MERGED THREADS "Bullet Button Assault Weapon" Regs

[jdben92883]

If a Raddlock was used to register the AW, couldn't the screw simply be loosened after registration? After all, the magazine release device would not have been changed.

[Crazed_SS]

They'd charge you under the PC for possession of an unregistered, illegal AW, citing Rule 5477 that if you remove the BB, you have voided your registration.

The 5477 section of the regs say nothing about voiding registration.

It says the release mechanism should not be changed. It doesnt spell out any punishment, consequence, charge, etc for changing it. IMO, that's because there really isnt one.

Of course there's the saying about a DA being able to indict a ham sandwich. So even if there isnt a clear violation in the PC for removing the BB, it's conceivable that they could figure out some charge to jam someone up with.

[Fox Mulder]

The problem is that Rule 5477 establishes a rule for which violating (removing the BB) would instantly terminate your AW registration, thus leaving you in possession of an unregistered AW. The rule doesn't make you a felon, the fact you don't immediately dispose of the de-BB'ed gun, does.

If you take the BB off the gun, you have to immediately surrender it to police per Rule 5477, or you are a felon by possessing an AW that has lost its basis for registration. That is how the DOJ sees it, and that's how they will charge you.

That said, I agree with your opinion of the rule being illegal. The CA Supreme Court in hearing your felony sentence appeal, not so much. We need to challenge the regulation in federal court (as an overreach that violates 2A by exceeding state law authority), or accept it.

Pretty sure you're just making that up. Instant termination of your registration? That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.

[Shell]

If you change the mechanism, you are violating the terms of the Rule. Thus the gun is no longer in compliance with SB 880, and thus is an illegal AW.

I'm not saying this is fair, or right, or legal. I'm saying if I was Kamela Harris, that is what I would be testifying to at the state supreme court. Your freedom, and status as a convicted felon, is what would be at stake there should the police detain you - and choose to press charges.

And that is what you need to take heed of as you modify your registered BB MSR.

That is the clear, and present danger to removing your Bullet Button on a registered MSR. Don't do it, instead help seek an attorney to challenge the final rule.

[riderr]

If a Raddlock was used to register the AW, couldn't the screw simply be loosened after registration? After all, the magazine release device would not have been changed.

You can, but just up to the point when BB mag release becomes a standard one functionally

[ifilef]

Life has changed. It still is an AW. You can't travel with it. You can only transport it to a range, your work, and your office - or traveling out of state - with the weapon in a locked case.

I fear we will see many BB MSR owners charged for unlawful use of an AW, thinking that because they registered it, that it's fine in the backseat of their car, in an unlocked case, or stowed while going hunting. It isn't.

Separating completely the lower from upper and keeping in separate locked cases...would that suffice and get around the 30945 and other statutes' restrictions?

[tonyxcom]

But it no longer requires a tool.

[Fox Mulder]

You can, but just up to the point when BB mag release becomes a standard one functionally

So now you've created a completely different rifle by just turning a screw? Wow. We don't even need to swap out the BB...Just turn a screw and it's magically a completely different weapon than the one that was registered.

[Shell]

Separating completely the lower from upper and keeping in separate locked cases...would that suffice and get around the 30945 and other statutes' restrictions?

Honestly, I have no idea. Good luck finding someone that really does at the DOJ.

[ifilef]

Which AW are you talking about, the one you lawfully possessed prior to January 1, 2017, and registered in 2017, or the one you did not lawfully possess prior to January 1, 2017, and did not and could not register in 2017?

The latter is totally unwinnable (e.g. it's a 'loser') in court and the regulation 5477 will stand. See, PC 30900.

[The Gleam]

Pretty sure you're just making that up. Instant termination of your registration? That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.

That's where this crap goes off the rails; we have people with limited experience in CA in dealing with the many laws, ordinances, regulations, DOJ bulletins, and more for more then 30 years (as many of us have) coming in new to this and ADDING their reminiscing about what they have been accustomed to believe as influenced by prominent media and TV, for what "could/should" happen, what is "common sense", what they THINK is they way things are, because it sounds right to them - and then repeat it here enough times on Calguns that it starts to sound plausible.

Then others repeat it, and so on, to the point that what is being discussed as the regs - is not even a valid part of the regs.

[riderr]

So now you've created a completely different rifle by just turning a screw? Wow. We don't even need to swap out the BB...Just turn a screw and it's magically a completely different weapon than the one that was registered.

This is what the regulations imply. Hopefully, CADOJ will withdraw it after a massive negative feedback from the community and 2A organizations.

[Shell]

That's where this crap goes off the rails; we have people with limited experience in CA in dealing with the many laws, ordinances, regulations, DOJ bulletins, and more for more then 30 years (as many of us have) coming in new to this and ADDING their reminiscing about what they have been accustomed to believe as influenced by prominent media and TV, for what "could/should" happen, what is "common sense", what they THINK is they way things are, because it sounds right to them - and then repeat it here enough times on Calguns that it starts to sound plausible.

Then others repeat it, and so on, to the point that what is being discussed as the regs - is not even a valid part of the regs.

If you want to risk removing the BB, go right ahead. I painted a clear, realistic, and tangible argument for how you could be charged with a felony for doing so.

If some cop in San Francisco - as you're driving through the city - detains your locked AW case, opens it, and sees the standard magazine eject... good luck with your appeals.

Again, the only safe thing to do right now is to leave the BB on the gun, as gun rights attorneys review Rule 5477 and decide if it's worth suing over.

[riderr]

Separating completely the lower from upper and keeping in separate locked cases...would that suffice and get around the 30945 and other statutes' restrictions?

According to CADOJ regulations, a separated bottom and lower are no longer considered as semi-automatic rifle. However, I am not clear if the laguage works in the registration context only.

[FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!]

I didn't realize your point was that they forgot to codify what happens post registration.

the point is that your "the law is self-defeating" interpretation sucks lol.