Night Vision California "Sniperscope" definition

[Jo.]

Would a AN/PVS-22 or similar clip on device be legal to own by an american citizen, living in california. Or would this be considered to be a "Sniperscope" and illegal according to California Firearms Laws?

Sniperscopes
A sniperscope is defined as a device made or adapted for use on a firearm that enables the operator to detect objects during nighttime through the use of a projected infrared light source and an electronic telescope. (Penal Code § 468.)
Any person who buys, sells, receives, disposes of, conceals, or possesses a sniperscope is guilty of a misdemeanor. This prohibition does not apply to authorized use or possession of sniperscopes by members of the armed forces or peace officers, and does not prohibit use or possession solely for scientific research or educational purposes. (Penal Code § 468.)

http://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/firearms/forms/Cfl2007.pdf?

 

[jwp6114]

Sounds like Cali is saying "want anything cool?... NOT UP IN HERE!!!!

 

[sidewaysil80]

It's actually scary how restrictive they are. Whats even more disturbing is their use of the word "sniper" to describe a night vision scope. I really feel bad for enthusiasts who are forced to live there for whatever reason.

 

[flounderv2]

NVD's do not project light, they gather it. Illuminators would be illegal per that description not NVD's

 

[ksthomas]

Surprised they haven't changed this. I've been out of LE for many years now, but used to work LA County. There was a guy up in northern CA who launched a Bigfoot project, stating that he intended to shoot one, and settle the issue once and for all. The tree/bunny huggers (TONS of them out there) naturally went nuts about this, and managed to get the guy arrested by the local SO. Being familiar with the existing "sniper scope" law at that time, I was amused when they arrested him for possession of one. It was a (then) current generation ANPVS passive unit, no infrared to it. As I recall, they had to drop that charge, since it didn't fit the existing legal definition, and the guy had therefore committed no crime whatsoever. If I recall correctly, the state of CA and I believe OR both passed laws declaring Bigfoot and endangered species, or something along that line that gave them protected status. Go figure.

State of the art when this law was originally written was most likely the old Infrared spotlights with the huge battery packs/belts, and an IR image intensifier the military used on the M2 carbines in the late stage of WWII and the Korean War.

 

[flounderv2]

Surprised they haven't changed this. I've been out of LE for many years now, but used to work LA County. There was a guy up in northern CA who launched a Bigfoot project, stating that he intended to shoot one, and settle the issue once and for all. The tree/bunny huggers (TONS of them out there) naturally went nuts about this, and managed to get the guy arrested by the local SO. Being familiar with the existing "sniper scope" law at that time, I was amused when they arrested him for possession of one. It was a (then) current generation ANPVS passive unit, no infrared to it. As I recall, they had to drop that charge, since it didn't fit the existing legal definition, and the guy had therefore committed no crime whatsoever. If I recall correctly, the state of CA and I believe OR both passed laws declaring Bigfoot and endangered species, or something along that line that gave them protected status. Go figure.

State of the art when this law was originally written was most likely the old Infrared spotlights with the huge battery packs/belts, and an IR image intensifier the military used on the M2 carbines in the late stage of WWII and the Korean War.

I hope youre kidding about the bold above

 

[Bushmaster11]

I hope youre kidding about the bold above

I couldn't find anything on that, but some countries have....

1965: Bigfoot was officially put on the endangered species list in Russia. 1967: Germany and France follow suit.

But the California Dept of Fish & Game have given their statement on it

"The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department says that in theory, it would be legal to hunt Bigfoot in their state," a DFG facebook post stated on May 11. "Not so in California!"

Daily Kos: Bigfoot hunting legal in Texas, but not in California

Unbelievable...

 

[DanGuy48]

Well, we all know how many homicides and mass murders are the result of the availability of night vision.

It's hard to believe our legislators got to this level of stupidity on their own, they surely must have studied. In the words of H. L. Mencken, (from memory, pardon any errors)

"Democracy is the belief that the common man knows what he wants, and deserves to get it good and hard."

 

[Victor-TNVC]

Surprised they haven't changed this. I've been out of LE for many years now, but used to work LA County. There was a guy up in northern CA who launched a Bigfoot project, stating that he intended to shoot one, and settle the issue once and for all. The tree/bunny huggers (TONS of them out there) naturally went nuts about this, and managed to get the guy arrested by the local SO. Being familiar with the existing "sniper scope" law at that time, I was amused when they arrested him for possession of one. It was a (then) current generation ANPVS passive unit, no infrared to it. As I recall, they had to drop that charge, since it didn't fit the existing legal definition, and the guy had therefore committed no crime whatsoever. If I recall correctly, the state of CA and I believe OR both passed laws declaring Bigfoot and endangered species, or something along that line that gave them protected status. Go figure.

