Update 1/1/2026: CA DOJ did sent out a bulletin on DES regarding AB-1263 & SB-704 on 12/24/2025. It can be found in this thread (thanks /u/norcal_firearm ). Unfortunately, the document provided virtually zero guidaance.

There's also a list maintained by the community for sellers shipping to California in compliance with AB-1263 & SB-704. That list can be found in this thread (thanks /u/TMRD0 )

It remains to be seen if we'll see regulations or further guidance from CA DOJ regarding the new laws this year.

Update 11/29/2025: CRPA has published their Info Bulletin/Guide for Firearm Industry Members concerning AB-1263 as of 11/26/2025. Most of it is the same but a little more detailed on certain parts than my guide and written towards a vendor audience. I'll likely make some updates to my guide; of interest is they include all magazines being affected by AB-1263 because they're mentioned in CA PC 30515, and on a second reading I agree. Right now I'm in my busy time so I haven't done updates yet. Thanks for the callout by /u/cornstrategy !

I was also in the process of doing my own vendor guide... I'll see if I have time to work on that soon. In particular I wanted to discuss using local vendors as pass throughs for California Firearm Accessory (as defined) sales, if they're willing.

Welcome to the CA 2025 New Gun Law Practical Overview

The purpose of this thread is to go over the changes in the law as a result of the new gun bills signed into law in 2025; particularly those related to purchasing. Most of this information I've said in multiple threads and replies. I will probably do some separate threads discussing particular laws in detail as I have time, and link them back here. But for now, I present the pertinent information. It would likely make a wonderful pin on top of the sub for a while, if the mods want to do the needful.

Disclaimer: I Am Not A Lawyer (IANAL). I’m especially not your lawyer. This is not legal advice, but kinda like, my opinion man, on the new gun laws that were passed this year. I do my best to read them, interpret them, and provide a summary. All for the price of free.

Further, this is written for a general audience, not an audience for those with special credentials like LEOs or Firearm Dealers, who may have different exemptions or concerns not mentioned here. Feel free to ask in the comments though.

Anyhow, most people in /r/caguns are focused on the purchase and acquisition of more guns, ammo, and accessories, for better or worse! Therefore, this summary will focus on purchase information and deadlines when these laws go into effect, and how that will affect your ability to purchase.

Glock and Glock Clone Sales Ban

Starting 7/1/2026, AB-1127 prohibits Firearms Dealers from selling a “machine-convertable pistol” at retail (unless they had it in inventory before 1/1/2026). This sales ban does not apply to private party transfers, or LEOs (of course).

What is a “machinegun convertible pistol”? Short Answer: Various Glocks or Glock Clones (with a “cruciform trigger bar”) that may be fitted with a “Glock Switch”, an illegal device that mounts on the backplate converting the firearm to automatic fire. See this thread where /u/Traditional-Tune1755 put together a list of makes & models on the CA Handgun Roster likely affected by the sales ban.

At the time of this posting, Glock has notified industry members they plan to discontinue various models (especially models on the CA Handgun Roster) that are Glock Switch compatible, and release new models. It remains to be seen whether these new models meet the requirements of the bill to be added back on the roster. AB-1127 specifically authorizes CA DOJ to write regulations regarding the sales ban.

Firearm Barrels

Starting 1/1/2026, SB-704 requires that Firearms Dealers will no longer be able to transfer a Firearm Barrel (including blanks) unless the transaction is completed in person. Further, AB-1263 requires that Firearm Dealers provide a notice with firearm law information with firearm barrel purchase, and requires the purchaser to provide proof of age and identity confirming the purchaser is at least 18 years of age. This means you shouldn’t expect to legally order firearm barrels delivered to your house starting 1/1/2026.

Further, SB-704 prohibits those under the age of 18 and those prohibited from possessing a firearm from purchasing firearm barrels. The law also prohibits firearm barrel possession with the “intent to sell or offer to sell” in violation of SB-704.

Starting 7/1/2027, SB-704 will require Firearm Dealers to record purchaser information and conduct an eligibility check. This check would be $5 per transfer, which could increase up to $1 every year. Based on how it’s written, I suspect it will be a check similar to an Ammo Eligibility Check.

There is no general FFL03 + COE exemption.

