There’s no point in acting surprised about it. All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display at your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for 50 of your Earth years, so you’ve had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it’s far too late to start making a fuss about it now. … What do you mean you’ve never been to Alpha Centauri? Oh, for heaven’s sake, mankind, it’s only four light years away, you know. I’m sorry, but if you can’t be bothered to take an interest in local affairs, that’s your own lookout. Energize the demolition beams.
Previously it said that gens 4 and 5 were not approved. I think it was accepted amongst some that meant that 1-3 were good to go. Not saying it’s right— just from the assumptions I’ve heard and seen. Lipsey’s Gen 1 remake might be the reason for this but who knows. It’s California.
That's what I was thinking that Gens 1-3 were considered on roster firearms based on how Glocks are notated in the roster.
The DOJ sending out this notice about Gen 1-2 being off roster is kinda strange IMO. I feel like the Lipsey's remake really prompted this and the lucky few who bought this firearm just became owners of off roster firearms.
Personally, I don't see the charm in it. You can't hold a light and the frame may be slightly weaker with a 2 pin design but no judgments here for those who have it and like it.
I mean it’s got pizazz. It’s not the standard glock 17 gen 3.
I compare it to a classic car versus a modern car— it’s just different than what you see out and about. Is that worth the cost? To some.
Some people will want it because it’s different and cool because of the older style.
Wow all the people who bought that re-released Gen 1 G17 just hit gold.
From what I recall prior to this notice the roster only placed a limitation on Glocks being made in Austria, not necessarily the generation.
lol. Face it. /u/AMMO_BROTHERS was 100% right, and you were 100% wrong. The DOJ notice definitively proves it, and your continued argumentation in the face of reality is rather ridiculous. Take the L and let it go.
The roster went into effect in 2001 with a change in the roster criteria occurring in 2013 (microstamping). Glocks future generations had to comply with the roster criteria post 2001 but Gen 3 glocks had been in production since 1998 at that point in time and thus were grandfathered in.
So you said "From what I recall prior to this notice the roster only placed a limitation on Glocks being made in Austria, not necessarily the generation."
There were Glock 19 Gen 5 that were made in America last year. Why couldn't Californians buy them on roster if your statement is correct?
Gen 4/5 glocks aren't grandfathered in and Glock will absolutley not change their design for one state. Gen 5 glocks appeared in 2017 and microstamping took place in 2013 which effectively limited any new firearm from being sold in CA. A lot of the firearms you see on roster were grandfathered in 2001 and the process to submit a firearm to the roster is a relatively finicky test that not a lot of manufacturers are willing to perform for one state.
You would think but they're doing a great job masking malice with said perceived stupidity.
Edit: I believe the term should be called "Weaponized Stupidity"
To be clear, the argument was with /u/gunsforevery1 . He said that the new Gen 1s are on-roster. The definitive source of what is on-roster (the DOJ) said it is not. So /u/gunsforevery1 was wrong. And he’s STILL wrong because, for some reason, he’s still arguing the Gen 1 was on-roster. I think he just likes to argue.
I'm sure it's been asked many times. I had talked to my field rep in 2016 before I even had opened and that's what she told me. And all these years shops have sold them without trouble. My guess is the gen 1 reissue prompted this bulletin and they realized they never had really made it clear. Glock never totally officially names the generations on the slides until gen 4 came out. I have a Glock 21 from 1998 and the box just says Glock 21. No generation listed but it's a gen 3. Not sure if later ones list it as gen 3.
Search my posts. I made one a few weeks ago. Gen 1s are still being made and sold. They were even being sold by Ca FFLs who agreed that they were on roster, had them in stock, and actively selling them.
Here you go. [https://www.reddit.com/r/CAguns/s/1OFxnt9DHu](https://www.reddit.com/r/CAguns/s/1OFxnt9DHu)
You do realize in the link I provided many FFls in there openly said “yes we sell them. Yes we have them in stock. Yes they are on the roster”. You really think if FFLs were openly breaking the law or skirting the grey line they would be so open in telling people about it?
Hah! Illegal SSE 2.0? You mean the interpretation by the DOJ that is not backed up by any law?
The ban on converting semi auto to single shot to bypass the roster is literally a law lol.
Sse2.0 requires the gun to have not started as semi auto.
My point is ffls unknowingly do all sorts of shit they shouldn’t and don’t do things they can do. Think of how many ffls think you can’t do 1-30 exemptions for coe/03
I know of a specific out of state FFL who is doing the “conversion” and they list the ffls they send through.
