Glock vs CA DOJ


PDA






Teachu2
February 13, 2013, 02:32 PM
Glocks G4 guns are not CA listed, and now the USA-made G3s aren't, either. Causing a bit of panic out here - we have to find Austrian G3s....

From the CA DOJ roster:

Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale

Handgun models will be removed from the roster on the list expiration date unless the manufacturer renews the listing prior to the list expiration date.

Showing all records matching Glock
The matching records list is sorted by Make
This list is valid for Wednesday, February 13, 2013

No Generation 4 Glock handguns have been approved as of: Wednesday, February 13, 2013

No Glock handguns made in the USA have been approved as of: Wednesday, February 13, 2013

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock vs CA DOJ" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
NG VI
February 13, 2013, 06:43 PM
What.

They need to resubmit identical models of the same firearm depending on the specific mailing address where it was built? Even though not one other difference, including make and model numbers, has been put into effect?

I knew they made manufacturers submit identical models for things like different safety configurations, and I had heard that they even made them submit them separately for different color offerings, but this is pretty over the top.

tarosean
February 13, 2013, 06:50 PM
Does the actual generation matter?

Texan Scott
February 13, 2013, 07:00 PM
Sounds like Glock needs to stop selling to government agencies in CA.

JJE
February 13, 2013, 07:06 PM
Yes the Gen absolutely matters since it is a re-design, and Gen4's aren't generally available in CA, although there are legal work-arounds to get Gen 4's if you don't mind spending a bit more money.

Requiring re-testing of US-made guns is pretty stupid, but CA normally requires separate testing for different steels (blued carbon versus stainless) on the same model gun, so this is just SOP - anything to make gun purchases less convenient and more costly.

tomrkba
February 13, 2013, 07:13 PM
I wish Glock would follow the examples of LaRue and Olympic Arms: limit all sales to law enforcement equal to what the average citizen can legally own in that state.

Teachu2
February 13, 2013, 10:29 PM
Glock cannot certify the US products, as CA now requires mag disconnect and loaded chamber indicator - so the "new" US-produced models can't be listed.

Texan Scott
February 13, 2013, 11:06 PM
Glock cannot certify the US products, as CA now requires mag disconnect and loaded chamber indicator - so the "new" US-produced models can't be listed.

So has every police agency in California recently traded in all sidearms for new ones with magazine disconnects and loaded chamber indicators? Surely they aren't running around with guns that are *gasp* UNSAFE? :what:

Jim K
February 13, 2013, 11:25 PM
As I understand it, once a gun model is de-listed, guns of that model can no longer be sold in the state except to police officers. What a great way for all those "honest" cops to buy thousand dollar guns for twenty dollars.

Jim

Teachu2
February 13, 2013, 11:54 PM
No Glocks have been de-listed, we can still buy G3 Austrian-produced ones - if Glock continues to ship them to California.

The G4s were never listed, neither were USA-made G3s. LEOs are, and always have been, exempt.

HorseSoldier
February 14, 2013, 12:15 AM
So has every police agency in California recently traded in all sidearms for new ones with magazine disconnects and loaded chamber indicators? Surely they aren't running around with guns that are *gasp* UNSAFE?

California law should state that any weapons that are not NFA Act weapons that are in use by law enforcement have to be also approved for general civilian sales.

Of course, that would imply politicians divorce themselves from hypocrisy, which is asking more of the world than human beings have managed in our entire history . . .

9mmepiphany
February 14, 2013, 12:44 AM
As I understand it, once a gun model is de-listed, guns of that model can no longer be sold in the state except to police officers. What a great way for all those "honest" cops to buy thousand dollar guns for twenty dollars.

Jim
Slightly misunderstood, gun already in the state may be sold between owners, you just can't buy them from an FFL's inventory

Teachu2
February 14, 2013, 01:15 AM
As I understand it, once a gun model is de-listed, guns of that model can no longer be sold in the state except to police officers. What a great way for all those "honest" cops to buy thousand dollar guns for twenty dollars.

Jim
The cops are exempt, and can buy non-listed handguns - which they can then sell as private-party transfers to non-LEOs......

Quiet
February 14, 2013, 06:51 AM
Any make/model handgun placed on the Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale, is "grandfathered" in (exempt) from requiring any future requirements needed to be placed on the Roster.

