PDA

View Full Version : The final word on high-cap (yah sure)


gatesbox
02-15-2012, 9:42 AM
A recent thread, oh wait, the continuing threads on high caps, and the continued debate on hypothetical legal occurrences to acquire a high-cap mag have lead me to clarify a couple key points, and to suggest that one addition be made to the Calguns Wiki on High cap mags. In this thread I want to be clear, that there is no need to wax on about what is the smartest action but simply a careful examination of law. I understand the wiki, I understand that lawyers cost money, and I understand that all people should just keep their mouth shut and lawyer up.

Assumption 1. The Mag itself is never illegal. someone feel free to contradict this but everything that I can find seems to indicate that under no circumstance is there a PC that states that High-Cap (+10) mags are illegal. It is illegal to manufacture them, import them, or transfer them to non-exempt persons.

This results in the often sited response "possession of a High Cap magazine is not illegal."

Assumption 2. It is a common falacy to quote, suggest, or otherwise comment that purchasing a High-Cap magazine is not illegal, because PC 12020 does not list "Purchase" or "Buy"

12020 (a)(2) Commencing January 1, 2000, manufactures or causes
to be manufactured, imports into the state, keeps for sale, or
offers or exposes for sale, or who gives, or lends, any large-
capacity magazine.

The Danger of this distinction is that as a purchaser or buyer you are by default a knowing participant in a crime and as per PC 31 a principal in that crime.

All persons concerned in the commission of a crime, whether it
be felony or misdemeanor, and whether they directly commit the act
constituting the offense, or aid and abet in its commission, or, not
being present, have advised and encouraged its commission, and all
persons counseling, advising, or encouraging children under the age
of fourteen years, or persons who are mentally incapacitated, to
commit any crime, or who, by fraud, contrivance, or force, occasion
the drunkenness of another for the purpose of causing him to commit
any crime, or who, by threats, menaces, command, or coercion, compel
another to commit any crime, are principals in any crime so
committed.

Assumption 3. PC 31 requires knowing participation. (?) This is the area that I would like to see made clear, preferably from ACTUAL lawyers. To what extent does PC 31 contribute to an unknowing participant. Many of the hypothetical situations that pop up in threads involve a possible (although suspect) occasion where a Mag magically appears because a distributor makes a mistake, sends the wrong part, or on the occasion where a mag is found (please just allow this for the sake of argument). For that matter, if a relative sends a magazine to a recipient in CA, without the recipients expressed interest, advice, or foreknowledge (these are all occasions I'm sure have popped up). How much knowledge of crime or premeditation must be proved?

Assumption 4. Statute of Limitations.

801 Except as provided in Sections 799 and 800, prosecution
for an offense punishable by imprisonment in the state prison
shall be commenced within three years after commission of the offense.

For the Most part, I offer this post to inquire if it is worth adding to the Wiki an additional explanation of P.C. 31. And to find clarity on the degree of "Knowledge of Crime" necessary, to remedy the regular inquiry of the following possible occurrences (not exclusive to):

-mistaken delivery of assembled High Cap Mag
-Found assembled Mag
-Unsolicited gifting of assembled mag

And including the following Statute of limitations related occurrences:
- Negligent Importation (moved to CA without checking mag laws 3 years ago)
- Negligent purchase (online vendor sold mag to purchaser assembled 3 years ago)
- Negligent Manufacturing (purchased a parts kit at a gun show and did not know it was illegal to assemble, this happened 3 years ago).

ap3572001
02-15-2012, 10:03 AM
A recent thread, oh wait, the continuing threads on high caps, and the continued debate on hypothetical legal occurrences to acquire a high-cap mag have lead me to clarify a couple key points, and to suggest that one addition be made to the Calguns Wiki on High cap mags. In this thread I want to be clear, that there is no need to wax on about what is the smartest action but simply a careful examination of law. I understand the wiki, I understand that lawyers cost money, and I understand that all people should just keep their mouth shut and lawyer up.

Assumption 1. The Mag itself is never illegal. someone feel free to contradict this but everything that I can find seems to indicate that under no circumstance is there a PC that states that High-Cap (+10) mags are illegal. It is illegal to manufacture them, import them, or transfer them to non-exempt persons.

This results in the often sited response "possession of a High Cap magazine is not illegal."

