DOJ responds to questions about hi-cap mags

[ryang]

I wrote the CA DOJ a few weeks ago asking for clarification to our hi-cap mag laws. Here is their response:

I am writing in response to your letter (undated) regarding large-capacity ammunition magazines. You had a number of questions:

Q1: Can you import newly manufactured parts to repair a legally obtained hi-cap magazine?
A1: Yes.

Q2: Are there any restrictions on which parts can and cannot be imported?
A2: No.

Q3: Can you import all the parts of a single hi-cap magazine at once, provided they are unassembled?
A3: Yes.

Q4: Can a California resident travel to another state, purchase a hi-cap magazine in that state, dissassemble it and ship the required replacement parts back to themselves in California?
A4: Penal Code section 12020(a)(2) makes it illegal to import a large capacity magazine into the state of California. If you traveled to another state in order to import a large capacity magazine, you would be guilty of a felony, even if you disassembled the large capacity magazine before returning to California. If you disassembled the large capacity magazine with the intent to use it only as repair parts, you could lawfully bring the parts in to California. In either case, you would test the limits of the law, and be at risk of criminal prosecution.

Q5: Can you replace the magazine body with one marked "For Law Enforcement Only"?
A5: While theoretically you could use such a part to repair a lawfully owned large capacity magazine, most dealers would be unlikely to sell you such a magazine body, unless you were a law enforcement officer.

Q6: Is there any limitation to the number of parts you can replace in a legally obtained hi-cap magazine? (Scenario: if on successive days I replace each individual part of a legally obtained hi-cap magazine, am I guilty of assembling a new hi-cap magazine once the final part is replaced?)
A6: Whether the scenario you describe constitutes repairing or manufacturing a large capacity magazine depends upon the legal opinion of the prosecutor in the jurisdiction where the acts occur. There are 58 district attorneys in California's 58 counties. They could elect to prosecute you for a felony (Penal Code 12280(a)(2)), if they believed that you were manufacturing a large capacity magazine.

Q7: If the magazine body is replaced with one clearly manufactured after 2000 is there any burden of proof upon a California resident that they did in fact replace a worn/obsolete part and did not illegally purchase/import a new hi-cap magazine.
A7: A California resident who repairs a large capacity magazine that was owned before January 1, 2000 does not have any "burden of proof" that the magazine was repaired, rather than replaced with a new magazine. However, it would be prudent in such a case to keep records documenting the purchase of the part necessary for the repair in order to demonstrate that the large capacity magazine was repaired, not replaced.

Q8: Can you use parts designed for a 10-round magazine to repair a legally obtained hi-cap magazine?
A8: If parts designed for a 10-round magazine are interchangeable with parts of a legally obtained large capacity magazine, there is no legal barrier to using them.

Q9: Can you have enough spare parts to assemble a new hi-cap magazine provided they are unassembled and intended for use as replacement parts?
A9: Whether the scenario you describe constitutes posession of magazine parts with the intent to manufacture or with the intent to repair a large capacity magazine depends upon the legal opinion of the prosecutor in the jurisdiction where the acts occur. You could be charged with a felony (Penal Code 12280(a)(2)), if a prosecutor believed that you were manufacturing a large capacity magazine.

I hope that this information was helpful. Please feel free to contact me again if you have any additional questions.

Sincerely,

Alison Merrilees
Deputy Attorney General
Firearms Division

For Bill Lockyer
Attorney General

[ryang]

Note the answers to Q4, Q6 and Q9 basically say those are legal grey areas where the penal code gives no guidance--it will be up to case law to clarify these issues. Pity the unfortunate soul who finds themselves in that unenviable position in a court of law.

[RRangel]

Note the answers to Q4, Q6 and Q9 basically say those are legal grey areas where the penal code gives no guidance--it will be up to case law to clarify these issues. Pity the unfortunate soul who finds themselves in that unenviable position in a court of law.

Yes, and that is the exact problem that bad laws like this create. Want to exercise you rights? It's hard to do in California with all the freedom haters.

[Mr331]

The answer to Q3 and Q4 kind of contradict each other. I guess that's the problem with the law.

[scott]

IIRC, using a 10-round mag as a "hi cap" for another caliber that it wasn't originally designed for is legal.

This was talked about on the HS2000 forum some time ago, where people were able to stuff 15x 9mm rounds into a 10x .40 cal mag.

Just to add to the confusion. :-)

[C.G.]

Any chance you could scan the document (remove your peronal info) and post it, I would appreciate it.:)

[PanzerAce]

sticky time I think

[pogo]

This is a good thorough letter Ryang, I'm glad you took the time to do this.

Out-of-state sellers don't always know it's OK to sell mag parts to Californians, Question 3's answer would've been helpful to a Calguns member here whose seller was told differently over the phone by a DOJ agent and wouldn't send the disassembled parts to him. To this day the seller still thinks he was asked to do something illegal.

I'd appreciate a scan as well if possible.

[artherd]

+1 on the scan with signature. I just wrote a similar letter as well, looks like you beat me though :)

I have corrosponded with Deputy AG Alison Merrilees in the past. She is a Bar Certified attorney, not some desk clerk. This is a good letter, nice work!!!

[stealthmode]

great post make it a stickey

[ryang]

The answer to Q3 and Q4 kind of contradict each other. I guess that's the problem with the law.One of the main themes in all the answers is a matter of intent. That's going to be a very hard thing to prove one way or another, but I think in Q3 you're buying individual parts that have never been assembled and it may be a little more plausible to prove intent to repair rather than manufacture. But that's my interpretation of her interpretation. :)

[ryang]

IIRC, using a 10-round mag as a "hi cap" for another caliber that it wasn't originally designed for is legal.Are you sure the DOJ has provided that guidance? That would be a great follow-up question to ask the DOJ. Throughout my questions I asked about "repair" but one additional question I wanted to ask is if "upgrading" a non-defective hi-cap mag was okay as well.

Lest anyone accuse me of nitpicking details, I simply refer you to the different answers for Q3 and Q4.

[Inoxmark]

Excellent well thought through and formulated questions! Thanks ryang!

[Rascal]

IIRC, using a 10-round mag as a "hi cap" for another caliber that it wasn't originally designed for is legal.

This was talked about on the HS2000 forum some time ago, where people were able to stuff 15x 9mm rounds into a 10x .40 cal mag.

Just to add to the confusion. :-)

I just don't see how this can be legal, as this would actually be circumventing (spelling ?) the law. The law states that you can not have magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds, unless you bought them previous to the ban. If you bought new today 10 round 40S&W mags and put them into a 9mm pistol, and they had 15 rounds in them, this is skirting the law and the intent would be that you are breaking the law, because you can not have magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. :confused:

I sure would not want to be the test case in this one.

[bwiese]

IIRC, using a 10-round mag as a "hi cap" for another caliber that it wasn't originally designed for is legal.

This was talked about on the HS2000 forum some time ago, where people were able to stuff 15x 9mm rounds into a 10x .40 cal mag.

Just to add to the confusion. :-)

Yes, you have added to the confusion. For one thing, is this state or Federal?

You've just reported about some off-hand board discussion.

I think Rascal's right about this, in general.

Back when the crime bill/Fed AWB was still alive you were not supposed to do this (wrong cal in locap mag to get hicap effect). The misuse could be construed as 'manufacture'; BATF notes had some commentary somewhere (location long forgotten now). This was prob assuming that no locap mags existed before 9/13/1994, though - which was largely true. Conversion and continued use of locap mag in hicap application before/thru/after this date would likely have been legal.

I don't know how these HS2000 guys figured out something different.

The only SLIGHT bit of wiggle room - and this is legally murky - in CA would be if the locap 40S&W mag existed and was in your possession on/before 12/31/99. It would work as a hicap mag for 9mm but could not be used that way due to Fed restrictions; at that time there were no CA restrictions.

The laws have now flipped; no Fed laws banning this, but CA law is in force; it does grandfather ownership of hicap mags. I believe this is by function not by declaration as the CA mag laws don't mention anything about markings. If you could get toilet paper rolls to store+feed more than 10rds of ammo, it'd be a hicap mag (after all, BATF says a string is a machinegun!) Again, very very murky.

This is totally aside from functional issues. I would not bet my life on a misapplied 40S&W mag feeding 9mm ammo. I've seen some 9mm loaded into a 40S&W HK magazine at a local range [not my gun or mag!!] and the feed just didn't look right: the narrow 9mm rounds bundled "funny" in the mag body and almost wanted to try to be a 'triple stack' mag. [Some poor schmuck bought a used USP 9mm and got one HK USP40 mag.]

Just because it works at a range doesn't mean you bet your life on it.


Bill Wiese
San Jose



I just don't see how this can be legal, as this would actually be circumventing (spelling ?) the law. The law states that you can not have magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds, unless you bought them previous to the ban. If you bought new today 10 round 40S&W mags and put them into a 9mm pistol, and they had 15 rounds in them, this is skirting the law and the intent would be that you are breaking the law, because you can not have magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. :confused:

I sure would not want to be the test case in this one.

