And So It Begins… Arsenal Discontinues First CA Compliant Models

www.bluetimemedia.com

www.bluetimemedia.com

With the upcoming deadlines looming for the new California “Assault Weapons” law (I use the quotes as sarcasm, as I vigorously disagree with the term and intent of the state’s legislature), the floodgates have opened with the first public discontinuance of a “California Compliant” rifle model.

Arsenal, the Bulgarian AK manufacturer, has formally announced that two of their “California Compliant” models, the SAM7SF-84C (side folding stock) and SAMUF-85C (underfolding) have been discontinued, as the supply of CA compliant parts has been exhausted.

The CA Compliant SAM7R-61C looks to still be in production, but it is highly likely the quantities are limited. With lead times for various “California Compliant” bits being measured in months, it is unlikely that any significant quantities can be produced before the end-of-year deadline.

Further, with various companies competing for the same components, Arsenal running out means that other companies are likely running low too. Those in California should take note and act quickly or otherwise lose the ability to purchase the rifles factory new.

 

Statement from Arsenal: 

Arsenal Inc. appreciates the 2nd Amendment supporters and our enthusiasts from California and we remain dedicated to “The Right to Bear Arms” for everyone.

However, given the current laws and regulations in California and with less than 3 months left for the new laws to take effect, we regret to announce that the production of two of our California compliant rifles, the SAM7SF-84C and SAM7UF-85C has come to an end as of October 10th, 2016. All components for making the SAM7UF and SAM7SF into fixed stock California compliant rifles have been manufactured and the last units have rolled out of our production lines.

Features (courtesy of Arsenal):
• 100% new-production parts and components.
• Bulgarian hot-die hammer forged receiver, bolt, bolt carrier and double-hook trigger
• Cold hammer-forged 16.3” barrel from Arsenal’s Bulgarian factory, built on Steyr manufacturing technology
• Hard-chrome plated bore and chamber
• Removable 4-port muzzle brake with 14x1mm left-hand threads.
• Scope rail.
• Intermediate length US-made 10” trapdoor buttstock. (Total length of pull 13.4”.)
• 922(r) compliant with US or imported magazines.
• Substantially extended service life over other types of assemblies.

Those interested in Arsenal’s “California Compliant” rifles can find additional information on their configuration here. 



Nathan S.

One of TFB’s resident Jarheads, Nathan now works within the firearms industry. A consecutive Marine rifle and pistol expert, he enjoys local 3-gun, NFA, gunsmithing, MSR’s, & high-speed gear. Nathan has traveled to over 30 countries working with US DoD & foreign MoDs.

Nathan can be reached at Nathan.S@TheFirearmBlog.com

The above post is my opinion and does not reflect the views of any company or organization.


Advertisement

  • Swarf

    Gun free paradise coming up any second now…

    • Black Dots

      Oh, you mean Chicago?

      • Porty1119

        *Chiraq

      • Gambler X

        they just blame it on Indiana

        • Dougscamo

          Or Virginia…..like New York does…..

          • Gambler X

            because its not a criminal problem, its a gun problem.

  • jerry brown is a fascist

    • TC

      Kevin deLeon, was the State Senator that pushed these new bills through. Brown only signed them. And yes, he should have vetoed them, but the vetoes probably could have been overridden with the Democrat supermajority in the State Legislature.

      • Its not like Jerry Brown ever has pretended to be a friend of the constitution in the first place.

  • AC97

    I honestly don’t know why you would’ve even tried to go down the AR or AK route when Mini 14s and SKSs are options in California.

    Can someone enlighten me?

    • TC

      AR’s were selling very well in Calif. with the simple addition of the ‘bullet button’.

      • AC97

        Which Mini-14s don’t require. I don’t own a Mini-14, as I have an AR, but if I had the choice of a bullet button AR/AK, or a Mini-14/SKS, I’d take the latter.

        • Marcus D.

          After the first of the year, there will be no choice. Unless someone can tell me how you can load an AK without removing the magazine and field stripping the rifle, AKs will be history. ARs if featureless (i.e. look like a Mini with no pistol grip) will still be legal. Bullet Buttons are outlawed, and the mag must be “fixed” so that it requires disassembly of the action to remove the mag. One enterprising individual has designed a device that requires the separation of the upper and lower–by a fraction of an inch–to operate the mag release, Although not legally tested, this device may comply with the letter of the law–just as the bullet button complied with the letter of the old law.

          • iksnilol

            Or get a VZ 58 and start using stripper clips?

            Maybe even make a cut and guide in the AK dust cover to feed with stripper clips ?

          • Andrew Miller

            The piston and bolt carrier would interfere on an AK with that idea.

          • DataMatters

            You can get your fingers in there if the bolt is locked back. I’d have to go dig mine out of the safe. I haven’t shot it in years.

            How about a magazine with a spring that can be locked in place all the way at the bottom and a side port that lets you feed rounds in?

            LIke a Krag rifle?

          • iksnilol

            I was thinking feeding the clips at an angle.

          • valorius

            or move to america.

          • iksnilol

            *give up in other words

          • valorius

            by reinforcing the voting base of free states you are not giving up- you are doing the exact opposite.

            Barring massive natural disaster, you have literally ZERO chance of ever ‘saving’ commiefornia.

          • iksnilol

            Um, you are giving up by weakening the voter base in “commiefornia”. I mean, by your logic y’all could a won in Vietnam waay sooner by just not sending troops at all (and yes, I’m counting ‘Nam as a victory according to your logic).

          • valorius

            Your vote is absolutely wasted in California, you have zero chance of victory there. None. Zero.

            There are however about a half dozen battleground states where your vote not only counts, but is massively amplified. Such is the case for me, living in Pennsylvania.

          • valorius

            We definitely should’ve never sent troops to Vietnam.

          • iksnilol

            no, of course not. But you’re sorta missing my point.

            Eeeh, who cares ?

          • valorius

            My other comment was addressing your point, the one about sending troops was just an aside.

            There are 5.2million registered republicans in California, Compared to 8 million registered democrats.

            Those 5.2million are totally wasted votes in California, but if you took those voters and sent 1 million to each of 5 battleground states, R’s would be almost impossible to beat in presidential elections.

