MERGED THREADS "Bullet Button Assault Weapon" Regs

[jandmtv]

It has been stated that the magnet is not considered a tool once it is left on the lower it becomes part of the gun.

I WOULD USE THE BB as its intended . Even at the range

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Got it! Never did it myself. Just wondering is all. Though once registered I don't see how using one will be illegal. Time will tell I guess.

[ifilef]

So as of this second leaving a magnet on the bb while at the range is illegal? Curious if after we ref them as AW they will be allowed. I mean it doesn't change the fact that the rifle still has a bb installed.

A BB is NOT a detachable magazine under 5471(m), first sentence.

According to my review of the regulation, e.g. 5471(m), when a magnet is attached to the BB it's considered to be a detached magazine. My further understanding is that detached magazines are unlawful to be possessed as AWs because they were not lawfully possessed prior to 1/1/2017.

So I am inclined to believe that one can not attach a magnet to a BB even if the weapon is a RAW.

[Devon]

so sad

All this news is so depressing, that at least it makes me forget that I can't buy any new handgun I see in any magazines or up for reviews in CA. So not only can we not have any modern sporting rifles, I forgot all about how we can't even participate in the industry as customers. As years go on, the approved handgun list gets older and older and more and more antiquated.

[CreamyFettucini]

You assume too much in reading 30680(b). It initially will serve to protect because it assumes that you registered an eligible weapon and will continue to possess it as lawfully configured, not with the later unlawful modification to it that comes with a 'felony' attached.

That 'bad act' will not avail one the protection afforded under 30680 and will void the registration from the get-go.

Moreover, what makes the modification unlawful is 30900 and is the authority cited for adoption of 5477.

As I understand it, 30900 only permits the DOJ to regulate the registration process. It doesn't give the DOJ the indefinite authority to make regulations about assault weapons post registration. Otherwise, what's to stop the DOJ from requiring you never shoot the RAW after registration or convert to single shot if they really wanted?

If someone possesses a BB rifle prior to 1/1/17, follows the registration process the DOJ sets and the firearm is successfully registered, 30900 no longer applies. If later they remove the BB it is already a RAW so 5477 and 30900 doesn't apply.

[CreamyFettucini]

That would be a specious argument and not relevant. 30900 is the relevant statute. You can't register then unilaterally render the registration meaningless by modifying the weapon into an unlawful configuration. You have made the registration null and void as a matter of law.

So by this logic, if you have a SB23 RAW you would void the AW registration by removing the evil features and going featureless?

[ifilef]

So by this logic, if you have a SB23 RAW you would void the AW registration by removing the evil features and going featureless?

You can do that with a SB23 RAW because it's lawful to go featureless. But I would not try to sell, devise or bequeath it unless and until you de-register it because you will be committing a felony by trying to sell a RAW.

BB and mag releases are not features.

Features do not go to the core of the AW laws except they look scary to people and arguably make the weapon more dangerous to humans. Features count, but this time around and before they want to reduce the capacity to do harm by making it slower and more difficult to do mag changes.

So, no, my logic would not follow the conclusion you suggest in your query.

[1911su16b870]

Oh what a glorious train wreck this topic has become.

[CreamyFettucini]

You can do that with a SB23 RAW because it's lawful to go featureless. But I would not try to sell, devise or bequeath it unless and until you de-register it because you will be committing a felony by trying to sell a RAW.

BB and mag releases are not features.

Features do not go to the core of the AW laws except they look scary to people and arguably make the weapon more dangerous to humans. Features count, but this time around and before they want to reduce the capacity to do harm by making it slower and more difficult to do mag changes.

So, no, my logic would not follow the conclusion you suggest in your query.

But it's still a RAW despite the features (or lack there of) Even though it doesn't meet the definition of an AW set in 30515 pc.

Since a 2017 RAW would meet the definition of AW with either a BB or standard mag release, it is not an illegal configuration.

[curtisfong]

As I understand it, 30900 only permits the DOJ to regulate the registration process.

And as part of regulating the registration process, they could declare that changing your underwear after registering your rifle magically makes you in possession of an assault rifle with no exemption.

They literally can do anything they want, with no oversight, and no possibility of challenge it seems. Because "distinctions without a difference" are, nevertheless, distinctions. Remember there is no requirement for the law to be logical or rational.

[danez71]

As I understand it, 30900 only permits the DOJ to regulate the registration process. It doesn't give the DOJ the indefinite authority to make regulations about assault weapons post registration. Otherwise, what's to stop the DOJ from requiring you never shoot the RAW after registration or convert to single shot if they really wanted?

If someone possesses a BB rifle prior to 1/1/17, follows the registration process the DOJ sets and the firearm is successfully registered, 30900 no longer applies. If later they remove the BB it is already a RAW so 5477 and 30900 doesn't apply.

Wrong as described several times I this thread and also another thread.

While they don't have indefinite authority, they do have authority.

[Glimmer3]

Not sure if this was asked yet but how does this effect AR pistols ???


Thanks

[danez71]

So by this logic, if you have a SB23 RAW you would void the AW registration by removing the evil features and going featureless?

Wrong.... they specifically state you can remove the features and submit to deregister.


Just to point out these 2 posts I'm replying to.

In one, you're making the case that it's ok to remove the BB even though they specifically say you cant.

The other, you're making the case that you can't go featureless when they specifically say you can.


That and some of the other statements in this thread are the most bass akwards twisted illogical anayslsis ever made.

[CreamyFettucini]

Wrong.... they specifically state you can remove the features and submit to deregister.


Just to point out these 2 posts I'm replying to.

In one, you're making the case that it's ok to remove the BB even though they specifically say you cant.

The other, you're making the case that you can't go featureless when they specifically say you can.


That and some of the other statements in this thread are the most bass akwards twisted illogical anayslsis ever made.

I was only using the featureless example to show that simply changing the RAWs characteristics do not negate the fact that it's still a RAW. But I'll admit, it was a bad example, your right.

[UP2MTNS]

56 pages and still going, crazy.

I have a question that doesn't need its own thread so I'll just ask here, its a slight tangent:

Does anyone know what the DOJ's resources are for this? I mean, if they suddenly start getting thousands of applications a week, each with 3-4 photos, are they really going to be able to manually review, inspect and verify each application with photos?

Especially if the majority of people wait until the end of the year, they'll have a 12 month backlog...

[Cokebottle]

Not sure if this was asked yet but how does this effect AR pistols ???

Same as AR rifles, except featureless is not an option.

Stick with the BB and register, or go with a Franklin DFM or BBv2.0 and top-load/break top.