CA Legal AR on duty?

[tacticalcity]

Look, there is no extra paperwork when trying to by a listed assault weapon versus an unlisted assault weapon. As far as the CA DOJ is concerned, an AW is an AW, whether defined by name or by features. Buying something on list doesn't "raise eyebrows" with the DOJ. All they want is a letter from the department's commander (or person authorized by the department's head), and the blue AW registration card. It's actually quite easy once you have the letter.

If they give the letter before they buy the rifle, then that letter is part of the DROS. Later that can bite them in the rear and it has a huge political stigma to it. Especially since it allows their officers to buy listed brands. The departments do not want to be seen as "importing dangerous assault weapons" especially when the head of the department is an elected official who could be held accountable.

If the officer leaves the force he can keep the rifle, and if there is then an incident involving that rifle, then there would be a paper trail leading back to that department saying they gave him permission to buy that dangerous assault rifle. But if he buys it legally, on his own, then they are only on the hook so long as he is an active member of their department.

However, allowing officers to carry their own legally aquired rifles, which are not named on the Dangerous Assault Weapons list does not have the same dangerous political overtones to it. After all, the officers purchased their rifles of their own accord and within the law. Issuing a letter at that point, which the department keeps on file and does not give to the officer so he cannot use it to buy an off-list rifle, is considerably less risky. Now whether they actually bother with the letter, or just give their officers permission via their department police I do not know. But this practice is common place.

You guys need to start thinking like lawyers and public relations officials if you want to understand how and why things work the way they do at your departments. You're thinking too much like cops.

[tacticalcity]

Do I understand the boldened part it means your department can write you a letter that you have authorization to use your S&W MP15 rifle on duty, and now you can remove the mag lock and use it normally?

Please post or pm me the precedent on this! It would be greatly appreciated as a great and inexpensive way to bring in patrol rifles into my department.

San Ramon Police Department allows their officers to remove bullet buttons of their legally aquired personally owned AR15s and use them as duty rifles once they qualify. They do this because they do not have the budget for them.

However I am not calling out the other department in case this is someday determined to be against DOJ policy. I actually like them. I am not fond of San Ramon. In their very short existance they have done some very shady things to their own officers.

From conversations I have had with officers from all over this state, this practice is common place.

[1911su16b870]

Look, there is no extra paperwork when trying to by a listed assault weapon versus an unlisted assault weapon. As far as the CA DOJ is concerned, an AW is an AW, whether defined by name or by features. Buying something on list doesn't "raise eyebrows" with the DOJ. All they want is a letter from the department's commander (or person authorized by the department's head), and the blue AW registration card. It's actually quite easy once you have the letter.

This was my understanding up to this point and thread. DOJ wants you to get your AW from a CA licensed AW dealer. They do not want rank and file officers just converting their CA legal builds into AWs.

For a second there, I was getting my hopes up that DOJ would use common sense for patrol officers with a department letter saying they could convert their rifles into normal featured ARs, but that is against current law for 12276PC [need to insert it here thinking 12280-90PC] peace officer exemptions.

[biochembruin]

As in, if you already own a California Legal AR15 we will give you permission to take off the bullet button and use it on duty provided you qualify with it. However, we are not going to give you special permission to run down and buy a COLT AR15 or that super sexy KAC SR-15 that is banned just because you are cop. So buy your rifle the ordinary way, with the bullet button on it so it doesn't standand out to the DOJ or AG, then once you have it and it is already DROS'd into your name we will give you permission to remove the bullet button and use it on duty. They don't want to be part of the DROS process. If something goes wrong they want to be able to say "...but he purchased that rifle legally and of his own accord and we had no part in that..." and wash their hands of it. It is pure CYA on their part.

That is a very common approach/response from departments these days. I know of two that take that approach in my area alone. They are willing to give permission to their officers to use them on duty and run them normally, but are not willing to give them permision before they own the rifle, only after. Which means their rifles are all "off list" and nobody is "importanting assault weapons" into California on their behalf.

I really think you might be confused as to what these departments in your area are doing to allow their officers to own AW. It works this way:

1: The department decides which of their officers is qualified to buy an AW, based on their own policy.

2: The qualified officer meets with an AW dealer and picks a rifle, usually from a department approved list, based on the department policy. The officer obtains the serial number of said rifle.

3: The dept writes a letter for the officer stating the officer is a full time employee and is authorized by said department to purchase the rifle. The letter states the make, model, and SN of the rifle.

4: Officer buys the rifle and gives the letter to the AW dealer. The dealer gives the officer the rifle, a copy of the letter, and a blue AW registration card.

5: Officer fills out the card and sends it to the DOJ within 90 days, along with the $20 fee. If the officer fails to send in the registration card, the officer is then in possession of an unregistered assault weapon, and in violation of the penal code. The AW must be returned to the AW dealer.

