PDA

View Full Version : Legality of no mag release


Sig556swat
02-01-2010, 7:55 PM
Just for sh_ts and giggles I was wondering about the legality of having an AR without a mag relese button or bullet button. I have some preban high capacity mags but only have rifles that require bullet buttons to be legal. I often hold the mag well/mag while I shoot and can hold the mag in place while shooting. Id like to hear what you guys think

pullnshoot25
02-01-2010, 7:56 PM
Illegal if you have a PG, as no tool is required to remove the mag.

wildhawker
02-01-2010, 8:04 PM
High caps in featureless builds with no BB is fine. High caps in featured rifles is a no-go.

Sig556swat
02-01-2010, 8:07 PM
High caps in featureless builds with no BB is fine. High caps in featured rifles is a no-go.

ok I understand that but it wouldnt be a detachable mag its not attached in the first place

dantodd
02-01-2010, 8:09 PM
If you can remove the mag without a tool it is detachable. In this case it isn't attachable but that is NOT what the law states.

Sig556swat
02-01-2010, 8:11 PM
Well to be detachable it would have to attach in the first place right???

bwiese
02-01-2010, 8:12 PM
Well to be detachable it would have to attach in the first place right???

Your definitions/connotations are irrelevant.

The formal regulatory definition of 'detachable magazine' (11 CCR 5499) says that a mag not requiring a tool for removal from the firearm is a detachable mag.

Thus, your rifle has 'capacity to accept a detachable magazine'. It likely would also operate at least for a cycle or two holding it in by hand.

Try this and go directly to jail. We can't defend you on that one.

dantodd
02-01-2010, 8:14 PM
Nope. While that would make sense and is not how the DA will see it. It only has to be able to "accept" detachable magazines, not "have detachable magazines attached."

Sig556swat
02-01-2010, 8:21 PM
Your definitions/connotations are irrelevant.

The formal regulatory definition of 'detachable magazine' (11 CCR 5499) says that a mag not requiring a tool for removal from the firearm is a detachable mag.

Thus, your rifle has 'capacity to accept a detachable magazine'. It likely would also operate at least for a cycle or two holding it in by hand.

Try this and go directly to jail. We can't defend you on that one.

:D dont worry I wasnt going to try it. Just wondering And it will cycle the whole mag ive had to do it before when my mag release broke at the range and it was with 10 round mags. But from what your saying that action was ilegal as i was useing detachable mags at the time right?

Sig556swat
02-01-2010, 8:25 PM
Your definitions/connotations are irrelevant.

The formal regulatory definition of 'detachable magazine' (11 CCR 5499) says that a mag not requiring a tool for removal from the firearm is a detachable mag.

Thus, your rifle has 'capacity to accept a detachable magazine'. It likely would also operate at least for a cycle or two holding it in by hand.

Try this and go directly to jail. We can't defend you on that one.

I hear what your saying but the hard headed side wants to say that in fact it does not have the ablility to accept a detachable mag since there is no magazine catch. So if your going to say that is does have the ablity to accept detachable mags then so does a stripped lower

dantodd
02-01-2010, 8:39 PM
I hear what your saying but the hard headed side wants to say that in fact it does not have the ablility to accept a detachable mag since there is no magazine catch. So if your going to say that is does have the ablity to accept detachable mags then so does a stripped lower

Yes, a stripped lower does in fact have the ability to accept detachable magazines. However a stripped lower is not a rifle and it is not centerfire and it is not semi-automatic.

bwiese
02-01-2010, 8:41 PM
it will cycle the whole mag ive had to do it before when my mag release broke at the range and it was with 10 round mags. But from what your saying that action was ilegal as i was useing detachable mags at the time right?


Yes. And it's generally not a good idea to admit felonies in public.


I hear what your saying but the hard headed side wants to say that in fact it does not have the ablility to accept a detachable mag since there is no magazine catch.

Translate: hard-headed == people who go to jail.

The only definition relevant is the one in the law.


So if your going to say that is does have the ablity to accept detachable mags then so does a stripped lower

But that's not relevant: a stripped lower is neither semiauto, nor centerfire, nor a rifle and has no features attached.

In fact, a featureless OLL build (no FH, no pistol grip or telestock, etc.) can indeed accept detachable magazines, and they can even be hicaps [if you owned them legally before the 2000 ban].

It sounds like you're very unsure of the laws. I recommend you go read the Calguns AW flowchart and re-read 12276.1PC and 11 CCR 5469 definitions.

Sig556swat
02-01-2010, 8:53 PM
This was me being curious about differant interpritations of californias gun laws. After reading your responses I see clearly that it doeast matter that it doesnt attach and by not having the rifle complete also doesnt matter. The only way around is by moving out of state

timdps
02-01-2010, 9:49 PM
Make it featureless: Add a grip fin and replace the flash hider with a muzzle break and you are good to go with your pre ban high cap mags.

tim

MP301
02-01-2010, 10:25 PM
Just go featureless... Problem solved.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO! I cant stand the look and feel of a denudded AR...just cant do it....its just not meant to be and probably a sin on some gun-diety level im sure!

I just switch to my mini 14 whenever I need to use (owned prior to 2000) hi caps. I really dont want to end up in Gun hell for sacralidge on my AR!

Besides, I have opposable thumbs (im betting some on this board dont!) and short of cutting them off, there is no place to put them!

Just say No to featurless! Think of the children!