[blacklisted]

I worry about the same thing (magazines for one caliber holding more rounds of another). I wonder if the same "problem" would apply with 10 round .50 Beowulf and/or 6.5 Grendel magazines if one were to put .223 Remington in it.

I hate gray areas.

[mblat]

I worry about the same thing (magazines for one caliber holding more rounds of another). I wonder if the same "problem" would apply with 10 round .50 Beowulf and/or 6.5 Grendel magazines if one were to put .223 Remington in it.

I hate gray areas.

That is classical simptom of bad law - it creates "grey" areas and somebody goes to jail 'cause DA got wild hair up his a%%.
What about me having both USPs in 9 and .40? And caring both magazines? And mistakenly loading 13 9mm cartriges in 0.40 magazine?

Like you said - too much f!king grey.

[bg]

It's just a rotten shame we have to go through this nonsense at all, thanks to the Dem majority and Grey Davis..:mad:

[PanzerAce]

I worry about the same thing (magazines for one caliber holding more rounds of another). I wonder if the same "problem" would apply with 10 round .50 Beowulf and/or 6.5 Grendel magazines if one were to put .223 Remington in it.

I hate gray areas.

IIRC, it was said somewhere else on these forums that 6.5 wont feed 223 reliably, but that the Beowulf will. On the other hand, the Beos are only good if you have a gun that accepts AR mags.....Oh, wait, the SU-16 *shrugs*

[gobabygo]

If you could get toilet paper rolls to store+feed more than 10rds of ammo, it'd be a hicap mag.
Wha? But mine is preban! :p

[bountyhunter]

But make no mistake about one thing:

Q3: Can you import all the parts of a single hi-cap magazine at once, provided they are unassembled?
A3: Yes.

If you then create a magazine from those parts, that is a felony. As pointed out in the answer:

"You could be charged with a felony (Penal Code 12280(a)(2)), if a prosecutor believed that you were manufacturing a large capacity magazine."

IMHO, he could only substantiate charges against you for that if they recovered said parts assembled into a magazine or had a witness who saw a person build up said parts into a magazine (YMMV).



Q9: Can you have enough spare parts to assemble a new hi-cap magazine provided they are unassembled and intended for use as replacement parts?
A9: Whether the scenario you describe constitutes posession of magazine parts with the intent to manufacture or with the intent to repair a large capacity magazine depends upon the legal opinion of the prosecutor in the jurisdiction where the acts occur. You could be charged with a felony (Penal Code 12280(a)(2)), if a prosecutor believed that you were manufacturing a large capacity magazine.

[bountyhunter]

What about me having both USPs in 9 and .40? And caring both magazines? And mistakenly loading 13 9mm cartriges in 0.40 magazine?

Like you said - too much f!king grey. That topic has been clearly stated on more than one occasion: there is NO LAW BROKEN if you can load 13 rounds of 9mm into a legal 10-round .40SW magazine IF AND ONLY IF YOU DID NOT MODIFY IT TO DO SO.

"10 round" .45 mags for 1911 are shipped to kali legally all the time, and some will hold 11 or 12 rounds of .40.

The user does not have any legal burden with respect to mag capacity other than to buy only legally approved magazines and not modify them with the intent of increasing their capacity.

Always remember: anyone charged under this law must be shown to have BROKEN the law. If you hold up an unmodified 10-round magazine legal for sale in this state, they have NO CASE. The state may wish to force mag makers to modify their product to prevent "dual use exceeding 10 round capacity", but that is not the user's liability.

[kantstudien]

Time for a resurrection of this thread, where is the actual scan of this letter stating that importing parts is legal? Anyone have a copy of the actual letter they can scan and post here?

[ryang]

The pdf is 913kb--too large to upload here unfortunately.

[DRM6000]

The pdf is 913kb--too large to upload here unfortunately.

if somebody wants to send it to me, i'll be happy host it.

drm600 at gmail.com

[kantstudien]

Anyone? We need a scan of this letter here guys, won't someone step up here?

[EBWhite]

But make no mistake about one thing:



If you then create a magazine from those parts, that is a felony. As pointed out in the answer:

"You could be charged with a felony (Penal Code 12280(a)(2)), if a prosecutor believed that you were manufacturing a large capacity magazine."

IMHO, he could only substantiate charges against you for that if they recovered said parts assembled into a magazine or had a witness who saw a person build up said parts into a magazine (YMMV).