State of the art when this law was originally written was most likely the old Infrared spotlights with the huge battery packs/belts, and an IR image intensifier the military used on the M2 carbines in the late stage of WWII and the Korean War.

Us too. The current law still remains and the hinge point is the IR illuiminator. That was the only case law that I new about when I was with SB City, but I did not know it was about "Big Foot", just knew about the incident of the device.

To the OP, you're fine with just the 22 on it's own. We've told folks that even a PVS-14 with it's built in IR illuminator while useless when mounted on a gun behind a MRDS is considered a NV Sniper Scope when configured in this fashion.

Vic

 

[IR-V]

Would a AN/PVS-22 or similar clip on device be legal to own by an american citizen, living in california. Or would this be considered to be a "Sniperscope" and illegal according to California Firearms Laws?

http://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/firearms/forms/Cfl2007.pdf?

The AN/PVS-22 uses a cadiotropic lens system that could, under the definition you've referenced, be interpreted as a "telescope". However, there appears to be two components that form the prohibited item: a "telescope" and a "source of projected infrared light". By that definition, it would appear that a PVS-22 with even an IR LED illuminator would create a contraband package, as well as even a PVS-14 which has a low-power IR illuminator built in to the device. How Cali LE and judiciary would interpret constructive possession of the components is definitely something to be concerned about, because (incandescent) white light illuminators and (some) visible lasers will project NV-detectable infrared light within the wavelength spectrum of their outputs.

It would appear that THERMAL-only imaging devices would not meet that definition of a "sniper scope" and would be pretty much immune to even a constructive possession challenge regarding outboard IR projection sources.

The best solution, however, is to just leave the state of California. CItizens who exercise their 2nd Amendment rights need to vote with their feet.

IR-V

 

[Victor-TNVC]

Hey IR-V, it's a very OLD and senseless law, like many others from around Kali. Most LE folks never even heard of the PC on this one.

Vic

 

[IR-V]

Hey IR-V, it's a very OLD and senseless law, like many others from around Kali. Most LE folks never even heard of the PC on this one.

Vic

Hey Vic - I hear ya', Man! The problem with those old and senseless laws that remain on the books is that they are still "active" mandates that can be leveraged by an over zealous Cali state prosecutor to trump up charges ... then there's the "spirit of the law" argument that the state's attorneys use to try to sustain their charges upon appeal (for adjudication in successively higher courts of law).

IR-V

 

[hk dave]

Hold on a sec... I can mount the PVS-22 in front of my scope legally in CA?! I would LOVE to do that!

As for moving out of the state, difficult to do for folks like me. Difficult to leave my family, church, friends for my hobby, no matter how fanatical I am about it.

 

[pyplynr]

Sounds like Cali is saying "want anything cool?... NOT UP IN HERE!!!!

 

[Victor-TNVC]

Hold on a sec... I can mount the PVS-22 in front of my scope legally in CA?! I would LOVE to do that!

As for moving out of the state, difficult to do for folks like me. Difficult to leave my family, church, friends for my hobby, no matter how fanatical I am about it.

You can, the issue issue is if you put any sort of IR illuminator on the gun, then by California PC, it would then constitute a NV Sniper Scope.

Vic

 

[Hairball]

The words sniper rifle and assault rifle have the same connection out here. I try and correct people when I am at the range and I am always confronted with "what kind of sniper rifle is that"? It's partially our own fault as anything with "sniper" attached to it will be the next assault rifle issue as a sniper rifle is only used for one purpose in the eyes of anti's so obviously we don't need then in CA. I stick with long range precision rifle myself as the only rifle that is a sniper rifle is the one carried by a mil/LE sniper while in the performance of mil/LE duties. If it happens to be a pump .22, then at that moment it is a "sniper rifle". If you get confronted by LE in the middle of the night while you are walking around with a rifle, you have more than the optic to be concerned about in CA

 

[SkyPup]

Don't forget to protect your 2nd Amendment rights by voting with your wallets.....

 

[Mortar Maggot]

CA is way messed up, we knew that already but this type of thing can be abused easily.

Using this definition of "sniper scope and NV" can come back in a VERY bad way. If a "sniper scope" ban passed at the federal level I would have to guess an anti-gun president could come along and "clarify" the meaning of a "sniper scope" to encompass most any optic made as part of an executive order.

The way I understand executive orders is not to make new law but to make the law that was passed more easily understood and clear. Like the "sporting purpose" of firearms, very wide interpretations of what that means. That executive order stopped a whole lot of very nice guns and cheap ammo from coming into America.

Or am I just being overly paranoid and off base.

 

[gyz77]

Now I've heard it all!!! One more reason I'm glad to live in TX!! Born and raised!!

