Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

PSA: Which CA Roster Pistols Get Ejected First ?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • abinsinia
    Veteran Member
    • Feb 2015
    • 4246

    PSA: Which CA Roster Pistols Get Ejected First ?

    Here is a partial list of dates when which pistol was first added to the CA Roster. Sorted by oldest date first.

    Pistol Beretta 96 .40 S&W 4.9" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Beretta 92FS 9mm 4.9" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Kimber Comp. Stnls II .45 ACP 4" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Kimber Custom Target II .45 ACP 5" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Kimber Stnls Target II .45 ACP 5" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Kimber Pro Carry II .45 ACP 4" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Kimber Stnls Pro Carry II .45 ACP 4" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Kimber Ult Carry II .45 ACP 3" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Kimber Stnls Ultra Carry II .45 ACP 3" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Kimber Pro Carry HD II .45 ACP 4" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Ceska Zbrojovka (CZ) CZ 75 B (Black) 01120 .40 S&W 4.58" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Ceska Zbrojovka (CZ) CZ 75 Compact (Black) 01190 9mm 3.765" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Ceska Zbrojovka (CZ) CZ 75 D (Black) 01194 9mm 3.763" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Ceska Zbrojovka (CZ) CZ 75 B SA (Black) 01150 9mm 4.593" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Ceska Zbrojovka (CZ) CZ 75 B (Black) 01102 9mm 4.593" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Ceska Zbrojovka (CZ) CZ 97 B (Black) 01401 .45 ACP 4.658" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Heckler & Koch USP9 V1" 9mm "4.25" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Heckler & Koch USP40 V1" .40 S&W "4.25" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Heckler & Koch USP45 V1 (Black Frame)" .45 ACP "4.41" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Heckler & Koch Comp USP9 V1 (Black Frame) 9mm 3.58" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Heckler & Koch Comp USP45 V1 .45 ACP 3.8" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Heckler & Koch Comp USP40 V1 .40 S&W 3.58" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Glock 20 10mm 4.60" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Glock 31 .357 SIG 4.49" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Glock 30 .45 ACP 3.78" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Glock 21 .45 ACP 4.60" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Glock 23 .40 S&W 4.02" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Glock 26 9mm 3.46" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Glock 36 .45 ACP 3.78" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Glock 22 .40 S&W 4.49" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Glock 33 .357 SIG 3.46" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Glock 17 (Black) 9mm 4.49" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Glock 32 .357 SIG 4.02" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Glock 27 .40 S&W 3.46" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Beretta 92FS Brigadier 9mm 4.92" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Beretta 96 Brigadier .40 S&W 4.92" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Beretta 92FS Inox 9mm 4.92" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Glock 19 9mm 4.02" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Glock 35 .40 S&W 5.32" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Springfield Armory PB9108L .45 ACP 5" 2/9/2001
    Pistol Springfield Armory PB9108L (Integrated Locking System) .45 ACP 5" 7/19/2002
    Pistol Springfield Armory PX9109L (ambi safety) .45 ACP 5" 7/19/2002
    Pistol Springfield Armory PX9628L (ambi safety) .45 ACP 6" 7/19/2002
    Pistol Sig Sauer P239 (Blued) 9mm 3.6" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Sig Sauer P239 (Blued) .357 SIG 3.6" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Beretta 3032 Tomcat Inox .32 ACP 2.4" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Beretta 96 Inox .40 S&W 4.92" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Beretta 96 Brigadier Inox .40 S&W 4.92" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Beretta 96G Elite II .40 S&W 4.7" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Beretta 92FS Brigadier Inox 9mm 4.92" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Beretta 92FS Compact Type M 9mm 4.3" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Beretta 92G Elite II J92GE20 9mm 4.7" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Heckler & Koch USP 40 Exp.V9 .40 S&W 5.20" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Heckler & Koch USP 45 Exp.V1 .45 ACP 5.20" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Sig Sauer P232 (Stainless) 232-380-SSS .380 ACP 3.7" 1/1/2001
    Pistol Glock 20C 10mm 4.60" 1/10/2001
    Pistol Glock 17C 9mm 4.49" 1/10/2001

    Whole list attached.
    Attached Files
    Last edited by abinsinia; 11-06-2022, 5:09 PM.
  • #2
    saudadeii
    Veteran Member
    • Dec 2012
    • 3445

    If you mean when a "microstamped compliant" pistol come out, none of them because it won't happen.
    My Marketplace Feedback: https://www.calguns.net/forum/market...k#post54003245

    Comment

    • #3
      abinsinia
      Veteran Member
      • Feb 2015
      • 4246

      Originally posted by saudadeii
      If you mean when a "microstamped compliant" pistol come out, none of them because it won't happen.
      I agree it's not likely, but if one does then at least we know what comes off first.

