The Website of the Firearms Division of the California DOJ has up-dated the Olympic Exempt List to include the following pistols:
Hammerli 208S
Hammerli FP60
Pardini GPE
Pardini HPE
Pardini SP1
Vostok Toz35M
Walther SSP
CALIFORNIA OLYMPIC PISTOL EXEMPT LIST
Moderators: pilkguns, m1963, David Levene, Spencer, Richard H
Forum rules
If you wish to make a donation to this forum's operation , it would be greatly appreciated.
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/targettalk?yours=true
If you wish to make a donation to this forum's operation , it would be greatly appreciated.
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/targettalk?yours=true
Steve,
Yes,"Good" news if you live and shoot ISSF matches in California. Without the Olympic Exemption you could not buy or posses most match pistols since Californias gun laws are tougher than the Federal laws. There are 120 pistols on the Exempt List. Check it out. http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/forms/pdf/op.pdf
Yes,"Good" news if you live and shoot ISSF matches in California. Without the Olympic Exemption you could not buy or posses most match pistols since Californias gun laws are tougher than the Federal laws. There are 120 pistols on the Exempt List. Check it out. http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/forms/pdf/op.pdf
-
Guest
I am not sure why the Browning Medalist is more safe than some of their other models that seem to be deemed more "Unsafe" but most likely this is all done with tongue firmly planted in cheek. Perhaps as the list expands people will see the silliness of the list in the first place and repeal the whole thing. Of course this governing body (state that is) is proposing serial numbers on all handgun ammo as well so don't get too optimistic about seeing the light on silly rules.
Best of luck!
Best of luck!
Steve Swartz wrote:Sandy:
"Good" news I suppose.
Steve Swartz
Steve,
Whether a pistol is deemed more "Safe" or more "Unsafe" is irrelevant. The following is a simple explanation.
A law was passed that a magazine not in the grip of a pistol was deemed an assault weapon. The Walther GSP, OSP and many others that have the magazine in front of the trigger guard became illigal to buy or posses in California.
Two years later a safety test (dropping a loaded pistol on to a cement floor from a height of one meter without having it discharge) was required of all pistols to be cerified for sale in California. A dealer or manufacturer had to submit three pistols and pay for the testing. Most match pistols will not pass.
The price of a match pistol is around $1500.00 and the cost of the test is over $1000.00 each. For 120 pistols on the list, you do the math.
These are not silly rules. These are LAWS which are prosecuted as felonies.
To be able to train and compete in Olympic/ISSF competitions in California it was necessary to get an Olympic Pistol Exemption for match pistols. The list is not all-inclusive but it does cover most match pistols that are in use. USA Shooting has to certify that the pistols on the list are used in Olympic/ISSF competition.
The Legislature proposes and passes all kinds of laws. We (shooters) win some, we lose some and for some that we do not win, we get an Olympic Pistol Exemption so that we can compete and run matches.
It is doubtful if the ammo serialization is a workable law, but if it passes, I will work to get a Match Ammo Exemption so that Californians can still train and compete in Olympic/ISSF style competitions.
Sandy Santibanez
Whether a pistol is deemed more "Safe" or more "Unsafe" is irrelevant. The following is a simple explanation.
A law was passed that a magazine not in the grip of a pistol was deemed an assault weapon. The Walther GSP, OSP and many others that have the magazine in front of the trigger guard became illigal to buy or posses in California.
Two years later a safety test (dropping a loaded pistol on to a cement floor from a height of one meter without having it discharge) was required of all pistols to be cerified for sale in California. A dealer or manufacturer had to submit three pistols and pay for the testing. Most match pistols will not pass.
The price of a match pistol is around $1500.00 and the cost of the test is over $1000.00 each. For 120 pistols on the list, you do the math.
These are not silly rules. These are LAWS which are prosecuted as felonies.
To be able to train and compete in Olympic/ISSF competitions in California it was necessary to get an Olympic Pistol Exemption for match pistols. The list is not all-inclusive but it does cover most match pistols that are in use. USA Shooting has to certify that the pistols on the list are used in Olympic/ISSF competition.
