Proof that an SVT is legal in CA

[nickarino]

I'm currently trying to find some quick proof, perhaps in the form of a link, that can verify that the SVT-40 is legal in California. Anyone have any good links that I could reference. This is not for me, but for proof for an out of state seller. Just to be sure, this person is a private individual and I have my C&R, so all I would need from him is a copy of his DL to enter his info in my bound book. Correct? Thanks guys.

[Milsurp Collector]

You can send him here http://calnra.com/cgi-bin/flowchart.cgi and have him answer the questions. Go through it yourself first to make sure you end up with the right answer (not an assault weapon).

[Josh3239]

Penal Code:

12276.1a) Notwithstanding Section 12276, "assault weapon" shall
also mean any of the following:
(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to
accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action
of the weapon.
(B) A thumbhole stock.
(C) A folding or telescoping stock.
(D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(E) A flash suppressor.
(F) A forward pistol grip.
(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine
with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length
of less than 30 inches.

SVT cannot be AW based on features per above.

12276 As used in this chapter, "assault weapon" shall mean the
following designated semiautomatic firearms:
(a) All of the following specified rifles:
(1) All AK series including, but not limited to, the models
identified as follows:
(A) Made in China AK, AKM, AKS, AK47, AK47S, 56, 56S, 84S, and
86S.
(B) Norinco 56, 56S, 84S, and 86S.
(C) Poly Technologies AKS and AK47.
(D) MAADI AK47 and ARM.
(2) UZI and Galil.
(3) Beretta AR-70.
(4) CETME Sporter.
(5) Colt AR-15 series.
(6) Daewoo K-1, K-2, Max 1, Max 2, AR 100, and AR 110C.
(7) Fabrique Nationale FAL, LAR, FNC, 308 Match, and Sporter.
(8) MAS 223.
(9) HK-91, HK-93, HK-94, and HK-PSG-1.
(10) The following MAC types:
(A) RPB Industries Inc. sM10 and sM11.
(B) SWD Incorporated M11.
(11) SKS with detachable magazine.
(12) SIG AMT, PE-57, SG 550, and SG 551.
(13) Springfield Armory BM59 and SAR-48.
(14) Sterling MK-6.
(15) Steyer AUG.
(16) Valmet M62S, M71S, and M78S.
(17) Armalite AR-180.
(18) Bushmaster Assault Rifle.
(19) Calico M-900.
(20) J&R ENG M-68.
(21) Weaver Arms Nighthawk.
(b) All of the following specified pistols:
(1) UZI.
(2) Encom MP-9 and MP-45.
(3) The following MAC types:
(A) RPB Industries Inc. sM10 and sM11.
(B) SWD Incorporated M-11.
(C) Advance Armament Inc. M-11.
(D) Military Armament Corp. Ingram M-11.
(4) Intratec TEC-9.
(5) Sites Spectre.
(6) Sterling MK-7.
(7) Calico M-950.
(8) Bushmaster Pistol.
(c) All of the following specified shotguns:
(1) Franchi SPAS 12 and LAW 12.
(2) Striker 12.
(3) The Streetsweeper type S/S Inc. SS/12.

It isn't listed on the Roberti-Roos ban list.

[KING_PALM]

svt40's are legal. there are a few members on the board that have them
i have seen a few at gun shows for sale $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[Steyr_223]

bwiese and others went around and around on this topic. See this thread..

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=111014&page=4

Originally Posted by bwiese View Post
Firstly, as was proved with Gene Hoffman's purchase of several DOJ-seized receivers (and his acquiring legal ownership before getting them returned/LEGR'd/re-DROSed to him), you can indeed *own* a firearm without the DROS being complete: you can have ownership rights even if you can't have immediate legal possession. If you are (1) nonprohibited/eligible buyer, (2) paid all fees/taxes/etc. for gun, and (3) began the DROS you can be regarded as owning the gun and having exclusive rights to it.

