you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 8 months ago (1 child)

I think they might be referring to a lower-tier FFL.

CCW doesn’t award you legal suppressors and large capacity magazines in CA.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Correct. To my knowledge, there is no legal way to possess a suppressor or high capacity magazine in California, under their current laws. In (almost) all other states, high capacity magazines are not regulated, and suppressors can be legally obtained with a $200 tax stamp and NFA form.

    I'm not from California, so I'm not as familiar with their laws, but I find the idea of an easy loophole to suppressor ownership very difficult to believe.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    I never said it was "easy". It's not. As the other guy pointed out, it's a months long, expensive, and personally invasive process to obtain a FFL. That being said, certain individuals are highly motivated to go through the process anyways. My original point was that the entire process becomes streamlined so long as you don't mind presenting yourself as a conservative. I've heard of people being turned down for a years old social media post, but somehow the redhats don't run into the same issues.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)

    My original point was that the entire process becomes streamlined so long as you don’t mind presenting yourself as a conservative.

    Well I'm glad you clarified then. For a minute there, I thought your original point was that an FFL was an easy loophole to legal machine gun and suppressor ownership in California. Since the ATF regulates FFLs, how does one "present themself as a conservative" during a presumably remote, paper-driven process?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments