Bullet button raw

[Mrbeans]

[BajaJames83]

Still a no

[Uncivil Engineer]

Can we get the DOJ materials the LEOs get in these classes? Freedom of information?

Wouldn't it be good to know what DOJ is telling everyone. At least we can have an idea of how they want to enforce these new crazy laws.

[Quiet]

Anyone heard anything new regarding putting a standard mag release on a bbraw? A friend attended a LE DOJ update class not too long ago. The DOJ guy told everyone the regs say the bullet button has to stay but there’s no enforcement section in the penal code. Kinda like being able to use 30 round mags In registered bbraw’s. He said basically there is nothing the DOJ can do because there’s no other charge and you can’t make an “assault rifle” an “extra assaulty rifle”. There all just RAW’s either way. Thoughts?

Nothing new.

CA DOJ regulations still in effect.

Removing the "bullet button" style magazine release on the RAW makes it into a different non-registered AW. [11 CCR 5477(a)]
^Exemptions for repair/replacement with another "bullet button" style magazine release or done during the deregistration process. [11 CCR 5477(b)&(c)]


There are no CA laws and no CA DOJ regulations that restricts or prohibits the use of large capacity magazines in a RAW.
^Including RAW with "bullet button" style magazine release.

[Drew Eckhardt]

Anyone heard anything new regarding putting a standard mag release on a bbraw? A friend attended a LE DOJ update class not too long ago. The DOJ guy told everyone the regs say the bullet button has to stay but there’s no enforcement section in the penal code.

No.

11 CCR 5477 states

A weapon's eligibility for registration pursuant to Penal Code section 30900, subdivision (b)(1) depends, in part, on its release mechanism. Any alteration to the release mechanism converts the assault weapon into a different weapon from the one that was registered.

where the new assault weapon is not registered.

At a minimum, you end up possessing an unregistered assault weapon in violation of PC 30605 punishable by 3 years in prison.

An anti-gun DA will also charge you with PC 30600 manufacturing good for 8 years in prison.

Kinda like being able to use 30 round mags In registered bbraw’s

There is no law or regulation prohibiting 30 round magazine use in BBRAWs.

Before the law changed, using a 30 round magazine in a BB firearm created an assault weapon per PC 30515(a)(2)

(a) Notwithstanding Section 30510, “assault weapon” also means any of the following:
(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

After, you already have an assault weapon so that's not an issue.

People including gun shop employees and police officers often base their statements on what they've heard, not reading the law.

Start with legal opinion from a firm like Michel & Associates specializing in firearm law, read the law yourself, and be more or less conservative than the lawyers suggest based on your risk tolerance.

If you rightfully conclude it's BS under the Second Amendment and become a test case, I'll donate $200 to your gofundme legal defense fund.

If you sell all your semiautomatic firearms because an anti-gun DA might go after your spouse for illegal assault weapon possession they can buy an angle grinder at Home Depot then cut your safe open, I'll buy you a beer and counsel you about moving someplace else you won't live in fear.

[BAJ475]

Nothing new.

CA DOJ regulations still in effect.

Removing the "bullet button" style magazine release on the RAW makes it into a different non-registered AW. [11 CCR 5477(a)]
^Exemptions for repair/replacement with another "bullet button" style magazine release or done during the deregistration process. [11 CCR 5477(b)&(c)]


There are no CA laws and no CA DOJ regulations that restricts or prohibits the use of large capacity magazines in a RAW.
^Including RAW with "bullet button" style magazine release.

So are you saying that I can un-register my BBRAWs by removing the BBs and sending them to the CA DOJ?

[Dutch3]

Stop using the terms 'Assault Weapon' and 'Assault Rifle' interchangeably. They are not synonymous.

By doing so, you are hurting the cause. Those are my thoughts.

