The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old June 30, 2013, 06:01 PM   #1
magnum777
Member
 
Join Date: May 2, 2012
Location: upstate New York
Posts: 90
Why is the Springfield XDm illegal in California?

I recently purchased a Springfield XDm , I saw on the side of the box it came in read it is not legal in CA. Why?
magnum777 is offline  
Old June 30, 2013, 06:04 PM   #2
zoomie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: GA
Posts: 1,870
Because handguns are dangerous.

http://certguns.doj.ca.gov/

But no, seriously. Springfield hasn't jumped through the hoops to get the XDM approved.

Last edited by zoomie; June 30, 2013 at 06:09 PM.
zoomie is offline  
Old June 30, 2013, 06:28 PM   #3
tahunua001
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 21, 2011
Location: Idaho
Posts: 7,839
there are no magazines with less than 11 round capacity for the XDM.
__________________
ignore my complete lack of capitalization. I still have no problem correcting your grammar.
I never said half the stuff people said I did-Albert Einstein
You can't believe everything you read on the internet-Benjamin Franklin
tahunua001 is offline  
Old June 30, 2013, 06:47 PM   #4
zoomie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: GA
Posts: 1,870
You could use magazine blocks to limit XDM mags to 10. Epoxy and pin the limiter as you see fit to comply with CA DOJ.

http://www.magazineblocks.com/magent...-magblock.html

Springfield would have to sell the pistol from the factory with a limiter of some sort already installed, and they haven't felt like doing that (or the other litany of requirements they have to meet in CA for their other pistols.)

Last edited by zoomie; June 30, 2013 at 06:52 PM.
zoomie is offline  
Old June 30, 2013, 06:55 PM   #5
magnum777
Member
 
Join Date: May 2, 2012
Location: upstate New York
Posts: 90
Actually the Springfield XDm I just bought came with (2) 10 round mags, that is the only way they sell them in New York.
magnum777 is offline  
Old June 30, 2013, 07:01 PM   #6
Shane Tuttle
Staff
 
Join Date: November 28, 2005
Location: Montana
Posts: 9,455
Even so, it has to be placed on the CA DOJ approved list in order for it to be a legally owned firearm.
__________________
If it were up to me, the word "got" would be deleted from the English language.

Posting and YOU: http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/posting
Shane Tuttle is offline  
Old June 30, 2013, 07:03 PM   #7
BigD_in_FL
Junior member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: The "Gunshine State"
Posts: 1,981
You were able to get one in NY? WOW

Quote:
If it were up to me, the word "got" would be deleted from the English language.
As would the Valley Girl word "like"........
BigD_in_FL is offline  
Old June 30, 2013, 07:12 PM   #8
GJSchulze
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 3, 2013
Location: Western New York
Posts: 454
The only XDm with 10 round mags is the 45 because it uses the same mags as the XD. All other XDm models use only the larger mags. I live in NY and bought the XDm 9mm 5.25 from a gun dealer who also is a deputy sheriff, which is why he could order it in the first place. He placed a block in 6 mags and hot glued the base plate on.

I was surprised to see any XD 's on the CA list because I thought pistols had to have a magazine lockout (no mag, no bang) and the loaded indicator on the side, not on top. Is this incorrect or been changed?
GJSchulze is offline  
Old June 30, 2013, 10:47 PM   #9
Oceanbob
Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 2012
Posts: 47
Quote:
I was surprised to see any XD 's on the CA list because I thought pistols had to have a magazine lockout (no mag, no bang) and the loaded indicator on the side, not on top. Is this incorrect or been changed?
You are correct. The XD got in just under the timeline. All new handguns submitted to the CDOJ must have a magazine disconnect and a proper loaded chamber indicator.

The XDm didn't make it. Too bad, it is a great handgun. This is also why Glocks in Gen4 are not on the California Approved List.

