MERGED THREADS "Bullet Button Assault Weapon" Regs

[Discogodfather]

If I register my street legal car, and then modify it so that it's not street legal anymore (say, REALLY bright headlights), does that nullify my car registration? If I get pulled over for my REALLY bright headlights and the officer asks for my registration, and I show it to him, can he then say ,"Sorry, this isn't valid registration, because your car isn't street legal anymore"? I would be inclined to think he'd only write me a ticket for my REALLY bright headlights, unless somehow I fall into a category that is exempt from the law the prohibits them. I don't believe it's likely that I'd get an additional ticket for my current car registration being invalid as a result of the REALLY bright headlights I added after I registered my car. And if somehow I was exempt from the REALLY bright headlight ban, I don't believe I'd get any ticket, at all.

This is a bad analogy. First of all, you would get a fix it ticket. If you did not fix it, your reg would be revoked, so I am not sure what the argument your making means.

Modifying your car outside of the law is most certainly going to lead to a revoked registration.

[FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!]

Section 30680 exempts from 30605 by requiring ALL conditions to be satisfied,(a)-(c), so (c) is just a necessary condition. All three conditions must be satisfied for exemption.

Now I'm not sure what you're getting at.

You can't satisfy 30680(c) until you register the AW, so how can anyone satisfy all three conditions unless and until the AW is registered? If you can't satisy all three conditions until you register, then what is protecting you before you register?

[tninety]

This is a bad analogy. First of all, you would get a fix it ticket. If you did not fix it, your reg would be revoked, so I am not sure what the argument your making means.

Modifying your car outside of the law is most certainly going to lead to a revoked registration.

You'd get a fix it ticket, sure, but there's a law saying that you can't have those headlights.

There is no PC saying you can't remove the BB and it's the same as a normal release as far as the PC is concerned.

[IVC]

You can't satisfy 30680(c) until you register the AW, so how can anyone satisfy all three conditions unless and until the AW is registered? If you can't satisy all three conditions until you register, then what is protecting you before you register?

It's the other way around. The DA has to prove "I haven't registered by 2018." Kind of hard to prove, no?

[ifilef]

You'd get a fix it ticket, sure, but there's a law saying that you can't have those headlights.

There is no PC saying you can't remove the BB and it's the same as a normal release as far as the PC is concerned.

So, be our guest as the test case. Otherwise, clam up. Actions speak louder than words if you are so sure of your position.

The PC, at least cited by DOJ, which prohibits changing the release mechanism after registration as AW is 30900. Suggest that you read it in its entirely, also look at the Reference Statutes that were cited. And don't ignore what occurred during prior registration windows.

Note: Authority cited: Section 30900 Penal Code. Reference: Sections 30515, 30680, 30900, and 30950 Penal Code.

One might also want to take a peek at PC 30505 as well, to determine legislative intent under Roberti-Roos.

[CandG]

This is a bad analogy. First of all, you would get a fix it ticket. If you did not fix it, your reg would be revoked, so I am not sure what the argument your making means.

Modifying your car outside of the law is most certainly going to lead to a revoked registration.

What? It would only lead to your registration getting suspended (not revoked), if you wait too long to "correct" the problem. And then, there's nothing stopping you from putting the "problem" back on after you "corrected" it. They can't revoke a car registration for a fix-it ticket, or even for TWENTY fix-it tickets that are all for the same thing. All they can do is keep telling you to fix it again and again and charging you $25 every time you do.

So it's not a bad analogy. It's analogous to replacing your normal mag release with a BB every time you get caught, and switching it back later, since you needed me to spell it out for you. And no, I'm not suggesting we can do that. I'm suggesting why I don't believe it's an invalid point I was making.

[ifilef]

Nope because those are specifically banned by other penal code sections which don't have AW exemptions.

So are SACF featured with magazine releases under SB23, separate law since 2000.

You missed the boat to lawfully possess a SACF featured weapon with a standard magazine release back in 2000.

And it's not eligible for AW registration this time around. Overall, the regs really do help for those who are not particularly versed in the law:

"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".

