MG34 and MG42 semis LEGAL IN CALIFORNIA??, read this..

[Daskraut]

When I inquired if you can make one of their semi MG34s calif legal, some guy at mid states armory says that if I mount my MG34 semi to a tripod that it would be CALIFORNIA LEGAL!! , what do you guys think about this?.I need the big brains to work on this one. before I sell one of my motorcycles and buy one of his guns!.

[Jason]

if you mount it to a tripod it makes it legal?

that sounds wierd to this small south dakota brain

[ak47dennis]

The only item that I have ever heard concerning 34's/42's in komiefornnna was that you can’t have the evil pistol grip?? But then again I don’t live their (nor will I ever) you might want to check with some of the guys on 1919.com.

[MISTER DEUCE]

Each of you had half of the answer. It cannot have a pistol grip if it has a magazine/ammunition feeding device (ie, belt fed). The way that TNW solved the Kommie problem for its MG34 was to fabricate a new trigger housing for CA guns. It gets rid of the pistol grip entirely. You can then fire it with the laftette style tripods. They made an adaptor so that MG34s will work with a MG42/MG3 post war lafette tripod. I just saw a CA legal TNW MG34 a few weeks ago being fired in exactly that manner.

If you mounted it to a tripod but still retained the pistol grip on the weapon, then it would not solve the legal problem.

Just keep the original grip for trips out of state, or better yet, when you move to a better state.

[goesboom]

I just checked into this with the CA DOJ. They told me that there are no specific regulations on semi-auto belt fed guns. But the law states that:
a "magazine" shall mean any ammunition feeding device (so that can mean a belt)

So a Assualt weapon is:
A semiautomatic centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine (remember a magazine means any ammunition feeding device) and any one of the following:
1) A pistol grip tha protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon (mg34 and 42)
2) a flash surpressor (mg34 and 42 has these)
3) a shroud that is attached to or partially or completely encircles the barrel that allows the bearer to fire the weapon without burning his or her hand, except a slide that encloses the barrel. (mg34 and 42)
There are many more but these a the relivent ones

So the 34 and 42 meet all those. So I wonder how someone is making a CA legal version? Unless I'm completely reading this wrong it is not legal in CA

goesBOOM

POW of the Peoples RepubliK or Kalifornia

[MISTER DEUCE]

goesboom, I hope you didn't mention the 34 and the 42 to the DOJ. We don't need anymore scrutiny of belt feds or kits. It's best to look at the laws yourself and check with knowledgeable gun people to make sure that you are in compliance. DOJ will not help you. Thay are anti gun and will err on the side of telling you not to own anything.

If you look at the laws themselves, you will find that your list above is not accurate. Your item number three (a barrel shroud) is NOT a defining characteristic of an assault RIFLE, when combined with a detachable magazine. Instead, it is a chracteristic of an assault PISTOL and therefore does not apply. For everyone's benefit (or at least those that care about CA's crappy laws), here is the generic characteristic portion of CA's AW rifle ban, aka SB23:

Generic Characteristics Defining Assault Weapons:
12276.1 (a) Notwithstanding Penal Code section 12276, “assault weapon” shall also mean the following:
Rifles
(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and 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.


I already provided information above about how to comply with the pistol grip ban--you need a modified trigger pack that omits the grip itself and you fire the 42 or 34 off a laffette tripod. That is what TNW's CA legal MG34 does. Same principle applies to 42's.

As for flash suppressors, if you really want to be safe, you can always drill a hole in the cone such that the shooter will see the muzzle flash. It will then be cosmetic as it will not hide the flash. Arguably, that would satisfy this requirement. As it stands, a rifle can have a muzzle brake, just not a flash hider. The difference between the two is slight.

In sum, I am very happy to tell you that you are wrong because it means that there is some small hope for us.


p.s. Here is the portion dealing with pistols, so you can see that this is where that language comes from:

Pistols
(4) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer.
(B) A second handgrip.
(C) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel that allows the bearer to
fire the weapon without burning his or her hand, except a slide that encloses the barrel.
(D) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.
(5) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 roun

[goesboom]

Good I'm glad I'm wrong (not usually the case) but this time yes! When I called DOJ it was in regards to semi beltfeds in general, but I never mentioned any models. It was only after I began reading the laws did I wonder about the issues I mentioned.

