User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/2/2016 7:02:43 PM EDT
[#1]
What I want to know is if the ARs that can still be bought until 12-31-16 will be able to have detachable 10 round mags since BB are outlawed after that time. SB23 from 1-1-2000 said no more registered AWs after that deadline to register was up. I would hate to buy a couple lowers that can't be configured with detachable mags.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/2/2016 7:04:44 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What I want to know is if the ARs that can still be bought until 12-31-16 will be able to have detachable 10 round mags since BB are outlawed after that time. SB23 from 1-1-2000 said no more registered AWs after that deadline to register was up. I would hate to buy a couple lowers that can't be configured with detachable mags. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/2/2016 10:11:46 PM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
the safe act went into effect immediately but the California act let's you keep buying rifles until some deadline? We have till 12/31/2016 to buy BB rifles, then we have till 12/31/2017 (?) to register them. All CA laws take effect January 1 of the next year unless specifically written into the bill as a different date. Next year we can still buy: -Featureless rifles -Bullet Button Version 2 rifles -22 rifles on an AR lower By registering though we should be able to have rifles in normal configuration. Bullet Button free. But they will be registered, and we have to have our paper work for them, and follow AW transportation laws and and more BS I'm sure I'm forgetting... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2016 1:19:17 AM EDT
[#4]
Don't do any of it. Why should WE pay $35 to have our guns registered for these stupid liberals? They can go kill themselves.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2016 11:28:00 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Don't do any of it. Why should WE pay $35 to have our guns registered for these stupid liberals? They can go kill themselves. Because prison and felonies suck? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2016 12:14:56 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
By registering though we should be able to have rifles in normal configuration. Bullet Button free. So, just to be sure, if we chose to register them, can we configure them as normal AR-15's with normal detachable mags (regular mag release), flash hiders, pistol grips, collapsible (adjustable) stocks and can we then use our pre-existing high cap mags in them? Edited to delete the high cap magazine issue from the question. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2016 12:46:43 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, just to be sure, if we chose to register them, can we configure them as normal AR-15's with normal detachable mags (regular mag release), flash hiders, pistol grips, collapsible (adjustable) stocks and can we then use our pre-existing high cap mags in them? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
By registering though we should be able to have rifles in normal configuration. Bullet Button free. So, just to be sure, if we chose to register them, can we configure them as normal AR-15's with normal detachable mags (regular mag release), flash hiders, pistol grips, collapsible (adjustable) stocks and can we then use our pre-existing high cap mags in them? With SB 1446 signed it basically bans all legally owned magazines with greater capacity of 10 rnds. Unless you are LEO or under the exemption, we are f'd on our legally on property. Govt confiscation is Bullsh@t!!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2016 1:01:35 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
the safe act went into effect immediately but the California act let's you keep buying rifles until some deadline? I just bought this LMT complete lower yesterday. http://www.riflegear.com/p-547-lmt-defender-lower-with-sopmod-stock-and-standard-trigger.aspx |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2016 1:06:12 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, just to be sure, if we chose to register them, can we configure them as normal AR-15's with normal detachable mags (regular mag release), flash hiders, pistol grips, collapsible (adjustable) stocks and can we then use our pre-existing high cap mags in them? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
By registering though we should be able to have rifles in normal configuration. Bullet Button free. So, just to be sure, if we chose to register them, can we configure them as normal AR-15's with normal detachable mags (regular mag release), flash hiders, pistol grips, collapsible (adjustable) stocks and can we then use our pre-existing high cap mags in them? You will get different opinions on that issue. My opinion is a RAW is a RAW and you can't make a RAW more of a RAW by changing a feature. it either is or it is not. So based on that. Ill register a few and once i have the registration n proof back from DOJ they will have standard magazine releases. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2016 3:11:33 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You will get different opinions on that issue. My opinion is a RAW is a RAW and you can't make a RAW more of a RAW by changing a feature. it either is or it is not. So based on that. Ill register a few and once i have the registration n proof back from DOJ they will have standard magazine releases. This thread is the first I've heard of a requirement/option to register a rifle as an assault weapon, hence the questions. This actually sounds like a small benefit to participation in competitive shooting - conventional reloading technique. One option for dealing with this for self defense purposes is to gang together some 10 rounders and use a standard mag release to facilitate switching. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2016 3:39:08 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This thread is the first I've heard of a requirement/option to register a rifle as an assault weapon, hence the questions. This actually sounds like a small benefit to participation in competitive shooting - conventional reloading technique. One option for dealing with this for self defense purposes is to gang together some 10 rounders and use a standard mag release to facilitate switching. