Sig Sauer P239 SAS MA/CA Compliant
- Thread starter MrBot
- Start date
carguychris
New member
Both states have an approved firearms roster. In order to get on it, manufacturers must submit pistols for drop-testing. Roster approval is specific to each model variant, and the gunmakers don't get the guns back afterwards, so it's common for gunmakers not to submit every high-dollar low-volume version for testing.
Additionally, CA is not adding new pistol models to the roster unless they incorporate microstamping technology, and no gunmaker has yet submitted such a pistol. This requirement is being challenged in court; you can find plenty of info about it online, so I won't go into detail here.
Additionally, CA is not adding new pistol models to the roster unless they incorporate microstamping technology, and no gunmaker has yet submitted such a pistol. This requirement is being challenged in court; you can find plenty of info about it online, so I won't go into detail here.
While I'm not in CA, I have heard a bit about their roster, though I don't know how, (if any) the MA system differs.
A couple additional points about the CA roster, not only do the makers have to submit guns for testing (two I think) and not get them back, ever, they also have to PAY for the tests ($200, the last I heard). And as mentioned,
What this means is that the 6" barrel gun, the 4", the nickel finish, the staninless steel, the blued gun, etc., EACH is required by the state to have its own test or it will not be placed on the list. It's not done by manufacturer's model designations, the difference between variants is determined by the state of CA.
AND, after a given period of time, guns "fall off" the list, UNLESS the maker submits more guns and pays to have them tested.
As I understand it (and please, CA residents, if I'm wrong, correct me) the list applies to guns allowed to be sold in CA. Not guns already in your possession if you move to CA. OTHER CA laws cover them, (or don't, depending on the specific model gun in question).
Also, there are other laws covering "taking the gun into the state" if you are a non-resident. Generally speaking, unless you get prior written approval from the state, you can't.
A couple additional points about the CA roster, not only do the makers have to submit guns for testing (two I think) and not get them back, ever, they also have to PAY for the tests ($200, the last I heard). And as mentioned,
What this means is that the 6" barrel gun, the 4", the nickel finish, the staninless steel, the blued gun, etc., EACH is required by the state to have its own test or it will not be placed on the list. It's not done by manufacturer's model designations, the difference between variants is determined by the state of CA.
AND, after a given period of time, guns "fall off" the list, UNLESS the maker submits more guns and pays to have them tested.
As I understand it (and please, CA residents, if I'm wrong, correct me) the list applies to guns allowed to be sold in CA. Not guns already in your possession if you move to CA. OTHER CA laws cover them, (or don't, depending on the specific model gun in question).
Also, there are other laws covering "taking the gun into the state" if you are a non-resident. Generally speaking, unless you get prior written approval from the state, you can't.
Direct from the Ca. DOJ website:
Prime part is in bold. Now try to get that bureaucrat to register you handguns as required by law. They will conduct a check to determine IF your handguns are "Eligible" to be imported. New resident info Read pdf in paragrph 2. You may be having to sell off or otherwise legally disposing of something after they determine it is noncompliant.
Edit to add: If you intend to move here with your guns talk to the folks at calguns.net. You will find them a wealth of information on this subject.
Prime part is in bold. Now try to get that bureaucrat to register you handguns as required by law. They will conduct a check to determine IF your handguns are "Eligible" to be imported. New resident info Read pdf in paragrph 2. You may be having to sell off or otherwise legally disposing of something after they determine it is noncompliant.
Edit to add: If you intend to move here with your guns talk to the folks at calguns.net. You will find them a wealth of information on this subject.
2ndsojourn
New member
From the 'new resident' link above:
"Sell... to a California police or sheriff's department.
Hahaha. I can't stop laughing.
"Sell... to a California police or sheriff's department.
Hahaha. I can't stop laughing.
62coltnavy
New member
A lot of misinformation here. The California roster applies ONLY to guns brought into the state for SALE. Anyone moving here can bring all of their guns EXCEPT 1) they may not possess mags with greater than 10 round capacity, and 2)after 1/1/17, AR-15 and AK style rifles may not be brought in either. If you are traveling through, there is no registration issue, and the only issue is mag capacity. If you move here, you are required to do a "voluntary registration" of the guns you bring with you, and the fact that they are not on the roster is irrelevant. There is a small fee associated with the registration.
The prohibition applies ONLY to sales by a licensed firearms dealer, or a person otherwise "in the business of selling" firearms. Person to person and intrafamilial transfers are exempt. Police officer non-roster trade-ins (which are not uncommon) are perfectly legal, subject to the mad limit, as is a transfer from a family member in a vertical relationship (parent to child, child to parent, grandparent to child). So if you have a parent or child living in a free state, they can gift you a gun that you could not otherwise buy for yourself here because it is not on the Roster.
The microstamping requirement is applicable only to semiautomatic pistols.
The law started out as a safety statute, specifically to assure reliability and drop safety, but it has transmogrified into a "safe from idiots" roster. First it was loaded chamber indicators for people who did not know how to safety check their guns. Then it was an external manual safety for people who couldn't keep their fingers off the trigger. Then it was magazine disconnects, for those idiots who thought that by taking out the magazine they'd successfully unloaded it. And then, with microstamping, it became a tool for law enforcement statute--despite the absolute absence of any evidence that any crime has been solved by tracing shell casings left at a scene, and denial of the fact that the technology is easily defeated. The last point int his area is that the increased regs have been incrementally applied, and old., formerly compliant models, can be grandfathered in. Which is why we have Springfield XDs with no manual safety and none of the newer models. Same for Glocks. HOWEVER, if a model has a "material" change in its manufacture, and what is material has been tightened up significantly, then the model must be resubmitted for testing, and must comply with all existing regs. Which is why there is one Colt Commander on the roster, Colt having moved to CNC machining which constitutes a material change in the manner of production. Since no one has a microstamp model, there are no new Colts sold here except for the Commander which is still being produced on the old machinery.
Next, the law is not SUPPOSED to distinguish between models which are cosmetically different. If one model is allow2ed, the same model with a SS finish instead of melonite or parkerization should be good to go as well. But some models have different triggers or safety systems for the same basic pistol , a nd this leads to some models being here and other not.
The P238 was one of the last pistols to make it on the rioster before microstamping. There is a particular model that may differ from those sold elsewhere because of an LCI or mag disconnect that qualified it here but is not on others. The P938 came too late. But as I said, if you are moving here, the Roster is irrelevant.
Finally, handguns have to go through testing only once, and the testing costs thousands of dollars. it is extensive--something like 2000 rounds per gun are fired. The registration is annual, and that has now been changed so that every gun in California renews on the first of the year. There is no further testing, only the payment of a $200 fee per model to keep it on the roster.
The prohibition applies ONLY to sales by a licensed firearms dealer, or a person otherwise "in the business of selling" firearms. Person to person and intrafamilial transfers are exempt. Police officer non-roster trade-ins (which are not uncommon) are perfectly legal, subject to the mad limit, as is a transfer from a family member in a vertical relationship (parent to child, child to parent, grandparent to child). So if you have a parent or child living in a free state, they can gift you a gun that you could not otherwise buy for yourself here because it is not on the Roster.
The microstamping requirement is applicable only to semiautomatic pistols.
The law started out as a safety statute, specifically to assure reliability and drop safety, but it has transmogrified into a "safe from idiots" roster. First it was loaded chamber indicators for people who did not know how to safety check their guns. Then it was an external manual safety for people who couldn't keep their fingers off the trigger. Then it was magazine disconnects, for those idiots who thought that by taking out the magazine they'd successfully unloaded it. And then, with microstamping, it became a tool for law enforcement statute--despite the absolute absence of any evidence that any crime has been solved by tracing shell casings left at a scene, and denial of the fact that the technology is easily defeated. The last point int his area is that the increased regs have been incrementally applied, and old., formerly compliant models, can be grandfathered in. Which is why we have Springfield XDs with no manual safety and none of the newer models. Same for Glocks. HOWEVER, if a model has a "material" change in its manufacture, and what is material has been tightened up significantly, then the model must be resubmitted for testing, and must comply with all existing regs. Which is why there is one Colt Commander on the roster, Colt having moved to CNC machining which constitutes a material change in the manner of production. Since no one has a microstamp model, there are no new Colts sold here except for the Commander which is still being produced on the old machinery.
Next, the law is not SUPPOSED to distinguish between models which are cosmetically different. If one model is allow2ed, the same model with a SS finish instead of melonite or parkerization should be good to go as well. But some models have different triggers or safety systems for the same basic pistol , a nd this leads to some models being here and other not.
The P238 was one of the last pistols to make it on the rioster before microstamping. There is a particular model that may differ from those sold elsewhere because of an LCI or mag disconnect that qualified it here but is not on others. The P938 came too late. But as I said, if you are moving here, the Roster is irrelevant.
Finally, handguns have to go through testing only once, and the testing costs thousands of dollars. it is extensive--something like 2000 rounds per gun are fired. The registration is annual, and that has now been changed so that every gun in California renews on the first of the year. There is no further testing, only the payment of a $200 fee per model to keep it on the roster.
2ndsojourn
New member
"If you move here, you are required to do a "voluntary registration" of the guns you bring with you, and the fact that they are not on the roster is irrelevant. There is a small fee associated with the registration."
How is registration voluntary if it's required? (I guess that's why you put it in quotes.
) And what's the penalty for not registering? A felony for having an illegal gun?
All cloaked in the guise of safety.
How is registration voluntary if it's required? (I guess that's why you put it in quotes.
) And what's the penalty for not registering? A felony for having an illegal gun?All cloaked in the guise of safety.
That is not entirely true. Your generalization has failed to take into account the ASSAULT WEAPONS ban and the handguns that are defined in it. Second and to my point about the bureaucrats: I personally know two people who had to fight that one because they (DOJ minions) misinterpreted the statute. Some people won't go through the hassle of finding and paying a lawyer to fight them.
62coltnavy
New member
We were talking about pistols, not ARs.
The so-called AR "pistol" is treated the same as any other AR except OAL, and must be converted to comply with California law by adding a "Bullet Button." At least that used to be the case. Since California has banned bullet buttons effective the first of this year, it is questionable whether someone moving here can bring their ARs unless they come here with a bullet button installed, per the regs, prior to 1/1/17. They certainly cannot bring them in if purchased on or after 1/1/17 unless it is a "featureless" rifle with no pistol grip below the trigger, no adjustable stock, and no "flame suppressor" (e.g. A2 birdcage). I am confused as to whether muzzle brakes are allowed, but I understand them to be. A Monsterman grip or a "grip wrap" that prevent wrapping the thumb around the grip are legal as long as combined with a fixed stock (pinned or A2 style), as apparently is the Thordsen stock. Curiously, featureless builds do not have to have mag locks or Bullet Buttons.
I should add that the DOJ just released its regulations 12/31/16, and people are still "digesting" (i.e. arguing about) them. The DOJ has in certain instances appeared to exceed its delegated authority. For example, although acknowledging that an upper is not an "assault weapon," they want persons registering to supply multiple photos of the rifle, apparently with the intent of freezing the rifle in that particular configuration unless it is converted to featureless and deregistered. We cannot register complete lowers, only complete rifles, and each upper must be accompanied by a its own complete lower. Which seems awfully pointless and beyond the scope of the legislative change outlawing bullet buttons and requiring registration, especially since the upper is not serialized. The DOJ should have been perfectly satisfied with registering lowers, as this is the only "firearm" under federal and state law.Fights loom on the horizon. The regulations also explicitly preclude removing of bullet buttons after registration, leading to a new class of "assault weapons," i.e. pree-200 rifles (which can be fully automatic or are one of listed models banned), and "Bullet Button" rifles which despite being "assault weapons" are still required to be neutered. Though this is consistent with the Legislative intent to ban evil black rifles, there is no specific statutory authorization for this regulation.