So if this configuration is legal here in CA this means you can only have 10rd loaded belt? correct?
You must have a ground mount of some sort? Is there any "offical paperwork" that states this is a certified build by CA. Obviously everyone interrupts the laws differently (as shown by my mistake) but the real question is does CA DOJ agree with what you have determined?
I ask because you know how the CA DOJ operates. You drill a hole in the flashider to make it "none functional". yet the device is still called a flashider. Does CA still consider that a evil feature?

I'm also thinking if the barrel shroud is for the pistol, then I have no problem with a semi Maxim. vickers, 1917. I know these guns are off the subject of this board...Just thinking out loud.

Thanks for the info.
goesBOOM

[MISTER DEUCE]

I'm not aware of any DOJ ruling on converting flash hiders so that they comply with the law. I think it is common sense. A flash hider hides the flash from the shooter. If it no longer does that, why wouldn't it comply? Isn't it then more like a muzzle brake or other appendage on the end of a barrel which is legal?

Again, there is no such thing as "certified non-assault weapons". The whole idea behind the generic characteristics is that they wanted to be able to ban weapons without having to list each brand and model by name. Is your Remington 700 bolt action hunting rifle certified as a non-assault rifle? No, it isn't. You just know that it doesn't fall into the categories, right? Same thing here. So they aren't going to issue proclamations about what DOES comply, patricularly because someone could change one characteristic in 5 minutes and then it wouldn't comply.

Now, what you can do is look to analagous situations. I again point you to TNW's CA legal MG34. Take the hint and go look at what they did there.

As for belts, it is my understanding that DOJ considers belts to be "ammunition feeding devices", just like magazines. Now, if you had a magazine prior to the ban, it would be grandfathered under CA law. My guess is that the same would apply to belts, like the box of old belts I've had sitting around for parts kits that I never built. However, it gets more interesting if you acquire a belt after the ban. Arguably, you could comply as long as you only load 10 consecutive rounds and then skip a round. You'd have to cycle the weapon again, similar to changing a mag. Is there going to be a DOJ ruling on that? I doubt it. If they did issue one, do you think that they'd use common sense and apply the meaning most favorable to us, or the most restrictive interpretation? Thus, until some poor schmoe takes a case to an appellate court and gets a decision, you won't know for sure. You're on your own.

As for the 1919, they are perfectly legal in CA. They are sold here all the time. If you re-read the law, you will see why they are legal. (Hint: although 1919's are belt fed, they have no pistol grip protruding conspicusously below the action. The pistol grip is behing the action.)

[aftershock2222]

Until I retire,I'm stuck in this damn state.I'm pretty familiar with the insane gun control laws.I read the Sacramento loons' discription of an "assault rifle" over and over.As long I hack off the pistol grip and flash hider nozzle,I'm pretty sure I'll be okay.My semi will look kind of ugly,but I'll make it pretty when I move out of state.

[TOM R]

buy a cheap used stripped grip frame from rtg to cut up and just pack away the good one, the flash cone and grip make me unsure being in n.j. but what you gonna do, if someone wants to make an issue they can find something illegal in just about anything, most people don't realize there are semi beltfed guns so they ASSUME I am a class3 which I correct them and say I am not (wish I was)

because "you can't own that in n.j." i say why not, "it is a machinegun", no it isn't it is a semi auto rifle that looks like a machinegun, "oh ok well thats neat"

just remember guys other peoples ignorance to this hobby is our biggest enemy

[huntsinmtns]

This is the prototype Kalifornia grip for the 42 in the mount, GW & JG this is what they will look like. Few other mods to be done yet for forward mounting and grip panels but I think you get the idea.

GR

[huntsinmtns]

And the underside of the Ca model.

[aftershock2222]

That's great work,huntsinmtns.That's exactly how I figured a Kali trigger housing would look like. I hope to have you work on my parts in the near future.