That is what makes this law soooo silly. You can buy the parts and put it together, nobody would know the difference- obviously illegal and I still do not recommend doing it but it shows how this worthless law cannot even stand on its own two feet and stop things from happening.

[metalhead357]

Anyone? We need a scan of this letter here guys, won't someone step up here?

Amen! Just acouple of random pot shots from the peanut gallery here~
Heck! even a GOOD digi photo of it!

Does/will photo bucket hold a PDF? Anyone know if Kinko's does scans?

[ohsmily]

That is what makes this law soooo silly. You can buy the parts and put it together, nobody would know the difference- obviously illegal and I still do not recommend doing it but it shows how this worthless law cannot even stand on its own two feet and stop things from happening.

Well, I agree that it is silly...however, note that this law is extremely strict and effective for anyone born on or after 1/1/2000. There is no legal way, unless they are law enforcement, that they could legally be in possession of full cap mags. That is the main thrust of the law and as time goes by, more and more people will be born who will not be able to have full caps.

[metalhead357]

That is the main thrust of the law and as time goes by, more and more people will be born who will not be able to have full caps.

And so much for "Equal protection under the law":cool:

[DRM6000]

Amen! Just acouple of random pot shots from the peanut gallery here~
Heck! even a GOOD digi photo of it!

Does/will photo bucket hold a PDF? Anyone know if Kinko's does scans?


i will host a pic, pdf or whatever. just send it to me @ drm600 at gmail.com

[kantstudien]

Mucho thanks guys! That is awesome! :)

[hiyabrad]

RYANG

Please email a scan so he can host. This letter is important to all of us, and it would be greaty appreciated.

[SemiAutoSam]

In anyones opinion of the law about mags can mags be left to a spouse or child as in a will ?

Im expecting that the answer is no but cant hurt to try.

[GW]

Since California is a community property state, I would imagine the magazines already belong to your spouse. As for willing the to your kids who were born on or after 1/1/2000...
No

[grammaton76]

Since California is a community property state, I would imagine the magazines already belong to your spouse. As for willing the to your kids who were born on or after 1/1/2000...
No

Hmm. So, I imagine there are folks who would marry an ugly woman if she had lots of full capacity mags and they had none. :)

Actually, I've been wondering about mag capacity myself. When my gf and I get married, I'm certainly hoping that she can use my full-capacity mags without me being around... she's presently stuck with 10rd mags.

[adamsreeftank]

Hmm. So, I imagine there are folks who would marry an ugly woman if she had lots of full capacity mags and they had none. :)

Actually, I've been wondering about mag capacity myself. When my gf and I get married, I'm certainly hoping that she can use my full-capacity mags without me being around... she's presently stuck with 10rd mags.

AFAIK, community property only applies to things (money) earned duing the marriage. I don't think you would automatically become the owner of your wives high-caps when you get married.

[grammaton76]

AFAIK, community property only applies to things (money) earned duing the marriage. I don't think you would automatically become the owner of your wives high-caps when you get married.

*grin* Actually, my hypothetical joke-question was opposite from my real situation... my gf's the magless one, not me. :)

[ryang]

Please email a scan so he can host. This letter is important to all of us, and it would be greaty appreciated.I did that a long time ago. Search for another thread and see if he mentions hosting it.

[xLusi0n]

any luck on getting a copy? I would like one too.

[JPglee1]

I think its funny how every Yugo SKS in the state will feed/fire 11rds...

Try it sometime, I was *told* by someone *ELSE* that it works 100% of the time.

Does that make every SKS an assault weapon? LMAO.


J

[vonsmith]

I think its funny how every Yugo SKS in the state will feed/fire 11rds...

Try it sometime, I was *told* by someone *ELSE* that it works 100% of the time.

Does that make every SKS an assault weapon? LMAO.

J
Maybe YOU think it's funny, but do you realize that the addition of an 11th round increases the SKS's firepower by 10% making it 10% more deadly, especially to small children, cute animals, and law enforcement. I've sent your IP address info to the "squad". Their black helicopters will be landing in your compound within the hour. You better hunker down son. There's a whole lotta righteousness headed your way.

Have a nice day. :D


=vonsmith=

[Mudvayne540ld]

yea can do it with an AR to........ load the mag.... pop one in the chamber....... even tho that wouldent be a magazine capable of holding 11 rnds.... just 10 +1 in the chamber. =o

[bg]

I'm sure it's been asked before, but since this does
pertain to a hi-cap...What if one have lost the paperwork
proving one purchased the mag before 2000 ? One only
has his or hers word if questioned by police. Is one
possibly breaking a law by owning a hi cap ?