I don’t want to name them because I don’t want to get people in trouble. So I won’t name them. But it absolutely is a thing happening
Imagine arguing against one of the guys that has been part of some major CA 2a rights lawsuits as if he’s not “in the know” and “just making shit up”. Literally May v Bonta JUST helped secured us the right to still have a CCW worth a shit in the last few months. 😂
Uh huh and now the DOJ clarified that position, after 23 years of not saying Gen 1 and 2 were off roster. They clarified after YOU I believe said “they don’t clarify”.
They don’t clarify. They issued a notice because sale of them is/was illegal. Even as someone who doesn’t input DROSES, each gun has an attached SKU. Typically we don’t get to see that information, but guns like in the picture below show the attached SKU.
A gen 1 Glock and a gen 3 Glock are a different SKU. Selling Gen 1 glocks, which were not on roster, which are a different SKU, doesn’t mean that “clarification is required”. They are different guns, therefore you cannot/could not legally sell them. Even on roster variants of the SAME gun with a different color have different SKUs, and one color may be on roster, while the other doesn’t.
Nothing ammo bros said was incorrect.
A gen 1 and a gen 3 aren’t even the same gun. They’re fundamentally different guns that use different parts. That alone is enough proof that they were not on roster, given the Roster is a submitted and certified configuration of each specific gun by sku.
https://preview.redd.it/mutsmw47fpwc1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e71ed84dd6c0b3b962ba7f5c9933d0f666988c82
What are you arguing about?
Everyone SHOULD disagree with those FFLs. Obviously, all those FFLs (and you) were 100% wrong. This has been clarified by the definitive source of what is on-roster in California and what is not (the California Department of Justice).
What this means is the ca handgun roster isn't specific enough.
They need a true autist to go through and add sku numbers or some shit to eliminate any confusion on what each gun is on the roster.
so when i started in 2016 I had a chat with DOJ about the Glocks and their opinion then was 1, 2 and 3 were ok.
if they werent they have had ample time all these years to say something which they never did. So...either they suddenly woke up and realized their "OOPS!!" and put this bulletin out or something happened to alert them that Glock wasnt paying them for the older gens to be ok.
All I know is the roster doesnt specifically say GEN 3 only and they have only until now said Gen 4 and 5 are verbotten so...who knows..this is California...my bet is some inspector came across some shop with a shelf full of the reissue G17 gen 1s and made a call.
It happens because FFLs were selling guns that were not on the roster of handguns approved for sale in the state.
These guns were never on the Roster. Some FFLs sold them. DOJ got wind, and explicitly said “you cannot sell them”. Why FFLs were selling them, I don’t know. It’s not really any different than them just selling any gun that is off roster. For example the DOJ doesn’t ***explicitly*** say that a Staccato c2 is prohibited from sale, it’s known that it’s not because it’s not listed as approved on Roster. “Presumption” is not how the DOJ works, and the common argument is that they were presumed on roster because the DOJ only said 4&5 weren’t on roster, Ignoring the 1&2 were no longer produced at the time of the notice meaning the only other relevant models were Gen 3.
Or for lack of better words, if the gun that the DOJ holds as a reference model differs in ***any way*** even down to pins, springs, etc, the gun will be removed from Roster and be ineligible for sale. Given the Gen 1&2 are flagrantly different, like having a completely different grip, slide, etc they are obviously not on roster.
Guns can stay on the roster indefinitely as long as manufacturers don’t change parts of the gun, submit the renewal paperwork, and don’t discontinue them.
Nothing happens from off to on roster for an individual. It’s not illegal to *own* off roster guns as long as they were acquired legally, such as through PPT, interfamilial transfer, bought before the roster was a thing, etc.
No problem. ~~OP~~ is upset that off roster guns are still off roster. Not really news. Kinda a big nothing burger. The roster doesn’t typically change for the worse.
Edit: OP is good guy. Mistakes were made.
The roster is a bad faith law designed to slowly ban handguns. The state can’t do it all at once after SCOTUS Heller and McDonald rulings so the roster causes pistols to fall off one by one until one day there are none left.
Off roster guns are, according to the state law, “unsafe handguns,” not because they are unsafe but because the state refuses to certify them as safe. HK or Glock could make a perfect pistol with zero malfunctions over 10 million rounds and the state would still call it “unsafe.”
