When did suppressors get banned in CA?

[godlyatheist]

I could not find any information on the legality of suppressors in CA, if they were ever legal. The current Penal Code section 33410 is about suppressors, which was previously section 12500 before the Penal Code was reorganized in 2010. The notation listed in the old section 12500 says that section was amended in 1990, but I couldn't find any language in the 1989 AW ban nor the subsequent feature ban in 1990 that introduced the silencer ban. I've searched various wiki such as the Calgun one but none of them mentions when suppressors get banned in CA. Does anyone know the answer?

Edit: answer is Dangerous Weapons Control Law (1953)

[johnk518]

Bet you Librarian has the answer. But for as long as I can remember (20+ yrs ago) they have never been legal in CA.

[heidad01]

50-ish? Wild guess.

[Librarian]

Bet you Librarian has the answer. But for as long as I can remember (20+ yrs ago) they have never been legal in CA.

Probably 1917 - that's when the 'Dangerous Weapons Control Act' was passed in CA.

But, I don't know for sure about suppressors.

[Califpatriot]

I think 1953, which is also when MGs were banned.

Stats.1953, c. 36, p. 665.

[godlyatheist]

I think 1953, which is also when MGs were banned.

Stats.1953, c. 36, p. 665.

Link to legislative record, see chapter 36.
You are right! It was enacted Mar 28, 1953 and entered into force on Sept 9, 1953. The 1953 law is called the "Dangerous Weapon Control Law", expanding the scope of the 1917 Dangerous Weapons Control Act.

[johnk518]

Link to legislative record, see chapter 36.
You are right! It was enacted Mar 28, 1953 and entered into force on Sept 9, 1953. The 1953 law is called the "Dangerous Weapon Control Law", expanding the scope of the 1917 Dangerous Weapons Control Act.

And I thought we were the wild west. . .

[sigstroker]

So much for the "good old days" in California wrt guns. There never were any good old days in most of our lifetimes.

[Librarian]

Link to legislative record, see chapter 36.
You are right! It was enacted Mar 28, 1953 and entered into force on Sept 9, 1953. The 1953 law is called the "Dangerous Weapon Control Law", expanding the scope of the 1917 Dangerous Weapons Control Act.

Nice find! (Note, takes forever to load - big PDF image file). How did you locate it? I'm always interested in good sources.

Old 12200 is pretty interesting: it includes semi-autos with a mag capacity of more than 10 rounds in the definition of machine gun! That used to be the case in the Washington DC code, and I guess they either grabbed the CA definition, or both came from a different, common source.

[CAL.BAR]

And I thought we were the wild west. . .

CA was NEVER really part of the "wild West". As a result of the gold rush, CA grew far more quickly than the other "western" states, and large cities like SF, Sacramento, and LA grew up before any of that could take root. Also, the people the came to CA or were here (i.e. Missionaries, the Spanish/Mexicans and later the Chinese) had no "gun culture". "Gun Culture" really resided more in the cowboys and ranchers of the midwest and of course the plantation owners and farmers of the south. CA was far more like the east coast in terms of the demographics and their attitudes towards guns. Hence, NO state equivalent to the 2A like many other western states have.

[that one guy]

Now with the supreme courts in our favor. If something were to happen regarding suppressors being legal via Supreme Court. How would That work with the “Dangerous Weapon Control Law” already inplace?

[johnk518]

Won't affect us at all. But if the hearing protection bill gets passed you're good to go everywhere else.

CA was NEVER really part of the "wild West". As a result of the gold rush, CA grew far more quickly than the other "western" states, and large cities like SF, Sacramento, and LA grew up before any of that could take root. Also, the people the came to CA or were here (i.e. Missionaries, the Spanish/Mexicans and later the Chinese) had no "gun culture". "Gun Culture" really resided more in the cowboys and ranchers of the midwest and of course the plantation owners and farmers of the south. CA was far more like the east coast in terms of the demographics and their attitudes towards guns. Hence, NO state equivalent to the 2A like many other western states have.

Tongue in cheek bud, just making light banter.

[that one guy]

What about the farmer in Fresno who got off? That won’t be able to benefit us?

https://www.bakersfield.com/news/weapons-charges-against-member-of-bakersfield-farming-family-to-be/article_0cb33564-3081-11e9-8a33-df2a569d1fdd.html

[godlyatheist]

Nice find! (Note, takes forever to load - big PDF image file). How did you locate it? I'm always interested in good sources.

Old 12200 is pretty interesting: it includes semi-autos with a mag capacity of more than 10 rounds in the definition of machine gun! That used to be the case in the Washington DC code, and I guess they either grabbed the CA definition, or both came from a different, common source.

Califpatriot gave me the source in post #5, so you have to ask him where he found that reference. From there it was just looking up the legislative record from 1917 and comparing against the 1953 version. While no text of the 1917 law could be found, the index from CA legislature gave a summary for each of the bill passed. From there, I drew the conclusion that the silencer ban was added in 1953.

[sigstroker]

Won't affect us at all. But if the hearing protection bill gets passed you're good to go everywhere else.

That died when Stephen Pollock did.