Springfield XD Forum banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,705 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
On another thread (don't recall which one) I said there was a bill pending that might keep 1911 models out because of new requirements. I was wrong, the 2005 law is here and the sections applying to chamber indicator and mag. disconnect will be effective in 2006 and 2007 respectively. I realize this doesn't just apply to 1911 models. The below refers to pistols not allowed to be sold in the state. I thank orc4hire for the below info.

) Commencing January 1, 2006, for a center-fire semiautomatic pistol that is not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 12131, it does not have either a chamber load indicator, or a magazine disconnect mechanism.
(5) Commencing January 1, 2007, for all center-fire semiautomatic pistols that are not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 12131, it does not have both a chamber load indicator and if it has a detachable magazine, a magazine disconnect mechanism.
(6) Commencing January 1, 2006, for all rimfire semiautomatic pistols that are not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 12131, it does not have a magazine disconnect mechanism, if it has a detachable magazine.
(c) As used in this section, a "chamber load indicator" means a device that plainly indicates that a cartridge is in the firing chamber. A device satisfies this definition if it is readily visible, has incorporated or adjacent explanatory text or graphics, or both, and is designed and intended to indicate to a reasonably foreseeable adult user of the pistol, without requiring the user to refer to a user's manual or any other resource other than the pistol itself, whether a cartridge is in the firing chamber.
(d) As used in this section, a "magazine disconnect mechanism" means a mechanism that prevents a semiautomatic pistol that has a detachable magazine from operating to strike the primer of ammunition in the firing chamber when a detachable magazine is not inserted in the semiautomatic pistol.


Guess if I'm going to get a 1911 model, I better do it this year unless there are 1911s that already have these features that I'm not aware of.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
347 Posts
I looked this up a few weeks ago, when that story about the cat knocking the gun off the kitchen counter was going around. Some people in another forum were wondering how pistols are tested for drop safety.

California's testing looks pretty reasonable... until you look down the tracks and see the oncoming train. Notice that their requirement for a loaded chamber indicator includes explanatory text or graphics _on the pistol_? I don't know of any pistol that meets that requirement, so it is entirely possible that after January of '07 it will not be possible to buy a new centerfire semi-auto in California. I may be reading it wrong, or it might be applied differently, but I wouldn't bet money on that....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
196 Posts
retired said:
On another thread (don't recall which one) I said there was a bill pending that might keep 1911 models out because of new requirements. I was wrong, the 2005 law is here and the sections applying to chamber indicator and mag. disconnect will be effective in 2006 and 2007 respectively. I realize this doesn't just apply to 1911 models. The below refers to pistols not allowed to be sold in the state. I thank orc4hire for the below info.

) Commencing January 1, 2006, for a center-fire semiautomatic pistol that is not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 12131, it does not have either a chamber load indicator, or a magazine disconnect mechanism.
(5) Commencing January 1, 2007, for all center-fire semiautomatic pistols that are not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 12131, it does not have both a chamber load indicator and if it has a detachable magazine, a magazine disconnect mechanism.
(6) Commencing January 1, 2006, for all rimfire semiautomatic pistols that are not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 12131, it does not have a magazine disconnect mechanism, if it has a detachable magazine.
(c) As used in this section, a "chamber load indicator" means a device that plainly indicates that a cartridge is in the firing chamber. A device satisfies this definition if it is readily visible, has incorporated or adjacent explanatory text or graphics, or both, and is designed and intended to indicate to a reasonably foreseeable adult user of the pistol, without requiring the user to refer to a user's manual or any other resource other than the pistol itself, whether a cartridge is in the firing chamber.
(d) As used in this section, a "magazine disconnect mechanism" means a mechanism that prevents a semiautomatic pistol that has a detachable magazine from operating to strike the primer of ammunition in the firing chamber when a detachable magazine is not inserted in the semiautomatic pistol.


Guess if I'm going to get a 1911 model, I better do it this year unless there are 1911s that already have these features that I'm not aware of.
Read carefully.

for a center-fire semiautomatic pistol that is not already listed on the roster
In other words, if the gun is already on the roster, and is continuously renewed, it is exempted from the requirment. So many guns that we already have will be exempted.