          • valorius

            or you could just move to America and buy a real AR.

          • DataMatters

            When I was a kid, America had 50 states. It’s now down to maybe 30 and a lot of those are probably debatable.

          • valorius

            I’m In Pennsylvania, where our state legislation and constitution are extremely pro gun. We sure could use a couple million republican california gun owners to move here though, so we could swing it back to a red state for presidential elections.

          • Apparently CA and NY didn’t learn from the first civil war. I’m sure the southern states would enjoy putting them under a generation of Reconstruction, and teaching them how to be Americans again.

          • jcitizen

            The web site selling these AK variant rifles, says the magazine is removed with a special key – am I missing something here?

          • Marcus D.

            Yes and no. Under the current law, a magazine is “fixed” if it requires the use of a tool to remove the mag. A special key is a “tool” within the meaning of the statute, and is therefore legal—but only until the first of the year. After the first of the year, the definition of “fixed” has changed to require disassembly of the “action” in order to remove the mag or to permit reloading. The purpose of the law is to make reloading of an AR/AK slower, because this will make the guns less “dangerous” and unable, in the infamous words of Senator DeLeon “to fire thirty rounds per second.”

            [Please keep in mind that this is all political and really makes no sense. Just because a Prince 50 mag lock will completely disable a magazine release doesn’t mean a criminal won’t remove it, that a criminal otherwise subject to arrest won’t have his firearms seized at the time of arrest; or that somehow “evil black rifles” will disappear from the California landscape (which is the intent of the law).

          • jcitizen

            Okay, I think I finally get it – so the guns in this article will be legal until the new law comes into effect and then a guy may have to weld the key hole shut to comply with the new law.

          • Marcus D.

            Almost, citizen. After the first of the year, AKs as currently configured will no longer be saleable, new or used, unless they ahve a “fixed” magazine that complies with the current law. If you already own an AK, you are not required to change it, but if you don’t, you have three options: 1) if you change nothing, you must register it as an “assault weapon” by the end of next year; 2) you convert it to a “featureless” AK, if such an animal exists, (which means it has NO prohibited features) and then it is no longer an “assault weapon”; or 3) or someone invents a device, as is currently being manufactured for ARs, that requires some level of opening the action in order to release the mag. Actually, there is a fourth option: give up on AKs and sell it in state while you still can, or sell it out of state.

      • A bearded being from beyond ti

        What exactly is a bullet button? I can’t be arsed to look it up.

        • Major Tom

          Basically a device that prevents conventional mag swaps. The stuff they want to ban is the workaround that made tool-removed mags easily swapped with the press of the tip of an unfired bullet. Hence bullet button. Only tyrants think tool-removed mags are a good idea.

        • gunsandrockets

          The “bullet-button” is a subset of the devices called mag-locks or magazine locks. Magazine-locks apply a simple modification to a detachable-magazine rifle/shotgun/handgun which converts it into a fixed magazine firearm (as defined by 1999 California law).

          What the new 2016 law did was change the California definition of a fixed magazine firearm, so that magazine-locks no longer comply.

          • Christian Hedegaard-Schou

            Actually plenty of magazine locks comply. It’s just that the traditional bullet button and similar devices no longer comply.

            Nothing will really change in 2017, and that’s the joke.

          • gunsandrockets

            Nothing? Depends on how you define nothing. Besides, California is only getting started on new firearms restrictions. Just wait until Newsom is governor in 2019.

          • Marcus D.

            I only know of two mag locks, the Bullet Button and the Prince Device (which disables the mag release button). Would you care to elaborate?

          • Christian Hedegaard-Schou

            The prince-50 device and other devices modeled after it will allow rifles to comply. So will the new (forget what they’re calling it) “bullet button” thing that allows you to pop the mag out only once you’ve unhinged the upper from lower.

            The old style of “fixed magazine” compliance that was used for FAL’s for the longest time can be extended to many firearms. You fix the magazine in place and then load from the top with stripper clips.

          • Marcus D.

            You can’t top load an AR without fully opening the halves, which if you haven’t tried it is awkward and slow (which is the whole point of the legislation). And I don’t think AKs can be top loaded at all–so AKs are history after the first of the year. If you want one, buy it now–or move. I don’t know what the new device is called either–I saw one at the LGS yesterday, but as I’ve said, the legality of this device is uncertain. It is logical to conclude that it complies with the new law–but since when has this state ever been logical?

    • Ken

      Mini-14 is less accurate, mags cost more, parts are harder to come by, and you can’t attach stuff to it as easily.

      • billyoblivion

        That was probably true 10 years ago, but today, other than accuracy, you can hang just as much silly cr*p off a mini-[14 30] as you can an AR.

        Still would rather have an AR than a Mini-14, because they are generally sturdier and there’s got to be close to a brazillion of them in the US.

      • AC97

        But ARs required bullet buttons.

        • Black Dots

          I have the Ultimate Bullet Button Tool on my magazines, which allows you to release the old mag with a fresh mag. It works well. Not as fast as a conventional mag release obviously, but pretty quick all things considered.

        • Ken

          Featureless ARs exist too.

          • gusto

            and how anyone would chose a bulletbutton version over a featureless is beyond me.

            heck I would chose an ares scr regardless, it looks better that way

            even those with the funky stocks are better than needing a frekkin screwdriver to change mags, or opening and separating the lower from the upper to mag change

          • Ken

            I guess it’s a matter of looks. For someone who just considers an AR a range toy, they’d rather have their AR look cool than be functional.

      • Joshua Knott

        Pretty sure they are more accurate than what one would think, I own one. I’m not at all saying it’s a tack driver, stock it’s 2moa all day long (580 series and newer that is) with a more rigid stock ,accustrut and a 4x optic …lemme sayou it works wonders.

        • me
          • Disarmed in CA

            They don’t fire enough different calibers either. ARs can be readily converted to a ridiculous array with legal mail-order parts

          • me

            .223/5.56, 6.8, 7.62X39, 300 blackout

          • gunsandrockets

            Apparently the 6.8mm Mini-14 was discontinued in 2012. But who knows, maybe Ruger will offer one in 6.5mm Grendel some day.

