Skip to comments.What's going on with AR-15 rifle legality in California?
Posted on 12/29/2005 9:50:32 AM PST by Tree of Liberty
I haven't checked out the two above forums in a while, and when I did last night, there seemed to be alot of talk, especially on calguns.net, about AR-15's now being legal in CA due to a court case called Harrott.
Does anyone have any specifics on this, especially the chronology of events?
Bushmaster has a new model that is California legal.
The models that are Cali legal have a fixed 10 round mag that is loaded by stripper clip.
That's always been the case since Roberti-Roos and the AWB, but I'm asking about what this new case establishes. I think it came out in early December.
OK from what I know from calguns.com (even though I live in Nevada now I still read there a bit) there was a lawsuit, this lawsuit said that the Cali DOJ must name each rifle BY NAME before banning it.. hence an AR-15 is illegal, but a STAR-15 is not. This started a rush of people to buy lowers made by other companies who made the AR-15 style rifle but did not name them AR-15's.
The lawsuit also made it so the Cali DOJ has to open a window of 90 days after they ban a rifle to register it.. so lets say you go out and buy a DoubleStart AR lower, its called a STAR-15 so its "legal" to own because its not named.. the Cali DOJ bans it.. but since you owned it previous to the ban you can register it and own it in Cali cus now its a registered assault weapon.
This is a VERY basic outline of what is going on so you might want to head on over to calguns.net and get the real deal from them (right here is the correct forum http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/forumdisplay.php?f=81 )
Hope that helps.. you also can not have a pistol grip on the gun but there IS a workaround for that.
Hope that helps you out.
Me.. I am just glad I moved to NV :)
What about a CAR-15?
Not sure.. but i THINK it might be ok.. since each banned weapon type has to be named.
Thank you!!! That's the background I was looking for. The gun forum members, in general, seem to think everyone knows what's going on and don't fill in the history. Thanks again.
So, from what I gather, a company can just rename their AR's every three months as a work-around?
P.S. I'm hoping to move over to NV ASAP, as I'm really hating CA more and more every day. I just keep getting delayed.
Why not just sell off your bling-bling, Mr. T, and just buy yourself some qualifications?
I can see a revolving model name scheme. Every few days your rifles get a new name. DOJ will spend all their time banning rifles.
From what I understand, you can't have a pistol grip on a rifle assembled using a "legal" AR-15 clone. But at such time as the state of Kalifornia rules that the "clone" is really an "assault weapon", any owners who possessed the firearm prior to such a ruling are now in possession of an "assault weapon". They must register that "assault weapon" and once registered, they may re-assemble the rifle with whatever accessories they desire, since it already is an "assault weapon".
The result of the court's ruling seems to be that the ridiculous nature of the Kalifornia law is revealed. There is nothing of sigificance which distinguishes an "assault weapon" from an "ordinary" rifle.
An additional revelation seems to be that the state officials end up intimidating people who wish to import perfectly legal "clones". Apparently it isn't enough to just follow the law in Kalifornia. You have to anticipate what liberals will want to outlaw and behave accordingly.
Remember folks if they change the law you may have to walk your guns into your local police dept. and turn them in....yeah RIGHTTTTTTTTT!!!!
Actually, this law, as constrained by the courts, seems to offer a "loop-hole" for introducing evil "assault weapons" into the state. The anti-gunners may not like it, but the courts have recognized at least some limits to the ability to outlaw firearms just because they might be ugly, black, and scary looking.