MERGED THREADS "Bullet Button Assault Weapon" Regs

[Crazed_SS]

That's where this crap goes off the rails; we have people with limited experience in CA in dealing with the many laws, ordinances, regulations, DOJ bulletins, and more for more then 30 years (as many of us have) coming in new to this and ADDING their reminiscing about what they have been accustomed to believe as influenced by prominent media and TV, for what "could/should" happen, what is "common sense", what they THINK is they way things are, because it sounds right to them - and then repeat it here enough times on Calguns that it starts to sound plausible.

Then others repeat it, and so on, to the point that what is being discussed as the regs - is not even a valid part of the regs.

Agreed.

The laws, regs, etc say what they say.

Let's not create more than what's there. That's how we get people to this day claiming ammo and guns must be transported in seperated locked containers..

If you want to risk removing the BB, go right ahead. I painted a clear, realistic, and tangible argument for how you could be charged with a felony for doing so.

If some cop in San Francisco - as you're driving through the city - detains your locked AW case, opens it, and sees the standard magazine eject... good luck with your appeals.

OR the cop isnt an expert in calguns-esque analysis of gun laws. He probably flips out after finding an "Assault Weapon", but then he runs the serial and it comes back legally registered to the guy he has detained. He begrudgingly gives the rifle back and that's that.

This is why I'm suprised the DOJ is pulling this crap. It actually makes things a bit more complicated with respect to training, enforcement, etc. I genuinely thought they'd cut their losses and keep the status quo we have today where it's either a legally registered AW or it isnt.

[BAJ475]

Please for the love of all that holy in this world, explain to me how you still have a Bullet Button Assault Weapon which this regulation created, after you remove the Bullet Button?

You dont. You now have an Assault Weapon.

Did you register is AW in 2000? No, you didnt.

I buy a Mini-14. I install a Grip Pod on it. Please show me the law that says a Grip Pod is not a Bi-pod.

How can I be charged with AW possession for a featureless Firearm? Bi-pods are not illegal?

I buy an AR15 and install a FRS-15, many many many people here say I have an illegal AW? How is that? I see nothing in the law that says that? Why do they say that? What are they referring to?

First, let me say that IMHO there is nothing holy in this universe. Second, you would not have a Bullet Button Assault Weapon. I disagree that such weapons were created by the "regulations." IMO they were created by SB880 and AB1135. But to answer your question you would have an AW as defined in Section 30515 as it exist on 1/1/17, which makes no distinctions between BB AWs and non BB AWs, the same as it makes no distinction between AWs with one feature or ones with several features.

[The Gleam]

If you want to risk removing the BB, go right ahead. I painted a clear, realistic, and tangible argument for how you could be charged with a felony for doing so.

If some cop in San Francisco - as you're driving through the city - detains your locked AW case, opens it, and sees the standard magazine eject... good luck with your appeals.

Again, the only safe thing to do right now is to leave the BB on the gun, as gun rights attorneys review Rule 5477 and decide if it's worth suing over.

No... you've got a whole lot wrong.

But good luck.

[Shell]

Agreed.

The laws, regs, etc say what they say.

Let's not create more than what's there. That's how we get people to this day claiming ammo and guns must be transported in seperated locked containers..

Hold on a second. We all agree Rule 5477 denies you the ability to remove the BB. But they screwed up and didn't explicitly say what would happen if you do.

Caution is necessary, as the DOJ can easily argue that you are no longer in possession of a properly-registered AW - and thus, committing a felony.

This is a false premise to end discussion of a clear and present danger, should you remove the bullet button. One we all need to be concerned about.

[Sousuke]

the point is that your "the law is self-defeating" interpretation sucks lol.

We shall see.

[Shell]

No... you've got a whole lot wrong.

But good luck.

You do realize that you are strengthening the validity of my position by resorting to idle bickering, a fallacious argument.

If you disagree with my last post, I welcome/encourage you to challenge it with fact or logic!

