Ca. Microstamping Law - Page 2

62coltnavy · March 3, 2015, 02:08 AM

As long as a gun is unchanged, it can stay on the roster by payment of the annual $200 fee. There is a special Shield model made specifically for the California market, and given the costs associated with required modification to meet the pre-microstamping rules, it will be staying on the roster for some time.
Ruger on the other hand, has withdrawn all of its pistols from the California market. I understand that there is one still on the roster, but it is no longer manufactured and will likely drop off when the registration expires.
If Glock ever stops manufacturing Gen IIIs in its Austrian plant, Glocks will drop off the roster, since it cannot sell either the American built Gen IIIs or its Gen IVs in California. Similarly, Springfield can only sell its XD model from its Croatian polymer pistols, but not the XDm or XDS. I haven't checked on its 1911s, but as long as changes are limited to visual changes, they will continue to be sold, same as with the Colt 80 Series. Colt can also sell its 1873 SAA, but I don't think any other models are on the roster. I'm not sure that Colt cares.
We will not be seeing any of Sig's new models, and the selection we get is rather limited. I know there is a California version of the P238, but I've never actually seen one in the wild.

HarrySchell · March 3, 2015, 01:21 PM

You can add the new Browning 85%-scale 1911 in .380 ACP (and the Glock in .380) to the prohibited list.

Everything is going according to plan.

I don't recall that AG Harris had an engineering degree and manufacturing experience to determine that the microstamping technology is feasible and effective to serve its intended purpose.

Some people add stuff to their resume; she omitted this expertise, I guess. What a modest lady.

March 3, 2015, 01:21 PM	#27
HarrySchell Senior Member Join Date: March 30, 2007 Location: South CA Posts: 566	You can add the new Browning 85%-scale 1911 in .380 ACP (and the Glock in .380) to the prohibited list. Everything is going according to plan. I don't recall that AG Harris had an engineering degree and manufacturing experience to determine that the microstamping technology is feasible and effective to serve its intended purpose. Some people add stuff to their resume; she omitted this expertise, I guess. What a modest lady. __________________ Loyalty to petrified opinions never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul in this world — and never will. — Mark Twain

March 3, 2015, 02:08 AM	#26
62coltnavy Senior Member Join Date: February 1, 2011 Posts: 356	As long as a gun is unchanged, it can stay on the roster by payment of the annual $200 fee. There is a special Shield model made specifically for the California market, and given the costs associated with required modification to meet the pre-microstamping rules, it will be staying on the roster for some time. Ruger on the other hand, has withdrawn all of its pistols from the California market. I understand that there is one still on the roster, but it is no longer manufactured and will likely drop off when the registration expires. If Glock ever stops manufacturing Gen IIIs in its Austrian plant, Glocks will drop off the roster, since it cannot sell either the American built Gen IIIs or its Gen IVs in California. Similarly, Springfield can only sell its XD model from its Croatian polymer pistols, but not the XDm or XDS. I haven't checked on its 1911s, but as long as changes are limited to visual changes, they will continue to be sold, same as with the Colt 80 Series. Colt can also sell its 1873 SAA, but I don't think any other models are on the roster. I'm not sure that Colt cares. We will not be seeing any of Sig's new models, and the selection we get is rather limited. I know there is a California version of the P238, but I've never actually seen one in the wild.