MERGED THREADS "Bullet Button Assault Weapon" Regs

[dieselpower]

Possession of an assault weapon is illegal unless you fall under one of the listed exemptions in the Penal Code. For the current discussion, the applicable exemption is 30680 (as you have quoted above). All three subsections of 30680 must be satisfied for the exemption to hold. Registration alone is not sufficient to satisfy 30680.

Note that the wording in 30680(a) is "register that assault weapon." The "that" refers to the assault weapon that you are currently in possession of. It's that assault weapon -- the one you are currently in possession of -- that needs to be eligible for registration under 30900(b). An assault weapon without a BB would not be eligible for registration under 30900(b), even if it had already been registered, so you would not be covered by 30680(a), and your possession of that assault weapon would not be legal.

An aside:

There are currently two different versions of 30680(a) at leginfo.legislature.ca.gov, one right above the other. The one on the top has the wording, "would have been eligible to register," while the one on the bottom says, "was eligible to register." This seems to reflect the differences between SB880 and AB1135. Not sure how these discrepancies get reconciled (during trial, do I get to pick the version I want ).

its because they refuse to read what the DoJ actually did which was write a regulation creating a new class of AW.

As soon as you read the regs with the intent to create a new class of AW, you realize removing the BB on a BB-AW creates an AW, which is not the same as a BB-AW. so you are not protected anymore.

Its the failure here to understand the true nature of how bad the DoJ screwed this up.

anyone arguing that the regulation doesnt make removal illegal is basically saying the regulation isnt what it is.

Its almost like supporting the regulation as valid.

[IVC]

Description including color, barrel length, unique features etc...?? Photos? The pictures and descriptions can change if you modify and upgrade parts such as a free float handguard, 16 barrell to 18 inch etc...What if you want to change colors via cerakote? What's the purpose of all this really? If you make modifications to your rifle, are you required to submit new pictures and a new updated description??

They created "regulation" for how to register. You give them the info so they register the rifle. If they want to have all the extra details, it's their prerogative.

The problem (for them), of course, is that after they made you dance to their tune your rifle is registered, so the standard penal code applies about what you can or cannot do.

[nagzul]

I love how you guys are arguing back and forth over the placement of a word in the new codes, but forget it will be an anti gun overzealous rookie cop that interprets it however he wants when he pulls you over on your way from the range, and whether he's wrong or right, will start this thing off and causes thousands in legal fees for the unlucky fool.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

This is the scenerio that keeps me up at night. The few times I have been pulled over, most have been outstanding officers I feel lucky to be doing a thankless job.
But I have had 2, that for some reason still baffeling to me, went above and beyond to just be *******s. I would not have wanted anything in any grey area in my car.

Getting guns back is tough. Getting a bad cop off the streets is even tougher.

[dieselpower]

That's how it works in theory.

The problem is when regulation says: "you can't do X" without saying "or else you will violate penal code Y." What specific PC does "you cannot remove BB after registration" clarify so you are not in compliance if you do it?

FGG is sticking to a sort of "it can be interpreted to violate 30900(b)," but even he is not claiming that "you cannot remove BB" will create a "you didn't possess the AW legally prior to 2017." There is a faith-based logical jump from "possessed legally prior to 2017" to "wouldn't have been legal prior to 2017."

it does say all that.

you just refuse to read the regs and the code that way because you are not reading the code like a anti-gun DoJ lawyer.

Put on your anti-gun Nazi Tyrant cap and read the law and the reg. You will see the law requires you to follow the regs, the regs then require the BB to be a new class of AW and if you remove your BB from your new class of AW, you create an old class of AW and the law didnt give you that right.

the law was written to only allow the new class of AW, being the BB-AW.

yes its all BS and they are over stepping their mandate under the law, but that is what they did.

[IVC]

anyone arguing that the regulation doesnt make removal illegal is basically saying the regulation isnt what it is.

Regulation says "it's prohibited," not "illegal." To be illegal, it must create violation of a penal code. Which code would that be?

Under normal circumstances, DOJ wouldn't try anything remotely close to what they are trying to do. They would specify what is needed for registration and how it's going to operate. That's about it.

[tonyxcom]

Quick question, hopefully not too far off topic.

