PDA

View Full Version : Normal Capacity Magazine Question


lawaia
02-02-2009, 5:01 PM
If a manufacturer were to mistakenly mail you a normal capacity (13-round) handgun magazine in packaging labeled as a 10-round magazine (obviously a mistake), what is your liability in keeping and using said 13-round magazine?

sorensen440
02-02-2009, 5:02 PM
I would disassemble it and not tell anyone about it

ohsmily
02-02-2009, 5:26 PM
If a manufacturer were to mistakenly mail you a normal capacity (13-round) handgun magazine in packaging labeled as a 10-round magazine (obviously a mistake), what is your liability in keeping and using said 13-round magazine?

Was it you or someone else who asked this same question with strikingly similar wording about a week ago? This is like a carbon copy.

Linh
02-02-2009, 6:32 PM
I agree, I would disassemble it and not put it back together or make it a 10 rounder.

Cato
02-02-2009, 6:35 PM
Well, you didnt buy it; you bought a 10 rounder and have the reciept even. You didn't build it nor did you import it. I THINK you can keep it. Consult a lawyer if you want to be 100% sure.

SJgunguy24
02-02-2009, 6:57 PM
What magazine?

squishyhead
02-02-2009, 7:13 PM
Contact the manufacturer and let them know about the mistake. They should mail you a new 10 round magazine free of charge. As for the high-cap, having it is a felony, so you should get rid of it. You're not allowed to sell it, so you can either break it down or surrender it to your local PD.

LOW2000
02-02-2009, 7:16 PM
Contact the manufacturer and let them know about the mistake. They should mail you a new 10 round magazine free of charge. As for the high-cap, having it is a felony, so you should get rid of it. You're not allowed to sell it, so you can either break it down or surrender it to your local PD.

Point me to the high cap possession felony statute please.



I'll say though, there are a lot of people thinking to themselves, "Just shut up about it and use the damn thing."

lawaia
02-02-2009, 7:17 PM
Was it you or someone else who asked this same question with strikingly similar wording about a week ago? This is like a carbon copy.

It was me on Saturday morning, and my thread was deleted for unknown reasons. So here I am again.:)

Salty
02-02-2009, 7:17 PM
As for the high-cap, having it is a felony

No it's not.

No where in the law does it say that buying one within the state is a felony either. (keeping in mind that conspiracy to commit a crime is still obviously illegal)

DDT
02-02-2009, 7:51 PM
The reason your last thread was deleted was PROBABLY because people were suggesting you commit a felony.

There is no legal way to acquire a large-capacity magazine in CA unless you are LEO, Military or similar. The best approach is to tear it down into a "rebuild kit" and ask the mfg. to swap you out for a California legal magazine.

Jorge
02-02-2009, 10:33 PM
I'm not so sure that would be a felony. He didn't import, lend, sell, transfer, or offer for sale of said high cap mag as it is written.

lawaia
02-03-2009, 6:58 AM
I'm not so sure that would be a felony. He didn't import, lend, sell, transfer, or offer for sale of said high cap mag as it is written.


This is exactly why I am asking. If you acquired the mag the way I described, are you violating any laws by owning and using the mag? Are you contributing to the importation even if you did not know that they would send you the wrong magazine? Can you legally use it in this state, or do you need to store it as a parts kit? Or, should it just be returned to the manufacturer for replacement with a 10-round mag?

lawaia
02-03-2009, 7:01 AM
The reason your last thread was deleted was PROBABLY because people were suggesting you commit a felony.

Of the replies I read before it was deleted, no one suggested anything illegal. And if they had, I would expect their post to be deleted, not my entire thread.

CHS
02-03-2009, 8:56 AM
This mag may have been mailed mistakenly, but the keeping it, possessing it, and using it is perfectly legal.

You did not "import" this magazine unless you specifically ordered a hi-cap mag and were aware that a hi-cap mag was being mailed to you.

If you ordered a 10rd mag and were under the impression that a 10rd mag was being mailed to you, the liability is on the sender. However, they are not subject to CA law since they are outside CA.

