AW chart glitch?

[goober]

i thought about bringing this up this discreetly, but figure that he goal of these legal flowcharts is to be accurate, unambiguous, and easy to use.
and toward that end i think it's best to discuss them out in the open, as has been the process for the Draft Pistol flowchart recently. i wasn't party to the AW chart creation, but I assume it was done in a similar fashion.
i'd just like to bring up a potential glitch in the AW chart logic, and see what folks think. i apologize in advance if this has already been discussed and dealt with, or if i am mistaken/misinformed, or if posting in the open here was inappropriate.

seems to me that the "straight to legal" path for a "yes" answer at step 1 of the AW chart is a potentially dangerous simplification. it implies that barrel length and OAL do not matter at all in the determination of whether a RAW is legal or not. by this logic i can install a 10" barrel and an underfolder on my RAW AK and i'm totally fine, regardless of violating the SBR minimum for RAWs (16" bbl, 26" OAL).

does anyone else have a problem with this? or am i just not getting it? again, if this should be moved off-forum, mods please delete.

[xxdabroxx]

Interesting thought, i suppose you are correct in that. But i am not sure if the intent of the flowchart is to be an all inclusive form. I guess if you had a RAW you could get tax stamps for a sbr etc., would that be correct. Maybe add a disclaimer to the bottom of some sort regarding this issue.

[Librarian]

The chart is designed to distinguish non-aw's from aws. If an officer or other person looks at a particular weapon and determines it is a 'registered assault weapon' then on that criterion it's 'legal' -- it IS an 'assault weapon' but it's registered in the State of California and its 'assault-weapon-ness' is not an issue.

Whether such a registered aw is afoul of other laws is outside the scope of the flowchart.

[cedricxerxes]

Whether such a registered aw is afoul of other laws is outside the scope of the flowchart.

Makes sense to me.

seems to me that the "straight to legal" path for a "yes" answer at step 1 of the AW chart is a potentially dangerous simplification. it implies that barrel length and OAL do not matter at all in the determination of whether a RAW is legal or not. by this logic i can install a 10" barrel and an underfolder on my RAW AK and i'm totally fine, regardless of violating the SBR minimum for RAWs (16" bbl, 26" OAL).

This is a good point, but seems more directed at issues outside of the CA "Assault Weapon" laws such as NFA and differences between how CA and the Feds measure OAL.

For example, you could violate the State SBR regs without violating the Fed SBR regs with a 16" barrel and a folding stock. A good example of this is a GSG-5 with certain folding stocks. The Feds measure OAL with folding/collapsible stocks open. CA measures OAL with them closed.

I guess if you had a RAW you could get tax stamps for a sbr etc., would that be correct.

This is theoretically possible, but BATF won't approve your Form 1, if it would violate State law. You have to first obtain a "Dangerous Weapons Permit" from CA DOJ. See CHAPTER 7 (http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/). Basically, unless you have unbelievable political connections or work as an armorer for the entertainment industry, "Dangerous Weapons Permits" are unobtainable.

Believe me, if this were possible, I would SBR my RAW's in a heartbeat.

Are you suggesting another flowchart?

[goober]

The chart is designed to distinguish non-aw's from aws. If an officer or other person looks at a particular weapon and determines it is a 'registered assault weapon' then on that criterion it's 'legal' -- it IS an 'assault weapon' but it's registered in the State of California and its 'assault-weapon-ness' is not an issue.

Whether such a registered aw is afoul of other laws is outside the scope of the flowchart.

i could see that argument if the 3rd & 6th questions were not related to SBR status.
to me, the way the chart is constructed, it almost implies that the bbl & OAL considerations only matter if you can't say "yes" to question 1.
but if i'm the only one who thinks this, then it really isn't worth worrying about...
i'm not knockin the AW chart. i think its a great resource and very well crafted. its just that contributing to the thought process on the pistol chart made me think about this loophole in the AW chart.