Assumption 2. It is a common falacy to quote, suggest, or otherwise comment that purchasing a High-Cap magazine is not illegal, because PC 12020 does not list "Purchase" or "Buy"



The Danger of this distinction is that as a purchaser or buyer you are by default a knowing participant in a crime and as per PC 31 a principal in that crime.



Assumption 3. PC 31 requires knowing participation. (?) This is the area that I would like to see made clear, preferably from ACTUAL lawyers. To what extent does PC 31 contribute to an unknowing participant. Many of the hypothetical situations that pop up in threads involve a possible (although suspect) occasion where a Mag magically appears because a distributor makes a mistake, sends the wrong part, or on the occasion where a mag is found (please just allow this for the sake of argument). For that matter, if a relative sends a magazine to a recipient in CA, without the recipients expressed interest, advice, or foreknowledge (these are all occasions I'm sure have popped up). How much knowledge of crime or premeditation must be proved?

Assumption 4. Statute of Limitations.



For the Most part, I offer this post to inquire if it is worth adding to the Wiki an additional explanation of P.C. 31. And to find clarity on the degree of "Knowledge of Crime" necessary, to remedy the regular inquiry of the following possible occurrences (not exclusive to):

-mistaken delivery of assembled High Cap Mag
-Found assembled Mag
-Unsolicited gifting of assembled mag

And including the following Statute of limitations related occurrences:
- Negligent Importation (moved to CA without checking mag laws 3 years ago)
- Negligent purchase (online vendor sold mag to purchaser assembled 3 years ago)
- Negligent Manufacturing (purchased a parts kit at a gun show and did not know it was illegal to assemble, this happened 3 years ago).

+1!!!!

I tried to make some sense out it ...... Had no luck.

I have a feeling that many people dont really understand the whole magazine issue.

Ricky James
02-15-2012, 10:53 AM
You may consider including the use of standard handgun mags vs standard/hi-cap mags in firearms. I can never find the associate PC regarding handguns, but then I am rather interweb stoopid

Turo
02-15-2012, 11:29 AM
You may consider including the use of standard handgun mags vs standard/hi-cap mags in firearms. I can never find the associate PC regarding handguns, but then I am rather interweb stoopid

Assuming the handgun in question doesn't have a bullet button, there are no laws against using a large-capacity (greater than 10 round) magazine in such a firearm. In fact, the only law that pertains to usage of large-capacity magazines is the law that makes it illegal to use a large-capacity (greater than 10 round) magazine in a firearm with a fixed magazine (bullet button or similar device.)

Remember, the law tells you what you can't do, it doesn't say what you are allowed to do. Anything the law doesn't say is illegal is legal.

gatesbox
02-15-2012, 11:44 AM
I think the various flow charts do a pretty good job of describing AW configuration. The use of high cap in a rifle is always legal, but what becomes illegal is turning your rifle into an AW by CA definitions... Again with rifles, the AW flowchart does a pretty good job of this.

bwiese
02-15-2012, 1:13 PM
We went over this in that thread. You're way overreading the language... especially with a CA judge and state of appeals court, etc. 'Giving' generally comes with 'getting' as a package deal.

Some things are not flowchartable. There's nuance and the 'smell test'.

[Remember that something acquired outside the law can be regarded as contraband even if you're charged and found not guilty. [Just because they dropped drug charges on someone, does he get his 5 kilos of coke back?]

Ignore asshats that say "it's illegal for it to [give | sell | etc], but not illegal for me to [buy, acquire, be given]".

There's simply no such thing as being able to participate in 'half a crime' and legally get away with it [which is separate from not being caught].
If the law were rewritten such that it were specifically stated that one side was illegal and not the other, you might have something. But the phrasing here is wide enough that some legislative intent is likely inferrable.

There are only a couple of paths to legal hicap mag acquisition, and those two are on hold (one is the armored car exemption, the other you'll eventually hear about after we activate it after some initial legal work down the line.)

Someone in, say, NV sending a hicap mag to a CA resident also does not pass the smell test. Search "long-arm statute" on Wikipedia for a good explanation. (This also applies to mail order liquor sales situation and certain aftermarket performance racing parts sales, etc.)

And those insisting on 'finding' a hicap mag win the asshattery award.
Don't use it as a defense or mention it if arrested. You'll self-immolate.

The best thing to do if caught/charged with a hicap mag is to STFU and call a lawyer. From a practical standpoint, those with reg'd AWs and having a mag that matches the gun will likely scoot.

CGF has already defended a couple of hicap mag possession cases. But those were straight traffic stops and no allegation of illegal acquisition: the cops just thought the mag itself was completely banned and intrinsically illegal.

The worry I have is that all the people above asking/discussing this question will think they can 'play ball' with a DA on their own, and they will self-immolate.

gatesbox
02-15-2012, 1:28 PM
We went over this in that thread. You're way overreading the language... especially with a CA judge and state of appeals court, etc. 'Giving' generally comes with 'getting' as a package deal.

Remember that something acquired outside the law can be regarded as contraband even if you're charged and found not guilty. Just because they dropped drug charges on someone, does he get his 5 kilos of coke back?

Bill, you already have my utmost respect, but at a certain point your dead hookers and Cocaine metaphors are doing us a disservice... I am trying to figure out the law. A Kilo of Cocaine is in and of itself illegal and as such differs from a High Cap Mag, there is a law against possession AND distribution, sale, manufacture. possession of a dead hooker is not illegal, but likely is covered with evidence of the crime of how she was killed.


There's simply no such thing as being able to participate in 'half a crime' and legally get away with it [which is separate from not being caught].
If the law were rewritten such that it were specifically stated that one side was illegal and not the other, you might have something. But the phrasing here is wide enough that some legislative intent is likely inferrable.

Indeed there is such thing as participating in a crime without being culpable, that would be the standard of conspiracy to commit and being an accessory to the crime, both of which require knowledge of the crime being committed. harboring a criminal is only a crime if you have knowledge that the person has committed a crime.


There are only a couple of paths to legal hicap mag acquisition, and those two are on hold (one is the armored car exemption, the other you'll eventually hear about after we activate it after some initial legal work down the line.)

Someone in, say, NV sending a hicap mag to a CA resident also does not pass the smell test. Search "long-arm statute" on Wikipedia for a good explanation. (This also applies to mail order liquor sales situation and certain aftermarket performance racing parts sales, etc.)

And those insisting on 'finding' a hicap mag win the asshattery award.
Don't use it as a defense or mention it if arrested. You'll self-immolate

This is good to know, I'll look up long-arm statute... again the reason this thread differs is because I want to understand the letter of the law, not what to do if I am accused. I understand STFU and have frequently posted the "don't talk to cops" video link because I am sold 100%. Again I created this thread to understand the law, not practical what to do when scenarios.

bwiese
02-15-2012, 1:34 PM
Gatesbox,

Just remember the product of an illegal transaction (even if legal itself) is often regarded as contraband.

The wording of these laws is broad enough along with likely judicial readings of inclusion of take with give, etc. that you should not be looking for exemptions/defenses in this area.



WE WILL GET YOU HICAP MAGS IN THE FUTURE THRU A VERY SPECIAL PATH.




IT WILL PROBABLY DOUBLE THE COST OF THE MAGS.




THERE WILL BE *NOTHING* CA CAN DO ABOUT IT.




THESE MAGS, unlike pre-2000 MAGS, CANNOT EXIT AND REENTER CALIF.
THE PATH WE WLL TAKE WILL BE DIFFERENT THAN OLL START IN 2005/2006 since we don't have supporting paperwork and we need
to prime paperwork path so folks don't get busted.

gatesbox
02-15-2012, 1:39 PM
Long Arm Statute:

In United States jurisprudence, long arm jurisdiction is a statutory grant of jurisdiction to local courts over foreign ("foreign" meaning out-of-state) defendants. A state's ability to confer jurisdiction is limited by the Constitution. This jurisdiction permits a court to hear a case against a defendant and enter a binding judgment against a defendant residing outside the state's jurisdiction. That is, without a long arm statute, a state's court may not have personal jurisdiction over a particular defendant.

In CA listed as 410.10, this statute would grant the state of CA the authority to hold responsible an online retailer or out of state resident that imports a mag into the state via USPS or other carrier. It would not as it seem increase the likelyhood of the person in possession of said mag being prosecuted. It would provide a good reason to disassemble an mag that you know was sent by a friend or relative as keeping the mag assembled would serve as evidence of your family member or friends importation crime.

