New Revelations in 2007 for California Firearms Owners! Updated 1/28/07

[xenophobe]

We have a new bullet tip mag release that allows for attachable mag off-list builds:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=46802

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=45321

Detachable magazine Simonov rifles:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=45331

.50 BMG options that aren't banned by California:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=45332

Loopholes that may allow ownership of previously banned Roberti-Roos firearms:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=45333

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=45779

A way to build a SB-15 exempt assault-style pistol:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=45419

A list of AR/AK series firearms that can be made into non-Assault Weapons:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=34397

A Summary of AB-2728 and what it does and does not accomplish:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=45170

Category 1 Assault Weapons modified to non-semiautomatic CA legal status

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=45779

Want a SB-15 banned "unsafe" double action revolver? Diamondbacks and Cobras and Pythons, Oh My!
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=45558NEW!

U-15 California Legal Stock Alternative:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=42322

New MonsterMan Grip:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=45370

Also look forward to:

Hunt v. Brown, a case that is fighting the Attorney General on the grounds that the Assault Weapons laws are a mess and can't be easily enforced.

Parker v. District of Columbia, a case that could affect 2nd Amendment rights in the whole nation.


Individually, they might just bring a yawn to some. In the larger picture, they pretty much destroy what is left of the AW laws in California which may send shock waves throughout the whole nation. Thanks to the NRA, all of our members here, and an indecisive California Department of Justice, without whom most of this would not be feasible. And, thank you for AB-2728.

I honestly believe all the hard work, debate and 'out of the box thinking' here is directly responsible for a majority of what has happened in California in 2006, and 2007 looks to be even more promising!

[Unsub]

Thanks for this. It would be nice for every "New for 2007" thread to be posted in here, without clutter or debate (I will delete this post, or a mod can, in order to unclutter it).

[ivanimal]

Good post Xeno stuck as requested.

[xenophobe]

Thanks Ivan!

Thanks for this. It would be nice for every "New for 2007" thread to be posted in here, without clutter or debate (I will delete this post, or a mod can, in order to unclutter it).

That is my intent for creating this thread. Kind of a one stop view to see what's new. I will edit it as per request, or when I see new threads that should be posted here.

[guimus]

I would love to have a little microphone in the CA DOJ firearms division office this morning as everyone is getting back to work and reading what all those crazy calgunners have been up to over the weekend...

[xenophobe]

Does this mean my Yugo 56/44 or whatever the hell it's called I got from Turner's can now legally have a detach mag system on it?

Yes. The link is in the first post of this thread, in case you missed it.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=45331

[383green]

I would love to have a little microphone in the CA DOJ firearms division office this morning as everyone is getting back to work and reading what all those crazy calgunners have been up to over the weekend...

First outrage, then denial, then desperate scrambling, and then (hopefully) some involuntary career changes.

[Stanze]

Good post, but no mention of DAs now have the option of charging a so-called AW violation as a infraction beginning 1/1/07.

[xenophobe]

Good post, but no mention of DAs now have the option of charging a so-called AW violation as a infraction beginning 1/1/07.

If and when someone makes an in-depth analysis of exactly what AB2728 does, I'll add it to the post. If there is already a thread that does this, post or PM me the link.

From what I've seen so far, this hasn't been done recently.

[hoffmang]

My post here does an ok job of summarizing AB-2728:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=45170

-Gene

[Builder]

To All,
Please help me edit this letter. Thanks.

Dear "Out of State FFL or Distributor",
In 2006, gun owners in California were able to win back some freedoms which have gone into effect on January 1st, 2007. Here's the generalized synopsis: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=45423
Over 50,000 AR-15 receivers have legally entered the state within the last year. AR-15 and AK-47 firearms are legal in CA as long as they don't have any prohibited features and have a detachable magazine OR they have prohibited features and have a Fixed 10 round magazine. We don't get both (prohibited features and detachable magazine). Since our assault weapon laws are written for centerfire firearms, they do not apply to rimfire. Rimfires can have detachable magazines AND evil features. There are still named assault weapons so the manufacturer and model must be on the banned list to be illegal. If it isn't listed, then it is legal, or as we call them, Off-List Lowers or Off-List Receivers. Any off-list firearm must still follow the rules of evil features with a 10 round fixed magazine OR no evil features and detachable magazine. As an example, the AK-47 simply needs to have the pistol grip and flash hider removed for it to be legal in CA, assuming of course that it isn't a named banned manufacturer. Since the list was created in 1989, most of the new AK manufacturers are not on the banned list. None of the Romanian AK's are listed; they just can't have any evil features and the detachable magazine, to be imported legally. Simply removing the evil features meets the letter of the law. The list of banned (illegal) assault weapons is listed at: http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/dwcl/12275...1b121ac95b0045 under section 12276.
The evil features are listed in section 12276.1(a).
Section 12276.5 has been removed by the new law AB2728 which went into effect on 1/1/2007.
One final note, the way that the assault weapons law is written, it only applies to persons WITHIN THE STATE who are legally responsible, not persons outside of the state. As written, "12280. (a)(1) Any person who, within this state, manufactures or causes to be manufactured, distributes, transports, or imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives or lends any assault weapon........."
Check with your firearms attorney and you'll see that this is true. This means that you and your company aren't responsible for mistakes in violating California law. It is only us residents who are responsible.
Thanks very much,
Builder

[grammaton76]

To All,
Please help me edit this letter. Thanks.

Dear "Out of State FFL or Distributor",
In 2006, gun owners in California were able to win back some freedoms which have gone into effect on January 1st, 2007. Here's the generalized symopsis:

"Synopsis", not "symopsis". I wouldn't point this out, but you did ask for help editting.

I would also replace the word "evil" with "prohibited" when talking about evil features. While it's common in CA jargon, "evil" would sound to an out-of-stater kind of crackpot-ish.

[Builder]

Thank you grammaton! Your changes have been added!
Yeah, 6172, breaking them up looks better.

[6172crew]

To All,
Please help me edit this letter. Thanks.

Dear "Out of State FFL or Distributor",

In 2006, gun owners in California were able to win back some freedoms which have gone into effect on January 1st, 2007. Here's the generalized synopsis: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=45423

Over 50,000 AR-15 receivers have legally entered the state within the last year. AR-15 and AK-47 firearms are legal in CA as long as they don't have any prohibited features and have a detachable magazine OR they have prohibited features and have a Fixed 10 round magazine. We don't get both (prohibited features and detachable magazine). Since our assault weapon laws are written for centerfire firearms, they do not apply to rimfire, rimfires can have detachable magazines AND evil features.

There are still named assault weapons so the manufacturer and model must be on the banned list to be illegal. If it isn't listed, then it is legal, or as we call them, Off-List Lowers or Off-List Receivers. Any off-list firearm must still follow the rules of evil features with a 10 round fixed magazine OR no evil features and detachable magazine. As an example, the AK-47 simply needs to have the pistol grip and flash hider removed for it to be legal in CA, assuming of course that it isn't a named banned manufacturer.

Since the list was created in 1989, most of the new AK manufacturers are not on the banned list. None of the Romanian AK's are listed; they just can't have any evil features and the detachable magazine, to be imported legally. Simply removing the evil features meets the letter of the law. The list of banned (illegal) assault weapons is listed at: http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/dwcl/12275...121ac95b00 45 under section 12276.
The evil features are listed in section 12276.1(a).
Section 12276.5 has been removed by the new law AB2728 which went into effect on 1/1/2007.

One final note, the way that the assault weapons law is written, it only applies to persons WITHIN THE STATE who are legally responsible, not persons outside of the state. As written, "12280. (a)(1) Any person who, within this state, manufactures or causes to be manufactured, distributes, transports, or imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives or lends any assault weapon........."

Please check with your firearms attorney and you'll see that this is true. This means that you and your company aren't responsible for mistakes in violating California law. It is only us residents who are responsible.


Thanks very much,
Builder


I just broke it up alittle which makes it easier fo me to read, not sure if you want that done or not. If this is cluttering up this post I can remove them and we can start a new one...just let me know.

[midnitereaper]

Hunt v. Brown, a case that is fighting the Attorney General on the grounds that the Assault Weapons laws are a mess and can't be easily enforced.

Parker v. District of Columbia, a case that could affect 2nd Amendment rights in the whole nation.

Any links to more information on these cases?