No need for a bullet button on a .22 AR?

[Packy14]

I'd be a little weary to run a 5.56 upper with a conversion bolt... not because it is illegal to run it without a bb, but because most cops can't read and will let the DA sort it out.

[kemasa]

If you put a bullet button on it and use a magazine larger than 10 rounds, then it is a so-called a-salt weapon, but that is also limited to center-fire.

A .22LR is not center-fire, so the restrictions don't apply. If you go well past the law due to being afraid, then you might as well just turn over all of your firearms and admit defeat.

[kkp]

If you put a bullet button on it and use a magazine larger than 10 rounds, then it is a so-called a-salt weapon, but that is also limited to center-fire.

A .22LR is not center-fire, so the restrictions don't apply. If you go well past the law due to being afraid, then you might as well just turn over all of your firearms and admit defeat.

The 10 round magazine limit DOES apply to .22lr, whether rifles or pistols.

There is no need for a BB on a .22lr rifle, however, as the laws requiring a fixed magazine (which is what the BB creates) only apply to centerfire rifles.

The magazine capacity limits, and the need for a "fixed magazine", are governed by different sets of laws. One is specific to centerfire, the other is not.

[kemasa]

The 10 round magazine limit DOES apply to .22lr, whether rifles or pistols.

There is no limit on the magazines other than what can be put into a firearm if it is a non-detachable magazine.

30515. (a) Notwithstanding Section 30510, "assault weapon" also
means any of the following:
...
(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine
with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

It does not apply to rimfire.

[Chaos47]

I understand what you're saying, and don't disagree. However this is where it does get into a gray area; it could be argued by a D.A. that the rifle is chambered for a centerfire cartridge (the actual chamber of the barrel accommodates a 5.56 and it says so on the barrel) you're just running an adapter in it.

I personally will not run a .22lr conversion unit (as opposed to a .22lr dedicated upper) on a non bullet buttoned or otherwise exempt rifle out of an abundance of caution; YMMV and I understand those willing to do so.

[Chaos47]

The 10 round magazine limit DOES apply to .22lr, whether rifles or pistols.

There is no need for a BB on a .22lr rifle, however, as the laws requiring a fixed magazine (which is what the BB creates) only apply to centerfire rifles.

The magazine capacity limits, and the need for a "fixed magazine", are governed by different sets of laws. One is specific to centerfire, the other is not.

There is no limit on the magazines other than what can be put into a firearm if it is a non-detachable magazine.

It does not apply to rimfire.

I think you guys are saying the same thing in different ways.
kkp is trying to say that the magazine restriction law is a separate law from the AWB and still applies to rimfire. (Which is true)

kemasa is trying to say that in the AWB that there is no restriction to only the use of 10 or fewer rounds in a rimfire rifle by definition. Because they are not semiautomatic centerfire rifles with fixed magazines. (Which is true)
(A rimfire pistol with a fixed magazine would be restricted to 10 rounds though)

(a)Any person in this state who does any of the following is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or in the state prison:
[...]
(2)Commencing January 1, 2000, manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives, or lends, any large-capacity magazine.

16740. As used in this part, "large-capacity magazine" means any
ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than 10
rounds, but shall not be construed to include any of the following:
(a) A feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it
cannot accommodate more than 10 rounds.
(b) A .22 caliber tube ammunition feeding device.
(c) A tubular magazine that is contained in a lever-action
firearm.

[Merc1138]

I think you guys are saying the same thing in different ways.
kkp is trying to say that the magazine restriction law is a separate law from the AWB and still applies to rimfire. (Which is true)

kemasa is trying to say that in the AWB that there is no restriction to only the use of 10 or fewer rounds in a rimfire rifle by definition. Because they are not semiautomatic centerfire rifles with fixed magazines. (Which is true)
(A rimfire pistol with a fixed magazine would be restricted to 10 rounds though)

Right. The key is that while you may not be able to get a large capacity magazine, you can still use a large capacity magazine.

[kkp]

There is no limit on the magazines other than what can be put into a firearm if it is a non-detachable magazine.

It does not apply to rimfire.

You are correct in that, yes, I am referring to detachable box magazine rifles. (not tube-fed) I didn't think I needed to specify this BECAUSE THE TITLE OF THE THREAD REFERS SPECIFICALLY TO .22 AR RIFLES.

But yes, the 10 round limit DOES apply to rimfire. You're looking at the wrong section of law (the one re assault weapons), which is why I pointed out that different laws apply. Note that I am also NOT referring to mags that were owned prior to the ban, which took effect Jan 1, 2000. But if you're shopping for NEW mags for your rimfire rifle, darned tootin' they'd better be 10 rounds max, or they're illegal.

