AW Registration Guide **3/18/2021 update: Registration may re-open soon**

[Jonas Jonas]

Hello,

I have some question about Joint Registration. Can I register my son as the joint registrant (he's 12 years old)? so he can inherit it when I passed away?

Thank you in advance.

[shaocaholica]

Hello,

I have some question about Joint Registration. Can I register my son as the joint registrant (he's 12 years old)? so he can inherit it when I passed away?

Thank you in advance.

[engi]

Hello,

I have some question about Joint Registration. Can I register my son as the joint registrant (he's 12 years old)? so he can inherit it when I passed away?

Thank you in advance.

Short answer, NO. I highly recommend you read through OP's post in the first page.

[shaocaholica]

I guess the simple thing for an inheritor or an estate to do is to convert them to non AW configuration through a trusted party or gunsmith if necessary. No need to surrender.

[Robotron2k84]

I guess the simple thing for an inheritor or an estate to do is to convert them to non AW configuration through a trusted party or gunsmith if necessary. No need to surrender.

This likely wouldn't work. Once registered, a lower remains a registered assault weapon for the purposes of transfer until it is unregistered by DOJ de-registration (if available) as a featureless rifle. Therefore if registered, OpLaw will not operate and anyone who takes possession unless executor of an estate, LEO, joint registrant or direct beneficiary who lives out of state is guilty of possession of an unregistered assault weapon. If the intention is to make the rifle featureless before the 90-day grace period (180 days for 50 BMG), then unless you can get the DOJ to agree and provide the proof of de-registration, the rifle is still an assault weapon and can not be transferred. Likely DOJ would not complete the de-registration in the time allotted.

The smart thing to do is utilize a second never-built lower to rebuild the rifle as featureless and surrender the registered lower.

[Junkie]

Robotron, do you have a source for that?

A decade or more ago, Bill Wiese was told by DOJ that a RAW in non-AW configuration isn't an AW and isn't subject to AW laws.

[Robotron2k84]

Robotron, do you have a source for that?

A decade or more ago, Bill Wiese was told by DOJ that a RAW in non-AW configuration isn't an AW and isn't subject to AW laws.

One would surmise that such an exception would only apply to the registered owner(s) and specifically for transport and handling. The firearm is still registered as a RAW and can not legally be transferred (hence "for purposes of transfer" in my statement). Disassembling a RAW and attempting to bequeath in-state or OpLaw transfer will not fly if the rifle is still in the RAW database.

But, I'm happy to be proven wrong.

Edit to add the following:

The Calguns knowledge base doesn't have a lot of coverage for assault weapon law once an estate is liquidated. Undoubtedly it has happened but for purposes of general discussion, the legal corpus isn't rife with examples in this domain.

That being said, it will be a growing concern for RAW owners going forward as the average owner's age increases and more examples of such cases appear.

With the established nature of California as a de facto gun control regime, having a majority in all three branches of state government and the federal circuit and electorate in majority agreement, the only prudent corse of action in regards to prosecutorial policy and opinion is to take the narrowest reading until further cases establish the boundaries of what is legal.

Some might argue that this is giving in to the diminishment of rights, but in a politically hostile climate, expect the prosecutorial regime to extend their boundaries along established trends and, I for one, come to the conclusion that it's only a matter of time before constructive possession of assault weapons is legislated, tried and established as precedent. I wouldn't want to be the test case.

[f4irder2]

Has anyone received a comfirmation letter yet for an AR rifle?

[seainc]

See post# 379, 389.

[accel]

foregrip is considered as "evil" feature. I have a picatinny bipod that folds into a foregrip. Does it make sence to include it in the pictures?

Also, a question on additional applicants. Do tbey have to have FSC? Firearm safety certificate?

[busa]

Registration Photo and Joint Registrant

Hi,
Do i have to take off Magpul Handguard when taking pictures for registration?
Does my spouse need to have FSC to be Joint Registrant?

Thanks.

[numpty]

Hi,
Do i have to take off Magpul Handguard when taking pictures for registration?
Does my spouse need to have FSC to be Joint Registrant?

Thanks.

Good question about joint registration. I didn't think about this.

[HibikiR]

foregrip is considered as "evil" feature. I have a picatinny bipod that folds into a foregrip. Does it make sence to include it in the pictures?

Also, a question on additional applicants. Do tbey have to have FSC? Firearm safety certificate?

From what I gather:

1) If you checked the foregrip in the form, then include the device (in the foregrip configuration) in the photo.

2) I remember hearing that FSC is not required for joint applicants, but they still have to be legally able to own an Registered Assault Weapon (No felony record, 18+ years old, etc.)

[busa]

How about Magpul Handguard? I have LE6920MPS-B. Shall i take those off and take pictures like LE6920OEM?

Thanks

[HibikiR]

How about Magpul Handguard? I have LE6920MPS-B. Shall i take those off and take pictures like LE6920OEM?

Thanks

It's just a handguard, not worth the effort to remove it as it won't have any discernable effect on registration.