Glock 21SF and PC 12131.5

[Corbin Dallas]

Could this be the legal loophole for the 21SF to be imported into California?

Or am I totally off and not understanding what Glock did to the 21 to make it the 21SF.

(a) A firearm shall be deemed to satisfy the requirements of subdivision (a) of Section 12131 if another firearm made by the same manufacturer is already listed and the unlisted firearm differs from the listed firearm only in one or more of the following features:
(1) Finish, including, but not limited to, bluing, chrome-plating, oiling, or engraving.
(2) The material from which the grips are made.
(3) The shape or texture of the grips, so long as the difference in grip shape or texture does not in any way alter the dimensions, material, linkage, or functioning of the magazine well, the barrel, the chamber, or any of the components of the firing mechanism of the firearm.
(4) Any other purely cosmetic feature that does not in any way alter the dimensions, material, linkage, or functioning of the magazine well, the barrel, the chamber, or any of the components of the firing mechanism of the firearm.
(b) Any manufacturer seeking to have a firearm listed under this section shall provide to the Department of Justice all of the following:
(1) The model designation of the listed firearm.
(2) The model designation of each firearm that the manufacturer seeks to have listed under this section.
(3) A statement, under oath, that each unlisted firearm for which listing is sought differs from the listed firearm only in one or more of the ways identified in subdivision (a) and is in all other respects identical to the listed firearm.
(c) The department may, in its discretion and at any time, require a manufacturer to provide to the department any model for which listing is sought under this section, to determine whether the model complies with the requirements of this section.

[luvtolean]

I handled a 21SF in TX not too long ago.

I like where you're going here.

[XDshooter]

The SF is altered in it's dimensions, so that wouldn't work.

They didn't just change the grips.

[Corbin Dallas]

The SF is altered in it's dimensions, so that wouldn't work.

They didn't just change the grips.

But did they alter it in such a way that...

does not in any way alter the dimensions, material, linkage, or functioning of the magazine well, the barrel, the chamber, or any of the components of the firing mechanism of the firearm.

I don't think the law cares if the grips are changed, nor if the size of the overall weapon changes, only if the modifications change the...

Dimensions of the magazine well
Dimensions of the barrel
Dimensions of the chamber
Dimensions of the firing mechanism

Material of the magazine well
Material of the barrel
Material of the chamber
Material of the firing mechanism

Linkage of the magazine well
Linkage of the barrel
Linkage of the chamber
Linkage of the firing mechanism

Function of the magazine well
Function of the barrel
Function of the chamber
Function of the firing mechanism

Does that make sense? I mean, if we send our glock out for grip reduction, this changes the overall size, right? If we add a magazine well, this too changes the overall size, right? So I think the appearance of the weapon is a non-issue, only the workings of said weapon.

So this is where I don't understand. The G21 was approved for use and as I understand it, the G21SF is the same weapon, only with a thinner frame.

Same firing mech, same barrel, same trigger assembly, etc...

Or am I just wishing this would work......

[E. Fudd]

It also has a different ambi mag release and uses different mags from the older 21's. The newer 21 mags shipping have the cut-outs on the mag bodies to work with old and new 21/21SF's (side and front), but the old (original) style 21 mags will not work with the 21SF. Deal breaker for me.

[Corbin Dallas]

It also has a different ambi mag release and uses different mags from the older 21's. The newer 21 mags shipping have the cut-outs on the mag bodies to work with old and new 21/21SF's (side and front), but the old (original) style 21 mags will not work with the 21SF. Deal breaker for me.

Ok, but that has no bearing on mag size as you mentioned that the new magazine will work in the old 21.

So, that still doesn't change the design of the weapon, just the design of the magazine.

As for the ambi release, that could be added to any current glock. So if you sent your glock out for modification, do you need to resubmit it to CADOJ for testing?

[Dump1567]

The problem is that Glock probably takes advice from what the DOJ tells them and not what the penal code says.

Just as a lot of gun shops do.

[Corbin Dallas]

The problem is that Glock probably takes advice from what the DOJ tells them and not what the penal code says.

Just as a lot of gun shops do.

Hmm. Good point. Well, I guess that sums up that sucker.....

[bwiese]

From what I've seen here of the Glock 21SF, it's substantively different.