That's all there is to it. If an officer bought or manufactured a CA legal rifle with a bullet button, then removed said bullet button with "permission" of the department, the officer would have just manufactured an assault weapon, and would be in possession of an unregistered assault weapon. Neither of those violations have exemptions for law enforcement officers.

If an officer has an assault weapon, it must be registered. The process you previously described does not provide for registering the weapon with the DOJ, something the officer must do (ie, the dept can't do it for the officer) if it is an officer owned weapon.

[1911su16b870]

The way Murphy's law works for me is that as soon as I have authorization to buy a CA AW...the CGF/SAF AW lawsuit will win and they'll throw 12276PC out the window.

[tacticalcity]

I really think you might be confused as to what these departments in your area are doing to allow their officers to own AW. It works this way:

1: The department decides which of their officers is qualified to buy an AW, based on their own policy.

2: The qualified officer meets with an AW dealer and picks a rifle, usually from a department approved list, based on the department policy. The officer obtains the serial number of said rifle.

3: The dept writes a letter for the officer stating the officer is a full time employee and is authorized by said department to purchase the rifle. The letter states the make, model, and SN of the rifle.

4: Officer buys the rifle and gives the letter to the AW dealer. The dealer gives the officer the rifle, a copy of the letter, and a blue AW registration card.

5: Officer fills out the card and sends it to the DOJ within 90 days, along with the $20 fee. If the officer fails to send in the registration card, the officer is then in possession of an unregistered assault weapon, and in violation of the penal code. The AW must be returned to the AW dealer.

That's all there is to it. If an officer bought or manufactured a CA legal rifle with a bullet button, then removed said bullet button with "permission" of the department, the officer would have just manufactured an assault weapon, and would be in possession of an unregistered assault weapon. Neither of those violations have exemptions for law enforcement officers.

If an officer has an assault weapon, it must be registered. The process you previously described does not provide for registering the weapon with the DOJ, something the officer must do (ie, the dept can't do it for the officer) if it is an officer owned weapon.

That is how it should work. It is not how it is working.

When my conversation took place with the three officer friends of mine I made all the arguments you are making with me. They clearly spelled out that letters would NOT be issued to them before hand. However, once they legally purchased their own rifles they would be allowed to qualify with them. Once they did, they would be allowed to use them on duty - without a SB23 compliance devices. They made it very clear, the rifles had to be purchased before hand and had to be off-list rifles. Since that initial conversation I have had the same conversation with officers of other departments. Guys I was taking carbine courses with. Some were teaching the courses, some were my fellow students. Through those conversations it became obvious this was common place. Letters being issued to buy whatever they wanted seemed almost unheard of. The only explination that makes sense to me is that it is CYA. They don't want it showing up as an AW on the DROS. They want it to be DROS'd as a normal long rifle, and without their department associated with the purchase. Otherwise they would just issue the letter. Doing it their way means that when that officer leaves that department, their liability of his being legally able to keep the rifle goes away. It's not an AW, it's just another long gun that some civilian purchased on his own. Nothing to do with them. The fact that at one point he worked for them is much more manageble than them arming him with an assault rifle that he could keep after he left the force.

Frankly, I am getting tired of repeating myself here. I know what I know because all 3 officers purchased all their parts from me (except the lowers which they purchased from an FFL I put them in contact with). I tried to talk them out of doing it that way. I suggested they just get a letter and buy the Colt and KAC rifles they really wanted. These guys were friends, so I wasn't charging them a markup anyway. That is when they explained how their department works and why they could not do it the ideal way. They were buying the rifles to be duty weapons.

[1911su16b870]

T4 Tac...thanks for clarifying what is going on...your effort is appreciated by me!

[biochembruin]

That is how it should work. It is not how it is working.

When my conversation took place with the three officer friends of mine I made all the arguments you are making with me. They clearly spelled out that letters would NOT be issued to them before hand. However, once they legally purchased their own rifles they would be allowed to qualify with them. Once they did, they would be allowed to use them on duty - without a SB23 compliance devices. They made it very clear, the rifles had to be purchased before hand and had to be off-list rifles.

Frankly, I am getting tired of repeating myself here.

Then don't repeat yourself, just stop posting. The law regarding officers obtaining assault weapons was already outlined in this thread before you came in and confused the OP. If this department you mention is advocating their officers possession of unregistered assault weapons, you shouldn't be suggesting the OP follow their example and land himself in trouble. It was already suggested numerous times that he contact his department. It may very well be that they want him to field a CA legal rifle, complete with bullet button intact. Wouldn't be the dumbest thing I've heard a department doing. While the department may want this, others have pointed out this is tactically unsound.

To the OP and others that may be confused, follow the law and your dept policy. Remember, you might be fired for not following policy, and you might be jailed for not following the law.

And don't use a bullet button while on duty.

[tacticalcity]

I told him to ask his department to clarify exactly what they meant by "California Legal".

