glock 17 gen 4 illegal (not on Roster) in CA. why??

[reznunt]

^This^

There are still plenty of ways to get one in California despite it being off roster...

"There are still plenty of LEGAL ways to get one in California despite it being off roster..."

[Apec]

The DOJ sure is great at nitpicking.

Then again they're the same clowns that think a gun with green, silver, or black paint is an entirely different gun, safety feature (or lack therof)-wise.

[edgalang]

...
A glock is awesome because of its simplicity. Adding more features takes away from what I love about glocks. I'd rather have to go through a SSE then buy a glock with DOJ mandated "safety features" shoved up its butt.

Ah...but that is essentially what the Ruger SR series of pistols are. It has all the internal workings of a Glock...but with removable safeties if the user so chooses. I'm pretty sure Glock can design a pistol the same way with optional removable safeties.

[SMR510]

So technically, what you are saying is if my mom, who lives in North Carolina, bought a handgun that is off roster in CA, she could give it to me as an interfamily transfer. But how would that work since the gun is being brought in from out of state/what kind of paperwork and process would be involved in it? Does it still have to be shipped to a CA FFL and have to go through them (10 day wait and DROS)?

Your mom could send you a Gen 4 glock or any other non rostered pistol that is not illegal to sell here for other reasons as a gift. She would have to send it to your FFL with a letter stating that she is giving it to you and that no money has changed hands. You go down, do DROS and your 10 days and it is yours. Be sure to check with your FFL because some do not like doing these transactions, check before she ships it and select another one if they wont do it.

[Bug Splat]

Ah...but that is essentially what the Ruger SR series of pistols are. It has all the internal workings of a Glock...but with removable safeties if the user so chooses. I'm pretty sure Glock can design a pistol the same way with optional removable safeties.

True. If Glock could make a pistol with all these "features" removable I'd be OK with that. The reason I bought an M&P was because I could pull the mag disconnect and stupid take-down lever out and still have a working pistol.

I guess I just don't like the idea of the DOJ dictating what is produced in the name of Public Safety. As we all know these are just an excuse to ban more firearms. How this is legal just blows my mind. We need our 2nd amd rights back.

[uhlan1]

While I respect the Police I often wondered why they are exempt and special over us.

BTW..OC ARMORY has a GEN4 Glock 17 in stock. Neat weapon.

Bob

They created an upper or patrician class of gun owner to get support from the LE interests groups to support their inane laws. One of those 'I got mine, sucks to be you" kind of things.
The "Safe" Roster is a total sham, simply gun control through an agenda-driven administrator's edicts.
Same as Cowboy Action, in return for their support (treason) they were exempted.

[gorenut]

If Glock ever came out with a version of the Gen 4 that didn't have the finger grooves, I'd be willing to pay the premium to single shot em.

As it stands now though.. even though I do like the overall feel and the mag release of the Gen 4s.. its just not enough for me to justify replacing my Gen 3s.

[Apec]

True. If Glock could make a pistol with all these "features" removable I'd be OK with that. The reason I bought an M&P was because I could pull the mag disconnect and stupid take-down lever out and still have a working pistol.

I guess I just don't like the idea of the DOJ dictating what is produced in the name of Public Safety. As we all know these are just an excuse to ban more firearms. How this is legal just blows my mind. We need our 2nd amd rights back.

In the guise of public safety. Any idiots that need bells and whistles to know if a gun is loaded or prevent themselves from getting shot in the foot shouldn't be around guns in the first place.

[Magix]

I have the G17 and G21 in Gen4. Not illegal. Just need to find alternative ways to buy them as others have mentioned above. Cheers

[JeremyS]

You know for sure it has nothing to do with safety when they exempt the class of guns MOST likely to actually fail a drop test; single action revolvers. You know it has nothing to do with safety when 99.99% of modern pistols will pass the drop test and firing test without issue. It has to do with extorting fees from gun manufacturers ("sin industry") and making it difficult and scary for citizens to acquire guns. This thread started out asking why Gen 4's are illegal in CA. They are NOT illegal! As has been mentioned. But, the point is that the Roster creates so much fear and confusion that some people are turned off from even attempting to purchase a gun. Limiting available guns and discouraging ownership is the point.

Oh... sorry... while I'm on the rant here, it was also created as a de facto ban on "Saturday Night Specials" and other cheap guns. Many of these weren't reliable enough to pass the shooting test, which requires going through hundreds of rounds without a stoppage. Why does a "safety" test require that a gun can fire hundreds of rounds without a failure to eject or feed or fire? No clue. Oh yeah, because it's not about safety. It was about banning certain guns.

[Ronin2]

Illegal is the wrong word to use. It's non-rostered. Meaning it hasn't been submitted to the state or was rejected.

Hey hey... its not "illegal", its "undocumented" and we should be talking "amnesty" for the Glock 4th gen guns... ROFL

[Ronin2]

In the guise of public safety. Any idiots that need bells and whistles to know if a gun is loaded or prevent themselves from getting shot in the foot shouldn't be around guns in the first place.

^^^^^^^^^^^ ++++++++++++++1

[230infantry]

so if i buy a gen 4 glock in louisiana where im stationed can i legally bring it back and do the 10 day wait?

[uhlan1]

I went to order a glock 17 gen 4 and I was told that it was illegal in CA. can someone tell me why? backstraps, texture is what I was told, really....

Because we are ruled by idiots.

[Chaos47]

so if i buy a gen 4 glock in louisiana where im stationed can i legally bring it back and do the 10 day wait?

That's not how it works.
A resident generally (there are some exceptions, that I won't go into for clarity/simplicity of this topic) can not purchase a firearm out of their home state without the use of an FFL. If you do do it at an FFL the FFL has to send it to an FFL in your state. In other words you can not take possession of it. All state laws are then in effect when the FFL receives it.

So no you can not "bring it back" and no you can not "do the 10 day wait" because you cannot just walk into a shop and DROS a pistol already in your possession to yourself.



So are you a resident of CA or LA?


If you are a resident of CA then if you purchase it at an FFL out of state the FFL would ship it to a FFL in CA and it would have to be DROS'd and do the 10 day wait. Problem is that this is not an exempt method from the Roster so it would still cause the Roster to come into play. So thats not really going to work out unless you're receiving FFL does a SSE or you are an exempt person.

If you are a resident of LA and you purchase it there then you will have no problem bringing it into CA when you move back as long as it is not an assault weapon (threaded barrel, etc) and do not bring in magazines with the capacity to hold over 10 rounds that you did not possess in CA prior to Jan 1st 2000.
You would just fill out the new resident form when you moved here and pay the fee.