# Looking to buy first gun in California



## wakekidx66 (Jun 11, 2013)

Looking to buy my first gun. Since I live in California my first choices of a Glock Gen 4 or Springfield XDM are out because they are not on the California DOJ "SAFE" gun list.

Looking for a reliable and easy to maintain first gun. Leaning toward a 9mm or S&w .40 round.

Top of my list right now Glock (17 or 22) Gen 3 and Springfield XD, I have been able to find both on the approved list. Found a local gun shop that has both in stock. The employee I asked said about both guns said "Well they are pretty much the same, the Glock is $10 more".

So any comments or suggestions from anyone out there?
I have been able to really find a true comparison of the Glock Gen 3 and the Springdfield XD.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

How is it that a gen3 Glock is acceptable and a gen4 is not? How did they come up with that?

As to the gen3 Glock 17 and the XD. I have both so I can offer an opinion, and that's all this is. I shoot my Glock 17 better than my XD40 and this is largely due to two things: grip angle and bore axis. I prefer the grip on the gen3 Glock 17 over that of my XD40. It's just more natural for me. But that is a relatively small matter. The more important factor for me is the bore axis. It is significantly lower on the Glock than on my XD. This is very important to me. Others may differ on this one, but I much prefer a low bore axis in a defensive pistol.

Now what is it with California and gen4 Glocks and XD's?


----------



## wakekidx66 (Jun 11, 2013)

We have weird laws in California. Glock Gen 1-3 and Springfield XD were grandfathered in before California passed some additional laws on gun safe. Gen4 and XDM are considered new models there for have to meet all the gun safe laws in California, cocked and chambered indicators, 10 round magazine max, magazine drop safety, and many many many more.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Well both the gen4 Glocks and the XD's meet all of these requirements (10-round mags are required in several localities/states). Wonder what in particular California sees with the gen4 Glock and XD to make them not safe?


----------



## sengaruto (Jul 23, 2013)

Just do a single shot exemption. You can get any gun that is not on the list if you do a single shot exemption. Its very easy they just swap the barrel and put a mag lock so you can only shoot one bullet. All you do is walk out of the shop with your SSE gun, then walk back in and they swap the parts back. Most shops will do that for you, just ask.


----------



## DJ Niner (Oct 3, 2006)

SouthernBoy said:


> Well both the gen4 Glocks and the XD's meet all of these requirements (10-round mags are required in several localities/states). Wonder what in particular California sees with the gen4 Glock and XD to make them not safe?


I believe the manufacturer has to submit models for testing to get them added to the approved-for-sale list, and if I remember correctly, they have to pay a fee to get them tested, as well. Until the fee is paid and guns are tested and approved, they cannot be sold in CA. Certifications also expire after a certain amount of time, and then those handguns are removed from the list.

Please correct me if I'm in error or not completely up-to-date, Californians.


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

Socialist state!


----------



## bigjohn56 (Jan 26, 2013)

Why not just buy a Glock Gen 3 then? I picked up a Glock 17 just a couple of weeks ago here in So Cal.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

I was under the impression, that any handgun that fired a rubber bullet, was on the CA. approved list. :smt1099


----------



## DJ Niner (Oct 3, 2006)

Just saw this yesterday, in an article discussing why gun owners should resist new gun control.

Why Gun Owners Are Right to Fight Against Gun Control - Reason.com

Excerpt (discussing California law): "In 2001, dealers were forbidden to sell handguns that were not approved by the government, after rigorous laboratory testing, funded by the manufacturer. Every slight variation, even changes in color or finish, required a new certification. The tests actually had nothing to do with reliability or safety, as evidenced by the exemption of law enforcement firearms from them."

As Glenn Reynolds is fond of saying: Tar. Feathers.


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

DJ Niner said:


> Just saw this yesterday, in an article discussing why gun owners should resist new gun control.
> 
> Why Gun Owners Are Right to Fight Against Gun Control - Reason.com
> 
> ...


Very good read DJ. It's California's way of government to ban all firearms, magazines, and ammunition as the ultimate goal. Chipping away rights will lead to confiscation. Make it so difficult and expensive for manufacturers to sell their products, limit ammunition capacity, registration, ammo registration, finger printing. As an Aussie said, if you let you're government take a little now, they will get the rest in short order. In their case they took everything in short order.


----------

