#1
|
||||
|
||||
Purchasing an AK variant with installed BB
I'm reading the threads about BB era semi-auto rifles and I still can't figure out what is 'legal' and what is 'illegal' about them. I'm interested in buying a previously LEGALLY PURCHASED W/DROS AK variant. It has a BB installed on it to be 'compliant', when featured semi-auto was considered anything with a pistol grip (before fins and workaround grips were made).
What are my options for purchasing this firearm? I don't believe it was ever reg'd as an RAW. It has a fin grip on it to make it featureless, but the BB remains in place. If it's been made featureless/compliant, can the BB legally be removed? Can we remove the BB and DROS as a featureless firearm since it never was re-reg'd as a featured RAW? The firearm is a Century Arms N-PAP M70, with wood furniture and fixed wood stock. Thanks for any help. Last edited by TheGood; 08-18-2021 at 2:08 AM.. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
If it has a BB, but it wasn't registered, then it's an illegal AW per CA law.
If it has a BB, but it was registered, then it's illegal to sell it to anyone in CA unless he de-registers it. That can take years to do. If it is featureless (remove BB to be sure) and wasn't registered, then it might be legal to sell. Last edited by HibikiR; 08-18-2021 at 1:37 AM.. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
It was originally DROS'd in CA, but not re-registered as a BBRAW. Instead of registering as an AW the owner made it compliant by adding a fin to the grip. Nothing else was needed to de-feature it. The firearm make/model is not listed on the "Banned AW" list.
I'm also thinking that removing the BB prior to DROS is all that should be needed, but I just want to make sure. I was also considering having the owner strip it to a receiver/barrel and doing the DROS on it as a 'stripped lower/barrel assembly', so it's not considered a semi-auto at the time of DROS. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
There is no way of legally obtaining or converting into a BBRAW now that registration is closed. Not sure about LE exemption but for serfs, you cant get one anymore.
__________________
We’re ALL GOING TO DIE! Can’t somebody do something?!?!?!?! |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I never said I wanted a BBRAW. I want to buy a FEATURELESS AK As I recall, owners of featured BB AR/AK/ETC had two choices. Make the firearm featureless, and do not register as a RAW, or leave it as-is and register as a BBRAW and it can't be changed unless you de-register it or take it out of California. The owner of this AK pattern rifle made it featureless, he DID NOT register it as a BBRAW. My question is whether it is OK to remove the BB before I purchase/DROS. Last edited by TheGood; 08-18-2021 at 6:11 AM.. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
It shouldn't be hard. A "BB" has no bearing on being an AW. It was a compliance device, which is no longer a compliance device. Today, it either is featureless, fixed mag, or an illegal AW. If it's featureless, the BB is just dumb to still keep on, of course you can remove it. Everyone else that converted to featureless removed them. The only people that had to keep BB on, are those that registered AW.
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
OK, thank you for that clarification. I think the owner thought the BB needed to stay on it to be sure it was legal. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Yeah, I've already run into this as a problem. I asked an FFL and his response was that any AK with a BB on it is a BBRAW and can't be transferred. He thought by removing the BB I was looking for some sort of loophole, which I'm not because the firearm was never re-registered as a BBRAW to begin with. Last edited by TheGood; 08-18-2021 at 7:32 AM.. |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
Remove the dang BB if it has a fin and is not a RAW!!
Some FFLs will FREAK OUT if you bring in anything with a BB, featureless or not. We even have a story here of a FFL who turned such a rifle in to law enforcement when it was brought in for PPT. BE SMART: Do not take a BB rifle into a FFL. When you get to the FFL with the featureless AK sans BB, do not discuss the rifle's previous configuration! The words "bullet button" should never pass your lips inside the FFL when doing a PPT. And make sure that fin is attached to the grip very securely, if it is not an integral fin. Last edited by SkyHawk; 08-18-2021 at 8:55 AM.. |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
OK, thank you. This seems to make sense with all the confusion surrounding the BB device and weapons that originally had them installed but did not get registered as BBRAW. Normally one would think that the added 'safety' of a locked magazine would be a welcomed 'feature' but now they've even made the safety device 'evil', IMO. |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Oh, well that’s simple then, just buy a featureless AK Not sure why you are asking about a BB but on a featureless AK, a BB would make using a freedom week magazine a felony in this state. You are way over complicating this.
__________________
We’re ALL GOING TO DIE! Can’t somebody do something?!?!?!?! |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Why did you have to come on this thread and S**T all over it? You were the incorrect person on here. I was asking because there is EXTREME CONFUSION among sellers, buyers, and even FFLs about what an AW is in regards to the BB and whether an AK pattern rifle with a BB installed is transferable or legal to possess. Please, let the people who know the correct answers to my questions answer them. It's pretty obvious that you don't. |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
https://www.calguns.net/caawid/flowchart.pdf
__________________
We’re ALL GOING TO DIE! Can’t somebody do something?!?!?!?! |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
That's where I started when looking into this. Then I sent an email to my FFL asking about whether it could be transferred as a stripped lower/barrel assembly and was given the blanket response "It's a BBRAW, and can't be transferred" much like your earlier assumption about the situation. Quote:
That's not the sort of blanket answer I was looking for because it's not relevant to this situation. Honestly I would have expected the flowchart to apply but the response of the FFL had me confused, and reading a host of other threads about it on this forum had me even more confused. The confusion based on the FFL and reading old discussion still existed and was the reason why I posted on CG to a forum about 'How CA Laws Apply To/Affect Me' to ask the questions about transferring a non-BBRAW firearm that still has the BB installed. I hope you can understand that my reasons for asking the questions are so that I don't pay someone a bunch of money to DROS a firearm that either can't be transferred or is outright illegal to modify. I'd rather 'ask stupid questions' here than go to jail for not asking them. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
To avoid the potential "loose grip fin" issue, remove the grip completely, then remove the BB and transfer it without the grip or BB. Then put the grip (with grip fin attached) back on the rifle.
