Still around

Not a lawyer, but the bill was SB-880.

Before under California Penal Code 30515 a centrefire rifle was an "assault weapon" if it accepted a detachable magazine and had an "evil feature" like a folding stock.

After SB-880 it changed the language from "accept a detachable magazine" to "does not have a fixed magazine". It also redefined "fixed magazine" to mean a magazine that could not be detached without disassembling the action of the firearm.

The main point was to target "bullet buttons", which a lot of AR-15 style firearms used because they had pistol grips. Now semi-automatic, centrefire rifles with a "bullet button" and an "evil feature" would be assault weapons, effective January 2017. To keep such a firearm in that configuration, the firearm would need to be registered by January 2018.

The SU-16A, B, and CA are not affected by the SB-880 changes. They do not have pistol grips, and they do not have folding stocks (as they cannot be fired when folded). These SU-16s were fine before SB-880 and they continue to be legal after SB-880.

For how long... who knows?

Windswept said:

Glad to have confirmation from someone who knows so many of the twists and turns of the California gun law labyrinth.

Click to expand...

I was at a SoCal range and I saw a young man who had a SUB-2000. To comply with California laws, he had attached one of those Kydex "fins" to the pistol grip so that he could use a detachable magazine with it. Ugly as heck, but since he couldn't wrap his thumb around it wasn't a pistol grip.

I mean he was a perfect, law-abiding citizen trying to get by under highly restrictive and illogical laws.

Except... he then attached a vertical foregrip, which turned his firearm back into an "assault weapon". Because all you need(ed) was a detachable magazine plus one "evil feature", and it didn't matter if it was a rear pistol grip or a forward pistol grip. Just needed one.

He was kinda shocked when I mentioned it to him and quickly took the foregrip off. But that's what we have to deal with over here. People who want to follow the law have a hard time doing so.

Not sure what will happen come January 2018. Don't know how many will register their "assault weapons", especially considering there's no way to do it that I know of at the moment. Hopefully something will go through SCOTUS to lay the entire thing flat.

I want to thank all who responded. I am looking more at the bill that Lt. Gov. Newsom (SB63) put on the ballot and was voter approved, not by me. It includes most everything that Gov. Brown has vetoed in the past. Yes I can understand about the stock, but does the new definition include that "when folded, it becomes in-operable" and the SU16CA also has a detachable magazine and is semi automatic which falls under the definition of AW according to the chart on the CALGuns.net site. I look at this chart and wonder if it, (the chart), is newer than the November elections when the Newsom bill (SB63 I think) or if this definition is before the November elections. When I follow the Chart it tells me that just because it doesn't have an evil feature like a pistol grip it has all the other evil features like a detachable magazine and folding stock. What is everyone's take on the calguns.net chart definition. I am confused for one. I also believe that when the law is printed, it might not state anything about a rifle being semi auto, pump, bolt, or lever action. Maybe I am reaching because I own a home built AR15, I started with a 80% lower, I also have a Troy Pump Action Rifle as well as the SU16CA and the all have that evil DETACHABLE MAGAZINE feature but the only one that required a bullet button is the AR15. I have some time for the courts to figure that out, but would like to know other ideas that maybe have more insite. Thank you all. Bob

74man said:

I am looking more at the bill that Lt. Gov. Newsom (SB63) put on the ballot and was voter approved, not by me. It includes most everything that Gov. Brown has vetoed in the past.

Click to expand...

I think you're talking about Proposition 63. Prop 63 did a few things, but for most of us in California there were two main effects:

1) Background checks for ammunition required as of January 2018
2) Standard capacity magazines (over 10 rounds) can no longer be possessed regardless of whether they were pre-ban or not

I mean that stuff is pretty bad, but it didn't do anything directly to semi-automatic rifles. SB-880 was the big one for semi-automatic rifles.

74man said:

Yes I can understand about the stock, but does the new definition include that "when folded, it becomes in-operable" and the SU16CA also has a detachable magazine and is semi automatic which falls under the definition of AW according to the chart on the CALGuns.net site.

Click to expand...

You probably aren't going to find the definition of "folding stock" in the Penal Code. The CA DoJ published a guide back in 2001 that gives a definition of a "folding stock":

"A stock which is hinged to the receiver to allow the stock to be folded next to the receiver to reduce the overall length of the firearm."

It's a pretty vague definition... and on top of that it's an agency definition, not a legislature definition.

(Although I am not a lawyer and I can't speak for the DoJ) I don't think the definition applies to an SU-16A, B, or CA because the firearm is inoperable when folded. If disassembled firearms still counted, then we'd already be in trouble with the 30" OAL laws.

74man said:

I look at this chart and wonder if it, (the chart), is newer than the November elections when the Newsom bill (SB63 I think) or if this definition is before the November elections.

Click to expand...

If you're talking about this flowchart, then no it is not current. SB-880 changed the part about "detachable magazines" to "fixed magazines", which has its own special definition. So I would be careful of the parts of the flowchart that involve magazines.

74man said:

When I follow the Chart it tells me that just because it doesn't have an evil feature like a pistol grip it has all the other evil features like a detachable magazine and folding stock.

Click to expand...

As far as off-list centrefire semi-automatic rifles are concerned, there are only three ways in which it can be an "assault weapon":
1) Does not have a fixed magazine and has at least one "evil feature".
2) Has a fixed magazine and that fixed magazine takes more than 10 rounds.
3) Is less than 30" long.

So detachable magazine + folding stock = "assault weapon". That being said, I will repeat that the SU-16A, B, and CA series are probably not "assault weapons" because they are inoperable when folded.

74man said:

I also believe that when the law is printed, it might not state anything about a rifle being semi auto, pump, bolt, or lever action.

Click to expand...

The law is already published here. The rifle needs to be semi-automatic and centrefire (so feel free to mod out your 10/22 to your heart's content... within limit of other laws of course).

74man said:

Maybe I am reaching because I own a home built AR15, I started with a 80% lower, I also have a Troy Pump Action Rifle as well as the SU16CA and the all have that evil DETACHABLE MAGAZINE feature but the only one that required a bullet button is the AR15.

Click to expand...

BEEP BEEP NOT A LAWYER BEEP BEEP

Your pump-action rifle is fine. It is not semi-automatic, so it is not included within the bounds of CA PC 30515 (same reason I was considering getting a Remington 7615).

Your SU-16CA is fine. Although it does not have a fixed magazine, it also does not have any "evil feature":
It has no pistol grip
It has no thumbhole stock
It has no folding or telescoping stock
It has no grenade launcher
It has no flash suppressor
It has no forward pistol grip
This means it is not covered by CA PC 30515.

Your AR-15 may require some work, which includes (but is not limited to):
1) Needing a serial number stamped on it. Not 100% sure on this one, but AB-857 may require that your manufactured firearm have a serial number.
2) The "bullet button" definitely won't work anymore. You have a few choices:
A- Register it as an "assault weapon"
B- Make the rifle use a "fixed magazine", or a magazine that requires the action of the weapon to be disassembled to reload
C- Remove all your "evil features" from the rifle (like a fin over the pistol grip)

If you are worried, seek the advice of a lawyer.

Thanks Grotz you are a wealth of information but as soon as the printed version of the new laws come out we will know for sure if it matters if the firearm can fire or not when folded, and detachable magazines. I have to apoligize about the gun restrictions being a bill, you are right about it being a prop. 63, Sorry!!
Seems to me I remember that when they tried to pass a bill about online ammunition orders it was refused because it violated the 14th amendment. Don't know for sure but I remember something about it, and a Federal Judge struck it down, I think. We will see.

WINDSWEPT: That link you gave me was dated 2000 but it does have the new Attorney General on the header. Can't find anything bout folding stocks being able to fire when folded or not so with that in mind we just have to have a stronger meaning of "folded stock". I read it to mean just what it says,"Folding Stock". I you have a bullet button does it mean permanent magazine or detachable magazine? Using a bullet as a tool makes it permanent but it is still easy to remove, how lame these laws are!!