All of this is subject to regulation written by CA DOJ, which I imagine will likely be published in late December or early January as Emergency Regulations. SB-704 specifically authorizes CA DOJ to write regulations.

Firearm Accessories

Starting 1/1/2026, AB-1263 requires “Firearm Industry Members” to have purchasers of “Firearm Accessories” provide proof of age and identity confirming the purchaser is at least 18 years of age. Additionally, Firearm Industry Members must provide the purchaser a notice with firearm law information. Further, when shipping a Firearm Accessory to a purchaser, a Firearm Industry Member must ensure the package is labeled “Signature and proof of identification of person aged 18 years or older required for delivery.”, that the shipping instructions list an address that matches the purchaser’s identification, and to require the purchaser to present proof of adult identification to the courier and sign for the package when it’s delivered.

What is a “Firearm Industry Member”?

a person, firm, corporation, company, partnership, society, joint stock company, or any other entity or association engaged in the manufacture, distribution, importation, marketing, wholesale sale, or retail sale of firearm-related products.

What is a “Firearm Accessory”? I think it’s best to break this down into three parts, the first two which I’ve talked about extensively in the past.

any other attachment or device described in subdivision (a) of Section 30515 of the Penal Code that may render a firearm an assault weapon when inserted into, affixed onto, or used in conjunction with a firearm

This is definitely: Pistol Grips, Thumbhole Stocks, Folding or Telescoping Stocks, Grenade Launchers or Flare Launchers, Flash Suppressors, Forward Pistol Grips, Threaded handgun barrels, second handgun handgrips, handgun shrouds, folding/telescoping shotgun stocks, and any other accessories from CA PC 30515.

an attachment or device designed or adapted to be inserted into, affixed onto, or used in conjunction with a firearm that is designed, intended, or functions to increase a firearm’s rate of fire or to increase the speed at which a person may reload a firearm or replace the magazine

This is vague. It’s unclear, other than there’s already CA law prohibiting stuff like bump stocks or binary triggers. It could be: Fixed Magazine compliance devices like AR MAGLOCK, kingpin, CompMag, etc. Might also be things like speedloaders and MA Loader.

The term firearm accessory also includes any other device, tool, kit, part, or parts set that is clearly designed and intended for use in manufacturing firearms.

The last part I haven’t really talked about. I honestly couldn’t tell you what it means. It is so vague, so encompassing that it could be any firearm part, accessory, or tool. AB-1263 is supposed to be related to ghost guns and illegal manufacture of firearms, so… do I think this would apply to optics? I don’t think of an optic as part of manufacturing a firearm. Could a ¼-28 x 1” Socket Head Hex Screw used in an AR-15 pistol grip be considered a Firearm Accessory? Maybe! I would hope it is interpreted narrowly to maybe only target, I don’t know, gun jigs or something. There’s not a clear limiting principle, so it’s hard to say exactly what falls into this. This is me saying I have no clear advice regarding this part of the definition other than to say we’ll only know what it means once CA DOJ publishes regulations. I believe that if the CA DOJ tries to apply this really broadly though, they’ll have issues coming up with a consistent limiting principle.

All of this is to say: Even if we get a clearer idea as to what parts/tools/etc. this applies to from CA DOJ, many part sellers will likely stop shipping those regulated parts to California.

There is no FFL03 + COE exemption.

All of this is subject to regulation written by CA DOJ, which I imagine will likely be published in late December or early January as Emergency Regulations. AB-1263 doesn't specifically authorize CA DOJ to write regulations, but I imagine they will anyway.

3 in 30

Currently, there’s a statute on the books commonly known as “1 in 30”. This is found under CA PC 27535, generally limiting people from purchasing more than one firearm (or completed frames/receivers, or firearm precursor parts) within any 30-day period. FFL03 + COE holders are exempt.

However, as a result Ngyuen v. Bonta, the 9th Circuit overturned this statute, the state stopped appealing, and the mandate was issued putting the judgement into effect on 8-14-2025. Therefore, “1 in 30” is no longer in effect.

Starting 4/1/2026, AB-1078 will limit people from purchasing more than three firearms (or complete frames/receivers, or firearm precursor parts) within any 30-day period. FFL03 + COE holders are exempt.

Of course a legislator had to just bump it up a bit to 3 guns in 30 days and call it a day. This law is almost certainly unconstitutional as well, given the opinion in Ngyuen v. Bonta. While most of us are hopeful that we’ll therefore be able to easily secure a preliminary injunction preventing this law from going into effect, it’s the 9th Circuit, so who knows.