You are fine. If it's a pistol mag, use it. If it's an AR/AK/etc mag, be sure to ONLY use it on featureless builds.

There is no felony here.

lawaia
02-03-2009, 11:56 AM
This mag may have been mailed mistakenly, but the keeping it, possessing it, and using it is perfectly legal.

You did not "import" this magazine unless you specifically ordered a hi-cap mag and were aware that a hi-cap mag was being mailed to you.

If you ordered a 10rd mag and were under the impression that a 10rd mag was being mailed to you, the liability is on the sender. However, they are not subject to CA law since they are outside CA.

You are fine. If it's a pistol mag, use it. If it's an AR/AK/etc mag, be sure to ONLY use it on featureless builds.

There is no felony here.

Roger that. Thank you very much for an insightful and polite post!:thumbsup:

DDT
02-03-2009, 1:58 PM
You received property that was illegally imported by the manufacturer. Receiving that property is taking part in the crime and is a crime in itself. You may not like it and lots of people have looked into how to acquire large capacity magazines in CA. The simple fact is that there is no legal way to do so unless you are an exempt person or entity per PC. The only other possible option is to buy from an Armored Car company.

CHS
02-03-2009, 2:26 PM
You received property that was illegally imported by the manufacturer. Receiving that property is taking part in the crime and is a crime in itself. You may not like it and lots of people have looked into how to acquire large capacity magazines in CA. The simple fact is that there is no legal way to do so unless you are an exempt person or entity per PC. The only other possible option is to buy from an Armored Car company.

The sender is not subject to CA laws, and the receiver did not import the magazines. I fail to see any crime here.

M. D. Van Norman
02-03-2009, 2:51 PM
Congratulations! You just legally found a large-capacity ammunition-feeding device.

DedEye
02-03-2009, 7:57 PM
That last thread really shouldn't have been deleted. There was only one post that got it shut down from what I remember, and that post was HILARIOUS (if off topic)!

dexter9659
02-03-2009, 8:20 PM
While owning a full cap mag is not illegal in the least bit, I would disassemble it and use it as spare parts for my other full cap mags. Then I would order another 10 round mag.

Cypren
02-03-2009, 8:38 PM
My offhand guess is that this falls squarely into the list of things on which you would (probably) win at trial but most DAs would drag you through the mud anyway. It's not their own money they're spending, after all. So in my mind the real question becomes A.) how likely is it that someone will notice you're firing more than ten rounds and B.) how much are you willing to spend in legal fees for that privilege, knowing that there's a reasonably good chance that your magazine will be confiscated and not returned to you regardless out of the outcome of the trial?

I know you badly want an excuse to keep it and use it, but the people suggesting that you should disassemble it are correct, in my view. Barring a situation in which the government collapses or you find yourself fighting it, that magazine is more trouble in its current state than it's probably worth.

CHS
02-03-2009, 8:50 PM
My offhand guess is that this falls squarely into the list of things on which you would (probably) win at trial but most DAs would drag you through the mud anyway. It's not their own money they're spending, after all. So in my mind the real question becomes A.) how likely is it that someone will notice you're firing more than ten rounds and B.) how much are you willing to spend in legal fees for that privilege, knowing that there's a reasonably good chance that your magazine will be confiscated and not returned to you regardless out of the outcome of the trial?


I have TONS of preban hi-cap mags that I use all the time at public ranges. Cops don't even look twice at them.

What are you doing wrong, that cops are questioning your lawfully-owned hi-cap mags?

You know that there is nothing whatsoever on the books about the possession of these, right?

Cypren
02-03-2009, 9:08 PM
I have TONS of preban hi-cap mags that I use all the time at public ranges. Cops don't even look twice at them.

What are you doing wrong, that cops are questioning your lawfully-owned hi-cap mags?

You know that there is nothing whatsoever on the books about the possession of these, right?