[JackRydden224]

Except I'm always going to the range or going home.

If I'm driving away from the range then I'm going home. If I'm driving away from home then I'm going to the range. How can it be proven otherwise?

Life has changed. It still is an AW. You can't travel with it. You can only transport it to a range, your work, and your office - or traveling out of state - with the weapon in a locked case.

I fear we will see many BB MSR owners charged for unlawful use of an AW, thinking that because they registered it, that it's fine in the backseat of their car, in an unlocked case, or stowed while going hunting. It isn't.

[Shell]

Except I'm always going to the range or going home.

If I'm driving away from the range then I'm going home. If I'm driving away from home then I'm going to the range. How can it be proven otherwise?

If you're stopped by the police at some other facility or locale that has no standard route between your range and your residence.

If you're at Toys R Us and your car is broken into, and cops find an AW, they're going to ask how that is relevant to a route between the range and your home.

Then they may call the DOJ and ask what to charge you with. Not a position you want to be in. I will now only take my AW, now that it is an AW, between the range and the house - save for maybe (maybe) getting gasoline.

[Crazed_SS]

Except I'm always going to the range or going home.

If I'm driving away from the range then I'm going home. If I'm driving away from home then I'm going to the range. How can it be proven otherwise?

Yea, for most people, the "Concept of Operations" doesnt change that much between RAWs and regular rifles. Of course if you're the kind of person that leaves a rifle in your car all the time, or you have minor children that shoot them, then you have some issues.

But if you're the kind of person that generally goes to the range and back, the only things that's really changed is the requirement for locking them up.

If you're stopped by the police at some other facility or locale that has no standard route between your range and your residence.

If you're at Toys R Us and your car is broken into, and cops find an AW, they're going to ask how that is relevant to a route between the range and your home

This is why I usually go right home after the range. I do not feel comfortable running into Toys R Us with 1000s in firearms in the trunk. What if someone breaks in and steals them? That would totally suck.

[Sousuke]

If you're stopped by the police at some other facility or locale that has no standard route between your range and your residence.

If you're at Toys R Us and your car is broken into, and cops find an AW without the Bullet Button, they're going to ask how that is relevant to a route between the range and your home.

Then they may call the DOJ and ask what to charge you with. Not a position you want to be in. I will now only take my AW, now that it is an AW, between the range and the house - save for maybe (maybe) getting gasoline.

In theory they may have created a new way around this. If you separate your lower from the upper, you don't even have a centerfire weapon. Though I wouldn't test this.

[Shell]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIu7enBGiRk

Actually that's more of an argument to own a second, featureless rifle to drive around with.

If you like features, keep the BB, register it as an AW - and drive straight to and from the range. If you're going somewhere else, only take your featureless rifle.

[-aK-]

If a Raddlock was used to register the AW, couldn't the screw simply be loosened after registration? After all, the magazine release device would not have been changed.

shhh

[Shell]

In theory they may have created a new way around this. If you separate your lower from the upper, you don't even have a centerfire weapon. Though I wouldn't test this.

Possibly. Like I said, I don't know.

Still doesn't allow you to remove the BB, just may allow you to more easily transport the AW. I'd recommend using separate cases for upper and lower, if you want to try that... at least until DOJ clarifies.

[ifilef]

To be honest if you register your ARs with BB then life really hasn't changed from 12/31/2016. As far as configuration goes we are at status quo. I will be bummed if I cannot take the BB off but the fact is things have not gotten worse compared to years past.

Except these firearms can no longer be sold in BB configuration as in the past. That really bothers me.

[Shell]

shhh

Yes. Seriously. This is why I said wait for CRIS to open! And this isn't even what I was thinking of!

Stop talking about loopholes, people. Please!

That said, I wouldn't loosen the screw... DOJ would probably argue it violates 5477 without changing anything in the final rule... since they would argue the loose screw was illegal inside CA pre-2017, it's a violation of 5477 to perform on a registered AW BB MSR to do today.