 

[jhart2424]

In Kalifornia, we walk a very thin line between law abiding gun owners and felons. The laws are sometimes difficult to understand and that makes them open to some crazy interpretation. The wife and I have already set the ground work to move to TX soon. We were just in the houston area looking at housing and jobs. Most of my family lives there and I can actually buy a house for $100,000 compared to the same house for $500,000 here. I would love to be able to shoot with NV and suppressed. Also I am trying to raise 3 little girls in a state that will deform them through sub par education and a ideology that we as gun owners and anyone else who oppose libtards are evil.

 

[Name Enough]

I was supprised at this posting. I too am glad to live in Texas where as long as you have the money for the tax stamp you are good to go.

 

[QuietShootr]

Right there is the ENTIRE California problem. This isn't a "hobby".

Hold on a sec... I can mount the PVS-22 in front of my scope legally in CA?! I would LOVE to do that!

As for moving out of the state, difficult to do for folks like me. Difficult to leave my family, church, friends for my hobby, no matter how fanatical I am about it.

 

[jhart2424]

Right there is the ENTIRE California problem. This isn't a "hobby".

You nailed it.

 

[M40_A1]

The best solution, however, is to just leave the state of California. CItizens who exercise their 2nd Amendment rights need to vote with their feet.

IR-V

That's why I'm leaving the United States. LOL!

 

[M40_A1]

I don't believe the term "sniperscope" was made up to give snipers a bad name. IIRC, back fifty years ago or so there was an active IR scope actually called that (i.e. "sniperscope") which was designed as a rifle sight, and the handheld version was called a "snooperscope". I'm pretty sure that law is quite old, so rest easy, it's not a new end run at Californian shooters or any other U.S. citizens.

 

[Chingon]

Man, it really sounds like those dumbasses think somehow Hollywood is a credible source for banning "sniper" items.

 

[user]

So the legal answer would be a helmet mount NOD and IR Ilum & pointer on firearm? Ya ?

 

[Dogtown]

Still flogging a dead horse, I see?

 

[Nukes]

It's actually scary how restrictive they are. Whats even more disturbing is their use of the word "sniper" to describe a night vision scope. I really feel bad for enthusiasts who are forced to live there for whatever reason.

Read California's dirk and dagger law. It could be interpreted to include pencils.

 

[Strykervet]

This is even all the more ridiculous considering that almost all the major NV manufacturers and many of the major dealers are all located in the same place in S. California!!! ITT, L3, TNVC, many, many others. That would suck, having all that MADE RIGHT THERE, but not being able to use any of it. Great way to stimulate the economy. Not like gangsters are running around with T50 FLIR sights anyway! And if they did, they'd be the only ones with them since they, uh, don't follow laws.

California doesn't mind making money off the gear and technology, obviously. They just don't want their citizens to have any of it, yet glorify the misuse and mishandling of weapons via film and media. No wonder they are scared with fantasy ideas of what this stuff does, when you have Ah-nuld running the show banning weapons, that says it all right there folks. Ridiculous, that line of the law could be construed to call my M4 and EoTech with a PVS-14 QD mount a "sniper scope". Obviously a law written by people who have NO IDEA what they are talking about.

My mil/mil SN3 (thanks Gungasm!) now that is a sniper scope. But I guess it isn't illegal. Go figure. Glad I don't live in California.

 

[M40_A1]

Read California's dirk and dagger law. It could be interpreted to include pencils.

Or the blow gun law (no joke). Little criminals in every school cafeteria! LOL!

 

[Dogtown]

Surefire is also in SoCal...and suppressors are verboten for civies. CA is a big place with 40 milliion people and SoCal was the center of aerospace manufacturing for a long, long time, so in many ways it's not surprising to find those kinds of companies down there.

 

[LanceS4803]

I don't believe the term "sniperscope" was made up to give snipers a bad name. IIRC, back fifty years ago or so there was an active IR scope actually called that (i.e. "sniperscope") which was designed as a rifle sight, and the handheld version was called a "snooperscope". I'm pretty sure that law is quite old, so rest easy, it's not a new end run at Californian shooters or any other U.S. citizens.

Here you go.
Appears CA law is based on early 1950s technology, the M3 carbine.

 

[M40_A1]

Here you go.
Appears CA law is based on early 1950s technology, the M3 carbine.

That's it! Yep! And the law is probably just as old. I think I have an IR illuminator for that, but no way to test it (high voltage).

 

[andyman]

We are all in the same country and we love our country. Would you leave your home because of some idiotic law? Did you leave the country when the AWB was in effect? I think as americans we all will fight for our freedom. We don't run away. Its just a matter of time before CA pushes its citizens to the edge. But as americans, we will never surrender. If your in a different state, you should be supporting CA citizens, not encourage them to move. On the flip side, there are still many reasons to stay. What we really need is to fight for our freedom at the national level so that it wouldn't matter what CA does.

 

[TOSA INU]

Because the california officials think the way they do, is why their state is in the situation it,s in, broke.