Yes, I'm aware that possession isn't illegal. The original poster said it's a handgun magazine, though, which makes it a little more wobbly than, for example, an AR-15 mag, plenty of which existed well before the ban. Many modern and commonly used handguns were first debuted to the public after the Federal AWB began (I'm thinking of, for example, the USP, the Springfield XD, the FN Five-Seven, etc) and therefore legal manufacture or importation of a pre-ban standard capacity mag for one would be impossible. If an observant LEO (or someone willing to snitch on you) saw you with one of these that fired more than ten rounds, he would know that you had been transferred the magazine through illegal means. Whether or not, as the recipient of what you know to be illegally imported property, you are liable for conspiracy or some such is mostly going to be up to how ballsy a DA feels and whether or not he thinks he can swing a jury to his viewpoint.

If the magazine in question is for an older pistol, then there's far less likelihood that anyone will notice anything amiss and virtually no likelihood they'd try to prove you acquired it post-ban if you told them it was pre-ban. But that goes into my original point: likelihood of getting caught has to be part of the calculation.

Also, if you think that DAs don't know how to search Calguns for threads like this one to prove mens rea, I think you're probably underestimating them.

DedEye
02-03-2009, 9:57 PM
Yes, I'm aware that possession isn't illegal. The original poster said it's a handgun magazine, though, which makes it a little more wobbly than, for example, an AR-15 mag, plenty of which existed well before the ban. Many modern and commonly used handguns were first debuted to the public after the Federal AWB began (I'm thinking of, for example, the USP, the Springfield XD, the FN Five-Seven, etc) and therefore legal manufacture or importation of a pre-ban standard capacity mag for one would be impossible. If an observant LEO (or someone willing to snitch on you) saw you with one of these that fired more than ten rounds, he would know that you had been transferred the magazine through illegal means. Whether or not, as the recipient of what you know to be illegally imported property, you are liable for conspiracy or some such is mostly going to be up to how ballsy a DA feels and whether or not he thinks he can swing a jury to his viewpoint.

There are still legal means of acquiring hicap magazines post 2000. Possession of such a magazine is not evidence of a crime. The only reason anyone would get themselves into trouble for said possession is if they talked themselves into jail by saying too much.

I said it in the last thread on the topic, it's worth repeating: keep your mouth shut. It doesn't matter if it's a brand new 19 round Springfield XD(m) magazine or a 1960s vintage Colt 20 round M16 magazine that you personally carried in Vietnam and kept to this day. No one needs to know where you got your property, you are under no obligation to tell them, and it is legally advisable (remember, this is not legal advice, and I'm not your lawyer) to not say anything if asked about where you got your hicap mag, no matter how innocuous the answer may seem to you.

If the magazine in question is for an older pistol, then there's far less likelihood that anyone will notice anything amiss and virtually no likelihood they'd try to prove you acquired it post-ban if you told them it was pre-ban. But that goes into my original point: likelihood of getting caught has to be part of the calculation.

Don't tell them it was pre-ban, whether it is or not. The burden of proof in all criminal matters lies on the state. The more you talk, the easier you make their job in prosecuting you. You can't "make things easier" on yourself by talking, no matter what a cop tells you.

Trying to go with the flow and acting innocent is why so many people consent to searches for which no probable cause existed, and is in turn the reason that some of them end up getting in trouble that could have been avoided.

Also, if you think that DAs don't know how to search Calguns for threads like this one to prove mens rea, I think you're probably underestimating them.

This is true, and goes back to my original statement about keeping your mouth shut.

Cypren
02-03-2009, 10:24 PM
I completely agree with everything you said, especially the part about talking to the police (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik).

There are still legal means of acquiring hicap magazines post 2000.

Can you elaborate on this point? I wasn't aware there were any legal ways of getting a magazine greater than ten rounds into an individual's hands, only into corporate inventory (in the case of dealers) or armories (in the case of security firms).

DedEye
02-03-2009, 11:19 PM
I completely agree with everything you said, especially the part about talking to the police (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik).



Can you elaborate on this point? I wasn't aware there were any legal ways of getting a magazine greater than ten rounds into an individual's hands, only into corporate inventory (in the case of dealers) or armories (in the case of security firms).