          • me

            I would definitely consider one if they did.

          • b0x3r0ck

            I’m pretty sure the aftermarket makes 6.5 parts

          • valorius

            Minis can be had in 5.56mm, 7.62x39mm and .30 black out.

            Seems sufficient to me.

            If that’s not enough, might i suggest moving to America?

          • gunsandrockets

            I see you have one of the later cone barrel Mini-14s. So did the addition of the strut make any difference in accuracy? Or did you add it for cosmetic effect?

          • me

            The thicker profile barrel on the post 580 series pretty much addressed the accuracy issues with the older models. Mine being the 16 inch “tactical” model, I haven’t noticed much of a difference. People say they really do make a difference on the longer skinny barrels. I really just like the mini m1a look.
            As far as accuracy with the newer barrels. I have been able to get a few 1 inch groups with 55gr v Max. Typically I can shoot sub 2.5 inch groups with the cheapo steel cased stuff (witch it eats for breakfast and slings about 30 ft away!) I’ve got close to 3K rounds through it and have never had a malfunction.

          • Joshua Knott

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/67406740ff6271d1778a5a47757891a4f58798ee357b50b59db328ebed09dcee.jpg
            Accustrut or morod on yours? I love the mini’s same with ar’s. Sometimes I think I shouldve bought the houge stock like yours though. nice gun man

          • me

            Acccustrut

        • Ken

          You can do a more accurate AR build for less money than an off the shelf Mini-14 since float tube handguards are so common these days.

          • valorius

            which is no help at all to commiefornians.

      • n0truscotsman

        IMO, the AR is a better rifle in every aspect, although this is kind of moot in cali, where AR15 ownership is generally regarded as a moral blight 😉

        • Ken

          Featureless AR or one that required you to pop the rear pin to drop the mag, both compliant under the new laws.

      • valorius

        parts are harder to come by? Do you need me to give you the number to Ruger?

        • Ken

          AR parts are even easier to come by, and cheaper if I remember correctly.

    • Black Dots

      I believe M1As will also be an option after 1/1/17.

      • Gary Kirk

        Don’t know about that one.. Mine without bayonet lug, and shipped with a low cap mag was marked on the box “NOT CALIFORNIA COMPLIANT” right on the box.. And that was over ten years ago.

        • Christian Hedegaard-Schou

          Bayonet lugs are not regulated in CA. Period.

          Your M1A shipped with a flash hider most likely, which makes it illegal in CA. The CA-legal ones ship with the USCG muzzle brake instead.

          • Gary Kirk

            Yes, valid point.. Never quite understood that

          • Easy. A different set of victim disarmament monkeys cooked up the CA stupidity.

            Shoulder things that go up would have also been banned, but they couldn’t find a picture of one.

          • gusto

            flashhiders and or muzzlebreaks just seems like such a gimmick

            I can bet you that even in a selfdefense scenario they have never been an issue

            muzzlebreak on a .223? how small and fragile are you guys?

          • Sledgecrowbar

            I use muzzle brakes on my bench .223 rifles and it makes a significant difference, felt recoil is probably halved, but I agree, it’s not something I would put on a defensive rifle when a flash hider offers a better advantage for such use. I think there’s a good argument for the smallest-framed and elder shooters to be using a brake with .223, that’s where it would make good sense to me.

        • AlDeLarge

          My XD45 Mod.2 has a “NOT LEGAL IN CALIFORNIA” sticker on the box, but it came with 9 and 10 round magazines. I had to buy a 13 round mag separately. Anybody know what that’s about?

      • Marcus D.

        Yes they will, as long as they have a California compliant muzzle device. They otherwise constitute a “featureless” rifle for the same reasons that Minis are legal–proper length, no pistol grip.

    • Seth Hill

      Sorry to break this to you, but they along with the M1A have a pistol grip it just isn’t separate from the rest of the stock. Once the antis realize that the palm swell is called a pistol grip they will declare these to be “assault weapons” and thus are included in the ban.

      • Marcus D.

        The palm swell on the M1A does not fall within the definition/description of the statute, which requires a separate pistol group below the action.

        • DataMatters

          They’ll “reinterpret” the law to mean something different, just like in MA.

          • Marcus D.

            Umm, I don’t think so. They’d have to pass a new law. The current definition of an “assault weapon” is:

            30515. (a) Notwithstanding Section 30510, “assault weapon” also means any of the following:
            (1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that does not have a fixed magazine but has any one of the following:
            (A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon.
            (B) A thumbhole stock.
            (C) A folding or telescoping stock.
            (D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
            (E) A flash
            suppressor.
            (F) A forward pistol grip.
            (2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
            (3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches.Fixed mag, not an AW. OR no fixed mag and no “prohibited features.” (No the prohibited features do not make any sense if considered in the context of making a rifle “dangerous,” rather they were included to provide a generic description of what an AR looks like.) A palm swell simply cannot be interpreted as “a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action…”

        • valorius

          For now.

    • markrb

      Our new law, I believe, states that any semiautomatic rifle capable of taking a removable magazine will now be considered an “assault weapon”….most SKSs should be fine, but Mini-14s will be a no-no.
      Of course, we’ll be allowed to keep our guns we already own….we just have to pay a $75 per gun to register it fee.
      I forsee a large number of non-compliance.

  • ReadyorNot

    I just hope Nevada doesn’t become the next target of Californication.

    • Black Dots

      Nevada is where Californians go when they are sick of living in California. Also, Phoenix.

    • gunsandrockets

      Oregon and Washington are next on the hit list.

      • Swarf

        I wish I could say that weren’t true. I used to feel I lived in a fairly gun rights friendly state, but one has only to look at the recent headlines to see that creep is happening.

        I blame Amazon.

      • Shinypartsup

        Oregon is WELL down that path. They move from California to get away or retire from that place, then recreate it. smh

      • n0truscotsman

        Sadly yes. I have relatives near Seattle and heard plenty about the new law SNAFU occurring there.

