ar pistol registration

[Sir Stunna Lot]

im building an ar pistol from an 80% lower. i'm aware that it is not required to register it with the state.

my question is, can someone point out to me the penal code/law that exempts the ar pistol from needing to be registered?

thanks

[NoNOS67]

Overheard some guys having a similar discussion earlier. Still researching an 80% build myself.

[Quiet]

im building an ar pistol from an 80% lower. i'm aware that it is not required to register it with the state.

my question is, can someone point out to me the penal code/law that exempts the ar pistol from needing to be registered?

thanks

There are no CA laws that require home built firearms to be registered.

There are CA laws that effect changing/altering/obliterating a firearm's serial number and other markings. [PC 23900]

There are CA laws that allow a person to mark a firearm. [PC 23915]

There are CA laws that make it illegal to transfer a handgun that does not have certain markings (make/model/serial number). [PC 27530]

[RickD427]

im building an ar pistol from an 80% lower. i'm aware that it is not required to register it with the state.

my question is, can someone point out to me the penal code/law that exempts the ar pistol from needing to be registered?

thanks

There is no Penal Code section that exempts you from having to register a personally-built firearm. Laws are written to impose of duty on you to do something (like register an imported handgun) or to refrain from doing something (like assaulting someone). Laws are not written to tell you that you don't have to do something. It's the absence of a law that allows you to not register your personally-built firearm.

If you're building a semi-auto AR pistol, you should be aware of Penal Code section 32000(a) (The "Safe Handgun Law"). This section requires that you submit the weapon for DOJ testing and approval. There is no exception from the requirement for personally-built weapons. Also note that your weapon will need a loaded chamber indicator, or a magazine disconnect. Neither are provided for in the AR design. Some Calgunners will counsel you to build your pistol in a single-shot configuration, and then convert to semi-auto in order to evade the testing requirement. That's an untested avenue. It could wind you up in jail.

[Librarian]

If you're building a semi-auto AR pistol, you should be aware of Penal Code section 32000(a) (The "Safe Handgun Law"). This section requires that you submit the weapon for DOJ testing and approval. There is no exception from the requirement for personally-built weapons. Also note that your weapon will need a loaded chamber indicator, or a magazine disconnect. Neither are provided for in the AR design. Some Calgunners will counsel you to build your pistol in a single-shot configuration, and then convert to semi-auto in order to evade the testing requirement. That's an untested avenue. It could wind you up in jail.

I would suggest, for purposes of the Roster, that PC 32005 tells us who is a 'manufacturer' -

California Penal Code Section 32005

(a) Every person who is licensed as a manufacturer of
firearms pursuant to Chapter 44 (commencing with Section 921) of
Title 18 of the United States Code and who manufactures firearms in
this state shall certify under penalty of perjury and any other
remedy provided by law that every model, kind, class, style, or type
of pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon
the person that the person manufactures is not an unsafe handgun as
prohibited by Sections 31900 to 32110, inclusive.
(b) Every person who imports into the state for sale, keeps for
sale, or offers or exposes for sale any firearm shall certify under
penalty of perjury and any other remedy provided by law that every
model, kind, class, style, or type of pistol, revolver, or other
firearm capable of being concealed upon the person that the person
imports, keeps, or exposes for sale is not an unsafe handgun as
prohibited by Sections 31900 to 32110, inclusive.

[desertjosh]

Overheard some guys having a similar discussion earlier. Still researching an 80% build myself.

Didn't believe me earlier? Lol

[NoNOS67]

Didn't believe me earlier? Lol

Wise guy, eh? Haha.

[Sir Stunna Lot]

My understanding is that the only "handgun registration" law im aware of is the one that mandate people to register their handguns within 60 days of moving into the state (i dont even have that PC off top of my head).

With that said, is the above situation the only situation that requires registration? Since the ar pistol is built from an 80% and not imported, i believe it doesnt qualify for registration. Am i missing any other "handgun registraion" laws?

[ke6guj]

I would suggest, for purposes of the Roster, that PC 32005 tells us who is a 'manufacturer' -

I must be misunderstanding your post. have we decided that homebuilders don't need to initially build as SSE to comply with the roster?

[Sir Stunna Lot]

i think its been finalized around here that even homebuilt need to comply with the SSE

[Quiet]

My understanding is that the only "handgun registration" law im aware of is the one that mandate people to register their handguns within 60 days of moving into the state (i dont even have that PC off top of my head).

With that said, is the above situation the only situation that requires registration? Since the ar pistol is built from an 80% and not imported, i believe it doesnt qualify for registration. Am i missing any other "handgun registraion" laws?

AFAIK...

Required by CA law to report handguns to CA DOJ BOF:
1. New resident moving to CA.
2. Intra-familial transfer.
3. Operations of law.
4. C&R FFL acquiring outside of CA and bringing back to CA.

[Librarian]

I must be misunderstanding your post. have we decided that homebuilders don't need to initially build as SSE to comply with the roster?

Have we? How did we come to believe that non-commercial handgun builders were bound by the Roster? I don't know the answer to either question.

[RickD427]

I would suggest, for purposes of the Roster, that PC 32005 tells us who is a 'manufacturer' -

Librarian,

Sections 32000(a) and 32005 are different.

Section 32005 doesn't define a manufacturer. It only imposes a duty for a manufacturer to certify that a particular model of firearm is not an "Unsafe Handgun." In sum, it lets them market a specific model after a representative of that model has passed the test without having to submit every production weapon for testing.

Section 32000(a) still requires the test for any semi-auto that is "manufactured" and makes no distinction between licensed manufacture or personal manufacture.

[RickD427]

I must be misunderstanding your post. have we decided that homebuilders don't need to initially build as SSE to comply with the roster?

There's no way this question will be definatively answered until there is a court case.

The Pro-SSE argument is that you can lawfully personally manufacture a Single-Shot Firearm without need of the DOJ testing process. Once you have finished "Manufacturing", then you convert it to semi-auto and possess a lawful firearm.

The Con-SSE argument is that, since you're doing the manufacturing, you're not done manufacturing until you've got the semi-auto. At that point, you've got an illegal weapon.

Both are good arguments, and there is nothing (like a court decision) that can force a person to accept either one.

The bottom line is that if your District Attorney agrees with the "Pro" argument, you've got a nice pistol. If your District Attorney goes with the "Con" argument, you get to sit in the Defendant's chair at trial, and in jail if you're convicted.

My point is that its not worth the risk.

[Librarian]

Librarian,

Sections 32000(a) and 32005 are different.

Section 32005 doesn't define a manufacturer. It only imposes a duty for a manufacturer to certify that a particular model of firearm is not an "Unsafe Handgun." In sum, it lets them market a specific model after a representative of that model has passed the test without having to submit every production weapon for testing.

Section 32000(a) still requires the test for any semi-auto that is "manufactured" and makes no distinction between licensed manufacture or personal manufacture.

Oh, yes, but let's play for a moment.

32005 obligates licensed manufacturers to "certify ... [a] revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon
the person that the person manufactures is not an unsafe handgun".

What means is available to certify? Wouldn't the 32010 testing process be the expected way? For purposes of Division 10, Chapter 4, Article 5, wouldn't the description of 'manufacturer' in 32005(a) be what the Legislature meant in 1999?