in a pistol build? But then what guarantees do I have of ANY bolt/bcg that I buy that it's never been test fired in a semi auto? Even if it doesn't say anywhere in a product listing that it's been tested before shipping, it easily could have been. Something to worry about? Or something that a prosecutor would have to prove (impossible sounding). Could I just buy any cheap bolt/bcg that doesn't mention being test fired to use for the SSE part of the build? And then when I do the semi-auto conversion slap in a bolt that may have been tested as a semi or full auto bolt?

Second issue is I'm not clear on the built after 1-1-17 part. I've seen arguments that it's fine, and I've seen people say it's still legally up in the air. It seems it's clear that you can legally still build a break top single shot ar pistol, and keep it that way. The question is whether or not converting it to a semi-auto makes it an unsafe handgun. Is this only if you want to register it? Does the break action style mag lock nullify this? Or is this across the board? Please enlighten me!

apologies if this has been covered already, I did read through several other AR Pistol threads. This is the only one recent enough that I could post a reply to though.

[Quiet]

First is the part about making it SSE2 first.

It's harder to prove semi-auto with just the BCG.

Whereas, having an intact semi-auto operating system (gas tube/piston + gas block) is not hard to show that it was once or is semi-auto.
(AFAIK... When SSE2 AR pistol was being submitted to be listed on Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale. CA DOJ rejected intact semi-auto operating system and had no issues with BCG)

Bottom line is where your comfort level is and how deep they'll go to prove something illegal.

Second issue is I'm not clear on the built after 1-1-17 part. I've seen arguments that it's fine, and I've seen people say it's still legally up in the air. It seems it's clear that you can legally still build a break top single shot ar pistol, and keep it that way. The question is whether or not converting it to a semi-auto makes it an unsafe handgun. Is this only if you want to register it? Does the break action style mag lock nullify this? Or is this across the board? Please enlighten me!

Because of part of the "home built" firearm laws going into effect on 01-01-2017, it may no longer be legal to convert a SSE2 pistol into a semi-auto pistol.

On 01-01-2017, "manufacturing" now includes assembling parts onto a firearm.

So, assembling semi-auto parts onto an existing single-shot pistol, would now be considered "manufacturing".
Therefore, you would be "manufacturing" an unsafe handgun, which violates CA laws.

It's uncertain, until DOJ weighs in and the lawyers fight it out.


Bottom line as of 01-01-2017:
making a SSE2 pistol = legal
making a semi-auto pistol = illegal
making a SSE2 pistol into a semi-auto pistol = illegal under the letter of the law, but unknown until after the lawyers (DOJ/NRA/CRPA/FPC) fight it out.

[HighRoad308]

It's harder to prove semi-auto with just the BCG.
...
Bottom line is where your comfort level is and how deep they'll go to prove something illegal.

got it

Earlier I was asking about if a BB2 or other locking device would nullify this unsafe handgun problem, but after thinking about it more it's not about whether you have to open the action. It's about having a pistol not on that CA Roster of safe handguns. It's only exempt from it because it's a single shot. Once you go above a single shot it's no longer exempt.

However I wouldn't be manufacturing an unsafe handgun... I would be "manufacturing" or "constructing" a "safe" single shot pistol. I would then be modifying an existing safe pistol into a semi-automatic off roster handgun. My original intent was not to build an unsafe handgun. My intent would be to create a safe single shot pistol. It's not illegal to have an off roster handgun in CA. It is illegal to manufacture one, even as an individual without the intent of sale. However that's the whole point of SSE2 right? My intention is to build it as a SSE2 compliant device and then potentially modify, not construct, it to be semi auto. Thus legally producing an off roster handgun that I can own.

On 01-01-2017, "manufacturing" now includes assembling parts onto a firearm.

It's uncertain, until DOJ weighs in and the lawyers fight it out.

Do you have a reference for the part about assembling parts onto