  • Henry Reed

    As a CA AR-15 owner I’ll try to explain the current plan. After January 1st 2017, all ARs already equipped with a bullet button either have to be converted to “featureless” (no pistol grip, collapsible stock, flash hider or fore grip, among other BS), or you can register your rifle as an “assault weapon.” This means they’ll know where you live, and you can only keep it at home or at select ranges (no truck gun, can’t keep in car unless going to or from home or shooting area). You also can’t sell it in CA, or have a relative inherit it. Since the chances of our state gov actually trying to confiscate AWs down the line is pretty damn low, as they’ve never tried and would be idiotic to do so, I’ll be going the registration route.

    • Black Dots

      Same here. Plus, once you register as an “assault weapon” you can remove your bullet button. Besides, California has the DROS. They already have records of every firearm you purchased in the state. THE “assault weapon” registry is like double-secret probation.

      • Henry Reed

        Exactly. After the 1st, all that will separate our ARs from anyone else’s will be mag caps and no SBRs.

        • Black Dots

          Those sweet, sweet SBRs…

      • Marcus D.

        Whether or not one will be able to remove the BB and replace it with a regular mag release has not been established by court or regulation or letter from the DO, so it currently resides in a gray area. Second, they do not have records of every firearm purchased. Rifles have only been registered by serial number since 2013; prior to that they were described on the DROS as long guns of a particular caliber. And there was no registration at all prior to the 1991(? never can recall the year) Assault Weapons Ban.

        • Black Dots

          Point taken on the DROS. As for removing the bullet button, you are correct, there has been no guidelines or ruling. However, I spoke to the DOJ and they confirmed that registered assault weapons can have standard mag releases. The person I spoke to then went on to say that if you register an AR purchased before 1/1/17 as an assault weapon, it does not need to have a bullet button. Now, that’s just the word of one guy at the DOJ, but it makes sense given that if you currently have a registered assault weapon in California from an earlier registration period it does not need a bullet button. From what I’ve gleaned from reading the bills, the new laws passed on 7/1/16 eliminate the bullet button “loophole”, they do not otherwise change the existing laws about registered assault weapons. Of course, this is California, so God only knows what the legislature will do next year.

          • Marcus D.

            Yes, it makes sense that BBs will be able to be legally removed. But since when do the laws (or the regulations of the DOJ) make any sense?

    • Anonymoose
      • Henry Reed

        Sorry, not gonna happen. Enjoy your paranoia

        • Anonymoose
          • Black Dots

            I don’t even know what this means, but it’s my new favorite thing today.

          • Major Tom

            Is that pizza or cake?

          • Anonymoose

            Pizza.

        • gunsandrockets

          I strongly suspect the Governor of California in 2019 will disabuse you of that notion. Since that Governor is in all probability going to be Newsom.

          2016 isn’t the endpoint. California has only just begun to crack down on firearms.

          • n0truscotsman

            you betcha.

            I anticipate UK like laws within the next 5-10 years.

        • Democrats: Just Lies & Hate

          Ahhh… our first HRC troll?

      • Bill

        Federal agencies cannot enforce state laws unless they are assimilated and federal lands or holdings are involved.

      • Christian Hedegaard-Schou

        The ATF does not enforce state law.

      • gunsandrockets

        Nah. The Feds will be stuck in partisan gridlock for years.

        But there is a real danger of extreme crackdowns in those Blue States with single party domination by the Democrats. Like Commiefornia.

      • VeriAeq

        A.O.T. kinda creepy Anime there, the resemblance of character is sooo apropos.

    • TC

      There is a new style ‘bullet button’ out that requires the user to pull out the rear takedown pin on an AR and pivot the upper in order to release the magazine. This satisfies the requirement that the rifle must be ‘dissambled’ to remove the magazine. Not a perfect solution, but allows AR owners to continue to own their rifles without registering them and being subject to all the ‘assault weapon’ conditions.

      • Henry Reed

        Yeah, not down for that and never will be

        • TC

          Don’t know what state you live in, but if Hillary gets elected and packs the Supreme Court with anti gun activist judges, we will be looking back at ‘bullet button’ equipped AR’s as the good old days. She fully intends to implement ‘Australian Style’ gun confiscation one way or the other.

          • RSG

            Lol. Californians want to be subjugated. Americans don’t. There will be a kinetic, civil war before there’s “confiscation”.

      • Cymond

        I’m glad that’s an option, options are good, but I’ve held the Thordsen stock and consider it a far better option overall.

      • Marcus D.

        This MAY satisfy the legal requirements. The State hasn’t weighed in on it yet, and if the DOJ approves it, the Legislature will be almighty PISSED! They are attempting to ban all black rifles from January 1, 2017 forward, and designating those in circulation as “assault weapons,” hope to dispose of the rest in a generation.

    • Andrew Miller

      “Never tried confiscation”.
      I seem to recall SKS owners would disagree from back in what, 92?
      Register it once, miss the second registration, then….
      Knock knock, “Sir, your rifle isn’t registered.”
      “But yes it is.”
      “Sorry, the second registration passed, and you missed out.”
      “But I filed on time…”
      “Sorry, it didn’t get processed.”

      • Black Dots

        Hopefully the new process over the interwebs will work better.

      • Bill

        Who, were, how many?

        • gunsandrockets

          Mine for one. All the Chinese “SKS Sporter” models were confiscated by California back around 1999. The government gave a token fee in compensation for the confiscation of property.

          • Henry Reed

            And you were stupid enough to give it to them instead of simply selling it out of state and then play the victim card. Nice move

          • gunsandrockets

            You’re a real piece of work buddy. Are you lucky enough to live in Free State while you smugly snipe at your own side? I’ve been fighting the good fight for decades. What have you ever done?

      • gunsandrockets
      • Henry Reed

        That wasn’t confiscation, it was a buyback. But thanks for spreading the misinformation. They also could’ve sold out of state.

        • gunsandrockets

          That California confiscation of “SKS Sporter” model Chinese made SKS rifles was as much a so-called “buyback” as the Australian confiscation scheme was a “buyback”. Don’t comply? You go to jail. Some “buyback”!

          • Henry Reed

            I see you edited your comment, but I’m confused how I could be anti-gun when I spent 3 grand on a KAC SR-15 upper and SR-30 lower so I can legally own it in CA. But I guess you consider yourself a saint for owning guns and fighting for gun rights all these years. I see you’ve succeeded in blocking the legislators from enacting restrictions, well done sir!

