MERGED THREADS "Bullet Button Assault Weapon" Regs

[lrdchivalry]

I think that you might have misunderstood me. I'm arguing that 30680(a) prevents one from using a configuration after 1/1/2017 that would have been illegal before 1/1/2017. This would be independent of a firearm's registration status.

So my conclusion is that one is not going to be able to remove the BB either before or after registration, and I don't intend to remove my own BB unless I render my rifle featureless.

I would disagree. The PC does not state that the BB must remain on the weapon post registration. 30680 only states that a person will not be charged with possession if they meet the conditions listed.

30680.*Section 30605 does not apply to the possession of an assault weapon by a person who has possessed the assault weapon prior to January 1, 2017, if all of the following are applicable:
(a)*Prior to January 1, 2017, the person was eligible to register that assault weapon pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 30900.
(b)*The person lawfully possessed that assault weapon prior to January 1, 2017.
(c)*The person registers the assault weapon by January 1, 2018, in accordance with subdivision (b) of Section 30900.

30900 (b)(1) states what rifles are eligible for registration, no mention of a BB must remain on weapon post registration. Why is that? Because BB rifles now fall under the definition of AW per 30515(a), which also never mentions a mag release mechanism must remain on the rifle post registration.

30900(5) only gives the DOJ the authority to create regs for the purposes of registering BB rifles, nowhere does (5) grant the DOJ the authority to create a reg prohibiting post registration modifications of the rifle.

There is also no PC or reg, including the submitted regs by DOJ that invalidates a registration based on a violation of 4577.

Once the BB AW is a registered AW, it's a registered AW per 30515(a)

[LeadFarmer74]

Alright I missed it but what does SACF mean?

[tonyxcom]

I would disagree.

And we've just went back to square one with a new participant.

SACF - semi auto center fire

[LeadFarmer74]

And we've just went back to square one with a new participant.

SACF - semi auto center fire

Haha thanks.

[dieselpower]

Alright I missed it but what does SACF mean?

semiauto centerfire

[lrdchivalry]

with a new participant.

Wrong again!

[dieselpower]

I would disagree. The PC does not state that the BB must remain on the weapon post registration. 30680 only states that a person will not be charged with possession if they meet the conditions listed.

30680.*Section 30605 does not apply to the possession of an assault weapon by a person who has possessed the assault weapon prior to January 1, 2017, if all of the following are applicable:
(a)*Prior to January 1, 2017, the person was eligible to register that assault weapon pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 30900.
(b)*The person lawfully possessed that assault weapon prior to January 1, 2017.
(c)*The person registers the assault weapon by January 1, 2018, in accordance with subdivision (b) of Section 30900.

30900 (b)(1) states what rifles are eligible for registration, no mention of a BB must remain on weapon post registration. Why is that? Because BB rifles now fall under the definition of AW per 30515(a), which also never mentions a mag release mechanism must remain on the rifle post registration.

30900(5) only gives the DOJ the authority to create regs for the purposes of registering BB rifles, nowhere does (5) grant the DOJ the authority to create a reg prohibiting post registration modifications of the rifle.

There is also no PC or reg, including the submitted regs by DOJ that invalidates a registration based on a violation of 4577.

Once the BB AW is a registered AW, it's a registered AW per 30515(a)

I disagree, because the title of 5477 is 5477, Registration of Assault Weapons Pursuant to Penal Code Section 30900(b)(1); Post-Registration Modification of Registered Assault Weapons, Prohibition.

its clearly saying what act is prohibited.

do we all need to go to Webster.com and read?

[danez71]

I just love it when people pass off 'argument' or 'legislative analysis' as law. So disingenuous.

That's real rich coming from you as your history has shown that your 'legislative analysis' is not worth much at all and your lack of being able to admit you were wrong speaks to your ego and self righteousness.

What's disingenuous is you being shown to be wrong so many times by so many people in so many ways and you continuing to pretend youre right in order to self inflate your short comings.


Those are qualities that are difficult to respect as opposed to someone like diesel power that argued his position with gusto but is a big enough man with sensibility to realize and admit he was wrong

[FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!]

naught is spot on. Compliance with PC 36080 is ongoing, if you are in possession of an AW with standard mag release you are not within 36080(b) because you did not lawfully possess that assault weapon prior to January 1, 2017.

[dieselpower]

Wrong again!

this is what I am hearing from you;

I have read the law and nowhere does it say its illegal to have a dead hooker in the trunk of my car. Not one single time does any law say that.

[tonyxcom]

Wrong again!

And happy to admit it. Unlike an unnamed poster who has left this thread.

Carry on!

[Sousuke]

I disagree, because the title of 5477 is 5477, Registration of Assault Weapons Pursuant to Penal Code Section 30900(b)(1); Post-Registration Modification of Registered Assault Weapons, Prohibition.

its clearly saying what act is prohibited.

do we all need to go to Webster.com and read?

thats not what he was saying.

He said "There is also no PC or reg, including the submitted regs by DOJ that invalidates a registration based on a violation of 5477."

He is keying on invalidation of registry which is not mentioned. There is an assumption that one line of text from the penal code that FGG keeps repeating ties in to invalidation, but I and others disagree.

[lrdchivalry]

I disagree, because the title of 5477 is 5477, Registration of Assault Weapons Pursuant to Penal Code Section 30900(b)(1); Post-Registration Modification of Registered Assault Weapons, Prohibition.

its clearly saying what act is prohibited.

do we all need to go to Webster.com and read?

Again I would disagree, 30900(b)(1) says no such thing. It only states what rifles can be registered under the new law.

30900(5) is where the legislators have granted DOJ the authority to create regs governing the registration process only. Nothing in the PC grants them the authority to create new law, especially a law that contradicts 30515(a), which BB rifles now fall under.

[Mitch]

Yes they did when theyou were trying to ban the BB.. however, I was referring to when they intentionally wrote the previous ban so that the use of a tool was ok. That's not a loophole. That was intentional on their part.... with our prodding of course.

Of course it was a loophole, and the side effect that it would open the door to tens or hundreds of thousands of AR-15s being legally sold in California was completely unintentional.

The rule that allowed the bullet button was nothing more than a clarification to ensure that ordinary standard configuration SKS rifles were not defined as assault weapons.

Clever people later used this language against them by applying it to AR-15s and other EBRs.

[ifilef]

You still have to reconcile how you can get arrested for manufacturing an AW if it's already registered as an AW. You can ignore this issue and just imply a lot of things that the DOJ will do, but there's nothing in law to back it up.

Violative of 30900(b)(1) and 30600. 30680 does not shield from manufacturing even if it might apply to possession. Moreover, likely by doing so the unilateral act will VOID your AW registration. You can't unscramble that egg by using a RAW to commit a felony directly related to the foundation upon which registration was approved. Malum in se crime, mens rea, all that good stuff.