California DOJ Drops 28 More Handguns from Roster

By Woody published on in Chronicle, Firearms, General, Handguns, Industry News, Legal Issues, Manufacturers, News, Second Amendment

Law-abiding Californians are facing an increasing infringement on their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, say the Second Amendment Foundation and The Calguns Foundation.

California DOJ Drops Handguns

Two very different firearms that have fallen off the California DOJ roster since Feb. 1 include the Smith & Wesson 40-1 Color Case 150205 .38 Spl Revolver (bottom left in the top trio of wheel guns, removed 2/7/2014) and directly above, Smith & Wesson’s SW990L Polymer 9mm 120230 (removed 2/3/2014). On Jan. 31 alone, the California DOJ removed 3 Smith & Wesson M&P’s (not pictured): the M&P 40c (Mag. Safety) 109203 .40 S&W Pistol; the M&P 45 109006 .45 ACP, and the M&P 45 (Mag. Safety) 109206 .45 ACP Pistol.

Since Jan. 28, the California Department of Justice has removed 28 handgun models in common use from the handgun roster. Those handguns are now unavailable to gun buyers, Calguns reports. Smith & Wesson, Inc., manufactures 22 of those models.

Not surprisingly, Smith & Wesson and Sturm, Ruger & Co., Inc., have joined handgun maker GLOCK, Inc., in support of a federal Second Amendment civil rights lawsuit seeking to overturn the handgun regulation scheme commonly known as the “handgun roster.”

“As a result of the microstamping requirement, Smith & Wesson is losing its ability to sell many of its semi-automatic handguns in California, as its handguns are forced off the roster [by the California Department of Justice],” Smith & Wesson CEO James Debney said in one of two new declarations filed with the trial court.

The lawsuit, filed by the Second Amendment and Calguns foundations, seeks to overturn the entire roster scheme and restore the full handgun market to California consumers. Noted civil rights attorneys Alan Gura of Alexandria, Va., Donald Kilmer of San Jose, Calif., and Jason Davis of Mission Viejo, Calif., helm the case.

In January, The Calguns Foundation published its report on the roster’s effects on the California handgun market, which illustrates that the roster is an effective ban on handguns in common use for self-defense. The report, based on the California DOJ’s own roster database, shows that the California DOJ removed an average of 59 semi-automatic handguns from the roster every year for the past decade. But since Jan. 1, it already has removed 58 handgun models, with many more removals expected in coming months.

No new semi-automatic handguns may be placed on the roster due to the DOJ’s enforcement of the “microstamping” requirement, which Calguns believes will lead to an increase in the rate of handgun removal. Moreover, DOJ apparently also is requiring manufacturers to sign affidavits saying that no changes, even non-substantive changes in upstream components and suppliers, have occurred since the handguns’ submission for testing.

Also removed was Sturm, Ruger’s KMKCalifornia-DOJ-Ruger-KMKIII678GC-PIII678GC .22 LR Pistol, taken off on Feb 3.

Also removed was Sturm, Ruger’s KMKCalifornia-DOJ-Ruger-KMKIII678GC-PIII678GC .22 LR Pistol, taken off on Feb 3.

“Californians cannot acquire safe and reliable handguns in common use throughout the United States because of the roster and microstamping regulations,” Gene Hoffman, Chairman of The Calguns Foundation, explained. “The roster is nothing short of a gun ban that infringes on fundamental Second Amendment rights. We look forward to proving that in court.”

Click here to see the most recent removals from California’s Handgun Roster.

What do you think about the DOJ’s action? Tell us in the comment section.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Trackback from your site.

The mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, "The Shooter's Log," is to provide information-not opinions-to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (47)

  • Scott Bollinger

    |

    ..there is just no way I’d live there.. and if I did, I’d move out of California ,no matter the investment I had in that state.

    Reply

  • Rob

    |

    Isn’t it perfect!?! The flamingly liberal states are DESTROYING the constitution (I now say “Destroying The Const” rather than “anti gun,” or “pro-gun control,” etc) and go the further nation-destroying-mile by coddling the degenerates.

    In Massachusetts, they are trying to set up shops to give away IV Needles and Crack-pipes to “those in need.” Yeah! A new crack-pipe is a “need” in Mass. Pot is being legalized, decriminalized and encouraged left and right today. State legislators refuse to even consider or discuss the destruction to the culture and society that comes with permissive drug use. I know of crack-whores who pimp-out there little children for money and drugs.

    The degenerate legislators are deliberately accelerating our demise and have a target painted on the Good, The Decent, The Patriotic, The Moral, The Ethical, The Kind, The Caring, The Integrity of this once fine nation.

    I can no longer call The USA a “fine nation.”

    Reply

    • Zak

      |

      Rob,
      Don’t you see what the United States government is doing as a whole? Think about it this way, when people are getting everything given to them by any group or groups, those people are not going to stand in the way of letting them do anything they want as long as they get there hand out.

      Reply

  • Smitty550

    |

    @PNW: I’m glad you caught the gaffe, but in which movie can I find the clip?

    Reply

  • G-Man

    |

    @Smitty550 (Comment # 43). It is a movie entitled “End of Watch”. This is a really fantastic movie released in 2012. I am very selective about which movies I praise and I give this one very high marks.

    There is just something about the chemistry between these two actors (Michael Peña and Jake Gyllenhaal) in real life that transcends onto the big screen into a believably authentic partnership of two cops who are also off-duty friends.

    The director does a really good job of minimizing the Hollywood over-the-top BS while capturing realistic day-to-day banter. Anyone that has been (is) law enforcement or on a military team paired with a partner will relate to the realistic elements captured in this film.

    These actors trained intensively with police in order to produce as authentic a piece of work as possible. Sorry for the commercial, but it truly is a good movie… I now return you to your regularly scheduled CTD forum.

    Reply

  • PNW 5-0

    |

    @Smitty550

    Looks like G-Man beat me to it, but yes, it was the opening scene of the movie End Of Watch, which I agree was a really good movie.

    There were a couple of silly “Hollywood stereotype” scene such as one where the Feds arrived on a scene and the dialog that followed, and a scene between patrol officers and detectives at a burned out vehicle involved in a shooting (maybe LA is like that, I don’t know, but where I work we tend to get along). But otherwise it was very well done and the dialog between the two main characters was very well done and very authentic.

    Reply

Leave a comment

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.


9 − five =