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You will get different opinions on that issue. My opinion is a RAW is a RAW and you can't make a RAW more of a RAW by changing a feature. it either is or it is not. So based on that. Ill register a few and once i have the registration n proof back from DOJ they will have standard magazine releases. This thread is the first I've heard of a requirement/option to register a rifle as an assault weapon, hence the questions. This actually sounds like a small benefit to participation in competitive shooting - conventional reloading technique. One option for dealing with this for self defense purposes is to gang together some 10 rounders and use a standard mag release to facilitate switching. Just read the signed bills. There's so much bs floating around. You must possess before 1 Jan 2017 and then register before 1 Jan 2018. Registration going to be online. IANAL but my view is there going to be a few options to stay legal: Register as AW install standard mag release and any and all other evil features. Give up being able for heirs to inherit in California. Dissassemble and retain as a stripped lower or retain stripped lowers that were never assembled without registering. New BB Reloaded without registering. Featureless and keep standard mag release without registering. Remove from state. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2016 7:28:43 PM EDT
[#12]
It's time to buy and since it's only a state level panic prices haven't spiked yet.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2016 7:34:09 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This thread is the first I've heard of a requirement/option to register a rifle as an assault weapon, hence the questions. This actually sounds like a small benefit to participation in competitive shooting - conventional reloading technique. One option for dealing with this for self defense purposes is to gang together some 10 rounders and use a standard mag release to facilitate switching. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: You will get different opinions on that issue. My opinion is a RAW is a RAW and you can't make a RAW more of a RAW by changing a feature. it either is or it is not. So based on that. Ill register a few and once i have the registration n proof back from DOJ they will have standard magazine releases. This thread is the first I've heard of a requirement/option to register a rifle as an assault weapon, hence the questions. This actually sounds like a small benefit to participation in competitive shooting - conventional reloading technique. One option for dealing with this for self defense purposes is to gang together some 10 rounders and use a standard mag release to facilitate switching. The Caldwell set up will fit in some 30 round Mag pouches |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2016 7:42:01 PM EDT
[#14]
Turning in your high caps makes about as much sense as swearing you will never break the speed limit again. The violation for both are simple infractions, the speeding ticket costs more.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2016 7:44:53 PM EDT
[#15]
I need to buy some 10 round AR mags I guess. Who makes quality ones?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2016 7:49:28 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I need to buy some 10 round AR mags I guess. Who makes quality ones? Lancer and magpul. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2016 8:29:24 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Turning in your high caps makes about as much sense as swearing you will never break the speed limit again. The violation for both are simple infractions, the speeding ticket costs more. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2016 9:34:51 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Having a 10+ mag is a noncriminal violation? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Turning in your high caps makes about as much sense as swearing you will never break the speed limit again. The violation for both are simple infractions, the speeding ticket costs more. According to the bill it's going to be an infraction. $100 fine first time. $250 second time. $500 3rd and beyond. I'm sure you will have to surrender the mags you're caught with. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2016 9:37:22 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: According to the bill it's going to be an infraction. $100 fine first time. $250 second time. $500 3rd and beyond. I'm sure you will have to surrender the mags you're caught with. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Turning in your high caps makes about as much sense as swearing you will never break the speed limit again. The violation for both are simple infractions, the speeding ticket costs more. According to the bill it's going to be an infraction. $100 fine first time. $250 second time. $500 3rd and beyond. I'm sure you will have to surrender the mags you're caught with. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2016 9:51:59 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oh who the fuck cares about that? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Turning in your high caps makes about as much sense as swearing you will never break the speed limit again. The violation for both are simple infractions, the speeding ticket costs more. According to the bill it's going to be an infraction. $100 fine first time. $250 second time. $500 3rd and beyond. I'm sure you will have to surrender the mags you're caught with. Exactly. And as an infraction, there's no DA and no jury trial. The case is "prosecuted" by the arresting officer in a bench trial, just like a traffic ticket. With the exception of motorcycle cops most the officer no show resulting in dismissal on those infractions. Especially because they are tried in traffic court after all the traffic cases are finished. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2016 11:06:36 PM EDT
[#21]
Went into Turner's the other day. They haven't taken the AR's down and the place was packed.