Show me where in the law that it states that their personal rifles have to be a new purchase and not a rifle they already own?

I don't know what paperwork took place after they qualified. I only know letters would not be issued for the purpose of buying the rifle but that once they owned a rifle and qualified with it, they were allowed to use them without bullet buttons or other compliance devices. That does not preclude that paperwork being filled out at that point to notify the DOJ. I simply wasn't part of that part of the process. Maybe the department doesn't want them buying an AW until they have qualified on it. And since they cannot qualify on it until they have it...it becomes a catch 22. Primary motivation still being some form of CYA.

The only person confused here is you. OP seems to be doing just fine.

"the sale to, purchase by, or possession of assault weapons by the Department of Justice, police departments, sheriffs' offices, marshals' offices, the Department of Corrections, the Department of the California Highway Patrol, district attorneys' offices, or the military or naval forces of this state or of the United States for use in the discharge of their official duties" and provides that nothing shall "prohibit the possession or use of assault weapons by sworn members of these agencies when on duty and the use is within the scope of their duties." (Penal Code section 12280(d))"

Source: http://www.rkba.org/ca/sb23-analysis-psc.html#poe

[biochembruin]

Read California Penal Code 12280(f)(2). In part...

Required authorization is defined as verifiable written certification from the
head of the agency, identifying the recipient or possessor of the
assault weapon as a peace officer and authorizing him or her to
receive or possess the specific assault weapon. For this exemption to
apply, in the case of a peace officer who possesses or receives the
assault weapon prior to January 1, 2002, the officer shall register
the assault weapon pursuant to Section 12285 on or before April 1,
2002, and in the case of a peace officer who possesses or receives
the assault weapon on or after January 1, 2002, the officer shall
register the assault weapon pursuant to Section 12285 not later than
90 days after possession or receipt.

I think I've been trained well enough by my department on this, since I'm qualified to teach it. If no letters were issued, stand by. It's not the department's *** that will be in jail.

[tacticalcity]

Read California Penal Code 12280(f)(2). In part...

Required authorization is defined as verifiable written certification from the
head of the agency, identifying the recipient or possessor of the
assault weapon as a peace officer and authorizing him or her to
receive or possess the specific assault weapon. For this exemption to
apply, in the case of a peace officer who possesses or receives the
assault weapon prior to January 1, 2002, the officer shall register
the assault weapon pursuant to Section 12285 on or before April 1,
2002, and in the case of a peace officer who possesses or receives
the assault weapon on or after January 1, 2002, the officer shall
register the assault weapon pursuant to Section 12285 not later than
90 days after possession or receipt.

I think I've been trained well enough by my department on this, since I'm qualified to teach it. If no letters were issued, stand by. It's not the department's *** that will be in jail.

Nothing in that contradicts what I am saying.

Officer does not own an AW. He owns a normal long rifle. Only after he qualifies is he given written verifiable permission to possess an AW. At which point he removes the bullet button. Only at that point does the rifle become an AW. At which point he has 90 days to file the paperwork. Nothing in the above law says it can't work that way.

Now, if the officer FAILS to qualify he is not given permission from his agency. No harm no foul. He just can't remove the bullet button or use that rifle on duty. It was his choice to buy the rifle, they owe him nothing and they risked nothing. Perfect CYA for the department.

This way they make sure he can qualify with the weapon to their standards before they give him permission to have an AW. From a liability standpoint, it would be nuts to give him permission to buy the AW before they knew he was qualified on it. And if they do not own department ARs, how are they going to qualify him on it before hand?

[center_x]

Need to bust out the computer to respond to all these quotes, assumptions, and all the possibilities of a lot of egg on my face, because my phones' screen isnt big enough.

Actually, Im not going to, too much drama, but Ill try to keep it as simple as possible in "bullet points" to avoid any confusion.

-I will not ask for a letter until Im FT.

-Ive been told I can use a BB, with my own lower, if I qualify with it, but wasnt sure if I should (hence the reason why I started this post)

-I know the rules/laws on the AW issues.

-I dont care about a dream rifle, I care about coming home.

-I only care about my dept's policy

-If I qualify with a BB, Im not going to take it on/off while on/off duty. Thats stupid!

-This thread is done

-Ive already found a Mini 14

[biochembruin]

There is no LEO exemption for manufacturing an assault weapon. The only exemption is that a LEO may currently purchase and register an assault weapon.

[Notorious]

There is no LEO exemption for manufacturing an assault weapon. The only exemption is that a LEO may currently purchase and register an assault weapon.

This.

I thought about the other way and converting my existing rifle if I qual but was told that's not how it works. The rifle has to be bought as is from the dealer and registered as Biochem says.

[18sam2011]

Even if an officer is "allowed" to remove a bullet button from his off list rifle, he WILL NOT be able to register it with the Doj as an assault weapon unless he has a letter from his sheriff/chief. No way around that.