UPDATE- CRPA and Franklin Armory Take on the DOJ
UPDATE- The Legislature is Back in Session- They are trying to resurrect AB88 (the budget bill we told you about below). This bill is supposed to be only a budget bill, but they have packed it full of anti-gun language and are trying to pass it quickly and quietly through to the Governor. The Senate will not be left out-they too have a budget bill (SB 118) that mirrors AB 88 and the anti-gun provisions.
PLEASE CONTACT YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS TODAY AND TELL THEM TO VOTE NO ON THESE BILLS!
We need to flood their phone lines. If you don’t know who your elected officials are in Sacramento, click here to search.
CRPA and Franklin Armory Take on CA DOJ
CRPA is proud to stand with the manufacturers that work so hard to bring you compliant firearms in California. We all know that the state of California makes it very difficult on these companies by imposing numerous restrictions on the firearms and parts they produce. It is a costly endeavor for anyone wanting to do business in California who is in the firearm industry. But what happens when a manufacturer beats that system? What happens when they are able to create a firearm that does not meet any of the arbitrary definitions set by the California DOJ?
This is exactly what is happening to one such manufacturer, Franklin Armory. Franklin Armory has designed a new firearm (the Title I) that is California compliant and is lawfully selling to buyers in the state. One problem, they cannot complete sales paperwork on the firearms because it does not meet any of the defined choices on the state forms. Basically, the DOJ system does not allow for the transfer of certain firearms that do not meet the limited identifiers in the DES System. Franklin Armory has developed a firearm that does not meet any of these identifier definitions of either a shotgun, handgun, or rifle. That’s right, because a lawful firearm does not fall within these definitions and should really be labeled as “other,” a sale of these lawful firearms is being hindered by the state.
DOJ was made aware of the need to add an “other” category, but has refused to take this step. This technology barrier prevents licensed firearm dealers from proceeding with a sale, transfer, loan, or submission of information to the DOJ. The actual effect is that California firearm dealers cannot accurately submit the necessary information to the DOJ for processing. This is an arbitrary use of the Assault Weapons Act and one that harms not only a lawful retailer, but the citizens that choose to own a firearm that does not meet the restrictive definitions and therefore should be lawful to purchase.
CRPA joined with Franklin Armory in lawsuit because it seeks to compel DOJ to change the identifiers that would allow this new, lawful and approved firearm to be transferred and sold legally. But the DOJ is trying to be sneaky. Instead of doing the right thing and adding the “other” qualifier to the system, they are trying to add into a budget bill a provision that would make this type of firearm illegal. They are playing backroom politics by making a policy argument in a budget bill that the firearm in question is an “assault weapon.” DOJ is trying to moot a legitimate lawsuit by changing the law after the fact so that they can continue to keep new innovation in the firearm industry at bay.
CRPA supports bringing new firearms to California gun owners and does not believe that the government has the right to stand in the way by preventing lawful processing.
California Rifle & Pistol Association lawsuit Click Here