MERGED THREADS "Bullet Button Assault Weapon" Regs

[ifilef]

Tried to go onto the site to see if the registration period is open; nothing yet.

What for? What for?

I'm at least going to wait to see what the legislature is up to in this new session, take it from there.

[gdt82]

AWs with standard mag releases are not registrable under SB 880. If you have an AW with standard mag release, it would be unregistered, and you would therefore not be the "registered owner" of that AW for purposes of PC 30675(c). You would instead be in direct violation of PC 30605. You don't need 11 CCR 5477 to arrive at that conclusion, but hopefully that regulation will help people from doing something stupid. The new regs, specifically 11 CCR 5472(b), emphasize this aspect of SB 880, i.e., that SB 23 AWs are not registrable. Registration of a pre-2017 compliant AW with bullet button is not registration of a pre-2017 non-compliant AW with standard mag release.

Only a few people here are seriously (or perhaps not) talking abut attempting to register something with a standard mag release. That is clearly not eligible because it doesn't meet the definition of lawfully possessed prior to 1/1/17. What most here are questioning is replacing the bullet button post registration. The DOJ regs say not to, but once it's registered, what you would have done was swap one assault weapon characteristic for another, which is not prohibited in the penal code. Manufacturing an assault weapon from a registered assault weapon seems like a ridiculous proposition. It's clear the DOJ wants another class of assault weapons, but that's not what the legislature gave them.

[ifilef]

What if people didn't take pictures prior to 2017? Their registration will be denied?

Yup, sorry.

That's a joke... He is 'ribbing you, Smedkcuf.

[Shell]

What if people didn't take pictures prior to 2017? Their registration will be denied?

Yup, sorry.

Funny. To be clear, there is no requirement that your photos have to be taken prior to the rule even being posted for the public.

In fact, you don't even have to have the rifle fully built until the day you register, so long as it was above 80% with a BB on it by December 31. And then all you have to do is swear under penalty of perjury.

The photos are just to prove that, at the time of registration, the BB was affixed, thus trapping you with Rule 5477 so you can't take it off later.

[Smedkcuf]

Yup, sorry.

That would probably be 99.99% of SACF owners, and the only ones who would have known about the picture requirement are the few hundred that found out 2 days before 2017.

[darkshire]

What for? What for?

I'm at least going to wait to see what the legislature is up to in this new session, take it from there.

yeah im in no rush to register. if i do, it wont be until september or october 2017

[Shell]

alright makes sense. i do however remember seeing some talk about EXIF metadata potentially being examined for timestamps when registration begins. i didnt follow the thread for too long as it was new years, but i thought it may have something to do with proving your rifle(s) are already """""assault weapons"""" and therefore eligible to register.

Again, no part of the DOJ rule requires the photos be taken by December 31, 2016. All the photos are for, is to ensure you aren't registering an out of state AW with a standard mag eject.

They just want to see that, at the point of reg, a BB is on the gun.

Feel free to strip the EXIF metadata from the photo, it isn't required either way.

[Crazed_SS]

alright makes sense. i do however remember seeing some talk about EXIF metadata potentially being examined for timestamps when registration begins. i didnt follow the thread for too long as it was new years, but i thought it may have something to do with proving your rifle(s) are already """""assault weapons"""" and therefore eligible to register.

I think that's just calguns people being calguns people lol.

They haven't even officially posted the regs on the site yet. Everyone's pics are most likely going to be taken sometime in 2017.

They are asking for info about date of purchase and they can clearly see the serial number in the pics. If they want to go crazy ensuring that the rifle came from 200-2016, they can knock themselves out. They will have all the info to do so . It might take some extra effort for pre-2014 rifles/receivers since those weren't registered at time of purchase..


I work in IT and I'm really fascinated in the logistics of processing the submissions.. are they going to use interns, staffers, contractors, etc? Just thinking out loud..

[Smedkcuf]

Funny. To be clear, there is no requirement that your photos have to be taken prior to the rule even being posted for the public.

In fact, you don't even have to have the rifle fully built until the day you register, so long as it was above 80% with a BB on it by December 31. And then all you have to do is swear under penalty of perjury.

The photos are just to prove that, at the time of registration, the BB was affixed, thus trapping you with Rule 5477 so you can't take it off later.

Actually it had to have been a complete functioning SACF rifle by December 31, a stripped lower with a bullet button wouldn't be eligible.