The above could have been drafted better but one is placed on notice that mag releases are not registrable, not lawful to possess. I would have inserted the phrase "include, but are not limited to" after "weapons" and before "firearms".

[FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!]

It's the other way around. The DA has to prove "I haven't registered by 2018." Kind of hard to prove, no?

If that's the case, and you've switched from BB to standard mag release, and you haven't registered yet, then you're good to go in exactly the same way.

[Drew Eckhardt]

You can't satisfy 30680(c) until you register the AW, so how can anyone satisfy all three conditions unless and until the AW is registered? If you can't satisy all three conditions until you register, then what is protecting you before you register?

They arrest and file charges, then drop them when their computer says your registration was accepted.

[ifilef]

Section 30680 exempts from 30605 by requiring ALL conditions to be satisfied,(a)-(c), so (c) is just a necessary condition. All three conditions must be satisfied for exemption.

Now I'm not sure what you're getting at.

One can't be lawfully arrested or prosecuted for a violation of 30605 in 2017 as it pertains to 30900(b)(1) firearms. They can't arrest you and claim the exemption does not apply when the express language contained in 30680 [and impliedly in 30900(b)(1)] grants one until 12/31/2017 in which to register.

[ceedubG]

The regulations, for those who want to take them as gospel, say you cannot change the release type. They say nothing about leaving a BB wrench installed. They also say nothing about backing out the Raddlock screw.

I think this is a great question.

You have a radlock (aka BB) installed as required to resister. I'm therefore in compliance.

What is to prevent me from backing the screw out?

Would love to hear some analysis on this...

-Cee

[tninety]

So, be our guest as the test case. Otherwise, clam up. Actions speak louder than words if you are so sure of your position.

The PC, at least cited by DOJ, which prohibits changing the release mechanism after registration as AW is 30900. Suggest that you read it in its entirely, also look at the Reference Statutes that were cited. And don't ignore what occurred during prior registration windows.

Note: Authority cited: Section 30900 Penal Code. Reference: Sections 30515, 30680, 30900, and 30950 Penal Code.

One might also want to take a peek at PC 30505 as well, to determine legislative intent under Roberti-Roos.

Not saying that, just saying the fix it ticket thing is not a good analogy either

[Discogodfather]

What? It would only lead to your registration getting suspended (not revoked), if you wait too long to "correct" the problem. And then, there's nothing stopping you from putting the "problem" back on after you "corrected" it. They can't revoke a car registration for a fix-it ticket, or even for TWENTY fix-it tickets that are all for the same thing. All they can do is keep telling you to fix it again and again and charging you $25 every time you do.

So it's not a bad analogy. It's analogous to replacing your normal mag release with a BB every time you get caught, and switching it back later. And no, I'm not suggesting we can do that. I'm suggesting why I don't believe it's an invalid point I was making.

So the DOJ will give us a fix it ticket for $25 if we get caught with a standard mag release and suspend our registration, got it. Thanks for clearing up this issue.

[FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!]

They arrest and file charges, then drop them when their computer says your registration was accepted.

So that's how it is during the grace period, you get arrested for AW possession (AW with bullet button), then they drop the charges if you register on time? No protection until you register? Everyone who hasn't registered yet is violating PC 30605?

[Drew Eckhardt]

so my opinion is that now (as of Jan 1, 2017) 30515 doesn't say ANYthing about a detachable magazine, it just defines a 'fixed' magazine.

30515(a)(4)(D)

30515. (a) Notwithstanding Section 30510, “assault weapon” also means any of the following:
...
(4) A semiautomatic pistol that does not have a fixed magazine but has any one of the following:
(A) A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer.
(B) A second handgrip.
(C) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel that allows the bearer to fire the weapon without burning the bearer’s hand, except a slide that encloses the barrel.
(D) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.

the implication being an AR/AK pistol with pinned muzzle appliance (no threads), no handguard (shroud), and bullet button (no detachable magazine outside the grip) is not an assault weapon even though it does not have a fixed magazine.