Now, I have seen a fair amount of resources referring to the muzzle device on an SVT-40 as a "flash hider" in addition to muzzle brake. From the nature of the holes/openings, it looks to have a fairly open interior with lotsa slits - that is, not that dissimilar from a non-CA-legal M1A/M14 flash hider as opposed to the CA-legal brake on Springfield M1As sold in CA.

Nationally-known gun lawyer James Bardwell (specializing in ATF/SOT matters and "What To Do When The BATF Comes A-knockin'") uses the term "flash hider" in his writings about the SVT40's muzzle device and its relation to importation ban of 1994 "Crime Bill": http://www.recguns.com/Sources/IIID2b194.html

If James Bardwell thinks it's an FH, and there seems to be quite a bit of information out there it's commonly thought of as a FH, then I'd steer clear of rifles with that particular device too.

While DOJ regulations for FH are poor and DOJ staff have no idea what is or isn't an FH (and in fact they say it could include sunglasses hanging off the end of the barrel!), folks should shy away of such issues until the CA AW ban is stricken or further clarification comes out.

It's a defendable case, but you don't want a $5K+ legal bill for a $200 rifle.

Quick fixes:

* FH is removed. Threaded bbls are not an evil feature under CA law or Federal law.
You can possess the FH separately/not installed. Find another surplus one, cut it
down and reblue it and turn it into a thread protector - or better yet, have a
machinist make a thread protector from some bar stock and use a Birchwood
Casey blueing pen on it.

Keep the orig. FH unharmed for when you move to a free state or CA's AWB is stricken.

* Some kinda mag catch screw setup - have no idea how, others can speak up - is fastened
so the magazine is fixed and is not considered a detachable mag. (This rifle would work
GREAT with a fixed mag.)


Those of you with SVT40s out there should exercise caution in regard to this matter as this is functionally no different than a Mini14 or M1A with a factory flash hider.

[timdps]

It's a defendable case, but you don't want a $5K+ legal bill for a $200 rifle.

Quick fixes:

* FH is removed. Threaded bbls are not an evil feature under CA law or Federal law.
You can possess the FH separately/not installed. Find another surplus one, cut it
down and reblue it and turn it into a thread protector - or better yet, have a
machinist make a thread protector from some bar stock and use a Birchwood
Casey blueing pen on it.

This fix is not an option for the SVT-40. The muzzle brake is a part of the barrel extension, as is the gas block. Removing the barrel extension makes the rifle unusable. You could just chop the muzzle brake off of a spare extension, but its a waste of a $35-$50 piece.

The muzzle brake design is quite obviously designed to force the muzzle of the barrel down, making it a brake, not a flash hider. If you have ever fired an SVT40 at night, you know its NOT a flash hider. In addition to the muzzle flash coming out of the front of the brake, you get two side flashes out two feet of each side of the brake... and then you are blind for a while with the after-image of those side flashes.

Tim

[Vladimir]

Just use the code for it, SVT's are completely legal, Ive gone through 2 of them, buy/sell, in the past few years.

[saki302]

Some of the later models didn't have slits in the brake either- they had 4 huge ports. Definitely a brake! Ask the guy next to you at the range if it's a brake or not

-Save

[Dr. Peter Venkman]

For future reference, you don't "prove" that a gun is legal; it's the other way around.

[littlejake]

I'm currently trying to find some quick proof, perhaps in the form of a link, that can verify that the SVT-40 is legal in California. Anyone have any good links that I could reference. This is not for me, but for proof for an out of state seller. Just to be sure, this person is a private individual and I have my C&R, so all I would need from him is a copy of my his DL to enter his info in my bound book. Correct? Thanks guys.

should read his DL.

[TRICKSTER]

Copy of DL is nice to have, but not needed. All you need is name and address.

[OneApart]

SVT is 100% legal in CA. I ran into an ex SB County Sheriff that was selling one @ Crossroads of the West GS he says no problem. As was mentioned above, it does not have any "assault features", and is not banned by name in CA. good to go.

[mj1]

If you look for trouble you will find it.