MERGED THREADS "Bullet Button Assault Weapon" Regs

[CreamyFettucini]

Another new thing: Previously there was a lot of concern about the legality of affixing a magnetically-attached bullet button ejector.

But I see nothing in these regulations that prohibit that. It is not a permanent modification of the gun. And, these guns are now registered AW's (edit: assuming you register it in 2017, of course).

A magnetically attached BB eject button is a defeat device... but these regulations do nothing to prohibit defeat devices on registered AW's. And registered AW's are allowed to naturally eject.

I think that may be the long-term solution. Magnetically affix a BB ejector when firing, then put it back in your gun case when done.

Read 5471(m)

[FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!]

You quote a section 5472(b) that has absolutely NOTHING to do with what is being discussed, and you play it off.

It literally has EVERYTHING to do with what is being discussed lol. It's THE key regulation that implements SB 880.

[FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!]

This is about rifles that were part of the previous AW bans (including named, etc), not the POST 2017 AW law. They make this clear. You know, the one we're currently talking about that are affecting our rifles currently.
So no, you can't register that Colt Sporter now that should have been registered in 2000.

This isn't talking about registering any AWs in 2017.

Sorry, I just can't help you lol. You get the special triple facepalm.

[jcwatchdog]

It literally has EVERYTHING to do with what is being discussed lol. It's THE key regulation that implements SB 880.

Here is it so you can read it over again. This is saying you can't register any AWs that were previously needed to be registered. My AW with a bullet button never previously needed to be registered before 2017. If this is the key regulation that implements SB880, we're in better shape than I thought.

5472(b)

"The Department will not register a firearm that was required to be registered under PRIOR assault weapon registration laws in effect BEFORE January 1, 2017. These weapons include firearms known as "named assault weapons" and are listed in Penal Code section 30510 and sections 5495 and 5499 of Chapter 40."

[jcwatchdog]

Sorry, I just can't help you lol. You get the special triple facepalm.

You lost, admit it and move on. You're nothing but a troll

It literally has EVERYTHING to do with what is being discussed lol. It's THE key regulation that implements SB 880.

Here is it so you can read it over again. This is saying you can't register any AWs that were previously needed to be registered. My AW with a bullet button never previously needed to be registered before 2017. If this is the key regulation that implements SB880, we're in better shape than I thought.

5472(b)

"The Department will not register a firearm that was required to be registered under PRIOR assault weapon registration laws in effect BEFORE January 1, 2017. These weapons include firearms known as "named assault weapons" and are listed in Penal Code section 30510 and sections 5495 and 5499 of Chapter 40."

[FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!]

YOU CAN NOT REGISTER AN AW WITH A STANDARD MAG RELEASE THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. LOL

[jcwatchdog]

YOU CAN NOT REGISTER AN AW WITH A STANDARD MAG RELEASE THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. LOL

Yelling won't change the fact you won't acknowledge you were wrong and won't admit it, let's try again. Address what is below and stop being a DOJ shill.

It literally has EVERYTHING to do with what is being discussed lol. It's THE key regulation that implements SB 880.

Here is it so you can read it over again. This is saying you can't register any AWs that were previously needed to be registered. My AW with a bullet button never previously needed to be registered before 2017. If this is the key regulation that implements SB880, we're in better shape than I thought.

5472(b)

"The Department will not register a firearm that was required to be registered under PRIOR assault weapon registration laws in effect BEFORE January 1, 2017. These weapons include firearms known as "named assault weapons" and are listed in Penal Code section 30510 and sections 5495 and 5499 of Chapter 40."

[Devon]

of course not

YOU CAN NOT REGISTER AN AW WITH A STANDARD MAG RELEASE THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. LOL

Keeping the bullet button is the whole spirit of the law, of course you have to keep it on there. There is no loop hole around that.

[FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!]

So, go ahead and register your AW with BB, that's what the statute requires you to do! The question we are answering here is, where in the regs does it say you have to have an AW with BB in order to register? The answer is 11 CCR 5472(b). If you can't register an AW with standard mag release -- because it was a prohibited configuration that was required to be registered under AW law prior to Jan 1, 2017, something sb880 did not and could not change -- then the options of what AWs you can register are very few are they not? Lol. The statute says what you must register explicitly.

[Shell]

This is specifically addressed in the regulations. Page 3 section (m)

The definition was made, but it lacks some key clarity.

I don't want to comment more as there is a chance this could still be amended prior to the applications going live on CRIS. Let's revisit this when the registrations go up.

[Shell]

Keeping the bullet button is the whole spirit of the law, of course you have to keep it on there. There is no loop hole around that.

I don't see it that way. SB 880 said that BB guns are AWs. That was the spirit of the law. If the Legislature wanted to create a new class of AWs, they had ample opportunity to do so. DOJ doesn't have the regulatory power to do that, and it's possibly even a 2A argument for them to do so outside of state authority.

There's a huge opening for California gun rights attorneys to attack this, and I think even the CA courts would be receptive here. SB 880 was written in a manner to gain sufficient support, including allowing gun owners the right to register as AWs. They had the power to create a new class of AW, but knew that might draw the governor's veto pen.

[UP2MTNS]

Jcwatchdog gets me.....i'd reply more but this needs to wait until tomorrow as my gf is bugging me about going out, apprently something is going on tonight?

[Strykeback]

Why would we encourage people to register? You'd be giving the lawmakers what they want and encouraging them to keep trying to **** us. Featureless with a standard release looks a hell of a lot more fun then having to break the action open every mag, or jump thru the hoops of receipts photos and debauchery that the doj wants to do to you.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[umd]

Keeping the bullet button is the whole spirit of the law, of course you have to keep it on there. There is no loop hole around that.

Without getting into the legal debate circlejerk that's been going on, I disagree that was the spirit of the law that was passed. The stated intent was that the bullet button was a loophole that worked around the original AW ban in the first place. When discussing bullet buttons they often claimed that the bullet buttons made the rifles even more deadly. They had to say that bullet buttons were at best irrelevant or they would have had to admit they were actually effective.

[broadside]

Why would we encourage people to register? You'd be giving the lawmakers what they want and encouraging them to keep trying to **** us. Featureless with a standard release looks a hell of a lot more fun then having to break the action open every mag, or jump thru the hoops of receipts photos and debauchery that the doj wants to do to you.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

I can agree here. One of my rifles has a DFM and it's kind of a PITA. Only reason I have it is so my daughter can continue to shoot it. I'll be switching it to featureless on it so I can go back to standard mag setup.