CA Bill to amend definition of Assult Rifle

[rickOshay]

Here is a link to the CA Bill SB 249 that would effectively outlaw ALL AR style rifles:

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill...sm_v93.pdf

CA Grendelers - Please contact your Representative.

[bwaites]

WOW!! Sorry guys!

[BjornF16]

Republik of Kalifornia...good luck gentlemen (and ladies). I've sent my relatives in CA the link and encouraged them to act.

[Bwild97]

This Bill would also designate the Winchester Model 100 as an "Assault Rifle" because it has a detachable magazine, and in effect make it illegal to own in "Kommifornia", What a bunch of "Grab-ass-tic" dumbasses.

[rickOshay]

Yup - there is a long list of guns that will become illegal if this Bill goes through. Even the good old Ruger 10/22.

That is why we need everyone to:
1. Contact your representatives and let them know how you feel and how you will vote based on this issue.
2. Get out and vote!

I hope that firearms manufacturers are able to make this an interstate commerce issue.

[stanc]

Here is a link to the CA Bill SB 249 that would effectively outlaw ALL AR style rifles:

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill...sm_v93.pdf

Hmm. I think you're quite mistaken. I just read the linked pdf, and as far as I can tell, the bill basically only adds "bullet button" magazine releases to the list of "evil" features like pistol grip, flash suppressor, etc. ARs that do not have a BB mag release and other "evil" features would still be legal.

Actually, I'm surprised it took so long for this to happen. The "bullet button" always was in violation of the spirit and intent of the law. (And don't anyone misinterpret that to mean I condone the ban. I'm still pissed that it caused me to get rid of my M1A back in 1999.)

This Bill would also designate the Winchester Model 100 as an "Assault Rifle" because it has a detachable magazine...

Yup - there is a long list of guns that will become illegal if this Bill goes through. Even the good old Ruger 10/22.

I saw nothing in the bill that would designate either of those guns as "assault rifles." Where are you guys getting this stuff? :confused:

[Bwild97]

"Stanc"

I saw nothing in the bill that would designate either of those guns as "assault rifles." Where are you guys getting this stuff?

The first section of text in the Bill starting at SB249

2
3
An act to amend Section 31100 30515 of, to amend, repeal, and add
Section 30800 of, and to add Sections 30527 and 30618 to, the Penal
Code, relating to firearms.
legislative counsel’s digest
SB 249, as amended, Yee. Firearms: assault weapon conversion kits.
Assault weapons.
Existing law, with certain exceptions, prohibits the possession of an
assault weapon, as defined, and makes violations subject to criminal
penalties. Existing law defines a firearm as an assault weapon, in part,
based upon whether it has a detachable magazine.
This bill would define “detachable magazine” for this purpose to
mean any ammunition feeding device that can be removed from the
93
firearm without disassembly of the firearm action, and to include a
magazine that may be detached from the firearm by depressing a button
on the firearm either with the finger or by use of a tool or a bullet. The
bill would declare that these amendments are declaratory of existing
law, would direct the Attorney General to adopt regulations, and would
make these amendments operative July 1, 2013. By expanding the
definition of existing crimes, this bill would impose a state-mandated
local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local
agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state.
Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that
reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act
for a specified reason.

[stanc]

"Stanc" The first section of text in the Bill starting at SB249

Yes. It says:

Existing law defines a firearm as an assault weapon, in part, based upon whether it has a detachable magazine.

A detachable magazine in itself does not make an "assault rifle" under PRK law. It has to be in combination with certain other characteristics, like a folding stock. A Winchester M100 with an ordinary, drop-comb stock -- as shown in the photo you posted -- does not meet the legal definition of "assault rifle."

And IIRC, the law does not apply to rimfire rifles like the Ruger 10/22, only centerfire weapons.

Calguns.net has an interactive guide on how to determine if a weapon is covered by the ban. Check it, and you'll see I'm right.

P.S. If this bill does become law, it'll still be possible to own an AR. It'll just mean the bullet button and other evil features will have to be removed. Oughta make a nice windfall profit for the company making Monsterman stocks...

[Bwild97]

Existing law, with certain exceptions, prohibits the possession of an
assault weapon, as defined, and makes violations subject to criminal
penalties. Existing law defines a firearm as an assault weapon, in part,
based upon whether it has a detachable magazine.
This bill would define “detachable magazine” for this purpose to
mean any ammunition feeding device that can be removed from the
93
firearm without disassembly of the firearm action, and to include a
magazine that may be detached from the firearm by depressing a button
on the firearm either with the finger or by use of a tool or a bullet. The
bill would declare that these amendments are declaratory of existing
law, would direct the Attorney General to adopt regulations, and would
make these amendments operative July 1, 2013.

By tweeking the language that defines the "detachable magazine" a firearm with a "detachable magazine" as an "assault weapon" will include the Winchester model 100, Ruger 10/22 and many other firearms that have "detachable magazines" as "assault weapons"

[rickOshay]

I read it to mean a new definition of "detachable magazine". Guns have been illegal based on a combination of features. Having a detachable magazine plus ...... This new definition would make all the AR's with bullet buttons now fall into the "detachable" category.

Now read the guidelines:

(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon.
(B) A thumbhole stock.
© A folding or telescoping stock.
(D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(E) A flash suppressor.
(F) A forward pistol grip.
(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine
with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length
of less than 30 inches.