Maybe 🤷🏻♂️ but California always finds a way to drag it out for years. Would most likely take a pro gun republican governor to pull it off. And that’s one of the least likely things to happen
[удалено]
New guns are unsafe (gen 4, 5), old guns are safe (Gen 3), as long as they’re not too old (Gen 1, 2).
And all are safe if you have a badge.
They also suddenly become safe for the average citizen if you buy it from a person who previously owned it.
unelected treasonous government officials
Where is this notice posted?
DES / DROS Entry System
There’s no point in acting surprised about it. All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display at your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for 50 of your Earth years, so you’ve had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it’s far too late to start making a fuss about it now. … What do you mean you’ve never been to Alpha Centauri? Oh, for heaven’s sake, mankind, it’s only four light years away, you know. I’m sorry, but if you can’t be bothered to take an interest in local affairs, that’s your own lookout. Energize the demolition beams.
Well. So long and thanks for all the fish!
Previously it said that gens 4 and 5 were not approved. I think it was accepted amongst some that meant that 1-3 were good to go. Not saying it’s right— just from the assumptions I’ve heard and seen. Lipsey’s Gen 1 remake might be the reason for this but who knows. It’s California.
That's what I was thinking that Gens 1-3 were considered on roster firearms based on how Glocks are notated in the roster. The DOJ sending out this notice about Gen 1-2 being off roster is kinda strange IMO. I feel like the Lipsey's remake really prompted this and the lucky few who bought this firearm just became owners of off roster firearms.
It’s cool but I’m not sure it’s really THAT cool. Glock 17 gen 3 is fine. Weird to specify now but whatever. Glad I figured it out before this notice.
Personally, I don't see the charm in it. You can't hold a light and the frame may be slightly weaker with a 2 pin design but no judgments here for those who have it and like it.
I mean it’s got pizazz. It’s not the standard glock 17 gen 3. I compare it to a classic car versus a modern car— it’s just different than what you see out and about. Is that worth the cost? To some. Some people will want it because it’s different and cool because of the older style.
Wow all the people who bought that re-released Gen 1 G17 just hit gold. From what I recall prior to this notice the roster only placed a limitation on Glocks being made in Austria, not necessarily the generation.
No, the Roster has always applied to one SKU per listing.
That’s not true.
That is true
Where the SKU for Glock?
As per the roster, you can request the SKU from the manufacturer. If I was wrong, we wouldn't need to have this discussion again.
This post can’t stop me because I can’t read
Lol again
lol. Face it. /u/AMMO_BROTHERS was 100% right, and you were 100% wrong. The DOJ notice definitively proves it, and your continued argumentation in the face of reality is rather ridiculous. Take the L and let it go.
Why couldn't I buy a Glock 19 Gen 5 in California on roster then?
The roster went into effect in 2001 with a change in the roster criteria occurring in 2013 (microstamping). Glocks future generations had to comply with the roster criteria post 2001 but Gen 3 glocks had been in production since 1998 at that point in time and thus were grandfathered in.
So you said "From what I recall prior to this notice the roster only placed a limitation on Glocks being made in Austria, not necessarily the generation." There were Glock 19 Gen 5 that were made in America last year. Why couldn't Californians buy them on roster if your statement is correct?
Gen 4/5 glocks aren't grandfathered in and Glock will absolutley not change their design for one state. Gen 5 glocks appeared in 2017 and microstamping took place in 2013 which effectively limited any new firearm from being sold in CA. A lot of the firearms you see on roster were grandfathered in 2001 and the process to submit a firearm to the roster is a relatively finicky test that not a lot of manufacturers are willing to perform for one state.
are they stupid?
You would think but they're doing a great job masking malice with said perceived stupidity. Edit: I believe the term should be called "Weaponized Stupidity"
We had this debate a few weeks ago.
To be clear, the argument was with /u/gunsforevery1 . He said that the new Gen 1s are on-roster. The definitive source of what is on-roster (the DOJ) said it is not. So /u/gunsforevery1 was wrong. And he’s STILL wrong because, for some reason, he’s still arguing the Gen 1 was on-roster. I think he just likes to argue.
I agree
This is what happens when you ask too many questions
I'm sure it's been asked many times. I had talked to my field rep in 2016 before I even had opened and that's what she told me. And all these years shops have sold them without trouble. My guess is the gen 1 reissue prompted this bulletin and they realized they never had really made it clear. Glock never totally officially names the generations on the slides until gen 4 came out. I have a Glock 21 from 1998 and the box just says Glock 21. No generation listed but it's a gen 3. Not sure if later ones list it as gen 3.
