I have an Arsenal SA-M7 for sale. It is a post-ban gun. (no flash suppressor or grenade launcher). Someone in California wants to buy it. He says it is legal, if I take off the pistol grip stock and just include it in the package with the gun. Is he correct or not? Thank you.
Can I ship this AK-47 to California?
- Thread starter RM
- Start date
- Status
ECVMatt
Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2004
- Messages
- 2,870
Yes he is correct. The only two Arsenal that are banned are the SLG and SLR series of rifles.
Here is some more info:
http://blog.riflegear.com/archive/2...lt-weapon-identification-flowchart-again.aspx
If you remove the pistol grip and the rifle is not specifically listed then it is OK for CA.
Here is some more info:
http://blog.riflegear.com/archive/2...lt-weapon-identification-flowchart-again.aspx
If you remove the pistol grip and the rifle is not specifically listed then it is OK for CA.
ECVMatt
Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2004
- Messages
- 2,870
It is very complicated here in CA, but yes it did. Then it was decided that the law was too complicated for the average person to figure out so only specifically named guns could be banned. This lead to what we call off-list rifles. They are the same pattern guns, i.e. AR,AK, FN FAL, etc but they are not on the list and thus legal to own. We are working very hard to over turn the ban altogether. We have three big cases in court right now that are stepping stones to challenging the ban. The first one was heard yesterday and seemed to go well.
I'd consult an FFL in CA before you say yes.
You-Two
Member
Wouldn't the FFL the seller has to ship it to for the transfer be sufficient?
Not much risk to the seller since the FFL is doing all the legally required state paperwork on the transfer. As long as the rifle is off-list, doesn't have any "evil" features, and no >10 round magazines it is good. The lack of pistol grip and flash-hider takes care of the features. The buyer probably wants the pistol grip so he can use it once a proper CA legal magazine lock is installed. Just the silly stuff you have to do to get around stupid laws.
Sell away...
nwilliams
Member
Just out of curiosity....
If someone unfamiliar with CA gun laws were to ship a non-CA legal assault rifle to CA what would happen?
It seems to me that if someone were to transfer a firearm to someone in CA the FFL doing the transfer would be the deciding factor as to whether or not the transfer is legal or not. If the transfer is denied wouldn't the gun simply be returned to the person who shipped it or would the authorities actually get involved?
If the person having the gun transferred to them is denied the transfer by the FFL dealer involved then technically the gun wouldn't be owned in CA it would still be owned by the person who shipped it. If that is the case could that person be charged with having a illegal gun in CA even if that person lives out of State and simply shipped their gun to CA?
Anyone have any idea or even guesses as to how this kind of scenario would play out?
If someone unfamiliar with CA gun laws were to ship a non-CA legal assault rifle to CA what would happen?
It seems to me that if someone were to transfer a firearm to someone in CA the FFL doing the transfer would be the deciding factor as to whether or not the transfer is legal or not. If the transfer is denied wouldn't the gun simply be returned to the person who shipped it or would the authorities actually get involved?
If the person having the gun transferred to them is denied the transfer by the FFL dealer involved then technically the gun wouldn't be owned in CA it would still be owned by the person who shipped it. If that is the case could that person be charged with having a illegal gun in CA even if that person lives out of State and simply shipped their gun to CA?
Anyone have any idea or even guesses as to how this kind of scenario would play out?
evan price
Member
nwilliams: The FFL would send it back, in most cases. I know of pistols sent to CA with highcap mags, they were then sent back to the sender or sold on Gunbroker out of state. Got a great deal on new full-cap Springfield XD9 mags that way, from a CA FFL who had to swap them out for ten-round mags.
Quiet
Member
He is correct.RM said:
The Arsenal SA-M7 is not make/model listed as an "assault weapon" under CA laws and if you remove the pistol grip it is no longer considered an "assault weapon" under CA laws.
No.SaxonPig said:
The original 1989 Roberti-Roos assault weapon laws did mentioned the term "series" in order to try and cover look alikes. But a CA Judge threw it out as being too ambiguous and the CA legislature followed up by removing the CA DOJ's ability to list more make/model firearms as "assault weapons".
The calguns Off-List Lower (OLL) movement was an effect from those actions.
What the braintrust at calguns figured out was that if a firearm is not make/model listed as an "assault weapon" and it also did not have any features that would define it as an "assault weapon", then it would be CA legal. There have been several CA legal cases (charges dropped, firearms returned) that support this position.
The CA FFL dealer would ship it back to the sender.nwilliams said:
However, if the CA FFL dealer also has an assault weapons permit, they can legally accept it and modify it to be CA legal before transfering it to the buyer. A CA FFL dealer without an assault weapons permit can not legally do this and would have to send the firearm back to the shipper.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
Original question answered...
- Status