[ifilef]

Only a few people here are seriously (or perhaps not) talking abut attempting to register something with a standard mag release. That is clearly not eligible because it doesn't meet the definition of lawfully possessed prior to 1/1/17. What most here are questioning is replacing the bullet button post registration. The DOJ regs say not to, but once it's registered, what you would have done was swap one assault weapon characteristic for another, which is not prohibited in the penal code. Manufacturing an assault weapon from a registered assault weapon seems like a ridiculous proposition. It's clear the DOJ wants another class of assault weapons, but that's not what the legislature gave them.

Oooohhh....Oooooohhh, 'tooody-tooody'. Register tomorrow and then slap on that mag release and shoot at the police range. Bring your slippers...haha

[gdt82]

Oooohhh....Oooooohhh, 'tooody-tooody'. Register tomorrow and then slap on that mag release and shoot at the police range. Bring your slippers...haha

Can't even register tomorrow if you wanted to, unless they surprise us. The regs haven't even been made public, we just got a sneak preview here.

[Discogodfather]

The photos are just to prove that, at the time of registration, the BB was affixed, thus trapping you with Rule 5477 so you can't take it off later.

If that's the only proof then maybe there is a huge loophole. As already stated many BB's can't be visually ascertained.

And if they go to your sworn statement then you can show them the photo and say "why did you register it?".

And if they go all super crazy on the photographs and can't determine anything from them then maybe the system doesn't even work.

[darkshire]

I'm really fascinated in the logistics of processing the submissions.. are they going to use interns, staffers, contractors, etc? Just thinking out loud..

if i had to guess id say:
they will rely on people self policing with scary verbiage and e-signing a document agreeing to penalty of perjury. i dont think they will be reviewing every photo, even remotely so. im guessing they will take random samples; X per month for X number months and after that time calculating faulty registrations based on their total sample size. if there are X or greater number of faulty registrations, they will increase their sample size every month until faulty registrations are under X.

[ifilef]

Can't even register tomorrow if you wanted to, unless they surprise us. The regs haven't even been made public, we just got a sneak preview here.

Slippers are for taking those long walks to the showers in the 'big' house, or at least county jail after arrested and handcuffed.

[djhall]

AWs with standard mag releases are not registrable under SB 880. If you have an AW with standard mag release, it would be unregistered, and you would therefore not be the "registered owner" of that AW for purposes of PC 30675(c). You would instead be in direct violation of PC 30605. You don't need 11 CCR 5477 to arrive at that conclusion, but hopefully that regulation will help people from doing something stupid. The new regs, specifically 11 CCR 5472(b), emphasize this aspect of SB 880, i.e., that SB 23 AWs are not registrable. Registration of a pre-2017 compliant AW with bullet button is not registration of a pre-2017 non-compliant AW with standard mag release.

I appreciate the response. I keep trying to find clear verbiage to that effect in the text of SB880, but so far the closest I can find is reading a few assumptions into 30900(b)(1)

I think I've been reading it like this: (b) (1) Any person who, from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2016, inclusive, lawfully possessed an assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine, as defined in Section 30515, (including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be readily removed from the firearm with the use of a tool,) shall register the firearm before January 1, 2018, but not before the effective date of the regulations adopted pursuant to paragraph (5), with the department pursuant to those procedures that the department may establish by regulation pursuant to paragraph (5)

While I think you are arguing I should have been reading it like this: (b) (1) Any person who, from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2016, inclusive, lawfully possessed an assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine, as defined in Section 30515, (including those weapons) with an ammunition feeding device that can be readily removed from the firearm with the use of a tool, shall register the firearm before January 1, 2018, but not before the effective date of the regulations adopted pursuant to paragraph (5), with the department pursuant to those procedures that the department may establish by regulation pursuant to paragraph (5)

Essentially this is the difference between:

"If you legally possessed an assault weapon without a fixed magazine (including weapons that used tool release mag locks), then you shall register it as an assault weapon without a fixed magazine."

and

"If you legally possessed an assault weapon without a fixed magazine but with an ammunition feeding device that can be readily removed from the firearm with the use of a tool, then you shall register that firearm as an assault weapon without a fixed magazine but with an ammunition feeding device that can be readily removed from the firearm with the use of a tool."

Honestly, while your interpretation makes complete sense of the DOJ regulations, still I think my original interpretation requires a less tortured convolution of the sentence structure and supports a simpler interpretation of the purpose of the "including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be readily removed from the firearm with the use of a tool" clause.