MERGED THREADS "Bullet Button Assault Weapon" Regs

[IVC]

That would be a forbidden modification.

No it wouldn't.

There is different mechanism why it would be a problem (well, a likely problem). Details here matter.

[dynastyss]

Why are people talking about DROS and receipts? I see nothing about that in the paperwork.

[imarangemaster]

That would be a forbidden modification.

The PENAL CODE says nothing about modifications... I'm not saying DOJ isn't going to try to screw us, but even liberal courts have problems with charing people with a crime based on regulations, and not supported by penal code. All mine will be BBed long enough to be eligible to be registered (I'm taking time and date stamped pictures today) but will become featureless next year during the grace.

[IVC]

They don't need to charge you with anything

Revoke the registration, confiscate the firearm

This ^

Where exactly is this "revoke the registration" spelled out in either the law or the DOJ regulation?

[IVC]

The PENAL CODE says nothing about modifications...

I'm with you, but let's try to be PRECISE here.

As FGG points out, the problem would be with whether your registration would apply to the rifle you have at hand. If the DOJ can say "this is a different rifle and your AW registration applies to something else," that's a REAL problem since now you DO have AW registration paper, but you have a DIFFERENT rifle.

It all hinges on whether the DOJ can make this claim and whether it would fly in court.

[cyborg]

Where exactly is this "revoke the registration" spelled out in either the law or the DOJ regulation?

I don't know, but I don't doubt that they could. Even if they don't "revoke" the registration, if the firearm is confiscated, you're still screwed, and then you'll have to hire a lawyer.

[2Aallday]

How so?

The chassis is the car. The lower is the firearm. Piles and piles of paperwork support this. DOJ can't just redefine what a giraffe is on a whim.

[Nor*Cal]

I'm wondering if registering, and getting an approval, of an assault weapon with a prince bullet button would fly.
The button that has the screw in it so you can unscrew it to allow full functioning of the mag release. I only read about the magnet being left on the release in the new regs.

If they approve the configuration with that release, I'm wondering if you could back out the screw and be good. I saw no wording that the bullet button had to be functional from stopping release of the magazine.

Why do I ask? Because my friend has them on his rifles and intends to register. We are discussing what would keep him from using it if it was approved with photos ECT.

They define a "bullet button" as requiring a tool. If your bullet button does not require a tool, it's no longer a bullet button.

"Bullet-button" means a product requiring a tool to remove an ammunition feeding device or magazine by depressing a recessed button or lever shielded by a magazine lock. A bullet-button equipped fully functional semiautomatic firearm does not meet the fixed magazine definition under Penal Code section 30515b.

[nagzul]

This is their description of a bullet button on the new regs. If they approve the prince bullet button on registration, it appears it might be good. As the bullet button alone does not exclude it from registration. Quite the oppisite. It says it does not qualify as a fixed magazine. If that's the case....No harm in submitting it with that type of button.

`Bullet-button" means a product requiring a tool to remove an ammunition feedin device
or magazine by depressing a recessed button or lever shielded by a magazine lock. A
bullet-button equipped fully functional semiautomatic firearm does not meet the fixed
magazine definition under Penal Code section 30515(b~.

Edit: good enough. It was just something we were kicking around.

[1911RONIN]

We're all chasing our tails at this point. I suggest we just sit back, have a beer, and wait for Michael & Associates to post their legal analysis of this DOJ clusterfumble.

This +1000


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fox Mulder]

I'm with you, but let's try to be PRECISE here.

As FGG points out, the problem would be with whether your registration would apply to the rifle you have at hand. If the DOJ can say "this is a different rifle and your AW registration applies to something else," that's a REAL problem since now you DO have AW registration paper, but you have a DIFFERENT rifle.

It all hinges on whether the DOJ can make this claim and whether it would fly in court.

Same manufacturer/SN as registered = same rifle. They don't get to change the legal definition of what constitutes a firearm by simply writing regulations. It may be a different configuration but it is the same receiver, which is the weapon according to law, the BATFE, and countless other examples. If they're gonna try to do that it's gonna get slapped down as an underground regulation.

[God Bless America]

The chassis is the car. The lower is the firearm. Piles and piles of paperwork support this. DOJ can't just redefine what a giraffe is on a whim.

Yes they can.

[Hoop]

The biggest problem DOJ faces is the statute itself. It is either a removable magazine or it isn't. Thew statute only prescribes punishment for someone who does not register, if it does not have a fixed magazine. If you register it as an assault weapon, what can they charge you with if you swap the bullet button. DOJ regs ARE NOT CRIMES!

IMHO the biggest issue won't be the regs but whatever bull**** they disseminate to LE on how to enforce the new "laws".

Yes they can.

Yeah until a court tells them otherwise & even then the scumbags will keep up with their antics whenever possible. Remember, the CA DOJ/Democrats in general quite literally HATE us.

[dieselpower]

We're all chasing our tails at this point. I suggest we just sit back, have a beer, and wait for Michael & Associates to post their legal analysis of this DOJ clusterfumble.

the problem with that is this is the last day of 2016, so advice needed to comply in 2016 is not going to reach you until 2017 and then its too late.

this is the primary reason they waited to release the regs.

these regs have been written and completed for months from what I am told.

[RED (Y)]

Seems like i need grip wrap and muzzle brake.