California Legislators Approve Ban on All Self-Loading Centerfire Rifles with Detachable Magazines — Bill Goes to Governor
Yesterday (August 10th), the California Assembly, on a 44-31 vote, approved SB 374, which bans the sale (or transfer) of ALL semi-automatic centerfire rifles that can accept a detachable magazine of any kind (no matter what the capacity). Californians who possess such rifles would be required to register them with the State, for a fee, prior to January 1, 2015. Since SB 374 has already passed the California State Senate, this bill, after conforming amendments in the Senate, is expected to go to Governor Jerry Brown for signature within a few weeks.
The scope of SB 374 is sweeping. It bans all self-loading centerfire rifles capable of using a detachable magazine, regardless of magazine capacity (or placement). The operative language of SB 374 with respect to magazines is an awkward double-negative. But the intent is clear — if a semi-auto centerfire rifle can accept a detachable magazine AT ALL, it is banned:
SECTION 1. Section 30515 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
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 with the capacity to accept no more than 10 rounds.
The way we interpret this, a semi-automatic with ANY kind of detachable magazine (even a one-rounder) would be banned. This would outlaw a wide variety of commonly-used hunting rifles fitted with flush-mounted 3-, and 4-round ‘pop-out’ magazines. This would outlaw the classic Remington 750 deer rifle, for example. It would outlaw M1 Garands which have an 8-round en bloc clip. And if you already own an M1 Garand, you would have to register it with the state government. (Under other legislation in the works in Sacramento, all ‘bullet button’ ARs would also be banned.)
Other observers read SB 374 the way we do — that it bans any and all centerfire rifles that can take a detachable magazine (of any capacity). Ammoland states that SB 374 will “eliminate the future sale, purchase, manufacture, importation and possession of semi-automatic rifles that can accept detachable magazines. No more mini-14s, no more ARs, no more M1s, and say goodbye to your Remington 750 for deer hunting. [T]he goal is clear – if it is a rifle and has a detachable magazine, then forget about owning one.”
| California Legislative Counsel’s Digest SB 374, as amended, Steinberg. Firearms: assault weapons. Existing law regulates the sale, carrying, and control of firearms, including assault weapons, and requires assault weapons to be registered with the Department of Justice. Violation of these provisions is a crime. Existing law defines a semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and other specified features and a semiautomatic weapon that has a fixed magazine with a capacity to accept 10 or more rounds as an assault weapon. This bill would, instead, classify a semiautomatic centerfire rifle that does not have a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept no more than 10 rounds as an assault weapon. The bill would require a person who, between Jan. 1, 2001, and Dec. 31, 2013, inclusive, lawfully possessed an assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine, including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with the use of a tool, and who, on or after Januarry 1, 2014, possesses that firearm, to register the firearm by July 1, 2015. By expanding the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. |
Similar Posts:
- Semi-Auto Ban Vetoed in California, But Lead Ammo Ban Approved
- New “Assault Weapons” Ban Introduced in Congress
- Feinstein Introduces New Ban on Semi-Auto Rifles and Magazines
- New York State Mandatory Registration Program Starts Today
- California SB249 Would Outlaw Mag-Equipped Semi-Auto Rifles
Share the post "California Legislators Approve Ban on All Self-Loading Centerfire Rifles with Detachable Magazines — Bill Goes to Governor"
Tags: Assault Rifle, Browning BAR, California, M1 Garand, Magazine ban, Remington 750, Sacramento, SB 374, Semi-Automatic, Steinberg
The bill covers pistols too:
(3) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
…
(D) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.
The intent was to ban the AR-based pistols, but there’s no word “centerfire” in the bill – so my Morini CM22 will be banned too!
Editor: These provisions were already in existing California. But yes, under current law, certain types of pistols would be deemed “assault weapons”. The changes made by SB 274 would apply to centerfire arms only.
IT HAS ARRIVED!
when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns…
of course this new law may just make outlaws out of otherwise law-abiding citizens…
good luck to the “citizens without representation” in the People’s Republic…
if your a gun owner and you voted for any of the legislators who passed this bill, be ashamed, be very ashamed
the whole premise of these bills is a lie, the drafters of this type of legislation are not interested in reducing crime, only gun ownership, and the sheep that elect them dont care about that,but way too many gun owners join in with the flock, either because they dont want to pay attention and just vote the union card or other liberal issues are more important to them, either way we are the oppressed minority here.
Any responsible gun owners from California are more than welcome to relocate to Michigan. We’ll welcome you here with open arms and reasonable laws.
Hopefully other firearms and accessory manufacturers will follow industry leaders like Ronnie Barret, Dennis DeMille, MacMillan, and MagPul; don’t sell to them, don’t service them, don’t bank with them, and don’t do business or manufacture a product where the lawmakers make it clear you are unwanted.
Those of us who live outside states like Connecticut, NY, California, and Colorado have a voice too. Don’t buy anything from those states and don’t visit them.
LEAVE CA! I’m in CT which is on the fast track to being the next CA and I can’t wait to leave here. I don’t want to give this State a Penny of my $$$. CA will implode financially…unless of course Uncle Barry bails it out with $$$ from States that actually contribute to the Country instead of taking. f&^#@ng Liberals!
Jim is right on the money. Don’t contribute a cent to these States. Let them sink. A law like this one should be on a ballot,not decided by representatives that don’t “represent” their constituents.
So if I went out and bought an ar-15 just after the bill was passed in… say a month, would it be legal to have a detachable 10 round mag? In other words, does it take affect as soon as he signs it or not until jan 1, 2014?
An en bloc clip is NOT a magazine, and the law does not include the word “Clips”. Therefore, the M1 Garand would not be effected by the language of the current law, nor would the SKS-45, which is already banned in the state by fiat. I mean, seriously, if you live in CA and you want to own guns, then you should have started lynching state senators years ago. Since you haven’t they’re gonna keep raping you.
Editor: Your argument make be logical, but Californians can’t count on this interpretation. The California DOJ has already lumped together SKS=type rifles with semi-autos that have detachable magazines. I have little doubt that the DOJ will deem the en bloc of the Garand to be a “removable magazine” for the purpose of this law. The odd “double-negative” in the law (“A semiautomatic centerfire rifle that does not have a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept no more than 10 rounds”) makes the law incredibly broad.
Christopher, the problem is these reps DO represent their constituents, the majority of voters in CA dont care about the 2A
Bryton, there’s another bill in the pipe specific to AR type rifles that will outlaw the bullet button requiring owners to weld up the mag catch making the mag permanently fixed, and still requiring them to register it.
Kick these clowns out of the union … simply not American. I don’t need ANYONE or ANYTHING from “mainstream” Commi-fornia.
Wow, Christopher Jordan is 100% wrong. No one should be able to vote to take away the rights of someone else. What a horrible position to take.
As and Australian, I can tell you exactly where this leads. I’d be doing more than saying ‘move’ because these people never sleep in their move to remove your rights.
They, after all will never be happy until ALL guns, of every kind. Target, hunting or self defense are gone. Not one type of gun is acceptable to these people. Do not EVER let them make ground, every time they do, you get closer to a world in which you are defended purely by the state at their whim.
Well, it seems that because of the language in the bill and the fact that these rifles have been used specifically for the purpose of hunting; this bill would be overbreadth and therefore unconstitutional.
Gary that bill has been scraped since this law already includes a full ban on bullet buttons.
IM AMERICAN AND ILL NEVER GIVE UP MY GUN