So yeah they're still buying. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/4/2016 9:58:34 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Exactly. And as an infraction, there's no DA and no jury trial. The case is "prosecuted" by the arresting officer in a bench trial, just like a traffic ticket. With the exception of motorcycle cops most the officer no show resulting in dismissal on those infractions. Especially because they are tried in traffic court after all the traffic cases are finished. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Turning in your high caps makes about as much sense as swearing you will never break the speed limit again. The violation for both are simple infractions, the speeding ticket costs more. According to the bill it's going to be an infraction. $100 fine first time. $250 second time. $500 3rd and beyond. I'm sure you will have to surrender the mags you're caught with. Exactly. And as an infraction, there's no DA and no jury trial. The case is "prosecuted" by the arresting officer in a bench trial, just like a traffic ticket. With the exception of motorcycle cops most the officer no show resulting in dismissal on those infractions. Especially because they are tried in traffic court after all the traffic cases are finished. This is how California will avoid jury nullification and a huge back-log of pending prosecutions. As a citizen you have very few rights in a civil procedure. Criminals have access to a trial by their peers, that's why this law was written in this fashion. Michigan cities have "code compliance officers" that comb neighborhoods looking for damaged shingles and peeling paint and they write tickets. The fine imposed is not allowed to be challenged with a jury trial. Many times they are willing to negotiate a reduced fine if you fix the issue immediately. Challenging the ticket virtually guarantees a $230.00 fine. This is a work around by the government to impose restrictions or command compliance without the headache and expense of actually prosecuting a person. Every year Governors and Mayors have national conventions where they share new ideas on how to force their citizens into "shaping up" for the good of the community. While this may allow them to force compliance on minor annoyances and reduce blight, it runs roughshod over individual liberty. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2016 11:25:02 AM EDT
[#23]
What's with any pre ban weapons? What to know?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2016 11:28:11 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What's with any pre ban weapons? What to know? Wut? No such thing in Cali. Do you mean RAWs? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2016 3:36:02 PM EDT
[#25]
What is a "new bullet button"?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2016 3:37:44 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is how California will avoid jury nullification and a huge back-log of pending prosecutions. As a citizen you have very few rights in a civil procedure. Criminals have access to a trial by their peers, that's why this law was written in this fashion. Michigan cities have "code compliance officers" that comb neighborhoods looking for damaged shingles and peeling paint and they write tickets. The fine imposed is not allowed to be challenged with a jury trial. Many times they are willing to negotiate a reduced fine if you fix the issue immediately. Challenging the ticket virtually guarantees a $230.00 fine. This is a work around by the government to impose restrictions or command compliance without the headache and expense of actually prosecuting a person. Every year Governors and Mayors have national conventions where they share new ideas on how to force their citizens into "shaping up" for the good of the community. While this may allow them to force compliance on minor annoyances and reduce blight, it runs roughshod over individual liberty. It would suck for them if they arrested all the productive people in the state. so I guess making it a ticket makes sense. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2016 5:32:50 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wut? No such thing in Cali. Do you mean RAWs? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
What's with any pre ban weapons? What to know? Wut? No such thing in Cali. Do you mean RAWs? So if you own preban, any additional requirements? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2016 8:26:45 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So if you own preban, any additional requirements? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: What's with any pre ban weapons? What to know? Wut? No such thing in Cali. Do you mean RAWs? So if you own preban, any additional requirements? I'm assuming that you mean already registered assault weapons. Or do you mean ones that were not registered? Because that is a very interesting question. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2016 11:52:59 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm assuming that you mean already registered assault weapons. Or do you mean ones that were not registered? Because that is a very interesting question. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What's with any pre ban weapons? What to know? Wut? No such thing in Cali. Do you mean RAWs? So if you own preban, any additional requirements? I'm assuming that you mean already registered assault weapons. Or do you mean ones that were not registered? Because that is a very interesting question. The legislature wrote the law in a way that allow registration of even guns purchased prior to 1989 or 2001. The DOJ may try to stop that amnesty. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2016 11:53:08 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm assuming that you mean already registered assault weapons. Or do you mean ones that were not registered? Because that is a very interesting question. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What's with any pre ban weapons? What to know? Wut? No such thing in Cali. Do you mean RAWs? So if you own preban, any additional requirements? I'm assuming that you mean already registered assault weapons. Or do you mean ones that were not registered? Because that is a very interesting question. Registered DOJ first time 94? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2016 11:55:16 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Registered DOJ first time 94? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What's with any pre ban weapons? What to know? Wut? No such thing in Cali. Do you mean RAWs? So if you own preban, any additional requirements? I'm assuming that you mean already registered assault weapons. Or do you mean ones that were not registered? Because that is a very interesting question. Registered DOJ first time 94? Nobody has any idea what you are talking about. The federal ban has nothing to do with the state laws. There's no such thing as preban in California. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2016 12:03:44 AM EDT
[#32]
California had a weapons registration sometime in the 90s as mine was registered by taking to the DOJ. I am not talking about the Clinton Fed ban
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2016 12:13:32 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
California had a weapons registration sometime in the 90s as mine was registered by taking to the DOJ. I am not talking about the Clinton Fed ban I can assure you your registered nothing in the 90s by talking to the DOJ. if you are referring to SB23 you registered by mail. A registered assault weapon won't need to be re registered. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2016 12:27:35 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I can assure you your registered nothing in the 90s by talking to the DOJ. if you are referring to SB23 you registered by mail. A registered assault weapon won't need to be re registered. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
California had a weapons registration sometime in the 90s as mine was registered by taking to the DOJ. I am not talking about the Clinton Fed ban I can assure you your registered nothing in the 90s by talking to the DOJ. if you are referring to SB23 you registered by mail. A registered assault weapon won't need to be re registered. So your telling me something I did and the long line of subjects doing the same. Ok, thanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2016 2:27:00 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I can assure you your registered nothing in the 90s by talking to the DOJ. if you are referring to SB23 you registered by mail. A registered assault weapon won't need to be re registered. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: California had a weapons registration sometime in the 90s as mine was registered by taking to the DOJ. I am not talking about the Clinton Fed ban I can assure you your registered nothing in the 90s by talking to the DOJ. if you are referring to SB23 you registered by mail. A registered assault weapon won't need to be re registered. The original Roberti Roos ban, listed by name, there was a registration sometime in the early nineties. I have no experience with that, at the time I was otherwise occupied. 12275. This chapter shall be known as the Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989. 12275.5. (a) The Legislature hereby finds and declares that the proliferation and use of assault weapons poses a threat to the health, safety, and security of all citizens of this state. The Legislature has restricted the assault weapons specified in Section 12276 based upon finding that each firearm has such a high rate of fire and capacity for firepower that its function as a legitimate sports or recreational firearm is substantially outweighed by the danger that it can be used to kill and injure human beings. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this chapter to place restrictions on the use of assault weapons and to establish a registration and permit procedure for their lawful sale and possession. It is not, however, the intent of the Legislature by this chapter to place restrictions on the use of those weapons which are primarily designed and intended for hunting, target practice, or other legitimate sports or recreational activities. SB23 was the 2000 registration by features.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2016 10:17:45 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's my impression but I ain't a California lawyer Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: What I want to know is if the ARs that can still be bought until 12-31-16 will be able to have detachable 10 round mags since BB are outlawed after that time. SB23 from 1-1-2000 said no more registered AWs after that deadline to register was up. I would hate to buy a couple lowers that can't be configured with detachable mags. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2016 11:31:32 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The original Roberti Roos ban, listed by name, there was a registration sometime in the early nineties. I have no experience with that, at the time I was otherwise occupied. 12275. This chapter shall be known as the Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989. 12275.5. (a) The Legislature hereby finds and declares that the proliferation and use of assault weapons poses a threat to the health, safety, and security of all citizens of this state. The Legislature has restricted the assault weapons specified in Section 12276 based upon finding that each firearm has such a high rate of fire and capacity for firepower that its function as a legitimate sports or recreational firearm is substantially outweighed by the danger that it can be used to kill and injure human beings. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this chapter to place restrictions on the use of assault weapons and to establish a registration and permit procedure for their lawful sale and possession. It is not, however, the intent of the Legislature by this chapter to place restrictions on the use of those weapons which are primarily designed and intended for hunting, target practice, or other legitimate sports or recreational activities. SB23 was the 2000 registration by features.. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
California had a weapons registration sometime in the 90s as mine was registered by taking to the DOJ. I am not talking about the Clinton Fed ban I can assure you your registered nothing in the 90s by talking to the DOJ. if you are referring to SB23 you registered by mail. A registered assault weapon won't need to be re registered. The original Roberti Roos ban, listed by name, there was a registration sometime in the early nineties. I have no experience with that, at the time I was otherwise occupied. 12275. This chapter shall be known as the Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989. 12275.5. (a) The Legislature hereby finds and declares that the proliferation and use of assault weapons poses a threat to the health, safety, and security of all citizens of this state. The Legislature has restricted the assault weapons specified in Section 12276 based upon finding that each firearm has such a high rate of fire and capacity for firepower that its function as a legitimate sports or recreational firearm is substantially outweighed by the danger that it can be used to kill and injure human beings. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this chapter to place restrictions on the use of assault weapons and to establish a registration and permit procedure for their lawful sale and possession. It is not, however, the intent of the Legislature by this chapter to place restrictions on the use of those weapons which are primarily designed and intended for hunting, target practice, or other legitimate sports or recreational activities. SB23 was the 2000 registration by features.. Thank you Operatorerror. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2016 12:49:57 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What is a "new bullet button"?  |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2016 4:16:49 PM EDT
[#39]
Just a head up. We are now setup to install a BB on any AR ordered to be shipped to CA. Will will sub a 10 round Mag. No charge just order and we will pick up the CA address and add the BB. We have a Mfg FFL to legally do this.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2016 7:35:48 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just a head up. We are now setup to install a BB on any AR ordered to be shipped to CA. Will will sub a 10 round Mag. No charge just order and we will pick up the CA address and add the BB. We have a Mfg FFL to legally do this. Thanks for supporting us here behind enemy lines. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2016 8:16:19 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:That's my impression but I ain't a California lawyer Did you stay in a Holiday Inn recently? The Turner's weekly ad features two AR's as the first two firearms. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2016 9:55:12 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just a head up. We are now setup to install a BB on any AR ordered to be shipped to CA. Will will sub a 10 round Mag. No charge just order and we will pick up the CA address and add the BB. We have a Mfg FFL to legally do this. Thanks |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2016 10:29:47 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Thanks for supporting us here behind enemy lines. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Just a head up. We are now setup to install a BB on any AR ordered to be shipped to CA. Will will sub a 10 round Mag. No charge just order and we will pick up the CA address and add the BB. We have a Mfg FFL to legally do this. Thanks for supporting us here behind enemy lines. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2016 9:14:48 AM EDT
[#44]
I have questions concerning a possible sale to a CA resident.