So my Grendel would now have a detachable magazine (with the previously allowed bullet button) AND a pistol grip AND flash suppressor.

I was wrong about the 10/22 - rimfires are ok.

[Bwild97]

"stanc"

P.S. If this bill does become law, it'll still be possible to own an AR. It'll just mean the bullet button and other evil features will have to be removed. Oughta make a nice windfall profit for the company making Monsterman stocks...

"IF" the the proposed changes to the language in the existing law are adopted, then owning an AR15 will be a nightmare, try loading that mag through the ejection port. (ie. a permanently attached magazine) "IF" a satisfactory method of permanent attachment can be agreed upon by the law makers and the BATFE.

[stanc]

I read it to mean a new definition of "detachable magazine". Guns have been illegal based on a combination of features. Having a detachable magazine plus ...... This new definition would make all the AR's with bullet buttons now fall into the "detachable" category.

Correct. Of course, the bullet button rifles always did, in reality, have detachable -- not fixed -- magazines.

[video=youtube;7aspdQPvQGA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aspdQPvQGA[/video]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aspdQPvQGA

[stanc]

"IF" the the proposed changes to the language in the existing law are adopted, then owning an AR15 will be a nightmare, try loading that mag through the ejection port. (ie. a permanently attached magazine) "IF" a satisfactory method of permanent attachment can be agreed upon by the law makers and the BATFE.

Several years ago, Bushmaster received approval from CA for the permanently fixed magazine in the Carbon 15 version offered for sale in this state, so a legal precedent has been set. (BATFE has nothing to do with it. This is a state, not federal, matter.)

Loading such a fixed-mag rifle is done by pulling out the rear takedown pin, then hinging the receiver up so that cartridges can be pressed straight down into the magazine.

A legal option is available that allows detachable mags with a regular (non-bullet button) mag release: Get rid of the evil features.

[video=youtube;PHsPYauHBO4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHsPYauHBO4[/video]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHsPYauHBO4

[video=youtube;0Fj_WtPEPIU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Fj_WtPEPIU[/video]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Fj_WtPEPIU

[video=youtube;CPLus5snrWg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPLus5snrWg[/video]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPLus5snrWg

[stanc]

[video=youtube;O8ATsHBXG7w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8ATsHBXG7w[/video]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8ATsHBXG7w

[LRRPF52]

This is why I don't visit my home State anymore. It's overrun with illegal immigrants from not only Central America, but China. My home town has been socially engineered from a hard-working aerospace engineering mecca into a section 8 haven of human excrement from LA, and where you need a CCW more than anywhere in the West, you can't have one. On top of that, you are legally forbidden from bearing arms in your vehicle, with the ammunition and firearms having to be in separate, locked compartments.

It us truly a paradise for criminals, as the liberal retard judges let violent offenders back onto the streets in a revolving door system, while penalizing law-abiding citizens every chance they get.

When I was a kid, CA was military-style rifle heaven. Then we had the nutbag do the McDonald's shooting, then Patrick Purdy, and it was over. Two mental patients who the system let through were used as reasons why we should trust the same system to protect ourselves from ourselves. Productive people and companies are fleeing from California in droves for Free States. California has one of the largest populations of Conservatives in the Union, but their vote doesn't count due to Democrap Gerrymandering and international labor party stranglehold over government in that State. Counties need to start succession proceedures from the State gubm't ASAP, and tell LA, SF, and Sacramento to get bent. They can finance themselves and their illegal populations of thugs. They've become way too big for their britches, and display zero resemblance to adult decision-making capabilities.

[cory]

This is why I don't visit my home State anymore. It's overrun with illegal immigrants from not only Central America, but China. My home town has been socially engineered from a hard-working aerospace engineering mecca into a section 8 haven of human excrement from LA, and where you need a CCW more than anywhere in the West, you can't have one. On top of that, you are legally forbidden from bearing arms in your vehicle, with the ammunition and firearms having to be in separate, locked compartments.

It us truly a paradise for criminals, as the liberal retard judges let violent offenders back onto the streets in a revolving door system, while penalizing law-abiding citizens every chance they get.

When I was a kid, CA was military-style rifle heaven. Then we had the nutbag do the McDonald's shooting, then Patrick Purdy, and it was over. Two mental patients who the system let through were used as reasons why we should trust the same system to protect ourselves from ourselves. Productive people and companies are fleeing from California in droves for Free States. California has one of the largest populations of Conservatives in the Union, but their vote doesn't count due to Democrap Gerrymandering and international labor party stranglehold over government in that State. Counties need to start succession proceedures from the State gubm't ASAP, and tell LA, SF, and Sacramento to get bent. They can finance themselves and their illegal populations of thugs. They've become way too big for their britches, and display zero resemblance to adult decision-making capabilities.

+1

Personally I'd be all for giving those cities back to Mexico in a trade for, well I don't know what for, but I'd be happy with a truck load of avocados.

[davidj]

+1

Personally I'd be all for giving those cities back to Mexico in a trade for, well I don't know what for, but I'd be happy with a truck load of avocados.

+1

[Deezil]

so glad I dont live down there

[bwaites]

Yeah Deezil, we just live in CA north, though we haven't been stupid enough to allow ALL their gun laws quite yet.

When was the last time your vote for President counted? My last was Reagan if I remember correctly!

[Deezil]

dont get me started on gun bans and all that other crap, Ill probably get banned! Im trying to figure out a way out of washington also, too many stinking hippies here!