      Comment

      • #4
        WinchesterBolt
        Member
        • Sep 2020
        • 151

        Does that new law only remove handguns from the roster, if/when a new microstamped one is added?

        If so I agree manufacturers are going to be very reluctant to add new ones - not only the microstamp aspect, but that three guns get removed for every one added.

        Comment

        • #5
          SkyHawk
          I need a LIFE!!
          • Sep 2012
          • 23525

          Originally posted by WinchesterBolt
          Does that new law only remove handguns from the roster, if/when a new microstamped one is added?

          If so I agree manufacturers are going to be very reluctant to add new ones - not only the microstamp aspect, but that three guns get removed for every one added.
          IIRC it bumps three for every one added.

          And the main stream manufacturers are not who you should be worried about adding a microstamp gun to the roster. You need to worry about some Bloomberg backed no-name company adding 10 or 20 color / sight / grip variants of a single hack job smart gun that no one wants. Just like Armatix.
          Last edited by SkyHawk; 11-12-2020, 4:50 PM.
          Click here for my iTrader Feedback thread: https://www.calguns.net/forum/market...r-feedback-100

          Comment

          • #6
            abinsinia
            Veteran Member
            • Feb 2015
            • 4246

            I estimate it would take 166 new entries to wipe all the old ones away.

            Comment

            • #7
              Vinnie Boombatz
              Veteran Member
              • Feb 2020
              • 3036

              Why would a manufacturer go through the process and enormous cost of micro stamping and getting a new firearm added to the roster just for one state knowing that it would result in firearms that are already on the roster being removed? This makes no sense to the manufacturers from a business standpoint since they can just keep making guns they are already tooled for and have been producing instead of gong through all the hassle and cost for getting something new on the roster.
              sigpic

              Comment

              • #8
                plumbum
                Calguns Addict
                • May 2010
                • 5394

                Remember how Armscor was able to resurrect the 1911 models they had rostered under Charles Daly, so that is also an option - like if Browning decided to put the Hi Power back in production; no microstamping required. Maybe Ruger could even find a way to begin producing P series guns as they were also rostered previously?
                Originally posted by ysr_racer
                Please don't bring logic and reason into an interwebs discussion

                Comment

                • #9
                  9kracing
                  Member
                  • Sep 2014
                  • 406

                  If I was Gavin I'd start with the Glock 17 and 19
                  **WTB Northtech Defense upper receiver**

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Milsurp1
                    Veteran Member
                    • Aug 2016
                    • 3091

                    Read Skyhawk’s post above. It isn’t the actual bona fide manufactures who would try to roster a smart gun. If the Democrats didn’t have a Bloomberg funded manufacturer waiting in the wings to build chitty but compliant guns, why would the legislature have teed up the roster purge by amending the law to make it easier to get a micro stamped gun onto the roster?

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      dilbert40
                      Junior Member
                      • Apr 2016
                      • 96

                      Originally posted by Vinnie Boombatz
                      Why would a manufacturer go through the process and enormous cost of micro stamping and getting a new firearm added to the roster just for one state knowing that it would result in firearms that are already on the roster being removed? This makes no sense to the manufacturers from a business standpoint since they can just keep making guns they are already tooled for and have been producing instead of gong through all the hassle and cost for getting something new on the roster.
                      Don't know. I learned to never underestimate people's intelligence WRT to profitability. Almost all *volume* manufacturers are tooled up for LCI and Mag Disconnect, at least for new designs. If CA allows MS on firing pin only to be qualified (w/ LCI and MD tooled option turned on), then it only takes one volume manufacturer to flinch. Choice between continued MFG of old model and old tooling exactly the same versus just MS on FP on the latest model MFG, the latter is much easier option for MFG. No MFG would flinch -- they all learned from SW H hole. But I don't like the fact that the whole thing is not on a stable ground.
                      Last edited by dilbert40; 11-13-2020, 9:49 AM.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        naz
                        Veteran Member
                        • Jun 2020
                        • 3108

                        Time to all look at that shopping list and go back to “gun a month” program ?

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          dilbert40
                          Junior Member
                          • Apr 2016
                          • 96

                          Originally posted by naz
                          Time to all look at that shopping list and go back to “gun a month” program ?
                          Just me. I would not panic. There is no news nor new rumors to act on.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          UA-8071174-1