Glock market dead? (PPT)

[nakatomi]

Your not factoring in mine comes with a brand new racism ramjet and after market sights. I will consider your suggestion. I’ll put it at $1000 stock and $1400 with radian ramjet

Ah missed that racism Radian Ramjet. Yeah sell it separately. Subtly has no place in ads esp when the classified image resolution is so small.

 

[nakatomi]

I see a lot of people asking 1k plus for glocks, don’t see them selling. But yeah, I’ll keep talking though it’s fun.

The Gen 5 and 6 consistently move $1k +

Stock Gen 3 do not. Not even the G34s

 

[deadshot56]

Ah missed that racism Radian Ramjet. Yeah sell it separately. Subtly has no place in ads esp when the classified image resolution is so small.

I saw it afterwards. That wasn’t intentional, are you suggesting I should have placed as separate photo?

 

[nakatomi]

I saw it afterwards. That wasn’t intentional, are you suggesting I should have placed as separate photo?

Stick Radian Ramjet in the headline with the shot of the actual Ramjet nozzle close with the Glock in the shot. People only scan the headlines, first thumbnail, the price and doom scroll.

 

[Westernballer58]

Would it be possible to have a parent from out of state transfer a Glock via intrafamilial transfer after July 1st? Asking for a friend?

 

[Gawernator]

Would it be possible to have a parent from out of state transfer a Glock via intrafamilial transfer after July 1st? Asking for a friend?

No, it will be a crime.

 

[Westernballer58]

All the info needed thank you sir!

 

[Sheepdog1968]

No, it will be a crime.

You sure about this?

 

[Gawernator]

All the info needed thank you sir!

You sure about this?

The law says, starting July 1, 2026, a licensed dealer may not “sell, offer for sale, exchange, give, transfer, or deliver” a machinegun-convertible pistol unless an exemption applies.

AB 1127 does not list intrafamilial transfers as an exemption. The exemptions include things like old dealer inventory, law enforcement/military sales, gunsmith transfers, dealer-to-dealer/manufacturer transfers, return from safekeeping, forensic lab transfers, and private-party-to-private-party transactions through an FFL under Penal Code section 28050. It does not say “intrafamilial transfers” in the exemption list.

The penalty structure is in 27595(b):


First violation: fine up to $1,000.


Second violation: fine up to $5,000, and DOJ may suspend or revoke the dealer’s license / remove the dealer from DOJ centralized lists.


Third violation: misdemeanor, mandatory dealer-license revocation, and removal from DOJ lists.


So if an FFL knowingly processes a non-exempt intrafamilial transfer of a covered Glock after July 1, 2026, the obvious exposure is against the dealer under PC 27595. That is why most shops will probably refuse unless the transaction clearly fits an exemption.


For the private family members, AB 1127 itself does not appear to create a direct felony/misdemeanor simply for owning the Glock or for being the giver/receiver in a wrongly processed transfer. The statutory “shall not” language is directed at “a firearms dealer licensed pursuant to Sections 26700 to 26920.”

 

[nakatomi]

So... AB 1127 question:

If a CA FFL can’t transfer a readily convertible, cruciform-trigger Glock to a civilian after July 1 what happens to an interstate parent to child transfer?

And if that’s prohibited, how would a PPT of a Gen 6 Glock from an LEO to a civilian be any different??

And.. if that PPT isn’t allowed, then how can a civilian PPT their own cruciform-trigger Glock (including Gen 1–3 models)???

Trying to understand where AB 1127 draws the line.

This is why I think AB 1127 requires updated language.

 

[Gawernator]

So... AB 1127 question:

If a CA FFL can’t transfer a readily convertible, cruciform-trigger Glock to a civilian after July 1 what happens to an interstate parent to child transfer?

And if that’s prohibited, how would a PPT of a Gen 6 Glock from an LEO to a civilian be any different??

And.. if that PPT isn’t allowed, then how can a civilian PPT their own cruciform-trigger Glock (including Gen 1–3 models)???

Trying to understand where AB 1127 draws the line.

This is why I think AB 1127 requires updated language.

The distinction appears to be transaction type, not merely who receives the gun. AB 1127 bars a CA dealer from selling/transferring/delivering a covered cruciform-trigger pistol after July 1, 2026 unless a listed exemption applies. The bill expressly preserves CA PPTs through an FFL, but it does not clearly preserve interstate parent-to-child transfers as their own category. So a CA civilian PPT of a Gen 1–3 Glock should survive, and an LEO-to-civilian PPT should also survive if it is a true PPT. But an out-of-state parent shipping a Glock to a CA child is not a CA PPT; the CA FFL would be doing an interstate transfer/delivery, and that is where AB 1127 likely blocks it unless another exemption applies. That is why the law is messy: the same FFL counter can be lawful or unlawful depending on the legal category of the transfer.

