New SA Ruger - Log or Not?

[Scout106]

I just rcvd a new Ruger SA from an out-of-state Dealer via my CA Dealer.
Since SA revolvers are considered C&R in CA, does this brand new revolver need to be logged into my C&R book or does BATFE consider it a new handgun not subject to a C&R logbook listing?
I think I know the answer but wanted other opinions for confirmation.
Thanks

[dgey]

if it's not 50 years old, it's not c&r. no logging needed.

[jamesob]

i think they are consider c&r but they do not meet the 50 year status and do not get entered or at least i think.

[Mssr. Eleganté]

California does not consider a revolver to be C&R just because it is single action. California can't designate anything to be C&R. Only the Feds can do that.

To be considered C&R the revolver would need to either be on the Federal C&R list or be over 50 years old.

[NRAhighpowershooter]

Amendment II is correct.. a new SA Ruger is not a C&R

[jamesob]

a while back i seen on gb a few dealers were advertising these as c&r most likely because it was sa. so the single actions are exempt from the drop test and ok to sell in cal. is that right ?

[bwiese]

Single-action status DOES NOT IMPART ANY C&R STATUS.

a while back i seen on gb a few dealers were advertising
these as c&r most likely because it was sa. so the single actions are exempt from
the drop test and ok to sell in cal. is that right ?

Typical Gunbroker seller misinformation about CA gun matters.

Ruger single-action revolvers are indeed exempt from Rostering/drop test matters - if they are dimensionally compliant per 12133PC (min. 5 shots, min. 3" bbl length, min 7.5" overall length measured parallel to bore).

Other than that, there are no other exceptions for single-action revolvers: they are treated like ordinary handguns at both state and Federal level. If you ordered one on Gunbroker from an FFL to be shipped to your CA FFL, the supplying FFL would still have to be CFLC compliant as well. (CFLC does not apply to individual non-FFL sellers, they can ship directly to a CA FFL.)

[Scout106]

Thanks Bill, you nailed it. It was the CA roster exemption I was thinking about, and not C&R status - which also garners a CA roster exemption, thus my temporary confusion.

I will not be logging it into my C&R book. BTW, there have been many exceptions to the 50 year old rule as designated by BATFE.

Maybe we have too many firearms laws; therein lies the real problem.

[dfletcher]

Thanks Bill, you nailed it. It was the CA roster exemption I was thinking about, and not C&R status - which also garners a CA roster exemption, thus my temporary confusion.

I will not be logging it into my C&R book. BTW, there have been many exceptions to the 50 year old rule as designated by BATFE.
Maybe we have too many firearms laws; therein lies the real problem.

True - the Smith 53 and the Ishapores and some Colt Officers Model Match and so on. But I believe CA requires the gun to also be 50 years old IN ADDITION to being listed as a C & R.

As a practical matter, since all "mailed from out of state" C & R handguns have to go through an FFL dealer & when purchased while physically out of state the self register deal applies, I suppose the real effect occurs when buying in state & trying to use your COE to not have the 10 day wait; or doing the pick up when sent from out of state. I would still log a less than 50year old C & R (by fed law) in my book since it's a federally issued license, not a state.