          • DataMatters

            Dude, just…no. We’re all facing the same dilemma no matter what state you live in. It’s only a matter of time for all. The bickering is pointless.

          • gunsandrockets

            Why are you spreading misinformation about the California confiscation of the SKS Sporter rifles? Did you even live in California back in 1998?

          • Henry Reed

            I did 🙂 maybe you should become more involved in your state government if you care so much about this instead of wasting time behind your keyboard

        • n0truscotsman

          That is hair splitting. The overall end game is the the same: you being leveraged out of your private property without consent.

          If you are a AR15 or AK owner in Cali (or SKS), the debate of whether a ‘gun buyback is really a confiscation’ is really a moot point.

    • Disarmed in CA

      If you bought it or frankly ANY firearm in California, they already know where you live.

    • Marcus D.

      There is one other option, I think it has been mentioned here, which is a new device designed by the same guy who designed the bullet button. Basically it is a mag release that has a bar resting against the upper that prevents the button from being depressed until the rear pin is pulled and the halves separated (slightly). With the upper out of the way, the button works and the mag drops free. Since the new law requires that a rifle is not an AW if one has to “disassemble” the action to reload, this device appears to comply with the letter of the law, and any rifle so equipped would not have to be registered as an assault weapon. IF this device passes muster with the DOJ, THEN the rifle does not have to be registered as an AW, and can still be legally transferred (just as bullet button equipped rifles were before the new law) and used for more than just target practice at the range or on private property (i.e. to go hunting).

      And of course the legislature will try to pass another law to ban the new device.

  • Steve Hanna

    Why would anyone who loves liberty still want to live in California anyway?

    • Harry’s Holsters

      Good weather and the desire to turn it around. We need freedom loving people moving to CA not from it.

      • Black Dots

        Agreed. It easy to wear a “Molon Labe” shirt when you live in Texas when ain’t nobody trying to molon your labes.

        • Harry’s Holsters

          With everyone moving the the positive economic climate that is Texas they may soon be the next Cali. They are on a general swing towards a democrat majority.

          • Dougscamo

            Shudders upon reading this post….moves on to next…

          • bob

            Texas has been growing in positive numbers. The State has actually gotten more constitutional. Not less. And I say this as a Floridian.

          • Harry’s Holsters

            I hope you’re right.

          • Mystick

            The cities are already there.

          • Harry’s Holsters

            And that’s where people keep moving.

          • Democrats: Just Lies & Hate

            Texas has been a priority “target state” for the Democrats for years. Swing Texas to a Democrat majority? Kiss it goodbye.

          • Harry’s Holsters

            They have a solid long term plan in terms of acquiring voters. The good thing is millennials are less likely to affiliate with a party even if they are more willing to vote liberal. I’ve also read some articles that say millennials are more conservative that past generations at the same age. Who knows if this is true or not considering the polarization in polls.

          • TJbrena

            As a millenial (born in ’95) I’ve always leaned somewhat to the left of the (American) political spectrum, but never enough to be considered a neoproggressive. Sure, I may have SOME economic and social views to the left of most people in this site, but I’ve never in my life had anything but infatuation for guns and militaria.

            My issue with the NRA is that they’re not doing enough to reach out to millenials. With how big video games are, there’s absolutely a demographic ripe for the realization that guns=fun. Hell, latch it into this whole equality push; a gun is a tool of empowerment that doesn’t care one bit who you are.

          • Harry’s Holsters

            I was born in 1994 and I have more of a right/libertarian belief system. Fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

            NRA is making the lifestyle push with Colion Noir and other younger representatives. It’s good but unless you’ve already stepped into the gun culture it’s not effective. I do think it helps bring pro gun millennials into the NRA.

            I’ve yet to go shooting with a gamer that wasn’t open to the idea of guns when they were put in front of them. I agree that’s a demographic that needs to be captured.

            The companies in the industry are where this has to start. They are now starting the reach out through lesser known athletes and celebrities. Stop the noise campaign by silencerco is a great example.

            That said I think BJ Baldwin the off road racer posted pro 2A things is more effective than an NRA sponsored person doing it. When people of influence are willing to be more open about their hobby we’ll see more positive growth from our generation.

      • Anonymoose

        Just moving there is only going to result in more people being oppressed and the same crooked crap going on forever. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/33996710f9424a47a6bd55f92fa3383eb72672ce61eca4e0733299d1a0326f77.jpg

      • Bill

        It’s a beautiful state with lots of great assets, from a huge range and variety of natural areas to some neat towns and cities

      • Bob

        You state has a estimated population of 7,760,000 gun owners and you couldn’t even get less than a million of them to sign a petition to get a measure on the ballot that would then be up to the other 30 million voters to try to stop these laws let alone turn the ship around.

        California is a failed state. The Cultural Demographics shift is done. Culturally, California will never be a free people ever again.

        Between the massive birth numbers of American welfare recipients, the mass importation of 3rd World Peoples’ and their Cultures, and the mass brainwashing of Americans in Academia. You are a social and cultural minority in an ever growing majority of folks that support massive controlling Orwellian government.

        Sorry but as someone that has family in California…. it is done. I loved Manhattan Beach as a kid. But California is dead fr gun owners and folks that want smaller constitutional government.

        • Harry’s Holsters

          I’m afraid you’re right but I try to remain optimistic.

        • Marcus D.

          The FUDs don’t understand why it is important to defeat the bill–largely because they have no idea what it says, as it is invariably misrepresented. They will even vote for it, either not knowing or not caring what it will cost or how difficult it will be to walk out of a store with a box of ammo.

      • valorius

        No, you all need to leave and move to battleground states.

        • Harry’s Holsters

          NC I live in one.

    • Cymond

      I was stuck there for 3 years & 4 months for the same of my wife’s career.
      Fortunately for me, my sacrifice was a temporary one, and we’re better off in the long run because of it.

    • FarmerB

      I’m sure it’s not true about the rest of the state, but I spend quite a bit of time in San Fran and the Bay area, and I have to say it just sucks on many levels. I could get a job and move there if I wanted, but wild horses couldn’t drag me there. I’m off there again on Sunday (groan). Sorry to offend Bay people, but the pollution, congestion and all around quality of life isn’t a California Dream at all.