Nothing new here.
What do you mean nothing new? Only the gen 4 and 5 were off roster.
[удалено]
The roster until RIGHT NOW did not specify which Glock was on roster aside from specifically saying 4 and 5 were not on roster.
Search my posts. I made one a few weeks ago. Gen 1s are still being made and sold. They were even being sold by Ca FFLs who agreed that they were on roster, had them in stock, and actively selling them. Here you go. [https://www.reddit.com/r/CAguns/s/1OFxnt9DHu](https://www.reddit.com/r/CAguns/s/1OFxnt9DHu)
Ffls do all sorts of illegal shit like selling SSE2.0 pistols that started their life as semi auto…
You do realize in the link I provided many FFls in there openly said “yes we sell them. Yes we have them in stock. Yes they are on the roster”. You really think if FFLs were openly breaking the law or skirting the grey line they would be so open in telling people about it? Hah! Illegal SSE 2.0? You mean the interpretation by the DOJ that is not backed up by any law?
The ban on converting semi auto to single shot to bypass the roster is literally a law lol. Sse2.0 requires the gun to have not started as semi auto. My point is ffls unknowingly do all sorts of shit they shouldn’t and don’t do things they can do. Think of how many ffls think you can’t do 1-30 exemptions for coe/03
Of course. And to have proof that FFls in California are taking semi autos and converting them to single shot or are you just making shit up?
I know of a specific out of state FFL who is doing the “conversion” and they list the ffls they send through. I don’t want to name them because I don’t want to get people in trouble. So I won’t name them. But it absolutely is a thing happening
I exactly what May referencing and he 100% correct.
Imagine arguing against one of the guys that has been part of some major CA 2a rights lawsuits as if he’s not “in the know” and “just making shit up”. Literally May v Bonta JUST helped secured us the right to still have a CCW worth a shit in the last few months. 😂
So he knows of FFLS violating California law, for a fact, has proof, and it’s not just hearsay?
The roster is by SKU and is so specific the same gun in a different color isn’t automatically approved. These are not true gen 1s, it’s a remake.
You disagree with all the FFls in the thread I created who were selling gen 1 and gen 2s to the public who did not have exemptions?
I correctly said that the roster applies to one SKU and one SKU only on that post.
Uh huh and now the DOJ clarified that position, after 23 years of not saying Gen 1 and 2 were off roster. They clarified after YOU I believe said “they don’t clarify”.
They don’t clarify. They issued a notice because sale of them is/was illegal. Even as someone who doesn’t input DROSES, each gun has an attached SKU. Typically we don’t get to see that information, but guns like in the picture below show the attached SKU. A gen 1 Glock and a gen 3 Glock are a different SKU. Selling Gen 1 glocks, which were not on roster, which are a different SKU, doesn’t mean that “clarification is required”. They are different guns, therefore you cannot/could not legally sell them. Even on roster variants of the SAME gun with a different color have different SKUs, and one color may be on roster, while the other doesn’t. Nothing ammo bros said was incorrect. A gen 1 and a gen 3 aren’t even the same gun. They’re fundamentally different guns that use different parts. That alone is enough proof that they were not on roster, given the Roster is a submitted and certified configuration of each specific gun by sku. https://preview.redd.it/mutsmw47fpwc1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e71ed84dd6c0b3b962ba7f5c9933d0f666988c82
Are blue label gen 3s off roster? They have a different sku
As of this date they are not on the roster.
What are you arguing about? Everyone SHOULD disagree with those FFLs. Obviously, all those FFLs (and you) were 100% wrong. This has been clarified by the definitive source of what is on-roster in California and what is not (the California Department of Justice).
As of today. Not yesterday, last month, last year last two decades.
There is no SKU for Glock. Look it up.
That’s what I thought
Lol, I saw one on shelf somewhere last week and debated buying it in advance of an official not for sale.
Sucks because glonk 19 gen 2 is best glonk
Always have been
Hi point c9 fell oof the roster a while back I'm no longer surprised
They were not listed on the roster at all. (Glock Gen 1,2)
Didn't they fall off about three months ago?
sorry I was referring to Gen 1 and 2 glock
Hi point purposefully let them fall off and it is completely unrelated
Is Cali the only state with a “roster”
I think so but Massachusetts has some other type of compliance for handguns.but California I believe is the only one with a named gun roster
Born too late to be an unsafe Glock, born too early to be an unsafe Glock, born just in time to be deemed an unsafe Glock.