Starting on 01-01-2006, all semi-auto centerfire pistols had to have a "chamber load indicator" or a "magazine disconnect mechanism". [PC 31910(b)(4)]

Starting on 01-01-2007, all semi-auto centerfire pistols had to have both a "chamber load indicator" and a "magazine disconnect mechanism". [PC 31910(b)(5)]

Prior to 01-01-2006, Glock had the following models on the Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale:
17, 17L, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38 & 39
Because the above Glock models were placed on the Roster prior to 01-01-2006, they were exempt from needing a "chamber load indicator" and/or a "magazine disconnect mechanism".

After 01-01-2006, Glock then used an exemption [PC 32030] to get the following different variants of Glock pistols on the Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale:
17 OD, 17RTF2, 19 OD, 20 OD, 20SF, 21 OD, 21SF, 22 OD, 22RTF2, 23 OD, 24 OD, 26 OD, 27 OD, 29 OD, 29SF, 30 OD, 30SF, 31 OD, 32 OD, 33 OD, 34 OD, 35 OD, 36 OD, 37 OD, 38 OD & 39 OD.

Glock then tried to use the same exemption [PC 32030] to get the Gen4 Glocks onto the Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale.

CA DOJ BOF rejected that attempt and advised Glock that the Gen4 models were internally different that the Glock models already on the Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale. Therefore, they did not qualify for the exemption and would require a "chamber load indicator" and a "magazine disconnect mechanism". This is the reason why no Gen4 Glocks are on the Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale.

Recently, CA DOJ BOF made the determination that Glock USA is a different manufacturer than Glock (Austria).

Therefore, all pistols made by Glock USA need to be submitted for testing and require a "chamber load indicator" and a "magazine disconnect mechanism". This is the reason why no USA made Glocks are on the Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale.

Quiet
February 14, 2013, 06:53 AM
IMO...
The no USA made Glocks is the petty way that CA DOJ is doing to get back at Glock over Glock threatening to pull CA Gov/LE contracts due to CA's microstamping law.

When Para-Ordnance moved from Canada to the USA and reorganized into ParaUSA, CA DOJ did not require ParaUSA to resubmit pistols or require them to have a "chamber load indicator" or a "magazine disconnect mechanism". This is proof that CA DOJ is being <edited> over the no USA made Glocks issue.

Quiet
February 14, 2013, 07:01 AM
In addition...

The CA DOJ BOF Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale is an example of what can happen when gun owners do no stand together and only look out for their own interests.

When the "unsafe handgun" bill was working it's way through the CA legislature, several CA gun groups opposed it.

A few of those groups represented the cowboy action shooting community and the law enforcement community.

Once those groups were able to sell themselves for an exemption to the proposed "unsafe handgun" laws, they switched from opposing the bill to supporting it.

With their support, the "unsafe handgun" bill became law and created the Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale and all the requirements that go with it.

Those same groups also sold their support for other CA gun control laws (assault weapons ban, large capacity magazine ban).

hAkron
February 16, 2013, 12:27 AM
It would be unsafe for anybody but the police to possess these weapons, since they alone are trained in the safe operation of said weapons
http://rt.com/usa/news/man-duenez-shooting-video-012/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/07/lapd-shooting-at-innocent-people_n_2638701.html

Texshooter
February 16, 2013, 01:32 AM
It is way past time to "unexempt" gov't employees of any stripe from the tyraniccal acts that other gov't employees impose on honest citizens.

We have got to demand of Glock / S&W & all of them to only sell to the gov't what they can sell to civilians.

Soldiernurse
February 17, 2013, 10:13 AM
:rolleyes: Whiskey Tango Bravo! The Blue Label prices are around a $150 savings, i.e. G4G19 $398 & G4G30 $464.

a) Move out of CA.
b) Notify (email or whatever) CA legislators.
c) See a) above.
http://imageshack.us/a/img7/5079/photonov16165719.jpg

Soldiernurse
February 17, 2013, 10:24 AM
The Gen4's have a round in the chamber (peep hole) indicator. A lot of handguns don't have the mag disconnect feature.

God Bless Texas?

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock vs CA DOJ" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!