Possession of a non-serialized firearm

[Lightstrider]

So up here I read the news about a marijuana grow bust and at the cultivation site a guy had a lot of firearms. Among the charges I read possession of a non-serialized firearm.

From the pictures it clearly looks like an 80% build and it's also an AW with a multi-burst trigger device.



I am confused because I thought you could have non-serialized home built firearms in CA? I thought a non-serialized firearm charge would be brought up if someone filed off the serial number or something.

[colossians323]

I'm thinking the serialized charge will be dropped if it has to do with a homemade receiver

[PolishMike]

Its tough to say what it is unless the news cites the PC. They like saying buzz words like that without actually knowing what they mean.

[AdidasCJ]

The news insets words to make the story more appealing... "Oh look how people are getting the "GHOST GUNS"".

Only thing the media is good for is the weather.... and sometimes they embellish that!

[SunsetIE]

That bumpfire stock is gonna be a fun charge to fight!

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

[baranski]

If when they were questioned (assuming by someone who knows what they're doing) didn't admit to 'building" it, there would be where the charge could come from.

Accused may have said "I didn't build it"


Are those unsafe pistols off roster?

[Mitch]

Its tough to say what it is unless the news cites the PC. They like saying buzz words like that without actually knowing what they mean.

Yeah, we really have no idea what the guy was really charged with.

Some firearms, especially those made before 1968, don't have serial numbers, and there is no law against possession. I had one myself until a couple years ago, an old Ross rifle. Sold it to another collector.

It is however against Federal law (and probably state law, too, right?) to efface or obscure an existing serial number. Perhaps that was the charge.

[Whiskey_Tango]

That bumpfire stock is gonna be a fun charge to fight!

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

Has anyone ever been charged for possession of a Slidefire stock?

[SunsetIE]

Pre 1968 commercially manf guns werent required to have a serial number, that was set forth with the GCA of 68. I've got a 1964 marlin that doesn't have a single serial #.

Has anyone ever been charged for possession of a Slidefire stock?

Not sure, but I'd venture to guess it falls into constructive possession, or full on use as its seen attached to the rifle - "multiburst trigger activator".

[Jimi Jah]

This will be plea bargained down to other charges. Don't expect a clear cut test case for anything here.

[Junkie]

Pre 1968 commercially manf guns werent required to have a serial number, that was set forth with the GCA of 68. I've got a 1964 marlin that doesn't have a single serial #.



Not sure, but I'd venture to guess it falls into constructive possession, or full on use as its seen attached to the rifle - "multiburst trigger activator".

I was under the impression that simple possession of a "multiburst trigger activator" was a felony (or was it a wobbler?)

[RickD427]

I was under the impression that simple possession of a "multiburst trigger activator" was a felony (or was it a wobbler?)

Possession is a felony. Please refer to Penal Code section 32900. It is a felony that is subject to section 17(b).

California law only recognizes three different levels of crimes (Felonies, Misdemeanors, and Infractions). Please refer to Penal Code section 16. What many folks refer to using the slang term "wobbler" is a felony that may be reduced to a misdemeanor by a prosecutor or court (the police may not reduce the charge at the time of arrest). It's important to remember that all "wobblers" start out as felonies, and nothing less than felonies, until they actually "wobble". Then they're a misdemeanor, and nothing more than a misdemeanor, from that point on.

I'm also interested to learn if there is any case law holding the Slidefire device to be a "Multiburst Trigger Activator."

[Guido02]

Since when are slide fire stocks are illegal in CA?

[dvs762]

Well they won't send the. Here..

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[The Gleam]

Isn't the fact that he is dealing/growing a Schedule I controlled substance that has Federal prohibitions and in possession of firearms while doing so a bigger worry for him right now, rather than a slide-fire stock or lack of serial on an 80% build?