What would you purchase after new CA gun laws

Yes. You can buy any semiautomatic rifle that does not have more than one banned feature. If it has a bullet button, it is now an "assault weapon".

>>32464571
I would buy a machine gun. I know a guy who isn't an ATF agent who would sell them.

t. not ATF

>>32464571
I am just buying 80% receivers at this point and building whatever I want. Making a 9mm ar pistol at the moment

File: DONOTCOMPLY.jpg (318KB, 1400x1050px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 1400x1050px

>>32464571
DONOTCOMPLY

>>32465386
If you owned a machine gun in California, your machine gun is exempt from all "assault weapon" laws and may have as many banned and evil features.

File: 1481685090807.jpg (4MB, 3984x2988px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3984x2988px

Finish building my AR lowers I purchased. Then I'll probably get a PTR, or Glock 19/P226. Probably the handgun first.

>>32465343
>more than one
No. That's the old AWB, not the CA one.
>A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following 1) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon; 2) a thumbhole stock; 3) a folding or telescoping stock; 4) a grenade or flare launcher; 5) a flash suppressor; or 6) a forward pistol grip;
Key phrase:
>any one of the following

>>32465613
The wording is ambiguous... maybe deliberately. Is the weapon banned if it has any one of the following, or if it has the capacity to accept any one of the following?

>>32464571
Ares SCR

>>32465745
> Is the weapon banned if it has any one of the following
Yes, that is how it works.

>>32464571
Unironically an M14, if you can get an FAL with a stripper clip guide that would be good too

>>32464571
A one way ticket out of California.

>>32465745
It's not ambiguous at all from a legal view.
>A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle
A rifle that is both semiautomatic and centerfire, note the comma.
>and
'in addition'
>has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine
Self explanatory.
>and
'in addition'
>any one of the following
Self explanatory, but note it is clearly a separate clause and contains no mention of capacity to accept within this clause.

Rimfires are exempt, anything that isn't semi auto (not including all full autos, because most can be switched into semi auto without modification) is exempt, and anything with an internal magazine is exempt. Note this section is one of many, and there are separate internal magazine restrictions. Namely that they must be 10 rounds or less.

>>32465550
Wrong. The CA AWB and NFA are not one in the same. A registered NFA item is not exempt from the CA AWB and a registered CA AW is not exempt from the NFA. A pre '86 full auto weapon unable to be used semi auto without modification would however be exempt from the CA AWB as it is not semi auto.

Both of you should know that CA has a defacto ban on all NFA item transfers and manufacturing outside of city or state law enforcement and SOT FFL holders. You basically cannot buy a pre '86 machinegun in CA even though it is technically legal.

ares scr with arak 21 upper. Since it's bufferles you can use the standard bolt. People have swapped the scr stock with an 1100 so with a bufferless upper you could probably swap in a magpul 870 stock. just remember to add a left hand mag release like a troy.

>>32464571
Whatever the hell I wanted.
It's always easiest to get illegal guns where they are most heavily regulated, and the state doesn't want to fuck with the aliens it imports any more than it has to, because they are the only people who still vote for the current govt.
Just hike to the nearest Spanish-speaking L.A. slum and get a shot-out AK for a handfull of chicken guts and a case of shit beer.

>>32464571
sweet
how much did he pay?

>>32465613
Copied directly from Jew York, I guess Cali wanted to take their spot as the shittiest gun right state