How do I legally repair a 30 round magazine?

[Scarecrow Repair]

All this talk of previously owned hi-cap magazines reminded me of something, and I rooted around in a closet to find a 30 round magazine given to me by a friend when I lived in Nevada 10 years ago. I tried loading it; the top lips are apparently bent upwards too much and it won't keep even a single cartridge in.

Now other than bending the lips back down ... suppose I wanted to buy replacement parts and fix it that way. I suppose that would be the case, keeping only the top and bottom pieces and the spring between. How would I do this legally? Several posts have said it is legal to buy 30 round magazines in Nevada, take them and my broken mag apart, swap enough parts to make my magazine whole again, and discard (no!) or keep as apares (yes!) the remnants. Pretty silly, but I can see how this doesn't violate either the spirit or letter of the law.

So how would I do this? If cops are indeed watching Nevada gun shows and tailing CA residents back to the border, what do I do? Do I stop 10 feet from the border and make sure a cop watches me take the two mags apart? Do I leave mine at home in CA and disassemble the replacements in Nevada so I am only bringing parts back? And if the latter, what is to prevent me from buying enough spares so I don't have to do this again soon, and then assembling those spares back into whole magazines again? In fact, who is to say that the hundred modern magazines I might have in my closet are not all rebuilt old magazines, ones that were in such bad shape that I had to rebuild them several times and thus they have no old parts left? This one, for instance, probably was a working magazine when my friend gave it to me ten years ago, when I was not yet a gun nut and he was. He thought it would be a fun souveneir for me of my time in Nevada. There have been comments on retaining the old broken parts as an audit trail of sorts, but that seems a bit over the top.

[ohsmily]

Just fix it. Don't make a second magazine. Yes, you can have a hi cap magazine with no original parts because you replaced them all. You can replace every part on the magazine, just don't make and ADDITIONAL new magazine....this isn't that complicated (though it is REALLY stupid).

Stop overthinking this. Don't import high capacity magazines from out of state. You can import as many unassembled parts as you want. Do NOT make more magazines than you started with. It isn't a MUST to keep the old spare parts either. It isn't a bad idea however. The state has the burden of proof when prosecuting you.

[Gunsrruss]

Go to CPRODUCTSLLC.com Order what you need. They sell complete magazines which you can't buy. They also sell the parts to replace anything you have that is busted. MAG bodies 20-30 rounders, and spring and follower kits also for those bad springs you have. But you can't order both on the same order. You figure it out.

[Scarecrow Repair]

Yes, you can have a hi cap magazine with no original parts because you replaced them all. You can replace every part on the magazine, just don't make and ADDITIONAL new magazine....this isn't that complicated (though it is REALLY stupid).

Stop overthinking this.

Don't mean to overthink it, and I know how to do it in practice, silly as it is. But what I wonder about is ... if the burden of proof is on the state, what is that proof, a receipt? Supposing all I have is new magazines, suppose the particular variety was made only recently, or they just plain look all shiny and unused ... even if they have a recent receipt, I can still say I used them for spares, disassembled them and repaired my magazines before coming back into CA.

Is it legal to take mine out of state and bring them back in? If so, how can they prove I didn't take my broken ones out of state, repair them, and bring them back in with new parts?

People talk about this hi-cap ban as if it is a real threat, yet short of having them in a shopping bag with very recent receipt, I don't understand how they can possibly porve anything.

So is this a real threat, or isn't it? When do people get prosecuted for it, how often, where?

[ohsmily]

Don't mean to overthink it, and I know how to do it in practice, silly as it is. But what I wonder about is ... if the burden of proof is on the state, what is that proof, a receipt? Supposing all I have is new magazines, suppose the particular variety was made only recently, or they just plain look all shiny and unused ... even if they have a recent receipt, I can still say I used them for spares, disassembled them and repaired my magazines before coming back into CA.

Yes, you can say that.
It is difficult to prove a case against someone for importing mags. One easy way to do it is if someone has possession of a type of magazine that simply wasn't in production before 2000 (for newly designed guns, or newly designed types of magazines). That would be an easy case. Stop worrying about your mags.

Is it legal to take mine out of state and bring them back in? If so, how can they prove I didn't take my broken ones out of state, repair them, and bring them back in with new parts?
Yes, it is legal...YOU DON'T HAVE TO PROVE THAT YOU HAD THEM BEFORE 2000. Also, you are confused, you CAN take them out of state to repair them and bring them back in. Read what you wrote.

People talk about this hi-cap ban as if it is a real threat, yet short of having them in a shopping bag with very recent receipt, I don't understand how they can possibly porve anything.

So is this a real threat, or isn't it? When do people get prosecuted for it, how often, where?

It is a REAL threat for people born after 1-1-2000 and for people who want hi caps for newly released guns that simply weren't in existence before 1-1-2000......think all of your questions through and maybe you would arrive at the answers I gave you....It all makes sense in a twisted way; and yes the rules are stupid. The law has no teeth for people born before 1-1-2000 b/c it is hard to prove a negative.

[kantstudien]

If you start with ten mags, then make sure you end up with ten when you are done. Simple enough.