  • John

    This just in! …the murder and assault rate in California has dropped to ZERO after all guns were removed from the state!

    In a connected story, California has also removed all drugs, alcohol, gangs, knives, bats, concealable heavy objects, aggressive people, psychotic people, greedy people, jealous people, poisons, flammable liquids/solids, religion, nationalism, prejudice, suicidal people, violent criminals, hands, fists and feet.

    The rest of the nation eagerly awaits the long term effects of this unprecedented effort.

    • Anonymoose

      Greedy, jealous, prejudiced, and psychotic people? You mean they completely did away with their government? Wow.

      • A bearded being from beyond ti

        All that weed is making them dumb.

        • Major Tom

          I wouldn’t say it’s the weed more like the smog and contagious insanity.

        • Disarmed in CA

          Californians are taught from an early age fear, ignorance, and dependence. It’s not all their fault but the leftist a-holes in charge of “education” and other social programs. Thank God I was out of school before I came here, yet I do plead ignorance to the system as it was in 1990. I didn’t develop a love for the 2A until this century.

          • Paul Kersey

            Immigration, illegal and legal allowed this to happen. Crime rates increased predictably from third world invaders, foreigners vote largely Democrat and politicians use the crime stats to justify more gun control.
            If you have Mexicans, Africans and Asians in your state, get ready for the same thing to happen if Hillary Clinton gets elected.
            People who refuse to vote for Donald Trump will be responsible if Hillaty Clinton gets elected and we lose our gun rights.
            I don’t care if he said something that was offensive to some people. Losing our gun rights and becoming a minority in our own country is more offensive.

          • Doug Larsen

            No. Just…no.

            There is little nexus between immigration and crime rates in California. In fact, overall crime rates in California DECREASED rather dramatically between 1980 and 2014. In California you were twice as likely to be a victim of crime in 1980 than you are today. And California’s current per capita crime rate is currently about what it was in…1960.

            California has implemented idiotic gun control not BECAUSE of crime rates, but DESPITE falling crime rates. Which is one of the things that makes it idiotic.

            Really, xenophobia doesn’t exactly help our cause as gun owners. And you might be surprised at how many gun owners in California don’t have pearly white skin. You’re conflating two separate issues because…feelers.

            As for Trump, I don’t care so much about the numerous offensive things that have come out of his mouth. But I do care that he’s shown himself to be grossly unqualified for the office he seeks. And I blame emotional GOP primary voters for the current electoral situation. Trump’s almost certain loss was highly predictable. At least, it was to some of us.

          • Wow!

            Everyone should take a careful look at Doug Larsens comment. This is a perfect example of the kind of liberal(tarian) propaganda I warn about.

            When they can’t argue on logic or facts they start making things up. One of the core concepts of liberalism is the grey morality. The less black and white things are, the easier it is to justify evil. Liberals try to label us with the same characteristics they hold. In Dougs case, he selected “emotions” as a conservative label even though that is held by democrats. Another common example we all saw this year of democrats calling republicans “bad tempered” even though it was the democrats rioting, infiltrating political systems, and assassinating officer.

            He uses xenophobia to label our desire to follow the law and as I said in a previous comment, he tries to label gun ownership as equivalent to criminal acts and if we want guns we have to support their criminal acts, in Doug’s case, illegal aliens.

            This kind of political infiltration is the stuff you see a lot in the cold war and make no mistake, it is a technique still used today. You become part of a party and then you try to degrade it by instilling “moderate” ideals to corrupt the original message.

            Never compromise your rights to get a promise of retaining it. Compromise is what got us with all these illegal weapon restrictions. Stay true to your morals and don’t let the liberal(tarians) tell you virtue isn’t hip enough for the modern world.

          • Doug Larsen

            So you accuse me of engaging in “propaganda”, but then you don’t actually refute my points with the “logic and facts” you claim to hold so dear. Instead, you engage in ad hominem and dishonest rhetoric where now – all of a sudden – I “try to label gun ownership as equivalent to criminal acts”. Even though nothing I wrote would lead any reasonable person to that conclusion.

            As you may vaguely remember, I responded to the verifiably false claim that crime in California has been on the rise over the years, and moreover that this rise (which, remember, didn’t actually happen) is due to “third world invaders”. Since that idea is demonstrably false, it introduces the question, “What would motivate someone to make a claim that is both false and ill-conceived? Why would someone say illegal immigrants are responsible for “increased” crime that hasn’t actually increased? Xenophobia seems like a pretty good candidate, but if you think the false claim was spurred by something else I’d love to hear what you think that something else is.

            Of course, this would first require you to acknowledge that the claim was indeed false. And I couldn’t help but notice that in your emotion-laden diatribe, you didn’t actually address the underlying point of contention. Instead you engaged in a textbook ad hominem attack, where you “casted unfounded aspersions upon the person who made the argument, rather than addressing the validity of the statement or argument itself.”

            Moreover, absolutely NOTHING I wrote encouraged anyone to “compromise their rights”. What a ridiculous red herring argument for you to introduce. What I said was that California is illogical in introducing anti-gun measures linked to “increased crime”, when the crime stats show that crime in the state isn’t actually any worse than it was 40 years ago. Yet, this entirely logical and rational conclusion apparently doesn’t sit well with you.

            Sorry if I offended your own PC sensibilities by stating that the original poster has his facts mixed up. If you’d like to address that matter (which was the actual subject at hand), feel free! Otherwise, your impersonation of “Forum Grand Inquistor” is nothing more than mildly amusing. And highly ironic insofar as you’ve demonstrated an astounding disrespect for those “logic and facts” you claim to cherish.

            Color me unimpressed.

          • Wow!

            Ironically Doug Larsen only confirmed my comment further.

            Take note on how he labels the conservative stance as politically correct, even though the political correctness is a liberal progressive stance.

            Then how he makes fun that worrying about “third world invaders” is ridiculous. Another liberal agenda to eliminate border control.

            The “phobia” labels and brainwashing in a feeble attempt to shame his opponent into backing down.

