Making a Compliant non-AW pistol...

[gosparx]

I am sure this has been asked and answered many times, and I HAVE spent the last hour or two reading over old threads and re-reading SB23, but I just want to make sure that everything I have read has meshed together correctly inside my head.

Basically here is the goal... to create a CA legal and compliant semi-auto AR pistol in .223. (yes, completely impractically, but really cool) Some of these steps may not be necessary, but I am more concerned about missing a step that IS necessary.

I am starting with an 80% receiver that I am the "maker" of.

This receiver will be a dedicated 'PISTOL' receiver and will never have a stock attached to it. Just to be extra certain, I am going to have the word 'PISTOL' etched onto the outside of the lower.

Next I am going to fix (via BB) a single shot bob-sled into the gun

The upper that will be used has a 6" barrel, rails and a muzzle break (hence a threaded barrel).

For the time being, I will NOT install the gas tube and probably temporarily pin the hole at the gas block.

At this point I believe that it gun is a legal 'single shot' pistol and is exempt from the Safe Handgun Roaster.

Just to be uber-safe... at this point I am going to voluntarily register this gun (so that I will have legal paperwork to back me up should anything get ugly down the road)

Once the gun is 'mine' I am then free to modify it as I wish, so long as it remains within the legal parameters of a standard pistol.

If I understand things correctly, and the laws work the same way they do with rifles... I can now:
- Install the gas system
- Replace the bob-sled with a 10 round FIXED magazine (using a BB)

Since the magazine is fixed, I am also able to keep such evil features as:
- barrel shroud (i.e. forwrd handguard)
- threaded barrel (to allow for the attachment of a muzzle break)

Also, if I understand the law correctly, I CAN NOT add a forward pistol grip add definitely not a stock (which would in fact turn the gun into a SBR)

Am I missing something here? Or do I have things 'technically right' as far as people here have been able to decode from the CA Penal Code.

Yes I understand that according to many people there are lots of grey areas in doing some thing like this. But our whole lifestyle and interests in this sport is one big grey area.

NOW... part two of this plan is to do the same thing but with a dedicated .22LR (home made) lower and aftermarket upper. The one area that I could use a little help in is which gun laws become moot when dealing with rimfire, and which ones do I still need to follow closely? That is one area that I still need to do more research. (but my .22 upper is at least 4 weeks away)

I believe that I will be able to have a detachable magazine on the 22 pistol (just like on my dedicated 22 AR.) However, does that mean that I will not be albe to have the other evil features OR are they exempt because the gun is a 22 rimfire??

If you happen to know of a useful thread that already exists I would appreciate the link, but please don't just tell me to use the 'search' button. I've been doing that and have found lots, but the search option is actually pretty limited because there is so much stuff on this sight!!

So... I think that covers the basics. I look forward to any constructive criticism and an outside perspective that reveals any huge holes in my logic (or even any little oversights that might land my butt in jail)

Thanks

[ohsmily]

Rimfire handguns are subject to the same pistol regulations as centerfire ones. Basically, you will have to do the exact same thing with your .22LR pistol build as you will do with your centerfire pistol build. It is not like the rifle regulations with the prefix "semi automatic, centerfire, detachable magazine rifle." Rather, it is "semi-automatic, detachable magazine pistol" (notice the omission of "centerfire" with the pistol prefix).

P.S. Your build process and legal analysis are sound, if not a little broken in places. But, you have enough up there to remain in compliance.
P.P.S. It is a ROSTER not a ROASTER
P.P.P.S. It is a muzzle BRAKE not a BREAK.

[redneckshootist]

I believe home built pistols are excempt from the safe handgun roster. If you are doing an 80% buildup no need to do single shot you can go semi-auto right away. you would only have to do single shot if you imported it. Thats how I understand it but Im not a lawyer so I may be wrong.

[gosparx]

Thanks for the corrections!

Normally I get the 'brake' vs 'break' right, but I've probably messed up on the roster/roaster thing before with out realizing it.

And thanks for the info on the rimfire verses centerfire.

If you could also clarify a little on what you mean by 'broken in places' that would be a great help as well. I just want to make sure/see if it is just me writing/explaining things poorly OR if I am actually misunderstanding something.

Thanks again for your time!

[gosparx]

I believe home built pistols are excempt from the safe handgun roster. If you are doing an 80% buildup no need to do single shot you can go semi-auto right away. you would only have to do single shot if you imported it. Thats how I understand it but Im not a lawyer so I may be wrong.

I was thinking the same thing... but just trying to be paranoid-cautious since this thing is going to 'look' even less legal then most of the full sized EBRs out there.

Thanks

[ohsmily]

The "broken" portion is your description of the registration process and having a single shot pistol prior to registration. As RedNeckShootist pointed out, it isn't necessary that the pistol be single shot prior to registration. It is homebuilt and is exempt from the roster for that reason, not because it is single shot. I didn't explicitly correct it because it wouldn't expose you to any criminal liability; if anything, it would keep you even "safer."

[Quiet]

Didn't the BATFE have issue with the legality 80% AR recievers?

[aplinker]

There are lots of problems with 80%. There's no concrete definition, so things can change "at will" with the ATF. So yeah, there are potential issues with anything called 80%. The less finished design is, the better, but that makes it harder to build.

Didn't the BATFE have issue with the legality 80% AR recievers?

[gosparx]

I was a little concerned about the 80% receiver/BATF thing, but EVERYTHING we deal with regarding guns, particularly anything with regards to semi-auto rifles is constantly shifting and rumors and horror stories fly around continuously. Some true some myth.

I'm still have my concerns, hence I'm going out of my way to do a few things I 'technically' don't have to do with regards to building a couple or AR pistols, but there is being cautious, then there is living in fear. I'm not going to live in fear with regards to my guns or anything else. I work my tail off trying to keep everything legal and following these asinine and contrdictory rules.

I know that won't be worth ****e if they come after me for something, but it's all I can do unless I want to start ... hell, I was trying to think of something I could do that the gooberment didn't have it's clumsy paws into but I couldn't think of anything...

SO... I built... excuse me... I "MADE" my lowers and I'm going to jump through all the hoops I need to and then some then either hope it all works out okay, or live in ignorant bliss thinking I have nothing to worry about because I did everthing I was suppose to, and then some. Yeah, this is probably all feel good BS so I don't stress out TOO much about having a hobby that can land me in PRISON if I forget to put a certain screw in at the right time, but that's just the quasi-Orwellian world/country we live in today.

I'm getting grumpy... must be time for lunch!