See: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=387409

In particular, point #1:

1. California restricts certain things about magazines greater than 10 rounds; it has created a silly legal name for them - "large-capacity magazines" - and says we 'regular people' cannot import, sell or manufacture them. ("Dealer" FFLs may get licenses from DOJ for these activities; curio and relic licensees cannot.) The restriction applies to both centerfire and rimfire weapons.

The wiki has a long article: Large-capacity magazine restrictions and there is a long thread here at Calguns.

Read over SB-23 (passed July 1999), Penal Code 32310, and Penal Code 16740.

[Merc1138]

You are correct in that, yes, I am referring to detachable box magazine rifles. (not tube-fed) I didn't think I needed to specify this BECAUSE THE TITLE OF THE THREAD REFERS SPECIFICALLY TO .22 AR RIFLES.

But yes, the 10 round limit DOES apply to rimfire. You're looking at the wrong section of law (the one re assault weapons), which is why I pointed out that different laws apply. Note that I am also NOT referring to mags that were owned prior to the ban, which took effect Jan 1, 2000. But if you're shopping for NEW mags for your rimfire rifle, darned tootin' they'd better be 10 rounds max, or they're illegal.

See: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=387409

In particular, point #1:




The wiki has a long article: Large-capacity magazine restrictions and there is a long thread here at Calguns.

Read over SB-23 (passed July 1999), Penal Code 32310, and Penal Code 16740.

The law does not require having owned the magazines prior to 1/1/2000. If you really believe it does, please quote the portion of the penal code explaining that.

[kkp]

The law does not require having owned the magazines prior to 1/1/2000. If you really believe it does, please quote the portion of the penal code explaining that.

Feel free to take it up with Librarian in the CG thread I posted above. He's the expert. But I recommend reading point #4 in the list of legal considerations in post #1 of that thread, first:

4. The age of the magazine and the age of the gun mean nothing. The critical item is possession of the magazine(s) in California before January 1, 2000.

[Merc1138]

Feel free to take it up with Librarian in the CG thread I posted above. He's the expert. But I recommend reading point #4 in the list of legal considerations in post #1 of that thread, first:

That's not what I asked. I asked you to quote the portion of the PC that makes that a requirement. While Librarian is indeed very knowledgeable, he's not the law. There's also a difference between making an FAQ to keep people from asking the same questions 10 times a day(see the 30 round mag sticky thread in the rifle section, used to get asked multiple times a day before that sticky), and an interpretation of the PC.

edit: My point is, that as long as the magazine was legally acquired(you do realize there are even specific exemptions for people, right?) it can be used in a rimfire rifle without being an issue no matter how many rounds it holds.

[kkp]

That's not what I asked. I asked you to quote the portion of the PC that makes that a requirement. While Librarian is indeed very knowledgeable, he's not the law. There's also a difference between making an FAQ to keep people from asking the same questions 10 times a day(see the 30 round mag sticky thread in the rifle section, used to get asked multiple times a day before that sticky), and an interpretation of the PC.

edit: My point is, that as long as the magazine was legally acquired(you do realize there are even specific exemptions for people, right?) it can be used in a rimfire rifle without being an issue no matter how many rounds it holds.

If such a section exists, I'm sure I could dig it out for you. But I really don't feel like doing the digging on your behalf, as I'm perfectly comfortable with accepting Librarian's explanation of the matter. If you really want to know his justification, I have no doubt that he would respond to a question on the subject posted in the thread, as he monitors it and responds regularly.

[kkp]

edit: My point is, that as long as the magazine was legally acquired(you do realize there are even specific exemptions for people, right?) it can be used in a rimfire rifle without being an issue no matter how many rounds it holds.

Responding to your edit: Yes, agreed. Legally acquired being the key point.

[Merc1138]

If such a section exists, I'm sure I could dig it out for you. But I really don't feel like doing the digging on your behalf, as I'm perfectly comfortable with accepting Librarian's explanation of the matter. If you really want to know his justification, I have no doubt that he would respond to a question on the subject posted in the thread, as he monitors it and responds regularly.

I'll give you a hint since I've read it myself.

It doesn't exist. I'm handling this the same way anyone should handle fud.

"You can't do that"
"Oh really? Tell me what law states that I can't"

While I do agree with calguns for the most part regarding how to keep from getting arrested in CA over firearm related stuff, you really should look this sort of information up for yourself to get a better understanding of how it actually applies. You wouldn't be looking anything up on my behalf, you would be doing yourself a favor.

[Losd619]

Yup, definitely use a dedicated .22lr upper, not a conversion kit if not using a mag lock.

IBAARCTT.




(In before and after redcliff this time.)

This. You can also modify the buffer assembly in your dedicated lower by either removing it completely, or going the better route and adding a taccom 3g pressure plug. The plug is really nice for dedicated uppers because it puts forward pressure on the bolt. Helps with feeding issues etc. It also renders the rifle useless for centerfire as the bolt will not cycle with a pressure plug in it.