            Calling his opponent emotion laden (which I pointed out in my second comment, and he confirms my stance in this comment again).

            Again, watch out for people like Doug guys. Just because someone is on a conservative or pro 2A website does not mean they are “one of us”.

          • Mikial

            I’m sorry, I must have missed it . . . what planet do you live on again?

          • Doug Larsen

            Same planet as you, I suppose.

            Now, did you find that I misstated any facts? If so, which facts do you think I got incorrect? Or do you not really care because you’re just trolling?

          • Mikial

            Doug, you are clearly one of those trolls who believe if you use enough large and vaguely impressive words, then the rest of us will be cowed by your immense wisdom and obviously deeper understanding of the mysteries of life than our own, and throw our own beliefs to the wind and bow at the alter of your wisdom.

            There is no question that Illegal immigration is a serious issue, and the nurturing of so many illegals by the Liberal government and press has been the source of a great deal of sorrow in our communities. Now, that’s pretty much the end of the time I’m going to devote to a troll like you, so go ahead and launch your inevitable counterattack, no doubt fueled by talking points provided by the Liberals. I know people like you hold common working Middle Class Americans in disdain, but at the risk of irking your ire I am going to quote my WASP father when he said, ‘Never argue with a fool, people watching might not be able to tell the difference between you.’

        • gusto

          can anybody be pro-gun and anti-legalization?

          it is the same arguments, logical, reasonable and scientific arguments that should govern laws and rules.

          if you are only pro-gun because of the constitution than you are no better than fundamentalists like those “god hates phags”

          • Wow!

            Actually quite the opposite. No one can be pro gun AND pro weed. Gun ownership is a constitutional right, narcotics are not. Weed is outlawed by the CS Act which was approved through the constitutional laws of establishing legislation. To say weed should be allowed means to say states have the power over the higher laws, which means to say that states can restrict anyone regardless of what the constitution says

            Guns stop each other, but I have never seen a narcotic user stop another narcotic user. Freedom cannot exist when people are slaves to chemicals. The founding fathers clearly didn’t give us the right to narcotics for a reason, and did not outlaw prohibition even though it was a fairly popular concept at the time but didn’t get traction because too many people were hooked on alcohol.

            Always be aware of liberal(tarians). They try to label guns as a criminal act just to own them, and then say that if you want guns you have to “compromise” and agree with their criminal stuff. I have seen liberal(tarians) compare border patrol as “gun control”. Why secure the border when they are just going to jump over? Legalize it then they won’t be breaking the law? Duh, but if you do that the detrimental act is still being committed. Do we legalize theft? Murder?

            The right to bear arms is not a violation of the law it IS THE LAW. Remember this people, do not be manipulated by the liberal(tarians)!

            And remember, gun control will never be beat until we as an individual stand up and stop following illegal laws. Violate them, for your right is protected under law, but do so carefully as criminals in power seek to stop your righteous resistance.

          • AlDeLarge

            Why are you conflating “liberals” and libertarians? I use the quotes on “liberals” because I’m talking about the people who oppose liberty and can only call themselves “liberal” in the liberal/conservative aspects of change and no change. Libertarians are classic liberals in the liberal/authoritarian sense. I’ve never heard of a libertarian who supported gun control.

          • Wow!

            Libertarians are simply liberals with guns. They are the border to and from conservatism. People get the misconception that Libertarians are super conservatives, but the truth is the opposite. Take a look at lp.orgs website. Libertarians are extreme moderates. My personal opinion is the path of neutrality and moderation in a polarized subject where the answers are only yes/no, means to hold an undecided and uneducated stance. Again see my example on marijuana above ^

          • A bearded being from beyond ti

            i was being cheeky

    • McThag

      Don’t forget improved air quality and the end of gridlock on their roads.

    • Gary Kirk

      Nah, you missed it.. They banned all living matter in the state..

      • hikerguy

        They most certainly banned most grey matter for sure.

        • CountryBoy

          The Governor of California comes from royal blood, and is next in the royal line to be “Baron of Greymatter”.

          • jay

            “Barren”, there fixed it for you!

            Still remember when he was in power the first time. We had a water crisis then too. That’s where the phrase: “If it’s yellow, let it mello.” and “If it’s Brown, flush it down.” came from. Still has a lot a meaning today. Not looking for the royal *sshats newsom and de leon vying for governor ship. I hope someone cull the herd.

          • CountryBoy

            Reads the same either way, so folks doing so get the gist of it!

            Good sayings – not being in CA, I miss some of the antics out there (not “miss” as “wish they were here” though!).

            It seems as though CA has had a lot of governors that don’t really do the will of the people, or perhaps they’re doing the will of their own people rather than the voters.

          • jay

            That’s true. I don’t think we’ve had a representative government in 20 years.

    • Seth Hill

      Update to this news story, California has just managed to become the first state to not have any residents.

      • Unfortunately, they are moving to red states and then voting Democrat.

    • jay

      You are talking about removing ALL LIBERALS from kalifornia. WAY TO GO!

    • Jimbo

      The same thing happened here in New York!

  • Anon

    “I vigorously disagree with the… intent of the state’s legislature”

    TFB. Firearms NOT politics.

    • gunsandrockets

      Can’t escape politics when discussing laws regulating firearms. And because of the dire consequences of not obeying the laws regulating firearms, some discussion of those laws is going to happen here.

      • Waz

        Then why keep the motto?

        • gunsandrockets

          TFB is amazingly politics free when you consider the alternatives. Yeah, the comments posted about this story have piled on a lot of politics. But even so most of the talk has been questions about the law, and discussion of ways to abide by the law.

  • Black Dots
    • Disarmed in CA

      STOPNEWSOM.COM

  • Constitution-loving Californians should outright move to Free America. As long as there is a Free America, that is. I don’t see anything good coming in November.

    • gunsandrockets

      That is something known as “voting with your feet”.

  • Major Tom

    Sounds like I need to start filing presidential election paperwork for 2020.

    • Democrats: Just Lies & Hate

      If HRC wins in November…

      It’s all academic after that. Country is gone.

      Nothing but political window dressing afterwards.

  • uncle bobedy

    As a resident for one last year before I leave this 3rd world state, I understand the logic behind this acute business decision. Why would you sell something that can’t legally be owned in the state?

