assault weapons registration

[Sam Z]

While the rest seems a plausible goal of the grabbers, the bold is not correct.

CA DROS (or intrafamilial, or new resident) did not record any information about long guns before 2014 (unless, for some reason, it was voluntarily registered or forcibly registered so it could be returned from LE seizure/evidence). All they have is 'long gun'.

what about the information on the 4473?

[Norcalkid]

As long as I don't have to keep BB I will register post 2014 guns. I'll keep some older ones featureless.

I registered in 99 also.

[Strykeback]

As long as I don't have to keep BB I will register post 2014 guns. I'll keep some older ones featureless.

I registered in 99 also.

BB rifles are the new assault rifles you register. Once a bullet button, its permanent unless you go featureless. Trust me, I thought about it too if I got to ditch the BB

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[Subotai]

They know most everything, but they can't do a lot without laws. They're not nazis, right? Right?

[Librarian]

If the ATF got that back ground check they WILL share with LEOs. That's a fact. To many and I mean TO MANY on here have had this brought up numerous times. They have the info and will share.

CA does not use Federal background check - they decided to 'roll their own'. And I don't see that gun info is required to do a background check.

what about the information on the 4473?

In paper form only. When CA-DOJ begins copying all the paper 4473s, we'll hear about it. But there is no database to query.

(Yes, I'm aware that many people don't trust the BATF to obey the law here. But that would be a huge project, literally impossible to hide. We have no evidence that BATF is creating a database of current 4473 info, though I believe there was an attempt to do that with records turned in by FFLs going out of business. That one was stopped, IIRC.)

[Sam Z]

CA does not use Federal background check - they decided to 'roll their own'. And I don't see that gun info is required to do a background check.


In paper form only. When CA-DOJ begins copying all the paper 4473s, we'll hear about it. But there is no database to query.

(Yes, I'm aware that many people don't trust the BATF to obey the law here. But that would be a huge project, literally impossible to hide. We have no evidence that BATF is creating a database of current 4473 info, though I believe there was an attempt to do that with records turned in by FFLs going out of business. That one was stopped, IIRC.)

I have been to a couple FFLs that the entire DROS process was paperless, everything was entered electronically and this was around 2010

[Jimi Jah]

What registrations? They can't figure out how to make that law work.

I did, went featureless.

[heidad01]

with the workarounds why would anyone register?

This. Once registered, your use, transport, etc will be limited.

I would imagine they will be shocked at the compliance rate.

Why?? Are you registering your pieces of polymer perfection??? . .

[Corpral_Agarn]

Featureless is compliance.

Registration isn't worth it, IMO.

ESPECIALLY if I have to keep a BB. Are you kidding!?

[IVC]

Bullet button rifles that get registered become bullet buttoned forever.

BB rifles are the new assault rifles you register. Once a bullet button, its permanent unless you go featureless. Trust me, I thought about it too if I got to ditch the BB

Not true.

There was a massive discussion about this and it's very clear that the law doesn't care whether BB is on or off once you register your rifle as an AW. It's also clear that the DOJ tried to get around the law and force people to keep BB-s since they hate the idea of people getting their RAW-s.

The litigation is pretty much ready as soon as DOJ publishes "regulations" (not the law, just how DOJ intends to *interpret* the law) and this BB nonsense is one of the major items.

It's a disservice to the community to make statements that it's somehow settled that we have to keep BB-s. At best you can claim that the DOJ is *trying* to rewrite the law. Even if our initial challenge fails, I would be more than happy to be a test case with one registered rifle, removed BB, going to court all the way to determine what I'm violating while having a RAW in one hand and registration paperwork in another.

[IVC]

This. Once registered, your use, transport, etc will be limited.

Sure, but only those that are RAW-s. You can have as many featureless as you want in addition to any RAW-s.

[MaHoTex]

Assuming someone registers a BB rifle, just get a MagMagnet and install it on the BB. That is the route I would go if I were to register, which I won't be.

[Strykeback]

Not true.

There was a massive discussion about this and it's very clear that the law doesn't care whether BB is on or off once you register your rifle as an AW. It's also clear that the DOJ tried to get around the law and force people to keep BB-s since they hate the idea of people getting their RAW-s.

The litigation is pretty much ready as soon as DOJ publishes "regulations" (not the law, just how DOJ intends to *interpret* the law) and this BB nonsense is one of the major items.

It's a disservice to the community to make statements that it's somehow settled that we have to keep BB-s. At best you can claim that the DOJ is *trying* to rewrite the law. Even if our initial challenge fails, I would be more than happy to be a test case with one registered rifle, removed BB, going to court all the way to determine what I'm violating while having a RAW in one hand and registration paperwork in another.

My apologies if things have changed in the last month or two. I stuck around for the big discussion for weeks on end and have been busy the last month or two to keep up on it. That would be awesome if they are going to fight it. The transportation will still be somewhat of an issue.

Only ones I'd be willing to register would be my AR pistols but that would be because of a lack of featureless options and the chance to have a standard mag release makes the 9mm version an awesome home defense setup.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[ugimports]

I have been to a couple FFLs that the entire DROS process was paperless, everything was entered electronically and this was around 2010

Serial numbers for long guns were never submitted to CA DOJ prior to 2014.

4473s only exist in paper form even if you fill out electronically (you signed the paper documents).

ATF does not automatically have info for 4473s. When they do a Trace they request data from the 4473s from the last dealer of record.

[lordmorgul]

Meh, they'll get at least two...from me anyways.

Me too, hedge your bets people... limiting your own options down the road by not registering some (not all) is like deciding you'll never buy a handgun because of the handgun safety certificate. Sure I don't approve of requiring registration, but you are "complying" one way or the other with registration or featureless... I say comply both ways or walk the talk and run an unregistered AW like you really want to be non compliant... or stop BSing yourself and man up to the reality that you will comply... comply with the law in the most flexible way for you in the future to own and operate firearms within the absurd laws as they are. Register some, don't register others and go featureless, work the system as it is to your advantage not the other way around.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk