Unconfigured Ad Widget
Collapse
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peņa v. Cid (Handgun Roster) **CERT DENIED 6-15-2020**
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
The "safe" handgun roster is illegal. The 10 day wait is illegal. The one handgun in 30 days is illegal. Yes, the law has never stopped them before. It's up to us to challenge them. We do that by supporting organizations like the NRA and Calguns Foundation.Leave a comment:
-
-
Well, that can change with a single AB/SB. They already have the registry...Leave a comment:
-
Yes, they'll be legal to own if they're legal now. You can legally sell them to other CA residents via Private Party Transaction through a dealer. They are grandfathered in. The micro stamping regulation has no effect on what you currently own.Leave a comment:
-
-
Leave a comment:
-
If the micro stamping goes in to effect, do you think we will still be grandfathered to still own our older NONROOSTER guns?Leave a comment:
-
Yup.
Drop safety requirement for guns intended to be carried in public (open carry or CCW) would be a safety law that would have been reasonable, with the exception that you can buy any gun for hunting or range shooting.
The roster as is, it's just BS.Leave a comment:
-
-
Leave a comment:
-
What I still can't fathom is why micro-stamping is even a requirement. The stated purpose of the roster is to ensure that a pistol is "safe" for sale in CA. Can someone explain to me how the presence, or lack of, micro-stamping affects the "safety" of the pistol?
I would understand if the Legislature were to pass a separate law that required micro-stamping on all guns sold in CA as an aid to LE; but including it as a requirement on the roster (implying it is a safety feature) makes zero sense.
-RuskieLeave a comment:
-
How is MS even a safety feature?!
What I still can't fathom is why micro-stamping is even a requirement. The stated purpose of the roster is to ensure that a pistol is "safe" for sale in CA. Can someone explain to me how the presence, or lack of, micro-stamping affects the "safety" of the pistol?
I would understand if the Legislature were to pass a separate law that required micro-stamping on all guns sold in CA as an aid to LE; but including it as a requirement on the roster (implying it is a safety feature) makes zero sense.
-RuskieLeave a comment:
-
Microstamping, much like magazine disconnect and LCI, primarily limits availability.
Sure it wouldn't matter *much* if ANY gun could be purchased as-is, then have the local FFL install different firing pin. It would add cost, but at least wouldn't limit availability.
As it stands, most modern handguns do NOT have the magazine disconnect and only a few have natural LCI (which is often insufficient for CA.) None have microstamping, though. That's the REAL problem.
The firing pin would be an insignificant cost in the long run. The extra manufacturing necessary to do the case stamp, that's where the big bucks (comparatively) would have to be spent. And I still don't think it would work, or be safe, following the letter of the law.
It does, that's why no manufacturer can come up with a way to do it. No matter how you implement it, you are fundamentally weakening the most important piece of a gun. It would be like giving someone an air compressor, but first drilling a hole in it and covering it with some epoxy, then calling it good. Sure, it might hold, but probably not forever. People have guns blow up in their hand often enough.Leave a comment:
Calguns.net Statistics
Collapse
Topics: 1,854,799
Posts: 24,999,474
Members: 353,086
Active Members: 5,896
Welcome to our newest member, kylejimenez932.
What's Going On
Collapse
There are currently 9411 users online. 183 members and 9228 guests.
Most users ever online was 65,177 at 7:20 PM on 09-21-2024.
Leave a comment: