CA DOJ Handgun Roster

[Sandiegosurf1]

As of today there are 1228 Handguns available on the California DOJ Handgun Roster. That is 8 less than my original post on 11/21/13.

http://certguns.doj.ca.gov

During the month of November, 2013 0 (zero) new handguns were added to the roster.

During the month of November, 2013 46 handguns were removed from the roster.

http://oag.ca.gov/sites/oag.ca.gov/files/pdfs/firearms/removed.pdf

[m03]

During the month of November, 2013 46 handguns were removed from the roster.

http://oag.ca.gov/sites/oag.ca.gov/f...ms/removed.pdf

Broken link...

[kemasa]

You can always go to the CA DOJ web page to get the links.

http://oag.ca.gov/sites/oag.ca.gov/files/pdfs/firearms/removed.pdf

http://certguns.doj.ca.gov/

[rm1911]

CA DOJ Handgun Roster

www.saf.org

F*** glock. If they were serious they'd stop their LE contracts or say pay citizen price. Or better, refuse to sell to LE in kalifornia. But that's their business, aiding and abetting the state. So fine.

My next pistol won't be a glock. They shoulda said if you think gen 4 are unsafe then they don't want any LE getting hurt and not ship any to this s***hole state. They're happy for my tax dollars to be used by my enslavers to purchase guns I can't, to enforce their unconstitutional laws.

I'll only buy from manufacturers whose main clientele are citizens.

[Sandiegosurf1]

As of today there are 1215 Handguns available on the DOJ Handgun Roster.

So far, during the month of December, 2013 6 handguns have been dropped from the roster.
1 Smith & Wesson
4 Walthers
1 Sturm, Ruger & Co.

So far, during the month of December, 2013 0 (zero) new handguns have been added to the roster.

[Sandiegosurf1]

December 2013 Stats

As of today there are 1173 Handguns available on the DOJ Handgun Roster. The number of handguns available to Californians has been reduced by 63 since I started this list on November 21st 2013.

During the month of December, 2013 48 handguns were dropped from the CA DOJ roster.

During the month of December, 2013 0 (zero) new handguns were added to the roster.

[Raidernation 247]

So please explain to me why the Gen 4 Glocks are not allowed in California?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

[Librarian]

So please explain to me why the Gen 4 Glocks are not allowed in California?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

Apparently DOJ feels they are different from Gen 3s enough that they are 'new guns' - and require loaded chamber indicator (LCI) and magazine disconnect.

[glockman19]

I've been posting a monthly thread listing the guns that are up for renewal. We lost 100 in the last year.

[Quiet]

So please explain to me why the Gen 4 Glocks are not allowed in California?

CA DOJ's viewpoint...
The Gen4 Glocks have too many internal changes for Glock to get them listed via the exemption they used to get the SF & RTF2 Glocks listed.

Because of that CA DOJ rejected the Gen 4 Glocks, when Glock tried to first get them listed, and told Glock the Gen 4 Glocks need to have a CA DOJ approved chamber load indicator and a magazine disconnect mechanism.

Glock will not add those features to their pistols, so Glock is no longer actively pursuing getting the Gen 4 Glocks listed.


Another CA DOJ viewpoint...
Glock and Glock USA are two different companies.

Since they are "different" companies; Glock pistols made by Glock USA require a CA DOJ approved chamber load indicator, a magazine disconnect mechanism and microstamping array.

This is why Glock pistols made in the USA are not approved.

[Raidernation 247]

I looked at the roster and I don't see Glock listed on the declassification post. Isn't that good?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

[sothoth]

I went with a friend to Targetmasters in Milpitas and wanted to rent their CZ97b. They all laughed and said its off roster now so not to waste my time trying it if I had an eventual purchase in mind. CZ apparently made a change to the gun (according to the guy at TM, so I can't vouch for the accuracy) and thus the modified version fell off the roster. The new model would have to be submitted that complied with chamber loaded indicator, micro stamping, and mag disconnect, to be put back on.

The Pena v Sid argument is that there are currently zero manufacturers who use micro stamping or think it's even possible, so the Supreme Court would likely agree that this means the type of gun that is in general use by the public/military is being "banned" by virtue of the micro stamping requirement because now citizens can't buy something that's in general use.

I think the micro stamping part, which is effective 1/1/14, will be forced off the list of requirements the DOJ can use to exclude handguns. I'd like to see CA have to prove that the off-roster guns are really more dangerous but that's probably wishful thinking. Politicians' anecdotal and factually incorrect beliefs is what drives laws, not reason or safety. I really can't stand politicians.

[itisagoodname]

I wonder how much money CA makes of this roster BS. Without knowing that nobody can speculate on how it may change in the future.

[bigbob76]

F*** glock. If they were serious they'd stop their LE contracts or say pay citizen price. Or better, refuse to sell to LE in kalifornia. But that's their business, aiding and abetting the state. So fine.

My next pistol won't be a glock. They shoulda said if you think gen 4 are unsafe then they don't want any LE getting hurt and not ship any to this s***hole state. They're happy for my tax dollars to be used by my enslavers to purchase guns I can't, to enforce their unconstitutional laws.

I'll only buy from manufacturers whose main clientele are citizens.

I guess a lot of people would have a problem with S&W and Ruger also if they started digging into some of the business practices of firearms manufacturers. I'm sure there are other companies that have been less than 2A friendly.

[Librarian]

I wonder how much money CA makes of this roster BS. Without knowing that nobody can speculate on how it may change in the future.

Not much - it's $200 per listed model per year.