Glocks now off CA roster?

[DFence]

Because changing the color is a considerable change in the operation of the gun? Almost sounds like you're agreeing with the stupid roster.

If you read the post and put your ego aside you would realize I'm saying that its not.

If the manufacturer makes it a different model # because its a different color then they are subject to it. I think it's bull**** but it is what it is. I didn't create it nor do I like it.

Like my original post states "I'm pretty sure". Not saying I'm 100% right just saying what I think is correct. If you have the link to the rosters regs please post them instead of acting like I'm the bad guy.

[keenkeen]

Ummm, you do know that Austria and Australia are two different countries, right?

Lloyd: "That's a lovely accent you have. New Jersey?"

Woman: "Austria."

Lloyd: "Austria! Well, then. G'day mate! Let's put another shrimp on the barbie!"

Don't get out much do you?

[DFence]

Don't get out much do you?

Hahahaha!!!

[200Apples]

I was told when speaking to someone about an SSE for another gun, Glock hasn't scheduled the dollars for the Gen 4's approval yet.

Same with the SA EMP in .40S&W I wanted: not on the CA Handguns Roster as approved-for-sale. The 9mm chambering is... but Springfield simply hasn't spent the dough to get the .40 chambering onto the roster...

[jonc]

If it's true them here we go on $1000 glocks!!!

[KON5T]

fixed it for you

should really be:

My Glock 17 I just bought says Made in Austria

[Oceanbob]

I was told when speaking to someone about an SSE for another gun, Glock hasn't scheduled the dollars for the Gen 4's approval yet.

Same with the SA EMP in .40S&W I wanted: not on the CA Handguns Roster as approved-for-sale. The 9mm chambering is... but Springfield simply hasn't spent the dough to get the .40 chambering onto the roster...

That's FUD. It's not a matter of money or some future schedule for GEN4 Glocks. To get GEN4s approved by the CDOJ Glock would have to install a magazine safety and loaded chamber indicator.

Ain't gonna happen.

[JeremyS]

There is a fact that no gen 4's have been aporoved yet .."No Generation 4 Glock handguns have been approved as of: Saturday, February 02, 2013" from the roster but I would be surprised if they didn't approve them after Glock greases some dity liberals pocket.

I was told when speaking to someone about an SSE for another gun, Glock hasn't scheduled the dollars for the Gen 4's approval yet.

I think a little fundamental understanding of "The Roster" is in order here. To even be considered to enter the approval (drop testing, reliability testing, etc) phase, a couple of mandatory requirements MUST be met. One is a Chamber Load Indicator, and one is a magazine disconnect safety. Glock has neither of these. Greasing pockets and "scheduling dollars for approval" has nothing to do with it. In order to even get to the phase where the gun would be submitted for approval, it would require a mechanical redesign to add the two aforementioned, mandatory features.

Pretty much every single modern semi-automatic pistol can and will pass the drop test and the firing test. The manufacturer just has to decide to pay for submission for the testing, and the $200 yearly fee to keep the gun on the roster. BUT... to get a new gun on the Roster now it just absolutely must have the CLI and the mag disconnect. Period.


edit: dang, Bob beat me to it while I was typing! BUT... I'd like to make it clear that it isn't a "loaded chamber indicator" that's required, as many pistols have these but do NOT meet CA's requirement of a "Chamber Load Indicator." CA's requirement includes text or pictographic description of the function of the thing that provides a visual and tactile indication that the gun is loaded, so as anybody would immediately understand by looking at it whether the gun was loaded or not.

Penal Code 16380
As used in this part, "chamber load indicator" means a device that plainly indicates that a cartridge is in the firing chamber. A device satisfies this definition if it is readily visible, has incorporated or adjacent explanatory text or graphics, or both, and is designed and intended to indicate to a reasonably foreseeable adult user of the pistol, without requiring the user to refer to a user's manual or any other resource other than the pistol itself, whether a cartridge is in the firing chamber.

Penal Code 32010
(d)(2) Commencing January 1, 2007, no center-fire semiautomatic pistol may be submitted for testing pursuant to Sections 31900 to 32110, inclusive, if it does not have both a chamber load indicator and a magazine disconnect mechanism.

[AllynB]

My Glock 17 I just bought says Made in Austria (g'day mate!)

The envelope with the test fired casings in it is dated November 2012

I think you mean "hasta la vista baby"

[BoJackUSMC]

Jesus... $1000 for Glock.... don't want to even think about it...
One can buy Sig, H&K, or 1911 with that price.

[Dragon]

Oh man, the glock nut sack swingers are going to hang you for this .

[BoJackUSMC]

I have 4th gen Glock 26 and 23. In fact, I trust my life with it, but Glock is not worth $1000 in my opinion. Nothing against Glock... very fine weapon..

[KON5T]

$1000 seem excessive even for single shot conversion....

[safewaysecurity]

Well wouldnt this all depend on the model number? If Glock is not changing the model number then there should be no issue.

[JeremyS]

Well wouldnt this all depend on the model number? If Glock is not changing the model number then there should be no issue.

No. You can't just "materially change" a gun and give it the same model number and fool the DOJ.


HOWEVER... most people do blame the Roster for requiring that manufacturers test and pay for every possible version of a gun, including different finishes and other things that have no bearing on the gun's function. The fact is, manufacturers could use the following section of the law to get around that. If the different versions have different model numbers, I *think* they would have to pay the $200 annual fee to add them, but they would *not* have to submit the guns to testing. The question is, can Glock prove that the slide being made in the U.S. vs. Austria absolutely falls under the following code and doesn't require testing, as it doesn't change the gun's function (e.g. in section A(4)):

(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.