On subject of loaded chamber indicator, a manufacturer mearly has to paint the extractor and get away with it.

For the magazine disconnect issue, as long as firearm manufacturers manage to keep renewing the model, they won't have to worry about. However, introducing a new model would be a hassle since they now need to have that disconnect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
347 Posts
Ah, you're right. Looks like anything already approved gets grandfathered. At least for now. Forget about anything new, though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
556 Posts
orc4hire said:
Notice that their requirement for a loaded chamber indicator includes explanatory text or graphics _on the pistol_?
I wonder if a manufacturer could just slap a sticker with a brief notice about the loaded chamber indicator and call it good?

Honestly, I don't see what good a loaded chamber indicator does. If anything, it would promote horseplay amongst a `non-gun person' because "Hey, it isn't loaded."

-James
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
782 Posts
Meta4 said:
Honestly, I don't see what good a loaded chamber indicator does. If anything, it would promote horseplay amongst a `non-gun person' because "Hey, it isn't loaded."
I agree entirely. While loaded chamber indicators are useful, they don't make a gun inherently more 'safe' and in fact could encourage improper handling due to assumptions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,667 Posts
dolanp said:
Meta4 said:
Honestly, I don't see what good a loaded chamber indicator does. If anything, it would promote horseplay amongst a `non-gun person' because "Hey, it isn't loaded."
I agree entirely. While loaded chamber indicators are useful, they don't make a gun inherently more 'safe' and in fact could encourage improper handling due to assumptions.
+1

ALWAYS do a press check..... never trust an indicator.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
347 Posts
Guys, it doesn't matter if these requirements REALLY make the gun safer. That's not the point. The point is to make fewer guns available, and to make the ones that are available more expensive.

Remember, there's no such thing as 'gun control' anymore. The new phrase is 'reasonable gun safety legislation.' But the people deciding what's 'reasonable' don't want you to have any guns....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
190 Posts
The new Ruger P345 and all (I believe) new .22 variants have a loaded chamber indicator that pops up unobtrusively when the chamber has a case in it. It is painted red and has the word LOADED stamped in it. Notice I said a case, as all this indicator tells you is that there is something in the chamber, not if the case is loaded and live or not. It really is not a huge thing and would be easy to add to new models. It is just a shame that we should have to. It proves what anti-gunners don't know or take the time to learn....all guns are always loaded!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
196 Posts
The idea behind magazine disconnect is that some people think(or should I say their children) taking magazine out and think the semi-auto is safe and then fool around with it. I have no clue who would think a loaded chamber indicator would help to a naive untrained people, but since the cost of having a loaded chamber indicator is small(paint job), I see not much problem there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
298 Posts
orc4hire said:
Guys, it doesn't matter if these requirements REALLY make the gun safer. That's not the point. The point is to make fewer guns available, and to make the ones that are available more expensive.
quote]

You can get an approved ed brown kobra carry for only 2400. notice that the same model that isn't california approved is 200 less.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,534 Posts
9mmPara said:
The idea behind magazine disconnect is that some people think(or should I say their children) taking magazine out and think the semi-auto is safe and then fool around with it. I have no clue who would think a loaded chamber indicator would help to a naive untrained people, but since the cost of having a loaded chamber indicator is small(paint job), I see not much problem there.
I also think that the loaded chamber indicator will do little more than make someone complacient and more likely to not do visual checks. That's dangerous. The problem I have with the whole deal is that what we've got is Cali telling gun owners that they're not responsible enough to own a gun without one; but the fact is that a gun with a CLI is just as dangerous as one without. This is just one small step on a long road to smart guns, methinks.

Also, I hate...loath...disdain magazine disconnects. First off they're a pain in the ass and dangerous. Dry firing a gun is MUCH safer without the magazine in it, as your KNOW that when you rack the slide, if there's no mag in it, it's not going to chamber anything. The other part of it is this: what if you accidentally drop your mag right when you need your gun the most? Even if you do have a round chambered, you've still got nothing but an expensive brick.