[BAJ475]

My wife just got some emails from CFARS-PROD <BOFcris@doj.ca.gov> Other than identify some of the BBAWs she attempted to co-register with me, they say: "The California Department of Justice has received your electronic AB 1135/SB 880 Assault Weapon Registration and will begin processing your submission. You will be notified of the results via U.S. Mail. If you have any questions, please use the Report an Issue feature in the CFARS application https://cfars.doj.ca.gov. For questions regarding your account, please email the Bureau of Firearms at: bofcris@doj.ca.gov"

This seems strange given that they objected to how she completed the co-registration forms shortly after they were submitted. If I recall correctly, she stated that she got them from me, rather than the seller, I got them from. And with respect to one, she stated that the firearm had been manufactured in the US and I said that it was manufactured in CA. Knowing that we were moving to Idaho, she just ignored them at that time.

Are they going back and reviewing these old submittals? Should she notify them of our Idaho mailing address?

[beanz2]

My wife just got some emails from CFARS-PROD <BOFcris@doj.ca.gov> Other than identify some of the BBAWs she attempted to co-register with me, they say: "The California Department of Justice has received your electronic AB 1135/SB 880 Assault Weapon Registration and will begin processing your submission. You will be notified of the results via U.S. Mail. If you have any questions, please use the Report an Issue feature in the CFARS application https://cfars.doj.ca.gov. For questions regarding your account, please email the Bureau of Firearms at: bofcris@doj.ca.gov"

This seems strange given that they objected to how she completed the co-registration forms shortly after they were submitted. If I recall correctly, she stated that she got them from me, rather than the seller, I got them from. And with respect to one, she stated that the firearm had been manufactured in the US and I said that it was manufactured in CA. Knowing that we were moving to Idaho, she just ignored them at that time.

Are they going back and reviewing these old submittals? Should she notify them of our Idaho mailing address?

Good on them for doing that. We still have a few applications hanging in limbo although for most we have the "letter."

I wouldn't notify them as long as you can receive your letter as they will not forward the registration letter. If she ever receives her letter, consider it a bonus as she will always have the privilege to bring the RAW/RAW's back into CA for hunting, classes, etc.


.

[lordmorgul]

Bullet button raw

So are you saying that I can un-register my BBRAWs by removing the BBs and sending them to the CA DOJ?

No, but it seems that you can in the DOJ estimation have a RAW registered (to you) and have an unregistered AW simultaneously which have the same serial number. Obviously one of those is an issue...


Andrew - Lancaster, CA
NRA Life Member, CRPA member, Calguns.net contributor, CGF / SAF / FPC / CCRKBA / GOA / NAGR / NRA-ILA contributor, USCCA member - Support your defenders!

[bohoki]

you cannot switch to a standard mag release because that would put the gun in a different status but it is unknown if say a radlock came unscrewed a bit or a mag magnet was placed in a bullet button

[Stanze]

But, converting the RAW rifle to 26" and allowing folding stock and pistol grip on RAW shotgun does not change it into a different firearm that was registered and is perfectly OK and legal per DOJ website.

https://www.oag.ca.gov/firearms/regagunfaqs

[Milsurp1]

There is litigation ongoing over this BB removal regulation. Cal DoJ trying to add a restriction that the legislature did not.

[BAJ475]

you cannot switch to a standard mag release because that would put the gun in a different status but it is unknown if say a radlock came unscrewed a bit or a mag magnet was placed in a bullet button

I agree that would put them in a different status in CA. But I'm in Idaho where there is no such thing as an AW and registration is prohibited by Article I, section 11 of the Idaho Constitution. "....No law shall impose licensure, registration or special taxation on the ownership or possession of firearms or ammunition."

[aBrowningfan]

I agree that would put them in a different status in CA. But I'm in Idaho where there is no such thing as an AW and registration is prohibited by Article I, section 11 of the Idaho Constitution. "....No law shall impose licensure, registration or special taxation on the ownership or possession of firearms or ammunition."

If the BBAW is presently located in ID, and you want to modify it to remove the BB, as long as the firearm remains in ID, then ID law applies to the firearm. You are possessing the firearm in ID, not CA.