California Legal (the laws)

[Suvorov]

(split off from the 1911 thread (http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?9568-Not-Legal-in-California) in the Autoloaders section -- ToddG)

Oh yes, our much hated and derided "DOJ Roster of Approved Handguns." Only in a world so devoid of logic and so corrupt can a HK45c be considered unsafe and yet a High Point be approved. :mad:

[ffhounddog]

Nice 1911 you have there. I do not understand why that is illegal in Cali.

[Kyle Reese]

Nice 1911 you have there. I do not understand why that is illegal in Cali.

The California DOJ has deemed it to be "unsafe", hence verboten.

[Suvorov]

Nice 1911 you have there. I do not understand why that is illegal in Cali.

Kalifornia maintains a "Roster" of DOJ approved handguns. In order for a new handgun to be sold in this state by a dealer, it has to be on this list (there are some exceptions for LE and movie prop houses). In order to be approved, the pistol must be tested by the DOJ and meet an ever changing list of "safety criteria."* In order to be tested the manufacturer must pay the DOJ money and submit samples of the pistol. Once approved, the pistol will be on the roster for a number of years as long as the manufacturer keeps paying the DOJ a "fee" to keep it on the list. Minor changes in production to a pistol (such as barrel length, caliber, and finish - seriously) must be tested separately. Because of the cost and hassle associated with getting a firearm on the list, manufacturers only submit major models for approval (and some such as HK have just decided it isn't worth the bother to make their recent pistols "Kalifornia Compliant"), thus hundreds of pistols available to you East of the Sierras are unavailable to the average Kalifornian.

Testing criteria changes continually. Thus a Beretta 92FS certified back when this law was written COULD NOT be certified today if it was submitted as a new model due to such things as lack of microstamping technology, lack of magazine disconnect, lack of LCI, etc.

Sorry to take away from the original intent of the thread. That is a fine looking pistol sir!

[BLR]

Kalifornia maintains a "Roster" of DOJ approved handguns. In order for a new handgun to be sold in this state by a dealer, it has to be on this list (there are some exceptions for LE and movie prop houses). In order to be approved, the pistol must be tested by the DOJ and meet an ever changing list of "safety criteria."* In order to be tested the manufacturer must pay the DOJ money and submit samples of the pistol. Once approved, the pistol will be on the roster for a number of years as long as the manufacturer keeps paying the DOJ a "fee" to keep it on the list. Minor changes in production to a pistol (such as barrel length, caliber, and finish - seriously) must be tested separately. Because of the cost and hassle associated with getting a firearm on the list, manufacturers only submit major models for approval (and some such as HK have just decided it isn't worth the bother to make their recent pistols "Kalifornia Compliant"), thus hundreds of pistols available to you East of the Sierras are unavailable to the average Kalifornian.

Testing criteria changes continually. Thus a Beretta 92FS certified back when this law was written COULD NOT be certified today if it was submitted as a new model due to such things as lack of microstamping technology, lack of magazine disconnect, lack of LCI, etc.

Sorry to take away from the original intent of the thread. That is a fine looking pistol sir!

But just look at all the good! L.A. is a safe place. The meth is gone from San Francisco. No one jacks the little old lady from Pasadena's car anymore. All because micro stamping.

Right?

Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk 4

[Charlie Foxtrot]

Cali requires that every new gun - and a 1911 can be a "new" gun if offered in a different color - to have a magazine disconnect and a loaded chamber indicator visible from 24" away. Then you have to provide 3 samples of each variant for destructive testing, and, of course, pay a fee in order to have a gun approved. Otherwise, by law, they are defacto considered "unsafe handguns" and cannot be sold new through an FFL.

Stupid? Corrupt? Unconstitutional? You think? You should see what they are trying to do this legislative session. Flaky Jerry Brown "Governor Moonbeam" is our only hope.

Just one of the many reasons I'm happy to be getting out of this benighted state.

[Duces Tecum]

Flaky Jerry Brown "Governor Moonbeam" is our only hope.

Gosh, I would be dissappointed if Gov. Brown were our only hope. Actually, there are a series of court cases (Woollard v. Gallagher, etc.) winnowing their way upstream right now that may establish the core elements of the 2A. Previously everyone thought "keep and bear" and "shall not be infringed" were pretty clear statements, but then the lawyers got involved. "Keep" was established by District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008 and incorporated to the states by McDonald v. Chicago in 2010. Woollard is a "bear" case which the Supreme Court will decide whether or not to hear sometime in October. If accepted, oral arguments are expected in November or December with judgement rendered in late June, 2014. Woollard may establish the national lower limit of 2A protections which will almost certainly be the upper limit for California, New York, Maryland, etc. But at least we have a chance to recover "Keep and bear" in California within the next 9 months. If this comes to pass, attention will then be focused on "Infringed" and that will probably take generations to noodle out.

You'd think it would be simpler, I mean, there are only 27 words in the entire amendment.

[Suvorov]

But just look at all the good! L.A. is a safe place. The meth is gone from San Francisco. No one jacks the little old lady from Pasadena's car anymore. All because micro stamping.

Right?

Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk 4

Oh you know it! Why just today on my walk to Safeway, with my bacteria infested reusable shopping bag, I ran across not one, but two pink unicorns and way a double rainbow! :)


:mad::mad::mad:

[DocGKR]

The California "Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale" is yet another illogical embarrassment for the state...

