Skip to comments.
Colt Government Model .45 ACP no longer able to be sold in California
gunbroker.com ^
| 01/03/2003
| gunbroker.com
Posted on 01/03/2003 1:05:12 PM PST by RicocheT
What recent change in California gun laws makes the standard Colt .45 ACP pistol illegal to be sold to individuals in Californa? To gun owners, this is like saying white bread is no longer in the supermarkets.
http://www.gunbroker.com/auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=6845910
(Excerpt) Read more at gunbroker.com ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; US: California
KEYWORDS: banglist; california; guncontrol
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-35 next last
Slicing away the 2nd Amendment one law at a time.
1
posted on
01/03/2003 1:05:13 PM PST
by
RicocheT
To: *bang_list
bang
To: RicocheT
Maybe because it will accept mags bigger than 10 rounds? Or because it actually works well without any silly gadgets and techno-widgets? Or because it lasts forever to be handed down to the next generation?
3
posted on
01/03/2003 1:13:42 PM PST
by
Sender
To: RicocheT
The Colt Govt Model 45ACP is not on the approved for sale list because it was automatically delisted. Our enlightened elected officials that only care for our own safety has deemed that gun safety features that allow it to not fire if the gun is inadvertently dropped on a concrete floor is perishable and must be subject to constant recertification and retesting. Nothing but the very best in government inspections to ensure the safety of the sheep.... er... citizens of the great state of California!!!
4
posted on
01/03/2003 1:16:19 PM PST
by
Frohickey
To: RicocheT
Colt decided not comply with the Kalifornia government's requirement that all handguns to be sold in the state under go an extensive and utterly worthless test before they are certified as "safe".
5
posted on
01/03/2003 1:19:01 PM PST
by
Restore
To: Frohickey
With enlightened laws like these, California will soon rival the low crime rate of England. (sarcasm/off)
6
posted on
01/03/2003 1:19:31 PM PST
by
Argus
To: Argus
Look up Australia's crime rate after they abolished hand guns
7
posted on
01/03/2003 1:47:17 PM PST
by
Fyscat
To: Restore
I believe the term the use is "not un-safe". They'll never designate a pistol as safe. Sorta like doubleunplus good(1984 EngSoc)...
8
posted on
01/03/2003 1:56:23 PM PST
by
eyes_only
To: eyes_only
the=they
9
posted on
01/03/2003 1:57:06 PM PST
by
eyes_only
To: Restore
I believe that some of these test requirements led Kimber to change the firing pin block mechanism in the last year or so. Their 1911 models that have the new mechanism all carry the II suffix in the catalog. Unless I'm mistaken Colt is no longer producing handguns, and this 1911 would not have this new mechanism.
To: Argus
Good London
Times article on gun crime increase statistics:
LINK
11
posted on
01/03/2003 1:58:56 PM PST
by
RicocheT
To: RicocheT
12
posted on
01/03/2003 2:07:37 PM PST
by
Remedy
To: Restore
The Kaliban strikes again!
To: sheik yerbouty
The Kaliban strikes again! Wasn't he in Clash of the Titans ?
To: Centurion2000
Don't know. Was he an ET looking piece of shi'ite named Gray Doofus?
To: Tijeras_Slim
Unless I'm mistaken Colt is no longer producing handguns, and this 1911 would not have this new mechanism.You are mistaken. Go look on the Colt website. They definitely still produce handguns.
16
posted on
01/03/2003 3:25:39 PM PST
by
toddst
To: toddst
You are mistaken. Would'nt be the first time. Thanks for the correction.
To: Frohickey
Actually, in a manipulated drop test where the hammer was resting on a live round, the govt model Colt discharged. That's why everyone trained with the govt model knows you always carry in condition one: cocked and locked.
What's irritating about these politicians is that they infer such handguns are inherently defective. They are not inherently defective. They function exactly as they are designed.
To: Tijeras_Slim
I believe that some of these test requirements led Kimber to change the firing pin block mechanism in the last year or so. Their 1911 models that have the new mechanism all carry the II suffix in the catalog. Unless I'm mistaken Colt is no longer producing handguns, and this 1911 would not have this new mechanism. The new Kimbers have what is called as the 'Series II' safety, or the Schwartz safety. Here, the grip safety disengages a firing pin block, so in order to fire the gun, you need to fully depress the grip safety, and also pull the trigger.
There have been instances where a gun can have the grip safety partially depressed enough to allow the trigger to be pulled, releasing the hammer, but not enough to disengage the firing pin block. Thats a non-reliable gun, IMHO!
Colts, back in the 80s have what is called the 'Series 80' safety, AFAIK, its also a firing pin block, but its disengaged by the trigger. If the trigger is depressed, it allowed the hammer to fall, as well as disengaging the firing pin block.
Colt started producing handguns again, since it it was sold to private investors. I hear that Colt is going back to pre-Series 80, or the traditional safety that John Moses Browning put into the 1911, which is just a grip safety, and no firing pin block.
To: Frohickey
"The Colt Govt Model 45ACP is not on the approved for sale list because it was automatically delisted." It is good then that I have a 1991A1 all goodied-up and a Para Ord.
I want one of those "carry" packages but why bother because it is impossible to get a concealed permit in the People's Republic of California.
Just under the wire, I bought a Ruger .480 Super Red Hawk. Now my Basic Firearms Safety Certificate is no good and I refuse to give them a thumbprint for their new one.
As for demonstrating proficiency (another facet of this law), I suppose a gun safe full of shooting equipment, all well-used, does not suffice any longer.
I DID lust after one of those Beretta Neos models, but I guess I'll just have to satisfy myself launching .480s down the range.
--Boris
20
posted on
01/03/2003 6:08:32 PM PST
by
boris
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-35 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson