Which handguns to be banned in California?

D

DougB

New member
I understand that California's SB15 will kick in at the end of this year. I believe it is supposed to ban handguns with no manual safety, barrels shorter than 3", or that can't pass some safety tests performed by and independent lab. I haven't seen any list of specific guns that will be banned, or reports of any being tested. I have some questions:

1) Will Glocks, for example, be banned because they don't have a safety, or is there some "exemption" for specific guns.

2) As I read the law, it sounds like I could still purchase banned guns in other states, and bring them back to California, as long as I don't do so with the intent of selling them here. Is this correct?

3) Are private party sales within California (which must still go through a dealer) exempted from this law?

4) If guns have not passed the test, will dealers really be unable to sell them after January 1, 2001? It seems like there must be a lot of handguns that will never be submitted for testing (old, imported, etc.).

Other thoughts on what the impact of this law will be? I'm posting this here rather than in the gun rights section, because it specifically concerns handguns, and (mostly) because I think a lot more people read this forum. Thanks.

Doug
 
I don't know the specifics, but I do know that any handgun with a mag not in the grip is an assault weapon. That includes the Hammerli 280 and Walther GSP and OSP.

Regarding #2: No you can't. As a resident of the state of Ca. you may not purchase a handgun in any other state. That is a federal law. If you want to buy a handgun in another state, MOVE!!!
 
Glocks will not be banned because the law reads safety feature as defined by the BATF. If you bring weapons into the state of CA, you have 60 days to register them. Private party sales of legal guns are still ok, if it's a banned gun, the FFL must not resell it. If new guns have not passed the drop test, they will not be sold. You can get the whole 9 yards at http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/
 
I would like to know how many people in this state have been killed by someone dropping a handgun. More BS laws to harass the lawabiding citizen!
 
Bullseye. This probably stems from firearms from an earlier day. Probably the biggest offender would be the Colt Single Action Army, which if the chamber under the hammer was loaded, would fire if dropped. Seems like the balance of the pistol would almost alway make it land on the hammer. Old model Rugers have the same problem and should always have the hammer resting on an empty chamber. A lot of the early double action revolvers suffered the same problem, but I don't know which ones. If you are using one of the suspect revolvers, just remember "Five beans in the wheel".
Paul B.

[This message has been edited by Paul B. (edited July 05, 2000).]
 
I don't live in california but something like this may catch on elsewhere. I went to the website reference & didn't see anything about no guns with barrels less than 3". Did I miss something?
I have read postings from other people who think guns like the NAA Guardian and Kel-tec P-32 will be banned. Is this correct?
I saw the drop test requirement and reliability / shooting test. If these guns can pass those, would they still be banned?
 
This is absolutely freaking ridiculous. What is even crazier is people like Charles Schumer want to emulate California Gun laws at a federal level.

What Crap. How do you citizens in Kalifornia let your legislature blow this Jive past the rest of the Sheeple out there?

I wanna just scream. WAKE UP AMERICA! The other 49 states are next. This is just more crap to take guns out of law abiding citizens. And bit by bit they are banning all kinds of firearms. So when your m1a doesnt meet the "drop it of the Golden Gate Bridge test" they'll take that and when your m700 doesn't meet the "no bolt action sniper rifle test" the'll ban that.

Screw them.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>What Crap. How do you citizens in Kalifornia let your legislature blow this Jive past the rest of the Sheeple out there?[/quote]

I am offended by this. Some of us in California work incredibly hard to prevent these aggregious acts by the California legislator, as well as other equally assinine acts at the federal level. Stop generalizing that all Californians are sheeple. Rhetorically seaking, what have you done lately?


------------------
It is far better to dare mighty things, though riddled with failure, than to live in the dull grey of mediocrity.
 
Thanks for the info. I went to the website and searched the law to check on the 3" barrel issue. I had picked this up from a summary I read somewhere. I must have misread it, because it sounds like the 3" barrel is only an issue with single-action revolvers - some of which are exempt from this law if they meet certain criteria, including having at least a 3" barrel. It doesn't sound like barrel length is an issue with pistols like the P32, etc.

But I still don't see a clear way around the lack of a "positive manually operated safety device" on Glocks, Kel-tecs, the Walther P99, etc. I'm not talking about being able to bring one in from another state and register it. I'm talking about being able to legally buy one in California.

Here's what the law says (in part):

As used in this chapter, "unsafe handgun" means any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 12001, for which any of the following is true:

(a) For a revolver:
(1) It does not have a safety device that, either automatically in the case of a double-action firing mechanism, or by manual operation in the case of a single-action firing mechanism, causes the hammer to retract to a point where the firing pin does not rest upon the primer of the cartridge.
(2) It does not meet the firing requirement for handguns pursuant to Section 12127.
(3) It does not meet the drop safety requirement for handguns pursuant to Section 12128.

(b) For a pistol:
(1) It does not have a positive manually operated safety device, as determined by standards relating to imported guns promulgated by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms.
(2) It does not meet the firing requirement for handguns pursuant to Section 12127.
(3) It does not meet the drop safety requirement for handguns pursuant to Section 12128.

Any further explanation or official interpretation would be appreciated. Thanks.

Doug
 
From the way I am reading this, you need to include on your list all Sigs, any Beretta or Ruger that is decock only ( I don't think these have an external manually operated safety), SW99, and Kimbers or any other 1911 without the firing pin block. Junk guns all.
Again from reading this bill, I think the Glocks are banned. I don't the 'Safe Action' trigger is considered a safety, but I am uncertain.
 
I went to the address that 9x45 posted, and I couldnt find anything on this law. Does anyone have an exact list of the guns they are going to ban so far? I assume these are on going tests.
 
None of this really matters in the long run. It's all just a preview of coming attractions. The communistnazis have slowly but surely taken over virtually all of politics in Kalifornia, from the State governor and legislature down to the county and city councils and commisions.

They own and control virtually all the media and entertainment business. They control all of academia from the docterate level down to pre-kindergarten. They control all mainstream religions, whether Protestant, Catholic or Jewish.

The communistnazis who control Kalifornia will ban ALL HANDGUNS, and then ALL LONG GUNS.

There's no doubt about it. Incrementalism is their SOP, and it's working perfectly.

FWIW. J.B.
 
Not to stir the pot in the least ;) but they will attempt to ban all of them.

This latest is only (again) another "first step" for "common sense gun safety laws" which are, of course, "for your own good."

... oh yeah, and "for the children."
 
Straying from my own subject a little, but I must politely disagree with one of Jay Baker's comments regarding "communistnazis":

"They control all mainstream religions, whether Protestant, Catholic or Jewish."

I'm a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (nicknamed the Mormon church). While I realize that some wouldn't consider us "mainstream", there are certainly a lot of us in California. And he mentioned the Catholic church, which has got to be "mainstream" on anybody's list.

A few months ago, we (the LDS, Catholic, and many other churches and like-minded organizations) campaigned to pass the "Defense of Marriage Act" here, which says that the state will only recognize marriage between a man and a woman (i.e. - not between two men or two women).

Here in liberal California, which all the "gay rights" and media opposition, and to the surprise of many, it passed by a good margin.

While I agree with most of what Jay said, I don't think we should give the liberals too much credit, or count all major religions as the enemy. Also, if gun owners could marshall the effort that church members put into campaigning for this initiative (putting out signs, going door-to-door, etc.), we could turn the tide on the gun issue as well.

Doug
 
It's not the people who want this. California has turned into a political experiment of the Democratic party, and the results are obvious to see.

Many of us don't live in San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Marin, Contra Costa, etc., but we find our lives controlled by their elected legislators, all of whom are up for sale to the highest bidder.

Ledbetter
Born here,
Raised here,
Hope to die a free man in another state.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ledbetter:

Many of us don't live in San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Marin, Contra Costa, etc., but we find our lives controlled by their elected legislators, all of whom are up for sale to the highest bidder.

[/i][/quote]

I live in Calif and the politics of this state do amaze. Only place I know of where the politicians say, "We're going to screw you over but vote for us anyway." And we do.
But I frankly resent Ledbetter's remark. I truely believe our politicians, legislators, Congressmen and Senators are the best people money can buy.
 
AFFIRM! Jay Baker.

ROGER! DougB.

The "majority" of the human population in Kali OR their parents were not used to 1st, 2nd, or any other rights including voting because the countries they came from didn't have them.

The "other" sheeple in Kali are so ignorant of the "blood" investment Patriots made for them, their puny minds go "fetal" at the mention of any matters of "Principle".

And then there is "us", the remnant of a fading system that worked.
 
Well, I stopped by my favorite gun store here in SoCal yesterday and the owner told me that he was going to close shop and retire. This surprised me, so I asked him when and he said two years max. This guy is about 40yo and rather young to retire so I asked him if the reason for the early retirement was because of the new gun laws here in Kalifornia and he said yes and within two years there would not be any gun stores in Kalifornia. A sad day indeed. :(

------------------
"Lead, follow or get the HELL out of the way."
 
DougB, the 'positive manually operated safety device' is the Glock safe action trigger. This has allready been determined by the BATF, and will not change for California. The intent of that language was to kill off the Lorcin, Bryco, Raven, Hipoint, Jennings and all the other crap. The drop test is the same as Massachusets has had for years.
 
9x45,

Thanks for the info. I hope you are correct. I think speculating about the "intent" of the legislation depends on who's intent you mean. I think this legislation was sold to gun owners as having the intent you indicate (ban what most of us would consider junky guns anyway). But we all know that many would like to ban ALL guns, so I'm suspicious about explanations that aren't spelled out clearly in the law. I know that Glocks have a little button on the trigger, but I would have a tough time making a case that it is a "positive manually operated safety device," unless you also consider the trigger on ALL guns to be a safety device ("It won't go off unless you pull it"). And what about guns like Kel-tecs, P99s, Kahrs, etc. that don't have anything but a relatively heavy trigger pull? If you (or anyone) has any official link that indicates which guns will be affected, I would appreciate seeing it.

Finally, I think all guns need to be tested by an approved lab, but the last I saw, the DOJ hadn't approved any labs yet. So what happens on January 1 to all the clearly safe handguns that haven't been tested yet? I hate to be paranoid, and I hope this won't affect a lot of quality handguns, but I'm worried.

Doug
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top