Besides the oft-discussed armored car company exemption (See PC12020(b)(27)), there are two other potential and potential means. PC12020(b)(21) and (b)(23) allow for individuals with large capacity magazine permits and FFLs, respectively, to sell large capacity magazines. In neither of those exemptions (or the accompanying referenced sections of the penal code) does it set a limitation upon who they may legally sell large capacity magazines to.

This is not guaranteed or tested legal ground, and there are many smart people who disagree with me, or at the very least advise a more cautious approach. There's a reason you don't see every FFL and vendor with a hicap permit selling to Joe Gunowner, and while there are developments brewing and the potential for things to change dramatically in the future, the consensus is to maintain the status quo of keeping your mouth shut, being happy with the magazines you've got, and waiting for more case law to solidify our position before pressing ahead recklessly.

lawaia
02-04-2009, 7:40 AM
That last thread really shouldn't have been deleted. There was only one post that got it shut down from what I remember, and that post was HILARIOUS (if off topic)!

I must have missed that post.

DocSkinner
02-04-2009, 8:42 AM
I must have missed that post.

me too -

squishyhead
02-04-2009, 4:46 PM
This is just to the person who started this thread, get rid of the high-cap mag! Regardless of the chatter going on in this thread, and all of the online resources that've been used to create such "informed" talking points, possession of the magazine is a felony. I know this because I'm very close to the very attorney's that'll be prosecuting you when you get caught. As much as I love to argue the same way a lot of you do using "the law," the fact is that high caps are prosecuted as felonies and the DA's office gets convictions damn near 100% of the time.

So to summarize; having that magazine is a felony, and you can decide for yourself if a potential felony on your record is worth forfeiting your right to obtain legal firearms in the future!

lawaia
02-04-2009, 5:13 PM
Squishyhead,

Thanks for that strong warning. I must first state that I never said I had in my possession what you call a "high cap mag."

Secondly, I almost hate to say this, but with a post count of 12 on this forum, coupled with the fact that I have no idea who you are, I must take your statements with a grain of salt. (As I do most others.)

Thirdly, no where in the state penal code does it say that mere possession is a felony, does it? If I am wrong, please point me to the proper area.

I would also appreciate you giving me names of specific cases where there were actual convictions for possession of what you call "high cap mags."

I am not trying real hard to be a jerk here, it may just seem that way.;)

I am really interested to hear any specifics you can provide, as I am sure others on this site are also.

Thanks for your input.

DedEye
02-04-2009, 6:08 PM
This is just to the person who started this thread, get rid of the high-cap mag! Regardless of the chatter going on in this thread, and all of the online resources that've been used to create such "informed" talking points, possession of the magazine is a felony. I know this because I'm very close to the very attorney's that'll be prosecuting you when you get caught. As much as I love to argue the same way a lot of you do using "the law," the fact is that high caps are prosecuted as felonies and the DA's office gets convictions damn near 100% of the time.

So to summarize; having that magazine is a felony, and you can decide for yourself if a potential felony on your record is worth forfeiting your right to obtain legal firearms in the future!

Are you ****ing kidding me?

Squishyhead,

Thanks for that strong warning. I must first state that I never said I had in my possession what you call a "high cap mag."

Secondly, I almost hate to say this, but with a post count of 12 on this forum, coupled with the fact that I have no idea who you are, I must take your statements with a grain of salt. (As I do most others.)

Thirdly, no where in the state penal code does it say that mere possession is a felony, does it? If I am wrong, please point me to the proper area.

I would also appreciate you giving me names of specific cases where there were actual convictions for possession of what you call "high cap mags."

I am not trying real hard to be a jerk here, it may just seem that way.;)

I am really interested to hear any specifics you can provide, as I am sure others on this site are also.

Thanks for your input.

A very well reasoned response to the biggest FUD storm I've ever seen.

ohsmily
02-04-2009, 6:17 PM
This is just to the person who started this thread, get rid of the high-cap mag! Regardless of the chatter going on in this thread, and all of the online resources that've been used to create such "informed" talking points, possession of the magazine is a felony. I know this because I'm very close to the very attorney's that'll be prosecuting you when you get caught. As much as I love to argue the same way a lot of you do using "the law," the fact is that high caps are prosecuted as felonies and the DA's office gets convictions damn near 100% of the time.