[shootist26]

Kalifornia maintains a "Roster" of DOJ approved handguns. In order for a new handgun to be sold in this state by a dealer, it has to be on this list (there are some exceptions for LE and movie prop houses). In order to be approved, the pistol must be tested by the DOJ and meet an ever changing list of "safety criteria."* In order to be tested the manufacturer must pay the DOJ money and submit samples of the pistol. Once approved, the pistol will be on the roster for a number of years as long as the manufacturer keeps paying the DOJ a "fee" to keep it on the list. Minor changes in production to a pistol (such as barrel length, caliber, and finish - seriously) must be tested separately. Because of the cost and hassle associated with getting a firearm on the list, manufacturers only submit major models for approval (and some such as HK have just decided it isn't worth the bother to make their recent pistols "Kalifornia Compliant"), thus hundreds of pistols available to you East of the Sierras are unavailable to the average Kalifornian.

Testing criteria changes continually. Thus a Beretta 92FS certified back when this law was written COULD NOT be certified today if it was submitted as a new model due to such things as lack of microstamping technology, lack of magazine disconnect, lack of LCI, etc.

Sorry to take away from the original intent of the thread. That is a fine looking pistol sir!

Are these non-compliant guns illegal for an FFL to sell to you or illegal to flat out possess?

In MA, we have the same "approved roster list," but it only restricts FFLs from selling them. You can still own them by doing a FTF transaction, and there are a ton of "non-roster" handguns in MA. Usually they are brought in from out-of-staters who've moved into MA, or cops who make private purchases and then decide to sell them.

[Charlie Foxtrot]

Are these non-compliant guns illegal for an FFL to sell to you or illegal to flat out possess?

In MA, we have the same "approved roster list," but it only restricts FFLs from selling them. You can still own them by doing a FTF transaction, and there are a ton of "non-roster" handguns in MA. Usually they are brought in from out-of-staters who've moved into MA, or cops who make private purchases and then decide to sell them.

In CA, it's currently much the same as MA. (DC uses the CA list, does MA? If so, I'm so sorry.) You can privately possess "unsafe" handguns, and transfer them through the FFL/ FBI/ CA DOJ process. Currently, as our Loonislature has proposed eliminating the intrastate transfer of non-roster handguns. They'd have to be sold out of state.

[Tamara]

In MA, we have the same "approved roster list," but it only restricts FFLs from selling them. You can still own them by doing a FTF transaction, and there are a ton of "non-roster" handguns in MA. Usually they are brought in from out-of-staters who've moved into MA, or cops who make private purchases and then decide to sell them.

The way that skews the market for you guys is just sick, too. Some years ago, '03 or so, a Massachusetts FFL came into the shop in Knoxville where I was working and checked the serial numbers on our used Glocks. All of them that were old enough he bought at the asking retail price without a quibble, for resale back in the Bay State.

[JMorse]

The SSE loophole is potentially going to shut down 01/01/14 here too, hence my purchase of a P30LS here last week.

[shootist26]

The way that skews the market for you guys is just sick, too. Some years ago, '03 or so, a Massachusetts FFL came into the shop in Knoxville where I was working and checked the serial numbers on our used Glocks. All of them that were old enough he bought at the asking retail price without a quibble, for resale back in the Bay State.

ah yes, the whole MA "pre-ban" Glock fiasco. That's always fun seeing gun shops selling pre-98 Glocks for absurd prices.

[IceDevil]

ICurrently, as our Loonislature has proposed eliminating the intrastate transfer of non-roster handguns. They'd have to be sold out of state.

The new law that the legislature just passed will actually limit private party face to face transfers to only two per year. Not sure if that is two buys, two sells or combined, but you will still have options other than selling out of state.

[Savage Hands]

Are these non-compliant guns illegal for an FFL to sell to you or illegal to flat out possess?

In MA, we have the same "approved roster list," but it only restricts FFLs from selling them. You can still own them by doing a FTF transaction, and there are a ton of "non-roster" handguns in MA. Usually they are brought in from out-of-staters who've moved into MA, or cops who make private purchases and then decide to sell them.



No they are not! My last three handgun purchases were a Gen 4 Glock 19, Gen 4 Glock 17 and a SA XDs which are all not on the roster and the Glocks are listed on my CA CCW. I've also sold dozens of non-rostered guns out of a FFL.

[JMorse]

Shenaniguns,

Please explain. I'm currently in a month long wait for a P30 because everywhere I've called says the only way to buy a non-rostered new pistol here in Cali is to do a SSE, Intra-familial transfer, or buy an existing registered pistol from a resident.

What is everyone missing?

[Savage Hands]

Shenaniguns,

Please explain. I'm currently in a month long wait for a P30 because everywhere I've called says the only way to buy a non-rostered new pistol here in Cali is to do a SSE, Intra-familial transfer, or buy an existing registered pistol from a resident.

What is everyone missing?


Your understanding is correct, I was answering the bolded question.
Is possession illegal? No
Is it illegal (lol) for an FFL to sell them? No

[GardoneVT]

So of all the laws being sent to the Governors desk,do any of them ban future ownership,transfer,sale,or possession of off-roster handguns?

[Savage Hands]

So of all the laws being sent to the Governors desk,do any of them ban future ownership,transfer,sale,or possession of off-roster handguns?

AB-169 Unsafe handguns.(2013-2014)
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140AB169


Just a hint, a lot of these bills will be struck down in court for reasons not discussed publicly.