PDA

View Full Version : (non) STD. Capacity law. Is it here to stay???


ap3572001
08-20-2011, 1:12 PM
Is it likely that Ca. magazine law will be changed or dropped?

WWDHD?
08-20-2011, 1:15 PM
I think its here to stay. Or it will get repealed in about....... two weeks.

ccmc
08-20-2011, 1:17 PM
There have been a few threads on this. Why would they be changed or dropped absent new state legislation? This seems like a pretty tough thing to litigate.

ap3572001
08-20-2011, 1:20 PM
There have been a few threads on this. Why would they be changed or dropped absent new state legislation? This seems like a pretty tough thing to litigate.

Because of how its written and how its often not understood correctly.

hoffmang
08-20-2011, 3:38 PM
The days of California's magazine capacity restrictions are limited.

-Gene

Volksgrenadier
08-20-2011, 3:47 PM
Many stand poised upon those words.

Bhobbs
08-20-2011, 3:53 PM
The days of California's magazine capacity restrictions are limited.

-Gene

Since Gene is in the know, I'll take his word for it.

Treb5
08-20-2011, 4:11 PM
Since Gene is in the know, I'll take his word for it.

I will to..

Tango-Alpha
08-20-2011, 4:28 PM
Gene,

I am not aware of any proposed legislation, is there something in the works (he asked hopefully)?

The days of California's magazine capacity restrictions are limited.

-Gene

Bhobbs
08-20-2011, 4:53 PM
Gene,

I am not aware of any proposed legislation, is there something in the works (he asked hopefully)?

Gene has a legal work around for legal hi cap mags.

Uxi
08-20-2011, 5:23 PM
Workaround will be ready in :twoweeks:

Tango-Alpha
08-21-2011, 4:05 PM
That's outstanding. I look forward to hearing about it as do millions of other CA gun owners I'm sure. The hi-capacity magazine ban in CA, just like the federal ban that went out of effect in 2004 has proven to be absolutely worthless. It's completely restrictive and serves absolutely no purpose. Well....no purpose outside of pissing off gun owners.

Gene has a legal work around for legal hi cap mags.

Workaround will be ready in :twoweeks:

HKMadness
08-21-2011, 6:14 PM
The days of California's magazine capacity restrictions are limited.

-Gene

Is it closer to two weeks, or 2 years? I know "two weeks" is a range between two days and two years (or something like that).

HowardW56
08-21-2011, 6:25 PM
Is it closer to two weeks, or 2 years?

It is closer to two weeks than it is to two years... :D

But the I would expect the California law will remain on the books for the forceable future, it will just be neutered....

Trailboss60
08-21-2011, 6:46 PM
I know that I am preaching to the choir, but Jerry Miculek with a no-mag revolver is able to put more rounds downrange than most of us with 30 round jungle clipped mags.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLk1v5bSFPw

You guys understand what a lifting of the ban would cause..."Rivers of blood in the streets", "Ca. will be like Tombstone".....

http://www.covertconservatives.com/phpbb3/images/smilies/runforhills.gif

Chosen_1
08-21-2011, 6:47 PM
Something will be done in :twoweeks:

yellowfin
08-21-2011, 6:48 PM
The days of California's magazine capacity restrictions are limited.

-GeneTen or less? :D

sreiter
08-21-2011, 6:53 PM
Most of us thought this would have been done by now. Gene has/had some great work-around, and then ran into a hiccup. Paperwork or something. IIRC Ca. law violates some law that's been on the books since the mid 1700's.

As many others have pointed out, you can always go into the armor car business. There's exemptions.

I would think being a 07 SOT class 3 FFL would get you exempt too. Just like you could build a FA for yourself as a manufacturer sample.

HowardW56
08-21-2011, 6:59 PM
You guys understand what a lifting of the ban would cause..."Rivers of blood in the streets", "Ca. will be like Tombstone".....

http://www.covertconservatives.com/phpbb3/images/smilies/runforhills.gif


It will be Kamila, http://www.covertconservatives.com/phpbb3/images/smilies/runforhills.gif, it's those CGF guys again....

HowardW56
08-21-2011, 7:01 PM
Most of us thought this would have been done by now. Gene has/had some great work-around, and then ran into a hiccup. Paperwork or something. IIRC Ca. law violates some law that's been on the books since the mid 1700's.