The so-called AR "pistol" is treated the same as any other AR except OAL, and must be converted to comply with California law by adding a "Bullet Button." At least that used to be the case. Since California has banned bullet buttons effective the first of this year, it is questionable whether someone moving here can bring their ARs unless they come here with a bullet button installed, per the regs, prior to 1/1/17. They certainly cannot bring them in if purchased on or after 1/1/17 unless it is a "featureless" rifle with no pistol grip below the trigger, no adjustable stock, and no "flame suppressor" (e.g. A2 birdcage). I am confused as to whether muzzle brakes are allowed, but I understand them to be. A Monsterman grip or a "grip wrap" that prevent wrapping the thumb around the grip are legal as long as combined with a fixed stock (pinned or A2 style), as apparently is the Thordsen stock. Curiously, featureless builds do not have to have mag locks or Bullet Buttons.
I should add that the DOJ just released its regulations 12/31/16, and people are still "digesting" (i.e. arguing about) them. The DOJ has in certain instances appeared to exceed its delegated authority. For example, although acknowledging that an upper is not an "assault weapon," they want persons registering to supply multiple photos of the rifle, apparently with the intent of freezing the rifle in that particular configuration unless it is converted to featureless and deregistered. We cannot register complete lowers, only complete rifles, and each upper must be accompanied by a its own complete lower. Which seems awfully pointless and beyond the scope of the legislative change outlawing bullet buttons and requiring registration, especially since the upper is not serialized. The DOJ should have been perfectly satisfied with registering lowers, as this is the only "firearm" under federal and state law.Fights loom on the horizon. The regulations also explicitly preclude removing of bullet buttons after registration, leading to a new class of "assault weapons," i.e. pree-200 rifles (which can be fully automatic or are one of listed models banned), and "Bullet Button" rifles which despite being "assault weapons" are still required to be neutered. Though this is consistent with the Legislative intent to ban evil black rifles, there is no specific statutory authorization for this regulation.
Satchmoeddie
New member
California's gun laws = if you are not wealthy, your rights are gone.
California has a list of approved firearms. California, Massachusetts, New York, and probably New Jersey want all handguns tested by the DOJ for this, that and the other, driving up the cost of not just compliant guns, but all guns. California guns must have an external blocking safety, an item, I generally hate, on anything that is not a single action semi-auto. Then we have the 10 and 12 pound trigger. I can't think of very many modern firearms, that are not drop safe, but these states want an expensive round of inconclusive testing by the DOJ anyway. I can bend and file on a Glock's trigger mechanism and make it defeat all three safeties. Then we come to the magazines. I can stick a marble in my Glock 17 round mags, and they are okay in Colorado, but in California, I must block them, then epoxy or rivet the block inside the magazine. So much for ever cleaning those magazines. Obviously the people who came up with these laws have zero understanding of reality or how the world works, and less understanding of how guns work. The way things are going, in a few years, no guns will be California complaint, yet Arizona, with their notoriously loose gun laws enjoy both their guns, and a slightly lower crime rate than California. Most counties in California will not even allow a person to carry a loaded weapon, period. You can jump through all the hoops, fill out all the forms, grease the palms, with cash money, and all you get a CCW card that allows you to possess and carry an empty gun. Under Prop 65, I can't even use spray paint in California either, and 1000s of items we regularly use in the other 49 states start to cause cancer west of the Colorado River. Clearly all the nuts were not baked into the fruit cake, and now they are in charge. If California did not have such a large, wealthy population, I assume most gun makers would just forsake California, and let them do without. I would even go so far as to jack up the prices on California's police department guns by 10,000% to help pay for all their idiotic testing, and extra nonsense features. Yep, those Glocks would cost their cops $35,000 each. Hey, they want gun their crazy control regulations, so give it to them, but make "them" pay for it. Same with NY, NJ, MD, CT, DC, MA, RI, IL, MN, WA, OR, etc. The goofier they are, the more it will cost. If that gun control really worked, their police should not even need those guns. There are still cities in "gun free" England that are famous for violent crime involving guns. I doubt they jokingly call Manchester, Gunchester, for any other reasons. You generally won't see anyone from Manchester or Croydon posting any rhetorical comments about America being backwards when it comes to gun control, unless they are discussing California.