The Legislature proposes and passes all kinds of laws. We (shooters) win some, we lose some and for some that we do not win, we get an Olympic Pistol Exemption so that we can compete and run matches.
It is doubtful if the ammo serialization is a workable law, but if it passes, I will work to get a Match Ammo Exemption so that Californians can still train and compete in Olympic/ISSF style competitions.
Sandy Santibanez
-
metermatch
- Posts: 196
- Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 4:30 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
Olympic Pistol Exemption
I think it should be noted that we have Sandy to thank about even getting the exemption list in existance. Hopefully, this ammo garbage won't pass, but if it does, I'm sure Sandy will be on the front lines trying to help us out.
Thank You Sandy, as I posess 2 TOZ 35's, 2 IZH 35's, and 4 Walther GSP's because of you.
Jeff
Thank You Sandy, as I posess 2 TOZ 35's, 2 IZH 35's, and 4 Walther GSP's because of you.
Jeff
Sandy deserves a huge amount of credit for the persistence, time and energy he put into getting the "Olympic" exemption passed. Because the process of doing so involved many people over a long period of time, the choice of exempt guns on the list probably won't please everybody, but it does cover most of the guns we tend to use. It is possible to make additions to the list - also a time-consuming process - so if anyone wants to see other model(s) on the list they should contact Sandy.
I do have one little nit to pick with what Sandy wrote above, though. The California laws in question may not be "silly rules", but they definitely are silly laws. I find particularly amusing the bureaucratic mindset that designates guns that have passed the tests not as "safe", but rather as "not unsafe."
FredB
I do have one little nit to pick with what Sandy wrote above, though. The California laws in question may not be "silly rules", but they definitely are silly laws. I find particularly amusing the bureaucratic mindset that designates guns that have passed the tests not as "safe", but rather as "not unsafe."
FredB
The California Senate and the Assembly created and passed the legislation and the Governor signed it into law.
Call them "silly laws" if you like but the reality is, they can be prosecuted as felonies with fines and jail time.
I believe that these laws are wrong and I have worked to prevent their passing. When they were passed, I got the exemptions. Do not diminish how serious the consequences of what is happeneing by only thinking of them as "silly laws".
Call them "silly laws" if you like but the reality is, they can be prosecuted as felonies with fines and jail time.
I believe that these laws are wrong and I have worked to prevent their passing. When they were passed, I got the exemptions. Do not diminish how serious the consequences of what is happeneing by only thinking of them as "silly laws".
-
Steve Swartz
Sandy:
Good work on the exempt list but not such good work on attributing postings to the right people!
I say enough controversial things on my own without having other people's words attributed to me.
Hey, I'm not *that* sensitive about it but someone mentioned it to me today . . . about how "unfair" I was to the poor beleagured Californians and Sandy in particular. Of course, since I never said any such things, I had no idea what they were talking about.
I have no idea who "Guest" (June 13th 8:59 pm) was that you took exception to, but I can assure you that it wasn't me.
Steve Swartz
Good work on the exempt list but not such good work on attributing postings to the right people!
I say enough controversial things on my own without having other people's words attributed to me.
Hey, I'm not *that* sensitive about it but someone mentioned it to me today . . . about how "unfair" I was to the poor beleagured Californians and Sandy in particular. Of course, since I never said any such things, I had no idea what they were talking about.
I have no idea who "Guest" (June 13th 8:59 pm) was that you took exception to, but I can assure you that it wasn't me.
Steve Swartz
Steve,
I hereby apologize for putting your name on my response. The guest quoted you with your name in his post. I incorrectly focused on your name and posted a response. Please accept my apology for attributing his statement to you. If you come to California, you may shoot one of our matches as my guest.
It took me over one year to get the "assault weapon" exemption (AB 2351) passed in the legislature and another year for the "safety test" exemption (AB 2793) to be added to it. After the Governor signs the legislation into law, it still takes almost another year for it to go through the DOJ, the Department of Legislative Analysis, the Office of Administrative Law and other departments before it is posted on their website. With AB 2793 I got the Olympic Handgun Exempt list to include a provision to up-date the list so that it would not be necessary to go through the entire legislative process again to add new pistols to the list. The pistols that were just recently added only took a few months to prepare, document and get added to the exempt list.
