MERGED THREADS "Bullet Button Assault Weapon" Regs

[God Bless America]

Lets face it. There is only once classification of AW not multiple levels. .

There are 3 categories already, and there have been, for years.

[IVC]

Let me clarify my position a little bit: this is all about statutory interpretation and IMO the statute can reasonably be interpreted to allow registration only of AWs with BBs, and to disallow registration and prohibit possession of AWs that should have been registered under pre-2017 law.

The bolded part is the contentious one.

They can limit what can be registered. The law itself does that. The "possession" part is simply not there. The possession in the law applies to "assault weapons" as defined in the AW statutes, i.e., detachable magazine AND features.

An AW registration of a rifle allows that rifle to be an AW. So, as long as the paperwork applies to the rifle it's legal. They would have to claim that the registration *doesn't apply* to the rifle in order to prosecute under AW statutes.

Am I wrong here?

[God Bless America]

Don't think the ATF is going to like dual serial numbers on a firearm...

T

Mosins have them.

[IVC]

Please tell me what SPECIFIC law someone has broken if they are found with a standard mag release on their post-2016 registered AW?

They would claim that the mag release change creates a different rifle from the AW you registered, thus you are in possession of an "unregistered AW" and some toilet paper with their signature on it.

[Sousuke]

The bolded part is the contentious one.

They can limit what can be registered. The law itself does that. The "possession" part is simply not there. The possession in the law applies to "assault weapons" as defined in the AW statutes, i.e., detachable magazine AND features.

An AW registration of a rifle allows that rifle to be an AW. So, as long as the paperwork applies to the rifle it's legal. They would have to claim that the registration *doesn't apply* to the rifle in order to prosecute under AW statutes.

Am I wrong here?

No, completely agree.

[God Bless America]

There is nothing that says removing a BB in 2017 makes a felony..

Yes there is. Manufacture of an AW.

[kelvin232]

They would claim that the mag release change creates a different rifle from the AW you registered, thus you are in possession of an "unregistered AW" and some toilet paper with their signature on it.

That's not a law. Nor a citation. They would have to make the claim that a registered AW isn't in fact registered?

LOL. Good luck DOJ

[Fox Mulder]

because they are not equal, and I think you know that which is why you want to switch.

Not equal, but both compliant. If you change from one compliant configuration to another compliant configuration, before registration, it's compliant. It's been compliant since it was built, with no period of non-compliance, and it will be registered, in a compliant configuration...

[Malthusian]

How in the world do you get that receipts are required based on that?

Again, more people making stuff up.

(b) Once the registration has been submitted electronically and fees have been paid, the Department will inform the applicant, via email, that the application: has been received and accepted for processing; is being returned as incomplete and specify what information is required; or has been rejected

(c) If the Department deems an application incomplete and notifies the applicant via email of the incomplete determination, the applicant shall provide the requested information or documentation within 30 days. If the Department does not receive the additional information or documentation within 30 days, the application will be rejected and the application fee will not be refunded

Subjects whom bought umpty umpteen lowers on Dec 15th, 2016 will and should be subject to a higher level of scrutiny

A receipt is a document

If the subject bought all the components and built the lowers and properly photographed them fully assembled by today. It should not be a problem

The CADOJ is not going to allow unlimited AR registration without proper photos and or documentation

[jcwatchdog]

Well, I think that I made it clear that it's unlawful to possess a SACF featured rifle with a mag release today, it does not qualify for registration, it's also a felony today, and it's been a felony since ~2000.

Your argument that because you registered with BB and thereafter substituted a mag release will not fly...forget about it, unless you want to go to state prison. There's enough support in PC 30900(b)(1) and new PC 30680 to support my arguments and you walk a very dangerous path toward a manufacturing charge that is not protected or shielded by 30680.

Move on to other things re the registration regulations.

Support your argument? You mean the same argument you had that everyone needed to register any rifle from 2001 to 2016 that ever had a bullet button it, regardless of if it is featureless or not? When actual lawyers say, "there is no PC to back some of these regs up", will you believe it then? I guess not, because Michel and Associates said that featureless configurations were OK, but you continued to resist any idea otherwise.

[God Bless America]

And I'm not volunteering to be the test case for that.

Let the BBelievers be the test case since they are so sure. Pull that BB and show the DOJ.

[jcwatchdog]

Yes there is. Manufacture of an AW.

Sorry, a gun with a bullet button in 2017 is already an AW, bullet button or not. You have the year to register it.

[Fox Mulder]

They would claim that the mag release change creates a different rifle from the AW you registered, thus you are in possession of an "unregistered AW" and some toilet paper with their signature on it.

Uh, how's it going to be a different rifle with the same make, model, & SN as the one that you registered?

[IVC]

If you believe in diversification, then one rifle should be registered while the requirement is legally exposed as empty.

Yup. I was going to register all of mine, but after seeing the type of game they are trying to play I'll keep a few pre-2014 as featureless (I've already separated lower/upper just to be a good boy) even though I could register them, then deregister if I didn't like the outcome.

CA is going full retard and until Bader-Ginsburg dies we have to keep low in the trenches.

[nagzul]

Having a bullet button equipped rifle is the requirement for registration.
The bullet button no longer qualifies as a fixed mag device, hence them opening it up for registration.
Having a raddloc on the rifle as it's compliant device the whole time, and getting an approval, should allow you to unscrew it and use it. "Should".
Simply because a fixed mag device was the reason it was allowed to be registered, not that is is still deemed a fixed mag compliant devise. It is not. And no bullet button now is considered as much.

My friend will try to register his. And if it is approved, will run it screwed out. We both agree that there is some small risk, but he has run it for years legally like it is.

The requirement is met that is was bullet button equipped prior to 2017.
Now that a bullet button no longer qualifies as a fixed mag devise.....