As a non-prohibited gun buyer in California, you can legally buy an
"Off List Handgun" from a private party. (not an FFL, Gun dealer).
Oceanbob is offline  
Old June 30, 2013, 10:58 PM   #10
rkeiger
Junior Member
 
Join Date: November 11, 2012
Posts: 8
The reason its illegal in California is because it doesn't have a magazine lock. If you drop the magazine you can still fire it and that is illegal in California.
rkeiger is offline  
Old July 1, 2013, 11:43 AM   #11
Dragline45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 3,513
Quote:
But no, seriously. Springfield hasn't jumped through the hoops to get the XDM approved.
BINGO. I live in Massachusetts and we have no new production Springfield pistols because Springfield refuses to also deal with Massachusetts ridiculous process of getting a pistol approved, same goes with a few other companies. Rifles are no problem, but for some reason handguns need to go through a ridiculous approval process, because we all know how much more dangerous a handgun is than a high powered rifle .
Dragline45 is offline  
Old July 2, 2013, 03:41 AM   #12
railroader
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 8, 2000
Location: Tucson Arizona
Posts: 1,756
Quote:
The reason its illegal in California is because it doesn't have a magazine lock. If you drop the magazine you can still fire it and that is illegal in California.
Really? I have quite a few handguns in california with out a mag lock that are legal. For new guns to be added to the roster they need to have a mag safety, a loaded chamber indicator and now the gun has to micro stamp the spent case. This is for dealer sold guns. These aren't requirements for private party transfers even though they go through a dealer.
railroader is offline  
Old July 2, 2013, 07:32 AM   #13
Palmetto-Pride
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 31, 2009
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 2,071
I heard any new hand guns in CA have to have GPS, Micro stamping, heart rate Monitor, Mood Detector, and a few more features I can't think of right now....
Palmetto-Pride is offline  
Old July 2, 2013, 10:19 PM   #14
jmstr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 24, 2001
Location: San Joaquin Valley, CA
Posts: 1,304
Micro-stamping? That is one I am unaware of.

However, LCI that sticks up like a flag is a must on all guns that wish to pass the test since 2007. Same with mag disconnect. And 10 round magazines.

It is legal to own one that doesn't have these features. It is legal for a gunshop to sell new firearms that do not have these features: as long a they were 'on the list' before those features became required. For example, I have a Ruger P97. No mag disconnect and no LCI. Legal. I bought it in 2002.

I bought a new RIA Tactical 5" 1911 2 years ago. No flagpole LCI and no mag disconnect. Legal. Still.

If they have been on the list since before it was required, and the manufacturer continues to put it on the list, it can legally be sold [Glock Gen 3 for example].

If the manufacturer lets it fall off the list due to slow sales, then it can never go back on.

However, I can sell you my Ruger P97 without the mag disconnect and LCI, as long as we do it face to face in the state.


New laws are coming down the pike here. Too many and too fast.

We may be limited to two off-roster firearm transactions per year [and THAT is an improvement from the first draft of NO off-roster transactions]. And a bunch of other silly stuff.

Too bad people prefer to blame machinery instead of people for making bad choices. It is still a choice.
jmstr is offline  
Old July 2, 2013, 11:29 PM   #15
David13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 2, 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 243
The roster is not to make the gun legal or not. It's only to make it approved for retail sale.
Yes, they passed microstamping in 2007, but it was on hold for patent disputes. Now they supposedly solved that, so it supposedly has to go, on any gun that is now added to the roster.
Unless something happens.
Some miracle. Or court case. Or political shift. Which, lo and behold has happened more than once in the past.
And don't forget court cases. Did I say court cases?
dc
David13 is offline  
Old July 3, 2013, 05:01 AM   #16
thedudeabides
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 22, 2012
Posts: 1,031
Why do guns need magazine locks or loaded chamber indicators or firing pin blocks?

Maybe we need to stamp "Danger! Lead containing projectiles may come from this end! Lead, and other chemicals in firearm cartriges, have been found by the state of California to cause cancer." stamped on the muzzle.

Oh, and "NOT LEGAL IN CALIFORNIA" was also proudly displayed on my TRP's box.
thedudeabides is offline  
Old July 3, 2013, 05:19 AM   #17
rickyrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 8,387
Crime has been eliminated in California therefore no need for such firearms
__________________
Woohoo, I’m back In Texas!!!
rickyrick is offline  
Old July 3, 2013, 02:01 PM   #18
HKFan9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 3, 2008
Posts: 3,057
It is because the Wicked Witch of the West (I will let you guess who) said NO!.

She knew the M in XDm stood for Malicious Machine-gun Pistol.
HKFan9 is offline  
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2025 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.06746 seconds with 9 queries