T |
#17
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Yeah initially I was thinking about going a step further and having it stripped down to a receiver/barrel so it would DROS as a stripped receiver. Might not be worth the trouble of doing that. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I suspect that the CA DOJ told the dealers that they could not accept items with maglocks because of limitations in the law as written. Basically, there is no way for the dealer to know whether or not an item is a registered BBAW before they accept it. Of course, there is also no way for them to know whether a featureless rifle was registered as any type of AW, so the whole thing is pretty silly. What they should have done was to write the law such that dealers would not be penalized if they unknowingly accepted a registered AW, and to check the AW database during the background check. Then, if the item was present in the database, the dealer would be told to surrender it to law enforcement, and it would be forfeited by the person trying to transfer it. |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
It's possible CADOJ did that, but I think that FFLs just don't want to deal with it or don't understand that there are 'registered' and non-registered (featureless) rifles with BB's still installed. There is also a large percentage of those who bought these rifles and never knew about the law changing and they think their 'featured' BB (maglocked) rifle is 'legal' because that's what the BB was for to begin with. Quote:
I don't see how this would be 'good' for the firearm owners who bought BB rifles thinking that they were doing what was necessary to legally own an AR or AK, etc. It's CA laws and CADOJ who caused this whole mess (and furthered it with the break-action maglock law), so why should people who complied with the law to begin with be subject to confiscation? I find it interesting that people registered their BB rifles instead of making them compliant, which would keep their rifle out of a "scary weapon" registry and allow it to be sold within California. I'm sure that there are some models which probably could not easily be made compliant, which would be the exception. |
#21
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Technically, the way the law was written, once registered you can pull the bulletbuton off and it’s just like any other RAW, we are just waiting for the right test case volunteer.
__________________
We’re ALL GOING TO DIE! Can’t somebody do something?!?!?!?! |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Found it. This is what scared the FFLs:
https://web.archive.org/web/20161223...irearms/bbfaqs The date was 1/01/2017. Note who was the AG who issued this baloney. |
#24
|
||||
|
||||
^^^ Yeah, but buried in all of that was the statement that said:
Quote:
Which essentially means MAKE IT FEATURELESS, and you can continue to sell it (or PPT) because it's no-longer categorized as an AW. I can see how FFL's would be worried that they are going to be accused of transferring an AW now, since they would need the "Dangerous Weapons Permit" and if not face some sort of legal action against them by CADOJ. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#26
|
||||
|
||||
No it would not. What makes you think that? It is a felony to have > 10 rounds in a fixed magazine. A BB is NOT a fixed magazine. So it can't be illegal. That's what the law changed and started this whole BBRAW mess - BB no longer "counts" as fixed magazine compliance.
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
How quickly people forget CRPA and Michel & Associates dispositioning the recent regulations. |
#29
|
||||
|
||||
Not much different in application than a Juggernaut Hellfighter, or Patriot Pin. Yet now they call the BB 'non-compliant' therefore your previously legal BB rifle becomes an AW (if it has any features). Not really a fair change, they should have grandfathered the BB to be legal so long as it's not removed. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Encountered this long ago on a Hi-Point carbine - had a BB on it, FFL freaked out when presented for transfer. Seller ordered a regular mag release with oversize button, installed and went to a different FFL, no problemo.
I would describe it this way: 1. Legislators passed law requiring a "fixed" mag. 2. Pro-2A gun guys created the BB "workaround" for compliance. 3. Legislators threw a tantrum and made BB's illegal while re-writing all the anti gun laws... 4. Pro-2A people once again had to figure out exactly what was legal and what was not. This is "the dance" we do in CA to try to own things that in most other states are perfectly legal. St. Benitez spolke truth when he said CA gun laws were enough to make an angel swear. ALWAYS call ahead to confirm any "unusual" firearm/configuration with the FFL - you may need to make a few calls to successfully transfer some firearms. ALSO, do your own due diligence as much as possible to have the firearm compliant, if needed have appropriate legal references, but don't expect an FFL to put their license at risk if they aren't comfortable - use a different FFL. There is a vast range of "knowledgeability" between FFL's and you can't just waltz in and expect them to know - sometimes they may even make a call or two or do some research, but you're far better taking a little time to "vett" the FFL you are going to use. My most recent PPT required going down a long list of FFL's... Oddly enough Turner's was the most on top of what the actual law was, and was the easiest option! And about 1/3 of the FFL's in the geographical area were no longer in business - as designed by above legislators. I won't go into the one FFL trying to charge $85 for a PPT, swearing it was "legal" to do so... Hopefully this will be somewhat helpful in getting the transfer you need, done! |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
I already linked to that discussion above. The problem is that the FFL equated "a firearm with a bb and evil features is illegal to sell" with "a firearm with a bb and no evil features is illegal to sell" due to the confusing guidance from butthead Attorney General Kamala Harris.
|
#32
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|