    I just wish more manufacturers discontinued their sales to California, so law enforcement, and the security details of politicians would be negatively impacted in something approaching the level of infringement, and duress that these god damn laws keep bringing up.

    Until cops, who get carve outs when gun control laws pass here in Stupidville, start being adversely affected by a lack of needed equipment, this… ahh what the hell’s the point.

    End.

    • Cymond

      But they CAN be owned in the state, just not sold starting in 2017. That’s 2 months with of customers frantically trying to get everything they can, while they still can.

      If I still lived in CA, I would be maxing out credit cards to get as many different kinds as possible. When I lived there, it was impossible to acquire a preban RAW. Californians will probably never have another chance to register “assault weapons”.

      Imagine if ATF reclassified SlideFire stocks as machineguns, but they let us keep & register them, and then after registration, we could put in true autosears. It would essentially reopen the registry temporarily. (But we all know that if ATF reclassifies something as a MG, they’ll confiscate not register, like the old Akins.)

      • gunsandrockets

        Interesting analogy.

      • uncle bobedy

        Brother, I appreciate the distinction, but we really are splitting microns at this point. To argue that we can still keep these type of guns in 2017, just not sell them, in essence “grandfathering” them in as legal should at this point be remembered as the same legal standing for magazines over 10 rounds.

        Those were legally grandfathered in, and yet, ass cheeks Newsom and dingle-berry DeLeon have removed that “loophole” with their dueling gun bills. They will never stop this war. It is not blatantly calling for their real goal, which is the destruction of the 2nd Amendment. It is far more insidious and successful, they ask for little things at first and incrementally get more and more avenues of free expression of our rights blocked. This part today, that part tomorrow. There is no joy to be found in assuring ourselves that having a grandfathered magazine or firearm type is the same thing as a right that can be freely exercised as WE see fit.

        We need to boycott the perfidy of any Democrat or Republican in any office in which they represent the people from continuing beyond their present term. I would take a damn manatee in a suit, before I would ever vote for a politician who wants to further erode our ability to freely express our rights in this state and all the states of this union.

        No more stopgaps, no more self-assured distinctions that exist only as temporary holding positions to acclimate the people to the pending loss of their rights. Give them no quarter, they do not care about you, because they take from you everything they can. The next step is the banning of the new bullet button tool, the removal of the pistol grip, the banning of barrels, stocks, bcg’s, with the logic being, if you can’t buy the firearm, why do you need parts. They won’t care what the answer is because they will pass a law that does their talking for them.

    • gunsandrockets

      Yeah the cops need to feel the pain too if we are going to move the needle in places like California or Massachusetts. Getting rid of the legal exemptions for police guns might be possible by piggybacking on anti-cop movements like BLM, but still highly unlikely.

      My favorite idea is to organize a consumer boycott of ammunition, like the consumer boycott which brought Smith&Wesson to heel back in 2000. The gun people have a lot of power if they vote with their wallets.

      For example: discover which vendors supply ammunition to Massachusetts police departments and boycott those vendors until they cut the cops off. If the Massachusetts government wants ammo, force them to pay for their own ammo factory!

      • DataMatters

        Governments never do that. It is a power play against the people and the people are losing very badly on a number of fronts. We are the frogs boiling in the pot. I look at NY, CT, MA, the whole northeast really. It’s a bad scene. Our nation is dying whether we like it or not.

  • Marcus D.

    One MAJOR correction to this post. Not only will you not be able to buy a new AK after the first of the year, you won’t be able to buy a used one either. Used ones will be deemed “assault weapons” unless they are “featureless” (i.e. SKS) or have a fixed magazine. (I am not an expert, but as far as I know, an AK with a fixed magazine cannot be loaded without field stripping the rifle.) After the firt of the year, “assault weapons” cannot be sold, gifted transferred devised to anyone residing in California.

    • DataMatters

      The restrictions on private sales is the biggest infringement. It’s the King of England all over again.

  • Dr. Longfellow Buchenrad

    While I consider any firearm manufacturer deciding not to make a CA compliant gun playing into the CaliCommies hands, I would consider it hard to justify offering one if I owned or managed my own firearm company. Why cant it just go ahead and do everyone a favor and fall off into the Pacific.

  • Christian Hedegaard-Schou

    The funny thing is, the pictured rifle would be fine in CA after the new law if they just ship it without the pistol grip attached.

    Then it can be up to the end user to decide how he wants to make the gun comply with the new law before re-attaching the pistol grip.

    • iksnilol

      Or just use it sans pistol grip, AKs are fully workable without a pistol grip… I know, strange but c’est la vie.

    • Marcus D.

      Attach a pistol grip and you have “manufactured” an “assault weapon.” Here’s your ticket for two felonies (manufacturing and possession of an unregistered AW), nice doing business with you.

  • Seth Hill

    Here’s a better idea, how about all gun owners in CA discontinue being residents of the state? Let them have their “utopia”.

  • valorius

    I will never understand why gun owners in California don’t just simply move to America.

  • rrangel

    The end result of massive gun control, will mean out of hand violent crime, like that of Chicago and Mexico. Where you know that the left, will hope you ignore that it was their doing, that created it. And they still have the nerve to ask for more gun regulation, when the crime culprits, are their cash cow constituents whom they will not name.

  • HAHA73

    I heard that Arsenal ran out of krylon and could not finish coloring their canted fsb’s..

  • Dave

    Ok everyone, take all of your excess firecrackers, exploding targets, dyn-o-might, h-and-gren-aids and whatever else goes boom and dump it into the San Andreas Fault. Maybe we can nudge it a little to slide into the ocean!

  • jcitizen

    Damn! Are semi auto rifles with tube feeds holding more than 10 rounds illegal too?

  • Mikial

    Sorry, Brothers and Sisters. But if you live in California there is only one true solution open to you.

    Move out of California. Let the Liberals and the Gangstas they have nurtured have the state.

  • Doug Larsen

    Well, I believe what the facts show me I should believe. Not what my ‘feelers’ want to believe.

    It’s interesting how none of the responses to my post actually attempt to refute what I said. I wonder why?