California has a list of approved firearms. California, Massachusetts, New York, and probably New Jersey want all handguns tested by the DOJ for this, that and the other, driving up the cost of not just compliant guns, but all guns. California guns must have an external blocking safety, an item, I generally hate, on anything that is not a single action semi-auto. Then we have the 10 and 12 pound trigger. I can't think of very many modern firearms, that are not drop safe, but these states want an expensive round of inconclusive testing by the DOJ anyway. I can bend and file on a Glock's trigger mechanism and make it defeat all three safeties. Then we come to the magazines. I can stick a marble in my Glock 17 round mags, and they are okay in Colorado, but in California, I must block them, then epoxy or rivet the block inside the magazine. So much for ever cleaning those magazines. Obviously the people who came up with these laws have zero understanding of reality or how the world works, and less understanding of how guns work. The way things are going, in a few years, no guns will be California complaint, yet Arizona, with their notoriously loose gun laws enjoy both their guns, and a slightly lower crime rate than California. Most counties in California will not even allow a person to carry a loaded weapon, period. You can jump through all the hoops, fill out all the forms, grease the palms, with cash money, and all you get a CCW card that allows you to possess and carry an empty gun. Under Prop 65, I can't even use spray paint in California either, and 1000s of items we regularly use in the other 49 states start to cause cancer west of the Colorado River. Clearly all the nuts were not baked into the fruit cake, and now they are in charge. If California did not have such a large, wealthy population, I assume most gun makers would just forsake California, and let them do without. I would even go so far as to jack up the prices on California's police department guns by 10,000% to help pay for all their idiotic testing, and extra nonsense features. Yep, those Glocks would cost their cops $35,000 each. Hey, they want gun their crazy control regulations, so give it to them, but make "them" pay for it. Same with NY, NJ, MD, CT, DC, MA, RI, IL, MN, WA, OR, etc. The goofier they are, the more it will cost. If that gun control really worked, their police should not even need those guns. There are still cities in "gun free" England that are famous for violent crime involving guns. I doubt they jokingly call Manchester, Gunchester, for any other reasons. You generally won't see anyone from Manchester or Croydon posting any rhetorical comments about America being backwards when it comes to gun control, unless they are discussing California.
Satchmoeddie
New member
Idiot proofing the world creates a world full of idiots.
By making guns with extra added safeties, cars that automatically brake when they get close to other cars, we are attempting to make products that are suitable for complete idiots to operate. In making a world full of completely idiot proof products we have made a world full of complete idiots, and now we are wondering how the idiots took charge of things. California leads the world in idiot proofing, so it stands to reason they should also lead the world in idiocy too. Let's all strap on our helmets, shin guards, elbow pads, and training wheels and go for a walk, down the rubber brick road. I am sure it leads right to garden gate.
By making guns with extra added safeties, cars that automatically brake when they get close to other cars, we are attempting to make products that are suitable for complete idiots to operate. In making a world full of completely idiot proof products we have made a world full of complete idiots, and now we are wondering how the idiots took charge of things. California leads the world in idiot proofing, so it stands to reason they should also lead the world in idiocy too. Let's all strap on our helmets, shin guards, elbow pads, and training wheels and go for a walk, down the rubber brick road. I am sure it leads right to garden gate.