MERGED THREADS "Bullet Button Assault Weapon" Regs

[dieselpower]

My post was meant to be slightly tongue-in-cheek, it's a fixed tube magazine, but techinically anything is removeable with a certain amount of work

Doesn't take magazines at all. Tube-magazine.

It's not an AW: fine with the stock pinned - and OK to have the pistol grip.

please show me the regulation or law that classifies a tube that can be removed without disassembly a fixed magazine.

I see nothing in the law or regs which support a tube is not an ammunition feeding device.

[CandG]

please show me the regulation or law that classifies a tube that can be removed without disassembly a fixed magazine.

I see nothing in the law or regs which support a tube is not an ammunition feeding device.

Well hey, if my shotgun (not mine in the picture, but mine looks identical) is now an AW in 2017 and wasn't in 2016, then great, I'll happily register it so I can unpin the stock finally. Nothing in the DOJ regs says I can't do whatever I want with a shotgun after registration.

However, I'm pretty sure the DOJ considers tube shotgun magazines fixed. They always have, and as far as I can tell, nothing in the new laws changed that. The revised definitions mostly just affected rifles. Unless you want to claim that tube-mags have always been considered not-fixed, and thus everyone buying S/A shotguns has been buying AW's unknowingly from their LGS's and the DOJ just never noticed...

Also, if you go to your local LGS right now, you're sure to find a plethora of s/a shotguns available for purchase that have tube mags that are technically removable with a tool. I don't think they would be offered for sale if they were currently AW's.

[meno377]

holy mother of God, we are all looking at (f) (m) and (p) and didnt read (pp)



ifilef and the others who are looking at detachable and not detachable have no ground to stand on. a detachable magazine designation has no bearing on an identified AW as per 30515 and these regs.

OOPS!!!!!!! I certainly overlooked that.

[dieselpower]

Well hey, if my shotgun (not mine in the picture, but mine looks identical) is now an AW in 2017 and wasn't in 2016, then great, I'll happily register it so I can unpin the stock finally. Nothing in the DOJ regs says I can't do whatever I want with a shotgun after registration.

However, I'm pretty sure the DOJ considers tube shotgun magazines fixed. They always have, and as far as I can tell, nothing in the new laws changed that. The revised definitions mostly just affected rifles. Unless you want to claim that tube-mags have always been considered not-fixed, and thus everyone buy S/A shotguns has been buying AW's unknowingly from their LGS's and the DOJ just never noticed...

I believe they have removed the law that said a tube was not a detachable magazine. I do remember reading it, but I can no longer find it. Guess what that means. They must accept registration as an AW. For no fault of yours your legal 2016 shotgun has been turned into an AW by 2017 regulations / removal of law. They must allow registration.

[CandG]

holy mother of God, we are all looking at (f) (m) and (p) and didnt read (pp)



ifilef and the others who are looking at detachable and not detachable have no ground to stand on. a detachable magazine designation has no bearing on an identified AW as per 30515 and these regs.

So what does that mean for us? That we can switch over to regular mag releases before registration?

[CandG]

I believe they have removed the law that said a tube was not a detachable magazine. I do remember reading it, but I can no longer find it. Guess what that means. They must accept registration as an AW. For no fault of yours your legal 2016 shotgun has been turned into an AW by 2017 regulations / removal of law. They must allow registration.

I want you to be correct about that, I really really do.... BUT, the big problem is that if you're right, it would mean S/A shotguns with tube magazines are no longer legal for sale in CA, which would be very bad. BUT, they are legal still - as evidenced by the huge lineup of them I saw at Bass Pro last week.

[meno377]

So what does that mean for us? That we can switch over to regular mag releases before registration?

I don't see how when you have to take pictures that are entered into their database. If you have a regular magazine, you have an AW that is unlawful according to the old law before 2017.

[dieselpower]

I want you to be correct about that, I really really do.... BUT, the big problem is that if you're right, it would mean S/A shotguns with tube magazines are no longer legal for sale in CA, which would be very bad. BUT, they are legal still - as evidenced by the huge lineup of them I saw at Bass Pro last week.

unintended consequences of poorly written law. If not changed all sales post 1/1/2017 are illegal and all those guns need to be surrendered to police.

The law and regs do not support that a tube feeding device on a SA SG is a fixed magazine.

In fact I am fairly sure they say the exact opposite. If you can unscrew the tube and remove it without disturbing the action, its not a fixed magazine.

[dieselpower]

So what does that mean for us? That we can switch over to regular mag releases before registration?

No, but is clearly means if you still have a BB, your firearm is a legal AW, even with a magnet button attached.

[CandG]

I don't see how when you have to take pictures that are entered into their database. If you have a regular magazine, you have an AW that is unlawful according to the old law before 2017.

Just theorizing here, not arguing, but it only would have been illegal if you put the normal mag release on before 2017. Now that it's 2017, it's the same AW regardless of the mag release, especially when not registered yet and thus not under the jurisdiction of the DOJ regs (yet).

unintended consequences of poorly written law. If not changed all sales post 1/1/2017 are illegal and all those guns need to be surrendered to police.

The law and regs do not support that a tube feeding device on a SA SG is a fixed magazine.

In fact I am fairly sure they say the exact opposite. If you can unscrew the tube and remove it without disturbing the action, its not a fixed magazine.

You might be right. I doubt we'll see the DOJ demanding the halt (and forfeiture) of s/a shotguns though. The outrage would be like nothing they've ever seen.

Still, I may just put in a registration request for my s/a tube-fed shotgun. If I believe it needs to be registered, then I'm not doing anything wrong by trying to do so.

[Junkie]

I'm curious whether there's any consensus on a couple issues:

1) Featureless rifles with muzzle devices that bring OAL >30". Last year, no BB required. The new regulations claim OAL only includes permanently attached muzzle devices. For some, BBs don't even exist.

If we aren't allowed to make them <30", does that mean we're required to have a muzzle device pinned/welded? The same question applies to BB'd guns too I guess, but might be a different answer.

2) Semiauto shotguns. Now that they're AWs, can they have pistol grip + folding/telescoping stock?

For now I'll accept that a BB has to stay on, so it's a question of features that make even BB'd guns AWs.

[dieselpower]

Just theorizing here, not arguing, but it only would have been illegal if you put the normal mag release on before 2017. Now that it's 2017, it's the same AW regardless of the mag release, especially when not registered yet and thus not under the jurisdiction of the DOJ regs (yet).



You might be right. I doubt we'll see the DOJ demanding the halt (and forfeiture) of s/a shotguns though. The outrage would be like nothing they've ever seen.

Still, I may just put in a registration request for my s/a tube-fed shotgun. If I believe it needs to be registered, then I'm not doing anything wrong by trying to do so.

They may question it. But you can include the fact the ammunition feeding device can be removed without disassembly of the action and without the use of a tool. As per the regulations its both an AW and can be registered.

If they disagree that its not a fixed magazine, and say its exempt. They open themselves up to challenge on the entire definition of fixed magazine for all firearms.

If they disagree it can be legally registered, they open up a challenge to the entire registrations process for all firearms not covered by a BB exemption and turn every SA SG with a tube into an unregistered illegal AW.

[CandG]

redacted

[meno377]

On a different note, I have a somewhat unique thought....

Isn't the magazine spring and follower of ANY firearm technically part of the "action"?

"firearm action" is defined as the mechanism that loads, locks, fires, and extracts the cartridges. The spring and follower most certainly is a required part of the action that loads a cartridge into the chamber.

My point is, when you remove a magazine (by any method), aren't you by default "disassembling the firearm's action"?

You can still fire it. It's still functional.

[CandG]

redacted