I hereby apologize for putting your name on my response. The guest quoted you with your name in his post. I incorrectly focused on your name and posted a response. Please accept my apology for attributing his statement to you. If you come to California, you may shoot one of our matches as my guest.
It took me over one year to get the "assault weapon" exemption (AB 2351) passed in the legislature and another year for the "safety test" exemption (AB 2793) to be added to it. After the Governor signs the legislation into law, it still takes almost another year for it to go through the DOJ, the Department of Legislative Analysis, the Office of Administrative Law and other departments before it is posted on their website. With AB 2793 I got the Olympic Handgun Exempt list to include a provision to up-date the list so that it would not be necessary to go through the entire legislative process again to add new pistols to the list. The pistols that were just recently added only took a few months to prepare, document and get added to the exempt list.
-
Steve Swartz
Sandy:
We are all watching the troubling state of affairs in California very closely- your state has a long history of being a bellwether of sorts for various craziness from the various "progressive" elements of activist politics.
50 Caliber rifle ban?!?
Gun rights (of any stripe) advocates in California are truly "on the front lines" in the battle between totalitarians and libertarians.
Keep up the good work! While it is unfortunate that the work of liberty needs to be done in the first place, you certainly have my sympathies.
The fact that you have to deal with an "exempt list" is a travesty. Hmmm . . . wonder what other fundamental human rights should be subject to prior restraint? You can only worship in "approved religions?" You can only hold "approved opinions?" You can only associate with "approved groups?" It's getting downright European over on your side of the country.
Steve Swartz
We are all watching the troubling state of affairs in California very closely- your state has a long history of being a bellwether of sorts for various craziness from the various "progressive" elements of activist politics.
50 Caliber rifle ban?!?
Gun rights (of any stripe) advocates in California are truly "on the front lines" in the battle between totalitarians and libertarians.
Keep up the good work! While it is unfortunate that the work of liberty needs to be done in the first place, you certainly have my sympathies.
The fact that you have to deal with an "exempt list" is a travesty. Hmmm . . . wonder what other fundamental human rights should be subject to prior restraint? You can only worship in "approved religions?" You can only hold "approved opinions?" You can only associate with "approved groups?" It's getting downright European over on your side of the country.
Steve Swartz
-
David Levene
- Posts: 5617
- Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 12:49 pm
- Location: Ruislip, UK
-
Rick Nemcik-Cruz
California law reform
I heard that California D.A.s are suing the State because they don't understand the maze of California Gun Law. Sandy, I have been working here in Northern California to preserve target shooting as a sport. I would be happy to coordinate my efforts. Please contact me.
-
EuroShooter
Steve, while i do appreciate your insights in many of your previous posts, this one made me really angry.
The legislation in my country (Germany) in terms of weapon use is careful, but not absurd. As a result, you can have any weapon you want for serious sport usage if you prove that your interest is not based on psychic defects. Comparing the numbers of firearm abuse in your nation and mine makes me wonder if you wouldnt do better getting more "european".
Anyhow...off topic.
I can only hope that this was an ironic comment and not an offending one, Steve. I wouldnt like to believe that you consider "european" as a synonym for something negative, especially not these days where the better part of the world outside the USA considers "your" way the wrong one in many aspects. The fact that you seem to put the right to own a gun in the same category as the right to freely choose your religion ("fundamental human rights") and then call this approach "european" is ignorant at the best. If you find one central european nation that restricts, ignores and violates "fundamental human rights" as the USA do these days (talk about Guantanamo) i would be eager to hear it. And the vast majority of the world considers many things far more important than the right to own guns.It's getting downright European over on your side of the country.
Steve Swartz
The legislation in my country (Germany) in terms of weapon use is careful, but not absurd. As a result, you can have any weapon you want for serious sport usage if you prove that your interest is not based on psychic defects. Comparing the numbers of firearm abuse in your nation and mine makes me wonder if you wouldnt do better getting more "european".
Anyhow...off topic.