As many others have pointed out, you can always go into the armor car business. There's exemptions.

I would think being a 07 SOT class 3 FFL would get you exempt too. Just like you could build a FA for yourself as a manufacturer sample.

It could be a limited number of lawyers with a lot of irons in the fire for now...

There are only so many hours in a day...

And so many dollars to pay for those hours, so CONTRIBUTE!

bwiese
08-21-2011, 7:06 PM
Most of us thought this would have been done by now. Gene has/had some great work-around, and then ran into a hiccup. Paperwork or something. IIRC Ca. law violates some law that's been on the books since the mid 1700's.

No hiccoughs, just some lawyer workload /workflow issues. There are many other things going on that are at a higher priority right now.

These special path(s) have in no way changed, been reduced or evaporated. CA will still not be able to do anything about this once the flow begins.

The newly identified path is still valid and we will get there but the lawyers have to lift their head for a bit. In addition, yet another alternate path has now been identified and researched - however we want to have the relevant materials and preventives in place before pulling the trigger.

We had tons of paperwork available - much courtesy of CA NRA legal team (Chuck Michel and Jason Davis at the time - before CA OLL stuff started in full swing at end of 2005. We don't have that much, however, on over-10rd magazines - and we need to fill those gaps in a special fashion so people don't get picked off once the deluge (either ver 1 or ver. 2) starts.

Depsite all the above, CA over-10-round magazine law may well stay on the books. A direct challenge can be problematic, but if it's irrelevant we don't really care that much :)

hoffmang
08-21-2011, 7:37 PM
Let me say it this way. Very recently, two calgunners have had nasty run ins with the law. In both cases, they brought to light serious constitutional problems with certain California laws. Both laws and the cases they create are very, very important and could lead to a lot more practical expansion of the right to keep arms than the already hard to enforce magazine capacity limits.

There are only so many hours in the day and so much capital in the bank account. As such, those got prioritized up, and the magazine challenge came down a notch or two.

Should you start seeing big wins nationally (or cert grants on carry) the national and California case load starts to ease a bit. That's when you'll see this case move up in priority. At this exact second it is behind everything already filed, two new cases, and a reactive change of strategy in an existing case.

Once CGF can explain all of the above, I think people will understand why those take precedence over magazines.

-Gene

mosinnagantm9130
08-21-2011, 8:39 PM
Let me say it this way. Very recently, two calgunners have had nasty run ins with the law. In both cases, they brought to light serious constitutional problems with certain California laws. Both laws and the cases they create are very, very important and could lead to a lot more practical expansion of the right to keep arms than the already hard to enforce magazine capacity limits.

There are only so many hours in the day and so much capital in the bank account. As such, those got prioritized up, and the magazine challenge came down a notch or two.

Should you start seeing big wins nationally (or cert grants on carry) the national and California case load starts to ease a bit. That's when you'll see this case move up in priority. At this exact second it is behind everything already filed, two new cases, and a reactive change of strategy in an existing case.

Once CGF can explain all of the above, I think people will understand why those take precedence over magazines.

-Gene

Thanks for explaining that Gene.

gunsmith
08-21-2011, 8:43 PM
I once witnessed hundreds of rioters/thugs out to kill & another time 50 to 100 people attacking one guy. I deeply understand the need for 15 round mags in my glock etc...but can accept ten round mags for now in order to gain ccw rights for CA

Dreaded Claymore
08-21-2011, 10:09 PM
Gene, thank you so much for your comments on the progress of CGF's efforts. I will sleep better in the coming nights, chuckling and giggling quietly to myself, as I imagine what is in store for us.

ap3572001
08-21-2011, 10:26 PM
I once witnessed hundreds of rioters/thugs out to kill & another time 50 to 100 people attacking one guy. I deeply understand the need for 15 round mags in my glock etc...but can accept ten round mags for now in order to gain ccw rights for CA

I agree. I also have noticed when I travel to many states that MOST ccw holders carry single stack pistols and 2-3 inch barrel revolvers.

dantodd
08-21-2011, 10:40 PM
10 rounds in a holster are better than 100 rounds in my safe.

