Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 8/1/2002 3:29:10 PM EST
A gunsmith just told me the following: If you live in CA and you own a postban AR, you were forced to register that AR as an assault weapon. When you registered the AR as an assault weapon, you could legal attach a flashhider, bayonet lug, collapsible stock, etc. Why? He said because it is now a fully registered assault weapon and as such, you could put on all the evil features you want. My question is this. Doesn't this conflict with federal law? If my gunsmith is correct, does the CA law (SB23), supersede federal law? I've emailed CA DOJ to find out myself because if it is true, then there could be a loop hole in the law for legal conversion of a postban to a preban. I'll let you know what CA DOJ says, but in the mean time, what do you guys think? Any merit to his claim?
Link Posted: 8/1/2002 3:31:55 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/1/2002 3:37:29 PM EST
Ask him if he'll assume responsibilty if it's not legal! [;D]
Link Posted: 8/1/2002 3:43:40 PM EST
[b]FEDERAL[/b] laws and [b]STATE[/b] laws are two different things. If that rifle wasn't an assault weapon before 09/13/94, it can't be an assault weapon now. Remember, California law has nothing to do with Federal law. Sure, a postban and a preban (federally speaking) are both "assault weapons" under California law. But, they're sure as hell not under Federal law. Sorry. [:(] But, nice try! Mike
Link Posted: 8/1/2002 3:44:12 PM EST
I'll let you know what CA DOJ says, but in the mean time, what do you guys think? Any merit to his claim?
View Quote
Dont think so.
Link Posted: 8/1/2002 3:46:12 PM EST
I'm with Wolfpack. Nothing is really legal in Kalifornia. I think you would be in violation of Federal law if you put a preban upper with "evil features" on a post ban lower.
Link Posted: 8/1/2002 3:57:37 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/1/2002 4:06:34 PM EST by bwiese]
Your smith confuses Fed & Kalifornia state laws. Don't rely on gunsmiths for legal advice; don't rely on lawyers for gunsmithing advice. (As for me, I'm just a reasonably informed, reasonably well read guy that knows when & where to tread lightly. Statements below aren't legal advice as I'm not a lawyer, but you should take it to heart and/or do further research.)
...gunsmith just told me the following: If you live in CA and you own a postban AR, you were forced to register that AR as an assault weapon. When you registered the AR as an assault weapon, you could legal attach a flashhider, bayonet lug, collapsible stock, etc. Why? He said because it is now a fully registered assault weapon and as such, you could put on all the evil features you want.
View Quote
"Preban" and "postban" generally refer to before/after the Federal "Crime Bill" Sept 13, 1994 cutoff date. Has nothing to do with Kalifornia. What is/isn't an AW in Kalif may or may not be considered a SAW (semiautomatic assault weapon) under Federal law. While Kalifornia law itself may not care if your registered postban AR gets a CAR telestock or flash hider since it's alrady a Kalif. AW that requires registration, it sure as hell IS a violation of the Federal AW ban in the 'Crime Bill'. Conversely you can have a M1A rifle with a flash hider since it isn't a Federal AW, but that'd be considered an SB23 'by feature' AW in Kalifornia. (Springfield puts brakes on for Kalif sales.) Now, here's the slightly-good part. IF you're in Kalifornia with REGISTERED A.W's, AND IF the Federal Crime Bill AW restrictions sunset in Sep 2004, THEN you can take any of your Kalif AWs & put evil features on them that would've previously been illegal under Federal law. That is, your postban AR clones you hadda reg in 2000 can get flash hiders, bayo lugs, telestocks, etc.: they're already AWs by name/type under Kalifornia law, so plus or minus more features doesn't change that status. One other Kalif kinda-loophole: let's say you have some Imbel FAL-type receivers that weren't reg'd as AWs. (That's fine and legal. You can in fact buy Kalif-legal FALs or receivers: one variant has no pistol grip (Entreprise) while DSArms uses a fixed 10rd mag fed by a stripper clip thru a modified dust cover.) Since full FAL clones are SB23 'by feature' AWs you can't add the necessary evil feature and build up the rcvr. But if/when the DOJ declares FAL clones as AWs and gives a 90-day announcement/reg period, then upon registering your FAL clone it can become a full-fledged pistol-gripped FAL taking hi-cap detachable mags. [Assumes you were in legal possession of said hicap mags in Kalif on/before 12/31/99.]
Doesn't this conflict with federal law? If my gunsmith is correct, does the CA law (SB23), supersede federal law? I've emailed CA DOJ to find out myself [...snip...] then there could be a loop hole in the law [...snip...]
View Quote
DOJ may not give you the answers (or the correct ones) about Federal law. There is in fact nothing being superceded here; 1994 Federal definitions of assault wpns are different than Kalifornia's Roberti-Roos list of 54 guns and SB23's 'by feature' list. Even if their AW definitions were identical, Kalifornia would still be free to write far more restrictive laws (as they have done) unless Fed law specifically forbade them to do so (as the Feds haven't done). Bill Wiese San Mateo, CA
Link Posted: 8/1/2002 4:41:04 PM EST
Thanks for the response. Just one other thing. Bwiese talked about the crime bill and that it will "sunset" in 2004. What does that mean? Will the bill die by itself and we can go back to the good old days? Is there a good chance of that happening?
Link Posted: 8/2/2002 7:36:05 AM EST
Originally Posted By Octopaganini: ... Bwiese talked about the crime bill and that it will "sunset" in 2004. What does that mean? Will the bill die by itself and we can go back to the good old days? Is there a good chance of that happening?
View Quote
If Congress does not act to reauthorize it or enact a new law, the federal AW ban will automatically expire 10 years after it took effect, i.e. September 2004 IIRC. Whether or not Congress reauthorizes it depends on the makeup of Congress. The 2002 election is very important in that regard. President Bush has stated that he would sign a reauthorization.
Link Posted: 8/2/2002 6:53:26 PM EST
I can't believe Bush would sign the reauthorization. He's from Texas for God sakes. Booooooooooo
Link Posted: 8/5/2002 10:25:36 AM EST
Please save yourself the trouble and turn over all weapons you currently possess to law enforcement. What was the name of this gunsmith? Where does he work? Thank you for your cooperation, citizen.
Link Posted: 8/5/2002 2:58:05 PM EST
Get a haircut GD!
Top Top