CA-compliant handguns law requiring magazine disconnect safeties, does it expire?

[PrepperFS]

I believe the law states that new designs after some specified time have to have magazine disconnect safeties to be CA compliant, in regard to handguns.

It doesn't apply though to designs from before the law. So for example even a newly manufactured beretta 92fs doesn't have to comply with the law. But a newly designed glock like the gen 5's i think have to have it

Does this stupid law ever expire? I think a magazine disconnect safety is an absolutely RIDICULOUS thing to have on a pistol. Could cost you your life

[Cokebottle]

No, California gun laws never expire, they only get worse.

The goal of the California roster is not to ensure that guns available are safe, it is to ensure that NO guns are available.

[PrepperFS]

No, California gun laws never expire, they only get worse.

The goal of the California roster is not to ensure that guns available are safe, it is to ensure that NO guns are available.

so i'm wondering why something like the roberti-roos expired? and why won't the stupid Hughes amendment expire (federal i know)

[rivraton]

No, California gun laws never expire, they only get worse metastasize.

The goal of the California roster is not to ensure that guns available are safe, it is to ensure that NO guns are available.

More accurate...

[Librarian]

Roberti-Roos 'assault weapon' law has not expired.

It's right there in the Penal Code, beginning at 30500.

[PrepperFS]

Roberti-Roos 'assault weapon' law has not expired.

It's right there in the Penal Code, beginning at 30500.

Okay this is good, there's some learning going on here. Which was the law that banned ar's by name? Like remember when you couldn't buy Colts or bushmasters by name? And the monsterman grips were pretty much the only viable options (before the bullet button)

i believe the reason you can get them now is becuase some law expired around 2010 i think, and i thought it was the roberti roos

[mit31]

You are talking about the Federal Assault Weapons Ban. It expired because the only way they could pass it through Congress was with a 10 year limit. I don't know of any other gun laws on the books with an expiration date, especially in California.

Okay this is good, there's some learning going on here. Which was the law that banned ar's by name? Like remember when you couldn't buy Colts or bushmasters by name? And the monsterman grips were pretty much the only viable options (before the bullet button)

i believe the reason you can get them now is becuase some law expired around 2010 i think, and i thought it was the roberti roos

[PrepperFS]

gotcha.

[PrepperFS]

You are talking about the Federal Assault Weapons Ban. It expired because the only way they could pass it through Congress was with a 10 year limit. I don't know of any other gun laws on the books with an expiration date, especially in California.

I have to say, wow. So often it's just us californians that are subjected to such unconstitutional laws, it's surpising that nationwide people couldn't have many AR's

[Mitch]

I have to say, wow. So often it's just us californians that are subjected to such unconstitutional laws, it's surpising that nationwide people couldn't have many AR's

The 1994 "ban" probably had more to do than anything thing else with the explosion in popularity of the AR-15 (which before the ban was somewhat obscure among most firearms enthusiasts). You could buy any AR-15 you wanted, as long as it didn't have a flash suppressor; a bayonet lug; or a telescoping, folding or collapsing stock.

[Ki6vsm]

The 1994 "ban" probably had more to do than anything thing else with the explosion in popularity of the AR-15 (which before the ban was somewhat obscure among most firearms enthusiasts). You could buy any AR-15 you wanted, as long as it didn't have a flash suppressor; a bayonet lug; or a telescoping, folding or collapsing stock.

I laugh at some people's ignorance about the Fed AWB---with these people referring back to it saying, "We must do this again!" As you point out, it wasn't a "ban" on AWs at all. It only slightly changed what these rifles looked like.

My friend bought a new Bushmaster in 1999, in Arizona, right in the middle of the AWB period. Had an A2 stock, PG, and a 14.5" barrel with a pinned-welded AK muzzle brake.

[Paul_R]

Mag safeties have to be part of the design and functional in order to be sold new. Once you take it home that law has effectively "expired". It's yours to do with as you will.

[ARDude]

My first AR was a Bushmaster XM-15 stripped lower during the '94 ban, but before the California ban.

I built it with an A2 stock and pistol grip, non threaded barrel and no bayonet lug.

Registered it as a RAW i believe in 1999, and when the national ban sunset came, I replaced that barrel, and the A2 stock.

[Cokebottle]

so i'm wondering why something like the roberti-roos expired? and why won't the stupid Hughes amendment expire (federal i know)

Roberti-Roos did not expire. That list is still completely valid.
It was augmented by Kasler/SB-23

The only AW ban that sunset was the 1994 Federal AWB... you know... the one that passage cost the Democrats both houses.

[Cokebottle]

Okay this is good, there's some learning going on here. Which was the law that banned ar's by name? Like remember when you couldn't buy Colts or bushmasters by name? And the monsterman grips were pretty much the only viable options (before the bullet button)

i believe the reason you can get them now is becuase some law expired around 2010 i think, and i thought it was the roberti roos

No, you STILL can not buy AWs that are listed by name.

Please take the time to read:

http://www.calguns.net/caawid/flowchart.pdf