What specifically makes the new Springfield XDm illegal in California? If it cannot be sold in CA can it be purchased in another state and then brought legally to California? I'm aware of the ten round magazine limitation, but are there other laws barring ownership in CA?
Well it appears the XDm does not have a magazine disconnect.
To many people such a feature is a liability. It means you have more moving parts that intentionaly cause the firearm not to fire if they are not aligned properly. Parts to wear down which are unnecessary but the firearm depends on to allow firing. Even a faulty magazine or poorly seated magazine could cause some mag disconnects to think a magazine is not in the firearm, preventing them from firing.
Additionaly even if they work flawlessly as intended all the time, many people would rather thier firearm still be capable of firing when they remove a magazine or are in the middle of a reload. nto seat or falls out? You are defenseless.
Your firearm while in the holster has the magazine release lightly pressed. It causes the magazine to be less seated or even disconnect, you are totaly disarmed and you do not even know it.
Mag release gets bumped or pressed while unholstering and in the struggle of your life with a bad guy rolling around as he tries to harm you? You are totaly defenseless because it is working as designed.
Bad guy trying to get ahold of your firearm and bumps the mag release? You are totaly disarmed.
Imagine yourself in the firefight of your life, not sure how many rounds you just fired and want to be topped off with the threat still around the corner. Drop a magazine to throw another you have in and just then the goblin steps around the corner. You are totaly defenseless even with one in the pipe.
So bottom line is a magazine release is not for everyone, even considered a liability by some, much like the S&W trigger locks that can lock the action unexpectedly on occasion if they get loose.
Yet CA law requires the magazine disconnect.
CA also requires a 10 round or less magazine and the XDm uses standard capacity magazines
Even in spite of all that, it would appear the XDm went too far to appease just such people with "safety" features.
Check out this picture shamelessly copied from the first website that popped up with the image to show you:
That is the loaded chamber indicator stuck up. A tab sticking straight out at almost a right angle. A hard metal tab on a surface that is otherwise smooth.
The type of thing that will destroy a holster, get caught on things, and otherwise remind you of the unnecessary "safety" feature.
So they really hurt a good design already with a stupid LCI to appease those places requiring such a feature.
Yet on top of all that it appears the LCI is also not good enough for CA. You see CA has a very strict definition in statute on what a LCI must do and say. This definition was "updated" to be more restrictive.
This does not make the gun "illegal" in CA. It means FFLs cannot sell them in the state. Since all transfers from out of state go through an FFL it means they cannot be shipped from out of state to be sold to someone in CA.
They can however be brought into CA legaly by someone moving in from another state.
There is other legal tricks as well, but bottom line is the gun is unlikely to be rostered as a CA approved "safe gun".
You may wonder how some similar guns even by the same manufacturer got onto the roster in light of these requirements.
Until a couple years ago a magazine disconnect requirement or the updated definition of a LCI did not exist.
Most of the firearms on the CA roster would not actualy pass the requirements to be added to the roster today. However if the manufacturer continues to pay the yearly extortion fee CA will not drop them from the list. They cannot however add new firearms unless they have the requirements of the legislation in place.