It's a new frame, and has new hardware (mag catch), shorter slide/bbl, etc.

Basically you can sell/resell an approved gun with only grips & sight changes, period.

A handgun really is certified as a 'system' and things like a mag catch are significant functional elements. The minor exemptions quoted above merely allow new-but-similar models to be Rostered without testing, but they still have to have the fees paid to be listed.

If you have a current Rostered Glock 21 and want to sell it to a CA FFL who wants to resell it back to another Californian, it really should be reverted back to its bone-stock status as far as things like mag catch, firing pin, barrel, etc. This would also include elements like the 3.5 vs 5lb trigger bar. The only allowable mods that wouldn't affect a Rostered Glock's resale in CA would be sights or maybe some trivial doodad like a Jentra plug that fills the opening at the bottom rear of the grip.

Similarly, Glock Gen I & Gen II guns are substantively different than Gen III guns and are not approved for FFL resale (only PPTable) - even though I am sure some slide by because they're all called a Glock "XX" over the years (x = {17,19,20,21...} )

A Glock that got its gripframe worked over with a 'melt' treatment or shortened, etc. would be PPT only and would not be resellable by an FFL. Even though that's just a grip, that's really a key structural member (frame).

Some asshat will get a misdemenor charge for doing this and perhaps get his FFL in trouble.

[9mmdude]

The 21SF uses the same slide and barrel. You can swap the uppers on a 21 and 21sf without any problems.

[bwiese]

The 21SF uses the same slide and barrel. You can swap the uppers on a 21 and 21sf without any problems.

Still moot, as the frame is substantively different.

It's a different gun and it ain't on the list, period.

[9mmdude]

We shall see. What M4 posted nailed on the head.

[bwiese]

We shall see. What M4 posted nailed on the head.

No, he didn't. He quoted inapplicable material. He's just plain wrong.

It's a substantively different gun. It's not listed. It can't be listed at this time even if fees were paid, IIRC, because there's no mag disconnect safety or loaded chamber indicator (one or the other is required of new pistols, can't remember which).

[Corbin Dallas]

Ok, easy there...

I never said I was right, merely looking for options. Maybe a loophole or 2?

I would love to own a 21SF, but if DOJ wont clear it, then so be it.

[bwiese]

I never said I was right, merely looking for options. Maybe a loophole or 2?

I would love to own a 21SF, but if DOJ wont clear it, then so be it.

Sorry, I was replying to 9mmdude's reply above.

Bottom line: the G21SF is a new, appreciably different gun. It key structural member - the frame - is different in size/dimensions. Given that Glock has redone frame dimensions, thicknesses, materials over generations to stop problems, one could not argue that this was not a substantive technical change. It appears that another Calgunner above pointed out the G21SF has a different mag catch, too - that's an appreciable difference.

Even if the G21SF were identical except for color/finish to the G21, it would have to be listed separately. The only variations allowed that don't apply to being listed separately are different grips (*not* grip frames!!!) and sights.
Once you start changing dimensions and components, it's a whole 'nuther gun requiring not only separate listing but separate testing/certification - and exposure to the new SB489 mag disconnect/loaded chamber indicator laws.

I do suspect eventually CA-approved new Glocks - like the 21SF but with mag disconnect and/or loaded chamber indicators, will make it into CA. Other states and bulk purchasers (PDs) require one or both of these, and Glock engineering must have been looking at this awhile back, so I'd bet they will emerge and get approved (in their own sweet time).

The only way around this is

(1) a friend that moves to CA from another state and has a G21SF becomes a CA resident and transfers it to you via PPT;

(2) an out-of-state- parent, grandparent, child or grandchild transfers the gun to you; it has to go thru an FFL, but the DROS can be filed with an interfamilial exemption;

(3) a very loooong 22 short barrel is fashioned and installed, along with a very stiff action spring. This firearm then becomes a 12133PC-exempt single shot pistol, as long as it's dimensionally compliant (10.5" min overall length, 6" min barrel length). It is then sold/transferred as a single shot pistol. There are generally no restrictions on what the configuration of a handgun is (other than AW- and NFA-related configurations) before or after the sale: only at the moment before DROS until the moment after pickup does it have to be a single-shot. Its future status is irrelevant.