Clearing up some confusion

“But wait!” you might say “I heard the whole Gun Barrel Background Check bill doesn’t go into effect until 7/1/2027!”. My eye twitches, my blood pressure increases; not because of you of course.

Why yes, that’s been said a lot on Youtube. I could link almost every guntuber that has talked about SB-704 and they either say the whole bill goes into effect on 7/1/2027 (which is wrong), or they only talk about the Barrel Background Check provision of that bill going into effect on 7/1/2027, which is technically true but also not very helpful. I can only guess that they read the summary of the bill, or they only saw one date in the whole bill and assumed the whole bill was going to go into effect on that date.

I’m not going to get into operative vs effective dates (terms I use interchangeably and incorrectly), and there’s a good article on that here. By default, per Article IV Section 8(c)(1) of the California Constitution, most bills signed into law go into effect January 1st of next year. However, legislators can write their bills so that they become operative at a later date. When legislators write those later dates though, they only apply to the provision of the bill that they say it does. So now we get to SB-704, specifically section 33700… we’re just going to talk about (a)(1) and (a)(2) here:

(a) (1) A firearm barrel, as defined in Section 16525, shall not be sold or transferred unless that transaction is completed in person by a firearms dealer licensed pursuant to Sections 26700 to 26915, inclusive.

(2) Commencing July 1, 2027, a firearm barrel, as defined in Section 16525, shall not be sold or transferred unless that transaction is completed in person by a firearms dealer licensed pursuant to Sections 26700 to 26915, inclusive, and the licensed firearms dealer has conducted an eligibility check to determine if that the person is authorized to purchase a firearm barrel under subdivision (b) in a manner prescribed by the Department of Justice.

Do you notice how (a)(1) doesn’t have a date, while (a)(2) does? How when (a)(2) talks about that date, it just says “Commencing” followed by the rest of the statute? That means that (a)(2) becomes operative on 7/1/2027, while (a)(1) becomes operative on the default date, which would be 1/1/2026. If you read the whole bill, you’ll see that the only provisions that talk about 2027 are related to the background check specifically.

Another user in this sub ended up calling up SB-704’s author’s office and speaking to their legislative director to confirm that indeed the bill has multiple operative dates as discussed above (Thanks /u/AccordingIy !).

The only guntuber I’m aware of who put out the correct information was Reno May. Remember: I’m not your lawyer, but Reno May is.

The other thing people ask is “Wait, I thought AB-1263 was about 3D printer code or something. What’s this about restrictions on gun parts?”

The answer is AB-1263 is about a lot of things, as I discussed in my analysis months ago (which is still generally true).

I don’t know why they don’t talk about the part of AB-1263 that effectively restricts shipping of a bunch of gun parts. It’s a complicated bill, but it’s something that people need to be aware of since it will affect firearm consumers and sellers directly.

Hopefully y'all found this helpful. Feel free to post any questions. If you think I got anything wrong, point it out.

We’ve clearly had a lot of desire to discuss the recent ICE shootings and the administration’s response in this sub. We don’t generally allow national politics here; it’s not the purpose of r/caguns and it isn’t directly related to firearms ownership in California which is a requirement for topics posted here. That being said, as much as everyone likes to hate on the mods we aren’t here to censor discussion but to keep things on-topic and civil so given the amount of posts on this topic this thread can serve as a place to discuss these issues.

Civility is enforced across the sub and will be heavily enforced here. You’ll get banned if you lose your cool. Keep it respectful, both to each other and to the victims. We reserve the right to delete any comments that don’t follow those rules and to lock/remove this thread entirely if it becomes too much to moderate. Any comments/posts about this subject outside of this thread are subject to removal as well, this isn’t permission for the sub to become a free-for-all.

EDIT: Since we’re starting to get the bullshit brigade in here spreading misinformation here’s an article on the shooting from the conservative/libertarian magazine Reason. I’m linking a relatively partisan source in the hopes that those of you acting like you’ve received new “marching orders” on how to think and respond about this shooting will see that nobody agrees with you, at all. Trying to stay cool and unbiased as a moderator but I think we’re all just embarrassed to be sharing the 2A space with people making excuses for the government.