Does co-registering the AW with a family member require us to be at the same address?

[FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!]

FGG is sticking to a sort of "it can be interpreted to violate 30900(b)," but even he is not claiming that "you cannot remove BB" will create a "you didn't possess the AW legally prior to 2017." There is a faith-based logical jump from "possessed legally prior to 2017" to "wouldn't have been legal prior to 2017."

You're not "violating" PC 30900(b) by possessing an AW with a standard magazine release, you are violating PC 30605. And yes I am claiming that if you remove the bullet button and install a standard mag release you now have an assault weapon that you did not lawfully possess prior to Jan 1 2017. In fact if you waited until 2017 to install the standard mag release you did not possess that assault weapon at all prior to Jan 1 2017.

[dieselpower]

Quick question, hopefully not too far off topic.

Does co-registering the AW with a family member require us to be at the same address?

good question, I had the same one.

[Fox Mulder]

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.

For the record I never said anything about invalidation and do not endorse a concept of invalidation of registration

Again, your argument seems to be that if on Saturday 12/31/16 I had a semi auto, featured rifle equipped with a bullet button, legally possessed, in completely registerable condition, and I register it, in the exact same condition and configuration on 7/15/17, and then remove the bullet button and replace it with a regular magazine release button on 9/15/17, that the rifle was not in fact in registerable condition on 12/31/16 and did not continue to be in registerable condition through 7/15/17, and as of 9/15/17 is not, and never was a registered assault weapon.

Am I accurately representing your position?

[IVC]

Put on your anti-gun Nazi Tyrant cap and read the law and the reg. You will see the law requires you to follow the regs, the regs then require the BB to be a new class of AW and if you remove your BB from your new class of AW, you create an old class of AW and the law didnt give you that right.

the law was written to only allow the new class of AW, being the BB-AW.

You still need to put the *specific* penal code I would be violating if you're going to charge me. Which code is it?

[dieselpower]

Regulation says "it's prohibited," not "illegal." To be illegal, it must create violation of a penal code. Which code would that be?

Under normal circumstances, DOJ wouldn't try anything remotely close to what they are trying to do. They would specify what is needed for registration and how it's going to operate. That's about it.

and again, prohibited means if you do the act you are not following the regulation, once you do that you are not in compliance with the regulations and your registration is invalid.

[FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!]

Again, your argument seems to be that if on Saturday 12/31/16 I had a semi auto, featured rifle equipped with a bullet button, legally possessed, in completely registerable condition, and I register it, in the exact same condition and configuration on 7/15/17, and then remove the bullet button and replace it with a regular magazine release button on 9/15/17, that the rifle was not in fact in registerable condition on 12/31/16 and did not continue to be in registerable condition through 7/15/17, and as of 9/15/17 is not, and never was a registered assault weapon.

Am I accurately representing your position?

No.

[danez71]

I was never alluding to invalidation of registration, that's someone else's argument. If you'd like, post a link to the prior post.

Rereading the posts I found, I think Fabio is right.

He did say some things that could be interpreted as him alluding to it but I do t think that was his intentions.


The end result is the same.

If you register it under this new PC for BBAW and then take off your BB which the Regs clearly say you cant, you should not assume that youll be protect by the BB AW registration from being prosecuted.



We have several big talkers in this thread that are so sure of themselves that they are right and CA.gov doesn't have a leg to stand on...who is going to volunteer to be the test case?

You'll be considered a hero and a legal genius. Your book deals will be huuuge. That, I can tell you.

[dieselpower]

You still need to put the *specific* penal code I would be violating if you're going to charge me. Which code is it?

the same code you would be charged with for having a SACF rifle with Detachable magazine and features, because that is what you have.

you no longer have a BB-AW.

[Saym14]

You're not "violating" PC 30900(b) by possessing an AW with a standard magazine release, you are violating PC 30605. And yes I am claiming that if you remove the bullet button and install a standard mag release you now have an assault weapon that you did not lawfully possess prior to Jan 1 2017. In fact if you waited until 2017 to install the standard mag release you did not possess that assault weapon at all prior to Jan 1 2017.

So what if one installed a bullet button on New Year's eve at exactly midnight at the second in between 2016 and 2017?