 

[Sheepdog1968]

The law says, starting July 1, 2026, a licensed dealer may not “sell, offer for sale, exchange, give, transfer, or deliver” a machinegun-convertible pistol unless an exemption applies.

AB 1127 does not list intrafamilial transfers as an exemption. The exemptions include things like old dealer inventory, law enforcement/military sales, gunsmith transfers, dealer-to-dealer/manufacturer transfers, return from safekeeping, forensic lab transfers, and private-party-to-private-party transactions through an FFL under Penal Code section 28050. It does not say “intrafamilial transfers” in the exemption list.

The penalty structure is in 27595(b):


First violation: fine up to $1,000.


Second violation: fine up to $5,000, and DOJ may suspend or revoke the dealer’s license / remove the dealer from DOJ centralized lists.


Third violation: misdemeanor, mandatory dealer-license revocation, and removal from DOJ lists.


So if an FFL knowingly processes a non-exempt intrafamilial transfer of a covered Glock after July 1, 2026, the obvious exposure is against the dealer under PC 27595. That is why most shops will probably refuse unless the transaction clearly fits an exemption.


For the private family members, AB 1127 itself does not appear to create a direct felony/misdemeanor simply for owning the Glock or for being the giver/receiver in a wrongly processed transfer. The statutory “shall not” language is directed at “a firearms dealer licensed pursuant to Sections 26700 to 26920.”

Thanks for the detailed info.

 

[Gawernator]

Thanks for the detailed info.

Welcome

 

[nakatomi]

The distinction appears to be transaction type, not merely who receives the gun. AB 1127 bars a CA dealer from selling/transferring/delivering a covered cruciform-trigger pistol after July 1, 2026 unless a listed exemption applies. The bill expressly preserves CA PPTs through an FFL, but it does not clearly preserve interstate parent-to-child transfers as their own category. So a CA civilian PPT of a Gen 1–3 Glock should survive, and an LEO-to-civilian PPT should also survive if it is a true PPT. But an out-of-state parent shipping a Glock to a CA child is not a CA PPT; the CA FFL would be doing an interstate transfer/delivery, and that is where AB 1127 likely blocks it unless another exemption applies. That is why the law is messy: the same FFL counter can be lawful or unlawful depending on the legal category of the transfer.

Thanks for those details. The pathway for Glocks will be through owners moving into the state and blue label Glocks purchased by peace officers.

Supply is about to be a lot $maller.

 

[Darqhelmet]

Can’t a parent/child hand you a glock if they visit and you do the voluntary reg? Still not sure how that works, as in TX (free state i’m from) I could hand my kids or anyone really a firearm and say it’s yours and it was theirs. No gov, no reg, no nothing. I’ve given my kids a few guns each. Or is there an extra step i’m missing in CA?

 

[Gawernator]

Honestly need to ask a lawyer probably. Because the penalties are focused against dealers, so if you transfer parent to child and use the DOJ reporting form idk if anything would happen

Can’t a parent/child hand you a glock if they visit and you do the voluntary reg? Still not sure how that works, as in TX (free state i’m from) I could hand my kids or anyone really a firearm and say it’s yours and it was theirs. No gov, no reg, no nothing. I’ve given my kids a few guns each. Or is there an extra step i’m missing in CA?

 

[Darqhelmet]

Honestly need to ask a lawyer probably. Because the penalties are focused against dealers, so if you transfer parent to child and use the DOJ reporting form idk if anything would happen

That’s the part i’m not getting. You don’t have to transfer through a dealer interfamily any where else. If my dad wanted to give me the rest of his guns we would have to take them all to an FFL and pay to transfer them? Or I wanted to give my kids all of mine we would have to do the same?

 

[Gawernator]

In state you can transfer without FFL. Across state lines you have to use FFL

 

[Darqhelmet]

In state you can transfer without FFL. Across state lines you have to use FFL

interesting. was unaware that the feds cared about interfamily stuff.

i’m going to have a great time with my fathers old stuff. A bunch are pre 68 so who knows if they have serial numbers.

 

[chiroken007]

There is a form involved though to acknowledge transfer of ownership.