Our placing our firearms rights on par with the free exercise of religion helps reduce the possibility that our country will ever be able to commit the horrifying atrocities that were committed by a certain European country against over 6 million of its citizens. Perhaps if said European country had placed the same emphasis on both, the concept of religious freedom, and the right to bear arms, said 6 million people would not have become air pollution. I'd like to think that our values over here, while perhaps not in tune with "the better part of the world," have something to do with our being instrumental in ending two World Wars...world wars that were largely instigated and executed by a particular European country.EuroShooter wrote:Steve, while i do appreciate your insights in many of your previous posts, this one made me really angry.
I can only hope that this was an ironic comment and not an offending one, Steve. I wouldnt like to believe that you consider "european" as a synonym for something negative, especially not these days where the better part of the world outside the USA considers "your" way the wrong one in many aspects. The fact that you seem to put the right to own a gun in the same category as the right to freely choose your religion ("fundamental human rights") and then call this approach "european" is ignorant at the best. If you find one central european nation that restricts, ignores and violates "fundamental human rights" as the USA do these days (talk about Guantanamo) i would be eager to hear it. And the vast majority of the world considers many things far more important than the right to own guns.It's getting downright European over on your side of the country.
Steve Swartz
The legislation in my country (Germany) in terms of weapon use is careful, but not absurd. As a result, you can have any weapon you want for serious sport usage if you prove that your interest is not based on psychic defects. Comparing the numbers of firearm abuse in your nation and mine makes me wonder if you wouldnt do better getting more "european".
Anyhow...off topic.
Given that in most of Europe, firearms restrictions are more restrictive than most of the US and that California's gun laws are similar to Europe in being more restrictive, whether or not you perceive the description as negative does not affect its accuracy.
-
kelly
Steve, a big reason for the issues arrising in California is that it is one of a handful of states that does not have a Right to Keep and Bear Arms in its Constitution. Binding them down with the chains of the Constitution is generally a good idea, as rights not enumerated tend to vanish into privilege over time. [quote="Steve Swartz"]Sandy:
Gun rights (of any stripe) advocates in California are truly "on the front lines" in the battle between totalitarians and libertarians.
Keep up the good work! While it is unfortunate that the work of liberty needs to be done in the first place, you certainly have my sympathies.
Gun rights (of any stripe) advocates in California are truly "on the front lines" in the battle between totalitarians and libertarians.
Keep up the good work! While it is unfortunate that the work of liberty needs to be done in the first place, you certainly have my sympathies.
-
Guest
Interesting. I would be curious to learn how you get to that conclusion. From here it looks pretty clear that said right leads only to violence towards peaceful people...i may be wrong of course, but your claim seems pretty absurd to me. Justifying any bashing of europe/germany with the more than sad history of my country is pretty cheap. Well lets turn the game around: the right to wear firearms historically certainly helped with eradication of the native americans as well as black slaves, and was certainly a favorite pet of the KKK and a welcome tool to the enforcement of the segregation, that was removed...when again?Our placing our firearms rights on par with the free exercise of religion helps reduce the possibility that our country will ever be able to commit the horrifying atrocities that were committed by a certain European country against over 6 million of its citizens.
Come on, thats a pretty stupid finger pointing game. Especially today the USA and anyone defending the current policy is far from a moralically superior position that would allow such attitude. I am sorry if i repeat myself but while germany learned from concentration camps over the past sixty years, the USA still maintain the most popular one worldwide. You knw that saying with the glasshouse...?
Anyhow, the regulations mentioned in the task (the original topic), of california, sound pretty absurd to me. If you think that european regulations are alike, you need to read a bit more i guess.
I am sure that most people would agree that the direction that this post seems to be taking is ........... "not productive" for lack of a better word.
Let's stop this, agree that it is not a perfect world and nobody said that life would be fair so that we can approach the problems that confront us and our sport in a positive way.
The post was merely a notification that new pistols have been added to the exempt list and are now legal to obtain in California.
Sandy
Let's stop this, agree that it is not a perfect world and nobody said that life would be fair so that we can approach the problems that confront us and our sport in a positive way.
The post was merely a notification that new pistols have been added to the exempt list and are now legal to obtain in California.
Sandy