PDA

View Full Version : Oregon resident travel through Cali with 10+ Rd linked ammo legal?


EBR Works
05-02-2010, 6:38 PM
I am posting a question from the M2HB forum. One of the members there will be traveling from his resident State of Oregon through California to Nevada for a belt fed shoot. Is it legal for him to transport 10+ round linked ammo (several 100 rd belts) as he passes through California? Thanks!

Robidouxs
05-02-2010, 6:49 PM
I am posting a question from the M2HB forum. One of the members there will be traveling from his resident State of Oregon through California to Nevada for a belt fed shoot. Is it legal for him to transport 10+ round linked ammo (several 100 rd belts) as he passes through California? Thanks!

I would not drive into the state of CA with the links, as the individual would be importing "high capacity" ammunition feeding devices into the state, thus breaking the law. If he broke the links into ten round belts that would then be legal. He could also disassemble the links entirely; in the eyes of the law he would have pieces of metal and stuff, not belt links, thus high capacity belt links are not being imported into the state. If going this route, do not reassemble the links in the state of CA.

CSACANNONEER
05-02-2010, 7:01 PM
Nope. He can transport full auto weapons though Ca. If he only stops for fuel but, there is no provision to allow him to transport a +10 round ammunition feeding devise.

GrizzlyGuy
05-02-2010, 7:33 PM
Yes, it is legal, since he would be passing through CA and his linked ammo is legal in both OR and NV (I assume). See 18 USC 926A (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/926A.html):

Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof, any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle: Provided, That in the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driverís compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console.

CSACANNONEER
05-02-2010, 7:35 PM
Yes, it is legal, since he would be passing through CA and his linked ammo is legal in both OR and NV (I assume). See 18 USC 926A (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/926A.html):

The firearm is covered but not any +10 round "ammunition feeding devices" or "fun" ammo!

alex00
05-02-2010, 7:37 PM
The member should mail the links to his hotel in Nevada. Even paying top dollar for overnight service would be great insurance against running afoul of California import laws. Personally, I would drive through Idaho and avoid California entirely. It may be very easy for a California resident to avoid a +10 magazine charge, as the burden of proof is upon the state to prove the resident didn't possess the ammunition feeding device prior to the ban (not an easy task). For an OR resident, with an OR driver license and no discernable ties to CA, there would be adequate reasonable suspicion to thoroughly investigate an importation charge. It may not lead to immediate arrest, but it will definitely inconvenience him for a great deal of time.

FortCourageArmory
05-02-2010, 7:41 PM
FA firearms OK to transport through CA per federal law. 10+round ammunition feeding devices NOT OK to bring into CA regardless. He can break the links down into 10-round units and then reassemble them at his destination in NV. Otherwise, tell him not to bring them through CA.

EBR Works
05-02-2010, 8:04 PM
OK, thanks for the clarification!

GrizzlyGuy
05-02-2010, 8:06 PM
The firearm is covered but not any +10 round "ammunition feeding devices" or "fun" ammo!

Why wouldn't the ammunition feeding device be considered a part of the firearm under federal law, just like how a magazine is considered part of the firearm here? I ASSume he is bringing the gun as well, since he is going to a shoot. If he's not bringing the gun, then that would be a no-go.

CSACANNONEER
05-02-2010, 8:24 PM
Why wouldn't the ammunition feeding device be considered a part of the firearm under federal law, just like how a magazine is considered part of the firearm here? I ASSume he is bringing the gun as well, since he is going to a shoot. If he's not bringing the gun, then that would be a no-go.

Using that logic, it would be OK to import +10 round mags into Ca as long as they were accompanied by the firearm. Ammunition feeding devices are not considered "part of the gun" under Ca law.

But, now that I have types this, I see your arguement, even 922(r) considers magazines as part of the rifle. Still, I think it would end up costing $20K-100K to find out. In this case, I don't think it is worth it.

GrizzlyGuy
05-02-2010, 8:32 PM
Using that logic, it would be OK to import +10 round mags into Ca as long as they were accompanied by the firearm. Ammunition feeding devices are not considered "part of the gun" under Ca law.

But, now that I have types this, I see your arguement, even 922(r) considers magazines as part of the rifle. Still, I think it would end up costing $20K-100K to find out. In this case, I don't think it is worth it.

Importing the +10 round mags would still be illegal since your destination would be CA. But if you were simply transporting the mags with your guns through CA (ex: from OR to NV via Hwy 395) then I'd argue that would be legal under 18 USC 926A.

I agree, it isn't worth the hassle/expense of finding out when he can easily break them into lengths that would be legal even if the destination was CA. :)

bwiese
05-02-2010, 9:16 PM
Please ignore the above posters who say it's OK with Fed law.

Yes, in theory that's correct - but FOPA '86 ain't really solidified.

From a practical standpoint, you're an Oregon guy in CA - far away from home, CA bail is priced for California wages, and CA cops/DAs may not acknowledge or even know there exists superior Fed law in these matters: people have had issues transporting legal firearms materials thru NY and NJ at great personal cost.

One broken taillight and you could be in trouble. You don't wanna be a test case, though guinea pigs could be useful in the long term.

Remember the old saying: "It's legal to transport dead hookers in your trunk if your taillights work and your registration is current."

As NRA's CA lawyer Chuck Michel says, "We don't need no stinkin' martyrs." (Well,l I added the "stinkin'" and the double-negative...)

Break belts into 10rd or less links - that way there's no question about importation of "large capacity ammunition feeding devices".

If you are transporting firearms thru CA, ensure they are CA legal. If you don't know CA laws or don't want to render them CA legal (if even possible)
do not transport them thru CA. Expect drama if you were transporting an AW or MG thru CA and were detected.

packnrat
05-02-2010, 10:01 PM
you can take hwy 140 east out of Klamath falls to the town of Adel then south on coloman valley rd / 3-15 in Oregon. hwy 34 in Nevada. a lot of dirt rd. may not be passable in the snow. to the town of Gerlatch. if you use this rt please take extra food and water. fill up your tank in Adel.

there is NOTHING between these two towns....Adel - Gerlatch.

or just stay on hwy 140 to Nevada 95 and turn south all paved that way.

Merc1138
05-02-2010, 10:15 PM
Maybe after McDonald, FOPA '86 would hold more water, but until then people keep forgetting that it doesn't matter if something is federally legal, you can still land your rear in a long and expensive fight with a California DA and the DOJ, and unless you have the time/money to afford that, it's not worth the risk for something that isn't quite cut and dry.

bwiese
05-02-2010, 10:15 PM
y
or just stay on hwy 140 to Nevada 95 and turn south all paved that way.

Yeah, brings back memories... that's the Lakeview-Winnemucca highway and it runs thru Denio Junction.

(I had family in Lakeview: my Uncle Adin owned the Marketeria supermarket in the 50s/60s early 70s in Lakeview before he sold it and it became Stewart's. The town of "Adin" in norther California is named after his grandad? uncle? Adin MacDowell.)

It's fully paved 2-lane road last time I saw it long time ago - don't think it's been upgraded to a 4-lane split highway, so watch out for drunks and tired drivers. Long stretches of 'no service' so make sure your car runs OK, full tank of gas, and carry water. (Digital cellphone coverage may be sparse or absent unless you have Verizon and a phone that can fall back to analog - and even then there'll be gaps. CB radios are helpful.)