MERGED THREADS "Bullet Button Assault Weapon" Regs

[Discogodfather]

What's to stop them from asking for receipts if they can't make a determination from the pictures?

Receipts for what? The BB?

My point is that it's almost impossible to really verify a gun has a working BB from a photo. If the DOJ agrees to register something, they take responsibility for that, no? What kind of language do they need in the web interface to make you swear it has a BB on it and they are not responsible for verifying it?

[kyle2086]

I like how we are all deemed competent enough and expected to take professional photos and have all our receipts, yet not responsible enough to have a rifle that 90 percent of the country can go and buy. I just want to be treated the same as a moron who keeps going to prison for robbing the same store and getting his 18th 'second chance'. Or maybe if we get in trouble we can be eligible for diversion since some of us are addicted to guns?

[ifilef]

Well we can see it in the picture?

Trick question?

Good pics by the way. I spent about 30 mins taking pics and came up with them looking just like yours there. Absent any examples of how the pics should look, I think this is pretty much it...... except for your S/N isnt visible, but obviously that's because you're taking example photos for the forum here..

Photos look 'soft' (out of focus) to me and would tick me off and distract if I were reviewing them. Photos should be tack-sharp and impressive. You may need more depth of field and/or use a tripod.

[Crazed_SS]

It's there? Where?

Not trying to trick anyone, it's there, but what are you basing that observation on? A regular mag release looks a awful lot like a bullet button. In fact it's almost impossible to tell from a bad photo.

When LEO did come to me at a range once to verify my rifle was legal years back, he did not look at it and say "ok, you're good". He pushed the button, which did not work, and said "ok, you're good".

Is there a law against making a BB look like a regular mag release, exactly?

Well even older smartphones are capable of taking some pretty good pics, so I don't think clarity will be an issue.

We know what BBs look like vs standard mag releases because we know lol.. clearly the doj wants one closeup pic of the BB itself because when zoomed out, it's hard to tell.

Though when I was taking my pics, I was a bit concerned that two of my rifles have raddlocks which kinda mimic the look of a normal mag release. Oh well.. it is what it is. Hopefully the fact that I'm complying with their BS laws in good faith is good for something.

I can't imagine how they're going to even process this many applications assuming even 20% compliance. They would need an entire office floor full of people looking at pics, serial numbers, mailing reg letters, etc.

The logistics of the whole thing seems pretty daunting

[Discogodfather]

Photos look 'soft' (out of focus) to me and would tick me off and distract if I were reviewing them. Photos should be tack-sharp and impressive. You may need more depth of field and/or use a tripod.

I just hope you're joking, but I have a feeling you're being serious.

Maybe you should apply for a job at the DOJ. They are going to need you're photography expertise.

[Crazed_SS]

I just hope you're joking, but I have a feeling you're being serious.

Maybe you should apply for a job at the DOJ. They are going to need you're photography expertise.

Yea this guys Schtick has totally jumped the shark.

I'm guess he somehow came up with this tripod requirement from careful examination of the pc and Regs lol

[darkshire]

why are some of you already taking photos of your rifles ?
anticipation of registering, or something i missed ?

[Discogodfather]

Though when I was taking my pics, I was a bit concerned that two of my rifles have raddlocks which kinda mimic the look of a normal mag release. Oh well.. it is what it is. Hopefully the fact that I'm complying with their BS laws in good faith is good for something.

I can't imagine how they're going to even process this many applications assuming even 20% compliance. They would need an entire office floor full of people looking at pics, serial numbers, mailing reg letters, etc.

The logistics of the whole thing seems pretty daunting

Why are all the good comments coming from the people who post the least?

Just what I am getting at, if they register your gun after looking at the pics and verifying you have a BB then what do they do when they find out its a standard mag release and you have a photo proving they registered it that way?

I imagine lots of "swearing to" and bibles poping up on the website saying it's not their responsibility.

[ifilef]

It's there? Where?

Not trying to trick anyone, it's there, but what are you basing that observation on? A regular mag release looks a awful lot like a bullet button. In fact it's almost impossible to tell from a bad photo.

When LEO did come to me at a range once to verify my rifle was legal years back, he did not look at it and say "ok, you're good". He pushed the button, which did not work, and said "ok, you're good".

Is there a law against making a BB look like a regular mag release, exactly?

Wow, that really happened to you?

If you had had a standard mag release you would likely have been felony-arrested.

What do you believe were the circumstances that led him to inspect your weapon in the first place?

[ifilef]

I just hope you're joking, but I have a feeling you're being serious.

Maybe you should apply for a job at the DOJ. They are going to need you're photography expertise.

I've done some professional photography in the past but when people review photos in great numbers they might tend to scrutinize the application more due to the bad photos submitted. JMO.

I don't know where they get off demanding them in the first place.

The statute provides:

PC 30900(b)(2),(3):

(2) Registrations shall be submitted electronically via the Internet utilizing a public-facing application made available by the department.

(3) The registration shall contain a description of the firearm that identifies it uniquely, including all identification marks, the date the firearm was acquired, the name and address of the individual from whom, or business from which, the firearm was acquired, as well as the registrant’s full name, address, telephone number, date of birth, sex, height, weight, eye color, hair color, and California driver’s license number or California identification card number.

I surmise that DOJ interprets the word 'description' quite broadly as to include photos. I thought of that but the rest of the sentence gave me the impression we would just need to give a short narrative to describe the firearm.

Over-reaching? Maybe, but not surprised.

So when the LEO stops you and does an inspection I wonder if he/she will have access to those photos and compare to present appearance of the rifle. HHHmmm...

[Crazed_SS]

why are some of you already taking photos of your rifles ?
anticipation of registering, or something i missed ?

Clearly.

I want to have everything ready to go when the system goes live. The regs stated applications will be processed in the order received so I'd like to get in early and get mine processed as soon as possible.

[Discogodfather]

Wow, that really happened to you?

If you had had a standard mag release you would likely have been felony-arrested.

What do you believe were the circumstances that led him to inspect your weapon in the first place?

BLM land, Panoche Hills three years ago, a Ranger. We were shooting at around 200 yards to a hillside. He pulled up and claimed we were shooting across a trail which was not allowed, so we agreed to move. He inspected all our firearms. Nice guy, no problems.

[darkshire]

Clearly.

I want to have everything ready to go when the system goes live. The regs stated applications will be processed in the order received so I'd like to get in early and get mine processed as soon as possible.

alright makes sense. i do however remember seeing some talk about EXIF metadata potentially being examined for timestamps when registration begins. i didnt follow the thread for too long as it was new years, but i thought it may have something to do with proving your rifle(s) are already """""assault weapons"""" and therefore eligible to register.

[Smedkcuf]

alright makes sense. i do however remember seeing some talk about EXIF metadata potentially being examined for timestamps when registration begins. i didnt follow the thread for too long as it was new years, but i thought it may have something to do with proving your rifle(s) are already """""assault weapons"""" and therefore eligible to register.

What if people didn't take pictures prior to 2017? Their registration will be denied?

[Discogodfather]

What if people didn't take pictures prior to 2017? Their registration will be denied?

Yup, sorry.