Citizen 14
08-21-2011, 11:46 PM
10 rounds in a holster are better than 100 rounds in my safe.

Well said.
Looking forward to the day when I can carry 10 rounds in a holster.
Thanks to the hard working folks here, I know that day is not so far off.

oni.dori
08-22-2011, 2:42 AM
I have complete faith in Gene and the CGF team/associates. I know it is a matter of time until the law is either repealed, or gutted and neutered so badly, that it will be nothing more than a waste of black ink on State Goverment printings.
As of right now, methinks that the fighting of the illegally-configured semi-auto rifle ban is a little higher on the priority list, and a little important than the standard capacity mag ban; because, what is the point of having kick-@$$ mag capacity, if you can't use them in your eunic rifle? Just my 2 cents.
The only real concern about the situation that I have is, will the work around make the necissary cost of the mags so expensive, that it will be rather prohibitively expensive for the average calgunner to afford? I guess only time will tell...

sreiter
08-22-2011, 2:47 AM
No hiccoughs, just some lawyer workload /workflow issues. There are many other things going on that are at a higher priority right now.

These special path(s) have in no way changed, been reduced or evaporated. CA will still not be able to do anything about this once the flow begins.

The newly identified path is still valid and we will get there but the lawyers have to lift their head for a bit. In addition, yet another alternate path has now been identified and researched - however we want to have the relevant materials and preventives in place before pulling the trigger.

We had tons of paperwork available - much courtesy of CA NRA legal team (Chuck Michel and Jason Davis at the time - before CA OLL stuff started in full swing at end of 2005. We don't have that much, however, on over-10rd magazines - and we need to fill those gaps in a special fashion so people don't get picked off once the deluge (either ver 1 or ver. 2) starts.

Depsite all the above, CA over-10-round magazine law may well stay on the books. A direct challenge can be problematic, but if it's irrelevant we don't really care that much :)

cool....i do remember the thread be it got deleted...Gene got a package, and one of the lawyers looked at it......I seem to recall Gene saying he didnt fill out some paper work correctly or something to that effect (unless i'm totally mistaken).....thats what i was referring to as the hiccup

Bhobbs
08-22-2011, 7:43 AM
Let me say it this way. Very recently, two calgunners have had nasty run ins with the law. In both cases, they brought to light serious constitutional problems with certain California laws. Both laws and the cases they create are very, very important and could lead to a lot more practical expansion of the right to keep arms than the already hard to enforce magazine capacity limits.

There are only so many hours in the day and so much capital in the bank account. As such, those got prioritized up, and the magazine challenge came down a notch or two.

Should you start seeing big wins nationally (or cert grants on carry) the national and California case load starts to ease a bit. That's when you'll see this case move up in priority. At this exact second it is behind everything already filed, two new cases, and a reactive change of strategy in an existing case.

Once CGF can explain all of the above, I think people will understand why those take precedence over magazines.

-Gene

Mag capacity isn't a big deal to me. Not being able to push the mag release on my AR15 with it's features is a big deal to me. I will wait patiently for mags but the AWB is something I want to see fall as soon as possible. Hopefully an AWB challenge is one of the top priorities.

hammerhead_77
08-22-2011, 11:53 AM
oh, yeah... bullet buttons first, by all means! I can just work on getting trice as fast on my tactical reloads while a wait for full cap mags...:cool:

IPSICK
08-22-2011, 12:10 PM
Mag capacity isn't a big deal to me. Not being able to push the mag release on my AR15 with it's features is a big deal to me. I will wait patiently for mags but the AWB is something I want to see fall as soon as possible. Hopefully an AWB challenge is one of the top priorities.

I thought I remember a thread where a case related to this was brought up. It got me to donate more immediately. That case may be why mag capacity is a slightly lower priority.

*ETA: I'm dumb. The link is in my sig.

Bhobbs
08-22-2011, 12:15 PM
I thought I remember a thread where a case related to this was brought up. It got me to donate more immediately. That case may be why mag capacity is a slightly lower priority.

*ETA: I'm dumb. The link is in my sig.

Yeah, I'm thinking that may be one of the higher priority cases.

hoffmang
08-22-2011, 4:49 PM
Yeah, I'm thinking that may be one of the higher priority cases.

Yep.

-Gene