I have been approached by numerous CA guys about purchasing a AR-10 that I have for sale in the EE. I've told them sorry but it's not a CA compliant firearm and that was the end of it. I've had a recent contact that wants me to ship the upper to his address in CA and the lower to a FFL in NV for modification into a compliant lower. The AR has a fixed stock, 18" barrel with BattleComp muzzle device, pistol grip and no bullet button. Question 1: Can I legally ship the upper with the BattleComp to him in CA? Question 2: Is it legal, It seems logical that it would be, for me to ship the lower to a FFL in NV so they can make it CA compliant and then they can make the transfer to the buyer's FFL in CA? Question 3: The sale includes 2 - 10 rd mags. Is this legal as well? I'd really like to see some serious responses to this as I'd like to sell this rifle. I also hate that you CA guys have to go through all this BS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2016 9:35:52 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Did you stay in a Holiday Inn recently? The Turner's weekly ad features two AR's as the first two firearms. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:That's my impression but I ain't a California lawyer Did you stay in a Holiday Inn recently? The Turner's weekly ad features two AR's as the first two firearms. I saw they say banned in 2017 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2016 11:03:02 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have questions concerning a possible sale to a CA resident. I have been approached by numerous CA guys about purchasing a AR-10 that I have for sale in the EE. I've told them sorry but it's not a CA compliant firearm and that was the end of it. I've had a recent contact that wants me to ship the upper to his address in CA and the lower to a FFL in NV for modification into a compliant lower. The AR has a fixed stock, 18" barrel with BattleComp muzzle device, pistol grip and no bullet button. Question 1: Can I legally ship the upper with the BattleComp to him in CA? Perfectly Legal Question 2: Is it legal, It seems logical that it would be, for me to ship the lower to a FFL in NV so they can make it CA compliant and then they can make the transfer to the buyer's FFL in CA? Also legal, there are a few NV and AZ vendors that do this for CA on the regular. Question 3: The sale includes 2 - 10 rd mags. Is this legal as well? 10 rounders are still legal, if you were including mags over 10 rounds and wanted to include them in the sale you could ask the NV FFL if they would restrict them to 10 rounds at the buyers expense. I'd really like to see some serious responses to this as I'd like to sell this rifle. I also hate that you CA guys have to go through all this BS. Thanks for making the effort to help us out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2016 11:07:27 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have questions concerning a possible sale to a CA resident. I have been approached by numerous CA guys about purchasing a AR-10 that I have for sale in the EE. I've told them sorry but it's not a CA compliant firearm and that was the end of it. I've had a recent contact that wants me to ship the upper to his address in CA and the lower to a FFL in NV for modification into a compliant lower. The AR has a fixed stock, 18" barrel with BattleComp muzzle device, pistol grip and no bullet button. Question 1: Can I legally ship the upper with the BattleComp to him in CA? Question 2: Is it legal, It seems logical that it would be, for me to ship the lower to a FFL in NV so they can make it CA compliant and then they can make the transfer to the buyer's FFL in CA? Question 3: The sale includes 2 - 10 rd mags. Is this legal as well? I'd really like to see some serious responses to this as I'd like to sell this rifle. I also hate that you CA guys have to go through all this BS. The upper can go directly to him. There are no restrictions on it. Sounds ok for the lower as long as a FFL in CA transfers it to him. You don't mention what brand of lower. If it is an actual armalite AR10 then it is banned by name and a no go in CA. There are others also banned by name. 10 rd mags are legal. Dang, I type too slow. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2016 11:13:28 AM EDT
[#48]
It's an LMT lower. Is that on the list?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2016 11:17:04 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's an LMT lower. Is that on the list? LMT is gtg. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2016 11:41:43 AM EDT
[#50]
Thanks guys for all your help
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