So to summarize; having that magazine is a felony, and you can decide for yourself if a potential felony on your record is worth forfeiting your right to obtain legal firearms in the future!

You're wrong. I don't care if you are so "close to the attorneys who will prosecute us" that you are sleeping with the district attorney, you are wrong. It would help if you actually read the penal code. Possession of high capacity magazines is not restricted. Please spare us the BS and FUD.

What evidence do you have to support your claim about "felony possession of high capacity magazines being charged and convicted nearly 100% of the time." I had a client who was arrested and later charged with FELONY counts of 12025, 12031, 12034 and 246.3. The guns used in the "crime" both had high capacity magazines. The defendant admitted to police that he had imported the high cap magazines after the ban. The DA didn't even bother charging him with it violating 12020. While this is only an anecdote, you don't provide any support for your absurd statement that people get charged with and convicted for possession of high capacity magazines. WHAT WOULD THEY BE CHARGED WITH??? There is no restriction on possession of high caps in the penal code. You should stick to the threads that address which 1911 is better.

P.S. By any chance, is that you in your avatar?

P.P.S. Is Squishyhead your user name due to a personal characteristic or just random coincidence?

OK OK, I couldn't help myself with the avatar and user name ;)

Lastly, I hasten to add that if one does receive an assembled high cap via mail order and an assembled high cap is not something that person ordered, it is not something to go trumpeting around to anyone. I will not give advice about what step to take if one is in this situation. All I will say is that possession is not restricted.

DDT
02-04-2009, 6:21 PM
Squishyhead,

Thanks for that strong warning. I must first state that I never said I had in my possession what you call a "high cap mag."


It is not squishyhead who calls it a high cap magazine, it is state law. While possession is not a felony facilitating in the importation is.

DedEye
02-04-2009, 6:27 PM
It is not squishyhead who calls it a high cap magazine, it is state law. While possession is not a felony facilitating in the importation is.

The law calls them "large capacity magazines," not high cap magazines.

DDT
02-04-2009, 6:30 PM
The law calls them "large capacity magazines," not high cap magazines.

you are right, my mistake

DedEye
02-04-2009, 6:37 PM
you are right, my mistake

Meh, no big deal. It just gets complicated when people start talking about standard capacity/full capacity/large capacity/reduced capacity.

sorensen440
02-04-2009, 6:54 PM
Meh, no big deal. It just gets complicated when people start talking about standard capacity/full capacity/large capacity/reduced capacity.
I like "standard capacity" but when it isnt obvious what I'm talking about I usually just say 10+

DedEye
02-04-2009, 7:07 PM
I like "standard capacity" but when it isnt obvious what I'm talking about I usually just say 10+

Standard capacity varies, too. Standard capacity for a 1911 is seven rounds for example.

sorensen440
02-04-2009, 7:09 PM
Standard capacity varies, too. Standard capacity for a 1911 is seven rounds for example.
Correct
I only use standard capacity for the capacity a firearm comes with in unrestricted states

JeffM
02-04-2009, 7:20 PM
Wow. Just wow.

This has been hashed out, and the law - as muddy as laws can be - is fairly clear in the respect that receiving and possessing a large capacity magazine is not a crime.

If you conspire, that is you have specific intent, to import a large capacity magazine, then you have broken the law.

Besides the oft-discussed armored car company exemption (See PC12020(b)(27)), there are two other potential and potential means. PC12020(b)(21) and (b)(23) allow for individuals with large capacity magazine permits and FFLs, respectively, to sell large capacity magazines. In neither of those exemptions (or the accompanying referenced sections of the penal code) does it set a limitation upon who they may legally sell large capacity magazines to.