What's to keep LEO's from arresting a person since
no paperwork is avail ?

[PanzerAce]

I'm sure it's been asked before, but since this does
pertain the a hi-cap...What if one have lost the paperwork
proving one purchased the mag before 2000 ? One only
has his or hers word if questioned by police. Is one
possibly breaking a law by owning a hi cap ?

What's to keep LEO's from arresting a person since
no paperwork is avail ?

Burden of Proof. The LEO has to PROVE that you bought the normal cap mag after 2000. and considering that many magazines dont have dates on them (and even for those that do, replacement parts could be the cause for the 2000+ date) makes it almost impossible to tell.

[phish]

http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~hobd8260/BeatDeadHorse.gif

[calAWBsux]

Now that's a fitting picture...

[PanzerAce]

http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~hobd8260/BeatDeadHorse.gif

agreed, but you have to admit, it is better than somebody getting thrown in jail.

[metalhead357]

Oh now that is AWSOME!

Might I get permission to use this elsewhere?:)





http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~hobd8260/BeatDeadHorse.gif

[ibbryn]

Have there ever been restrictions on the purchase of, transfer to or possession by minors of a full capacity magazine?

I'm not asking about weapons or ammo.

Could a minor have taken legal possession of a full capacity mags before their transfer was banned in 2000?

[phish]

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=36865&highlight=magazine+hi-cap
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=32294&highlight=magazine+hi-cap
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=32007&highlight=magazine+hi-cap
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=28567&highlight=magazine+hi-cap
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=29259&highlight=magazine+hi-cap
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=26890&highlight=magazine+hi-cap
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=26480&highlight=magazine+hi-cap
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=24287&highlight=magazine+hi-cap
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=23642&highlight=magazine+hi-cap
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=23483&highlight=magazine+hi-cap
http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~hobd8260/BeatDeadHorse.gif

[VeryCoolCat]

Well the fact I couldn't own a gun until 2 years ago close to this date. Is proof I couldn't have owned a hi-cap mag before 2000 :D

[grammaton76]

Well the fact I couldn't own a gun until 2 years ago close to this date. Is proof I couldn't have owned a hi-cap mag before 2000 :D

Negative - magazines are not restricted, and one member took a pic for later proof with a newspaper, a full-cap Glock mag, and his newborn granddaughter. :)

If you didn't move into the state until 2000, or were born after Jan 1 2000, then there's proof that you couldn't have owned it before 2000. Other than that, there's no proof.

[ibbryn]

Thanks phish, for your helpful reposting of all the mag related links.

I've already seen a bunch of those, and though it's repeated many times that anyone born after 2000 won't be able to possess full caps because they'd never have been old enough, and I guess everyone else but me could assume from that statment that a minor COULD legally own full caps, I never specifically saw the word minor mentioned. Just kind of a general assumption that minors could legally own.

So I guess you are saying (by posting the dead horse) that minors could possess.

Thanks for your time.

[ibbryn]

Grammaton,
Thanks for the short answer.

[bg]

Burden of Proof. The LEO has to PROVE that you bought the normal cap mag after 2000. and considering that many magazines dont have dates on them (and even for those that do, replacement parts could be the cause for the 2000+ date) makes it almost impossible to tell.
Thanks for the HELPFUL reply.

[JPglee1]

YES, a minor could legally buy HiCaps and own them.

I bought many when I was 17 at gun shows. Even tho I didn't have $$$ to buy actual guns, I always would buy 1 or 2 mags for any gun I thought I might someday want.


Was a good idea it turned out. The 2 weeks before the AW ban I couldn't afford any rifles so I bought mags instead...



J

[vonsmith]

http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~hobd8260/BeatDeadHorse.gif
Giddy up there Nelly, giddy up!


=vonsmith=

[1911_Mitch]

I have a copy of the DOJ letter. :)
I will scan to .pdf and post on Friday.....,

or maybe two weeks:D just kidding.

[sac7000]

I have a copy of the DOJ letter. :)
I will scan to .pdf and post on Friday.....,

or maybe two weeks:D just kidding.

I'd like a copy of the print letter myself so that my attorney (to be) can use it as part of my defense. (when I get arrested for possession of an unregistered AW)

Thanks,

Nervous in Shaky City

[1911_Mitch]

Well......here is a scan copy of the DOJ letter clarifying magazines

I had to scan, separate, and .zip the files because they exceeded the attachement size requirements.

(see .zip attachments)

[sac7000]

Thanks, good info.