The BEST gun safety is your finger. Keep your finger off the trigger, and the gun won't fire. This is just more Cali-liberal legislation that trys to take responsibility away from the individual.

Damn. I got all riled up and started ranting. I think I stopped making sense too. Sorry guys...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
300 Posts
Yeah, just how many people are shot because someone dropped the mag and thought it was "unloaded"? Probably only a small percentage of accidental shootings. And I'm sure all the kiddies will quickly learn the various kinds of loaded chamber indicators used by different manufacturers. :roll:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
196 Posts
mr0w1 said:
I also think that the loaded chamber indicator will do little more than make someone complacient and more likely to not do visual checks. That's dangerous.
Very valid point indeed. I hope those people who are at least marginally able to think actually follow proper clearing prcedure instead of relying on LCI(CLI in your post). I beleive that it is important we drill that into people's head.(not literally but you get the idea :wink: ). A problem I see with LCI is that most people don't even know what it looks like and that means it's going to be a redundant system.

Also, I hate...loath...disdain magazine disconnects. First off they're a pain in the ass and dangerous. Dry firing a gun is MUCH safer without the magazine in it, as your KNOW that when you rack the slide, if there's no mag in it, it's not going to chamber anything. The other part of it is this: what if you accidentally drop your mag right when you need your gun the most? Even if you do have a round chambered, you've still got nothing but an expensive brick.
A good point to ponder too. The reasoning behind magazine disconnect is that thanks to movies and tv shows, people know that taking magazine out takes bullets out, but they don't know that there can be a round in the chamber. So kids can take the magazine out, but not know that there is a round in chamber, and take safety off and pull the trigger. This has happened occasionally and although they are not exclusively by kids.

For dry firing, it can be suggested that we move the slide just enough to cock the firing pin, and then continue, or take the magazine out, rechamber. It's tedious, but it's doable.

Damn. I got all riled up and started ranting. I think I stopped making sense too. Sorry guys...
If you think you are not making sense, you can check it by comparing yourself to the Brady Bunch and realize how straight headed you are. :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
813 Posts
I am anxiously waiting to see how things will go this November when San Francisco tries to ban all handguns and requires everyone to turn them in. Should make for some very interesting situations. (reminds me, I need to get to work on that wall between Nevada and Ca. If they are idiots to vote the politicians into office, they can stay there and deal with it)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,705 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
9mmPara, you brought up an interesting point to my post, but isn't possible that the law could be interpreted by the regulating agency that only the guns on the roster in their present configuration are legal. If the manufacturer makes any modification, no matter how minor, cosmetic or not, to an existing permitted weapon, it becomes a "new" weapon and comes under the new restrictions?

It wouldn't surprise me if this occurred, for as I have posted before, I believe the anti-gunners won't be happy until all guns in Ca. are illegal and le will be like the bobbies of London. Of course, Boxer and Fienstein will retain their ccw's, along with their bodyguards, because they are "special."

If it wasn't for my family living here in S. Calif. and the climate, I would try to convince my wife to move to a gun loving state.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
196 Posts
retired said:
9mmPara, you brought up an interesting point to my post, but isn't possible that the law could be interpreted by the regulating agency that only the guns on the roster in their present configuration are legal. If the manufacturer makes any modification, no matter how minor, cosmetic or not, to an existing permitted weapon, it becomes a "new" weapon and comes under the new restrictions?
It is already like that. Handguns on the rosters are only ones that are available for public to buy as a new one. Old ones can be sold without being on the roster through private party transfer, as far as I know.

What the manufacturers can do is selling the existing configuration, but have the different configuration as an optional choice. It's not often that guns have significant changes, and thus should not be a big concern.

There should be a mutil-pronged approach in my opinion. First is to educate the general public that having a gun doesn't mean the person is a homicidal maniac. Second is to make sure we show the antis that we are not what they make us to look like. By being serious in safety at all times, we show that those who get guns also can display above average discipline. Third is to proactively seek legal muscle. In addition to current attempts to stop any more really stupid laws(10 cents per ammo), we should create the situation where contituents are able trust their Mr. Jones with his XD and don't give a damn about more restrictive legistature.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top