There has been some questions raised about how the sections referenced above are worded. There are inconsistencies in the wording that some of the legal eagles have identified that make only the armored car companies a lock for being able to freely sell large capacity magazines. The legality of FFLs w/ large capacity magazine permits selling them are not as clear.

ohsmily
02-04-2009, 7:22 PM
Correct
I only use standard capacity for the capacity a firearm comes with in unrestricted states

Remington supplies their AR-15 rifles with 10 round magazines. So, I guess standard capacity is 10 rounds for the ar-15....standard capacity is too vague.

squishyhead
02-04-2009, 8:41 PM
Alright folks, I've made a few calls and cleared up a lot of my own confusion, so now I'm gonna lay it out. I contacted LA, OC, and Riverside county DDA's that I've talked to and they all confirmed the prosecution of "10+ capacity magazines" in combination with "assault weapon" category RIFLES. So even with a BB, you're AR/AK/etc. goes back into "assault weapon"/felony territory when you put the 10+ on. For some reason, first time around I applied those prosecutions to all guns. Now for the twist.

My Riverside contact told me that they also prosecute 10+ for any type of semi-automatic firearm. I can't download the California penal code file right now for some reason, but apparently the wording of a section following 12020 can be used by an over-zealous prosecutor to apply felony charges toward simple possession of said magazines. They did mention that this type of prosecution is seen in large gang infested areas such as Riverside county, but that I didn't need to worry about it. Simply put, this is a tool to tack on extra charges for gang bangers that have been causing trouble.

Due to the hour, no one I spoke with seemed inclined to give me case numbers, but I'll see what I can get out of them this weekend. To re-cap; no 10+ mags for potential "assault weapon" rifles, but unless you're using your pistol to rob a liquor store in Riverside county, you should be fine if you're found with a 10+ mag. Sorry for the confusion gents, lesson learned.

ohsmily
02-04-2009, 8:47 PM
Alright folks, I've made a few calls and cleared up a lot of my own confusion, so now I'm gonna lay it out. I contacted LA, OC, and Riverside county DDA's that I've talked to and they all confirmed the prosecution of "10+ capacity magazines" in combination with "assault weapon" category RIFLES. So even with a BB, you're AR/AK/etc. goes back into "assault weapon"/felony territory when you put the 10+ on. For some reason, first time around I applied those prosecutions to all guns. WE ALL KNOW THIS. IT IS CLEARLY STATED IN THE PENAL CODE. IF YOU PUT A 10+ ROUND MAG IN A BB OR OTHER FIXED MAG BUILD, YOU CREATE AN AW. Now for the twist.

My Riverside contact told me that they also prosecute 10+ for any type of semi-automatic firearm. NOPE I can't download the California penal code file right now for some reason, but apparently the wording of a section following 12020 can be used by an over-zealous prosecutor to apply felony charges toward simple possession of said magazines. NOPEThey did mention that this type of prosecution is seen in large gang infested areas such as Riverside county, but that I didn't need to worry about it. Simply put, this is a tool to tack on extra charges for gang bangers that have been causing trouble.

Due to the hour, no one I spoke with seemed inclined to give me case numbers, but I'll see what I can get out of them this weekend. To re-cap; no 10+ mags for potential "assault weapon" rifles, but unless you're using your pistol to rob a liquor store in Riverside county, you should be fine if you're found with a 10+ mag. Sorry for the confusion gents, lesson learned.

You, and whoever you talked to, still have it wrong to an extent.

leelaw
02-04-2009, 9:50 PM
Several people in here need to cool down, or just leave the thread permanently, or this thread will find itself deleted just like the other (and mostly for the same reasons, too).

lawaia
02-05-2009, 7:18 AM
squishyhead,

Thanks for the follow up. I appreciate your efforts in making those phone calls. I understand now where the confusion was, and I believe the information in your last post is correct.

Please do post any other information you are able to find out.

You must be a stand-up guy, since you came back after the abuse!;)

SteveH
02-05-2009, 10:57 AM
I'm not so sure that would be a felony. He didn't import, lend, sell, transfer, or offer for sale of said high cap mag as it is written.

He imported it. He just didnt knowingly import it.