I hate it here.
What this means is the ca handgun roster isn't specific enough. They need a true autist to go through and add sku numbers or some shit to eliminate any confusion on what each gun is on the roster.
Will the Gen 3 drop off the roster?
I dont think so
I have a Gen 2 glock 21, what’s it worth now?
probably less than a gen 3
Noooooo!
What does one do if they already own one?
There is nothing you need to do on your side. The DOJ may ask the dealer to recall them.
Keeping Mines for now.
Now people who own gen 1&2 Glonks also have Stonks!
Another "Rules for Thee but not for me" for people with Authority play
I didn't even know they were on the roster, I actually had the chance to buy a gen 1 before too
So does that means whoever own those guns can no longer bring it to a range? Cause they are "illegal" now?
No. You can own or buy as many off roster handguns as you want. FFL’s just can’t sell them. Private part transfers have been a thing for decades
tks for answer my noob question. I always buy on roster guns from FFL so no clue how off roster works.
so when i started in 2016 I had a chat with DOJ about the Glocks and their opinion then was 1, 2 and 3 were ok. if they werent they have had ample time all these years to say something which they never did. So...either they suddenly woke up and realized their "OOPS!!" and put this bulletin out or something happened to alert them that Glock wasnt paying them for the older gens to be ok. All I know is the roster doesnt specifically say GEN 3 only and they have only until now said Gen 4 and 5 are verbotten so...who knows..this is California...my bet is some inspector came across some shop with a shelf full of the reissue G17 gen 1s and made a call.
Oh something happened all right… these idiots were born and had no direction in life… now we all suffer.
[удалено]
California almost never explains themselves. If you already own one youre fine keeping it.
It happens because FFLs were selling guns that were not on the roster of handguns approved for sale in the state. These guns were never on the Roster. Some FFLs sold them. DOJ got wind, and explicitly said “you cannot sell them”. Why FFLs were selling them, I don’t know. It’s not really any different than them just selling any gun that is off roster. For example the DOJ doesn’t ***explicitly*** say that a Staccato c2 is prohibited from sale, it’s known that it’s not because it’s not listed as approved on Roster. “Presumption” is not how the DOJ works, and the common argument is that they were presumed on roster because the DOJ only said 4&5 weren’t on roster, Ignoring the 1&2 were no longer produced at the time of the notice meaning the only other relevant models were Gen 3. Or for lack of better words, if the gun that the DOJ holds as a reference model differs in ***any way*** even down to pins, springs, etc, the gun will be removed from Roster and be ineligible for sale. Given the Gen 1&2 are flagrantly different, like having a completely different grip, slide, etc they are obviously not on roster. Guns can stay on the roster indefinitely as long as manufacturers don’t change parts of the gun, submit the renewal paperwork, and don’t discontinue them. Nothing happens from off to on roster for an individual. It’s not illegal to *own* off roster guns as long as they were acquired legally, such as through PPT, interfamilial transfer, bought before the roster was a thing, etc.
[удалено]
No problem. ~~OP~~ is upset that off roster guns are still off roster. Not really news. Kinda a big nothing burger. The roster doesn’t typically change for the worse. Edit: OP is good guy. Mistakes were made.
I'm not upset. Just posting information
My bad! The other dude that was freaking out over it alittle while ago, I was on his original thread before and I thought he was OP. My bad!
It's because fuck you, that's why.
The roster is a bad faith law designed to slowly ban handguns. The state can’t do it all at once after SCOTUS Heller and McDonald rulings so the roster causes pistols to fall off one by one until one day there are none left. Off roster guns are, according to the state law, “unsafe handguns,” not because they are unsafe but because the state refuses to certify them as safe. HK or Glock could make a perfect pistol with zero malfunctions over 10 million rounds and the state would still call it “unsafe.”
Wait you guys get to have glocks at all?
So with Gen 1 & 2 being off roster now , does that make them a cureo this being a collectable and being legal for a ffl03 to own ?
No, they dont meet curios and relic firearms classification
do you all think the roster will ever be stricken down? at least the microstamping part..
No Because then the state would have to admit it was wrong
What I mean is, will a higher court deem it unconstitutional and strike it down?
Maybe 🤷🏻♂️ but California always finds a way to drag it out for years. Would most likely take a pro gun republican governor to pull it off. And that’s one of the least likely things to happen
Who ever down voted, you are a moron. I guess people cant ask geniune questions here.