....

[Hk996]

123

[TKM]

Wow!

[rorschach]

Add a magazine lock and 10 round G3 mag and that SR9 is GTG.

[Librarian]

Okay... so I have a "friend" who owns a gun that was registered in the ninetys. Now I heard that there was re-restister period in about 2000 where they gave you 23 months to r-register the guns again. (would have bee nice of someone to say something about that)

If it were actually registered as a CA AW in the 90's, you don't need to worry about it. It does not have to be re-registered. The key, of course, is that a lot of folks misunderstood the DROS on purchase as being the separate AW registration. Your friend needs to dig out the paperwork for registration and see exactly what he has.

Possibly it was registered as a 'named' AW, and his/your concern is the SB23 'feature test' law which followed. Once registered as one, the later law is of no concern for that weapon.

So, here we are. Can you modify gune for current rules? or ard you SOL cause of the missed reregister period.

Someone already suggested treating it as if it were an Off List Lower, which would work if (a) it were not a named receiver and (b) it actually wasn't already a registered CA AW - why cripple it if you don't need to?

Some dumbass in the stockade said i could to 2 things. return them to be destroyed or sell out of state.

Accurate, I'm afraid, but only if you suddenly come into possession of a CA AW not already registered to you, or if you move into CA with what is perfectly legal in the Real US.

Gun are going to be nevada for keeping.

Pending confirmation of whether it was actually registered as an AW, that's a real good idea - as well as not mentioning it any more ....

Do you think whey will chang it so we can shoot them here again? most of these laws are just too damn confusing! Everybody s buing lowers and building something.

I may have to do this but we''l seel any help well be apprideicatedd.

Change of CA AW laws is not something CA politicians will initiate; those laws seem to make them feel as if they are Doing Something.

Shooting them, by the way, isn't that big a deal; it's transfer that is prohibited (without permit), as well as acquiring new ones without playing (very carefully, but well understood) the OLL game.

[Spaceghost]

Jesus Christ, your spelling is so bad, are you from the new DOJ affirmative action program where they hire new agents from the old KGB or China? I really hope you are one of their flunkies, or I am going to beat every single one of your teachers from fourth grade up, for passing such a dumb arse. I only need a me a list of names and a school district.

Get lost KGB troll or serious drunkard. If you are legit, and have that a fine tool and no "edukashun", I have some breaking news.

Starting tomorrow, cars drive on the left side of the road. Be sure to look to your right before stepping on any street. Good luck.

ESAD.

PM me for what me for what that stands for.

[chico.cm]

is that a Henry Kissinger with a Zeiss on top?

I didn't think any of those creatures survived the 90's...

[gazzavc]

Apparently neither did the spell check...............

[ohsmily]

apprideicatedd.

That was my favorite.

If this is a listed receiver, follow the advice that the gun store gave you (never thought I would say that). Destroy the receiver or surrender it. DO NOT try to transport it out of state. If you are caught transporting an unregistered AW, you may have additional charges against you.

If it is unlisted, then fix the damn magazine in or remove the evil features, and ask the mods to DELETE your post.

P.S. The title of your post says that you are (when spelled correctly) "trying to understand new gun laws." Well, the laws you are trying to understand are OVER EIGHT YEARS OLD.

[Shane916]

I only need a me a list of names and a school district.

Hehe

[Spaceghost]

Sorry all. I was posting after having several drinks. Normally, I just lurk when I know that the only thing I am capable of doing properly is sleeping. However, the temptation was just too great in this case.

[ohsmily]

Sorry all. I was posting after having several drinks. Normally, I just lurk when I know that the only thing I am capable of doing properly is sleeping. However, the temptation was just too great in this case.

Gettin' sauced on a Monday night? Is there something you want to tell us?

YOU:________"Hi, my name is Spaceghost, and I am an alcoholic."

The CROWD : "Hi Spaceghost. Welcome."

[NRAhighpowershooter]

Just to add my 0.03 worth.. that pic in the first post is NOT a PSG-1 it is a HK-91 with the threads lopped off of the barrel... a REAL PSG-1 has a longer barrel (heavy barrel) no sights at all and a longer handguard as well as a different stock. PSG-1's came with 10rnd mags only as well as a special bi-pod


Edited: Actually that original pic is not a HK-91 with a cut barrel.. my goof ( I can't remember the model number right off but it is not listed as a HK-91)

[Librarian]

In either case, DO NOT move it. Transporting a AW brings a host of other charges.

What would those be, do you suppose?

A superficial reading of PC 12280

12280. (a) (1) Any person who, within this state, manufactures or causes to be manufactured, distributes, transports, or imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives or lends any assault weapon or any .50 BMG rifle, except as provided by this chapter, is guilty of a felony, and upon conviction shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for four, six, or eight years.

leads me to believe the context here is mostly 'intent to sell or transfer'.

Absent that, I'd expect only 12280(b) to apply:

PC 12280
(b) Any person who, within this state, possesses any assault weapon, except as provided in this chapter, shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for a period not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment in the state prison. However, a first violation of these provisions is punishable by a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500) if the person was found in possession of no more than two firearms in compliance with subdivision (c) of Section 12285 and the person meets all of the following conditions:
(1) The person proves that he or she lawfully possessed the assault weapon prior to the date it was defined as an assault weapon pursuant to Section 12276, 12276.1, or 12276.5.
(2) The person has not previously been convicted of a violation of this section.
(3) The person was found to be in possession of the assault weapon within one year following the end of the one-year registration period established pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 12285.
(4) The person relinquished the firearm pursuant to Section 12288, in which case the assault weapon shall be destroyed pursuant to Section 12028.

(since the (b)(3) requirement has long passed, that 4-part first offense cannot apply).

Could be wrong.

People with legally possessed (according to CA) AWs need merely follow the 12026.1 'unloaded in a locked case' method, and stick to the 12285(c) restrictions.

[TROJAN]

I don't know if your friends gun is stamped "T". But the gun in the above pic is the original configuration of an HK SR9 crudely stamped "T" by HK USA. They have polygonal barrels that are not threaded. To be allowed for importation under the "sporting" standard at the time, the handguard is smooth without bipod attachment capability, the PSG1 complete lower was considered having a target grip and not a regular pistol grip, and the stock was from a MSG90 with a MSG90 buffer. There was a "TC" stamped SR9 which replaced the MSG90 stock with a PSG1 stock.

To mount an HK91 handguard with an attached bipod is illegal on all SR9 configurations unless you bring down the # of imported parts by replacing them with usa parts. If it would of been legal, HK USA would not of used the smooth handguard shown in my pic that was made by bell&carlson. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there might of been a short grandfathering period where all SR9 versions could of been upgraded to any features such as the handguard with bipod and even flash suppressors.

If your friend did not register the rifle in its current configuration before the SB23 deadline, then he is in violation of a CA assault weapon. NOW if he had removed all of the offending SB23 assault weapon features(mainly the pistol grip) before the law took effect, then he would not of been in violation of the law and could of built the up the rest of the rifle per SB23 as some have with their JLD receivers.

Just my take on it....