Again I think this boils down to a clear exposition on the uses of PC 31 in prosecuting those in possession of an illegally aquired mag.

gatesbox
02-15-2012, 1:47 PM
Well I was just looking for a clear path of the law to understand, I can accept "In Two Weeks." If that's what it boils down to..

bwiese
02-15-2012, 1:55 PM
Gatesbox,

The AW stuff at least has regulations shaping the statutory law plus we have writings from DOJ.

Remember early on in the OLL movement the DOJ Dept AG was effectively trying to create new levels/varaiations of 'constructive possession' and reverse course, etc. It was a fight.

Far looser law like this with not a lotta regulatory stuff, case histories, etc. leaves broad openings.

The law, from a practical standpoint is not that enforceable for many situations but most folks including youngter twentysomethings dunno how to STFU when confronted by LEOs.


Bottom line: if you legitimately had a mag pre-2000, you're fine. CGF will cover your *** if problems. CGF may or may not push back in other situations too.

.... which does not include asshats driving back from the Big Reno show and getting popped and yelling "possession is not illegal!"

Mesa Tactical
02-15-2012, 2:23 PM
I have a feeling that many people dont really understand the whole magazine issue.

I certainly don't understand the fascination so many folks hereabouts have with disassembled magazines.

E Pluribus Unum
02-15-2012, 2:49 PM
We went over this in that thread. You're way overreading the language... especially with a CA judge and state of appeals court, etc. 'Giving' generally comes with 'getting' as a package deal.

Some things are not flowchartable. There's nuance and the 'smell test'.

[Remember that something acquired outside the law can be regarded as contraband even if you're charged and found not guilty. [Just because they dropped drug charges on someone, does he get his 5 kilos of coke back?]

Ignore asshats that say "it's illegal for it to [give | sell | etc], but not illegal for me to [buy, acquire, be given]".

There's simply no such thing as being able to participate in 'half a crime' and legally get away with it [which is separate from not being caught].
If the law were rewritten such that it were specifically stated that one side was illegal and not the other, you might have something. But the phrasing here is wide enough that some legislative intent is likely inferrable.

There are only a couple of paths to legal hicap mag acquisition, and those two are on hold (one is the armored car exemption, the other you'll eventually hear about after we activate it after some initial legal work down the line.)

Someone in, say, NV sending a hicap mag to a CA resident also does not pass the smell test. Search "long-arm statute" on Wikipedia for a good explanation. (This also applies to mail order liquor sales situation and certain aftermarket performance racing parts sales, etc.)

And those insisting on 'finding' a hicap mag win the asshattery award.
Don't use it as a defense or mention it if arrested. You'll self-immolate.

The best thing to do if caught/charged with a hicap mag is to STFU and call a lawyer. From a practical standpoint, those with reg'd AWs and having a mag that matches the gun will likely scoot.

CGF has already defended a couple of hicap mag possession cases. But those were straight traffic stops and no allegation of illegal acquisition: the cops just thought the mag itself was completely banned and intrinsically illegal.

The worry I have is that all the people above asking/discussing this question will think they can 'play ball' with a DA on their own, and they will self-immolate.


Gatesbox,

The AW stuff at least has regulations shaping the statutory law plus we have writings from DOJ.

Remember early on in the OLL movement the DOJ Dept AG was effectively trying to create new levels/varaiations of 'constructive possession' and reverse course, etc. It was a fight.

Far looser law like this with not a lotta regulatory stuff, case histories, etc. leaves broad openings.

The law, from a practical standpoint is not that enforceable for many situations but most folks including youngter twentysomethings dunno how to STFU when confronted by LEOs.


Bottom line: if you legitimately had a mag pre-2000, you're fine. CGF will cover your *** if problems. CGF may or may not push back in other situations too.

.... which does not include asshats driving back from the Big Reno show and getting popped and yelling "possession is not illegal!"

I know it's foolish for the ignorant to second-guess the educated, but being ignorant is an excuse for foolishness.... right? :) I beg to differ on your logic:

Let's say I purchase a Keltec PMR-30 (.22 mag pistol), and then I run to Oregon and purchase several 30 round magazines for it and I bury them in my back yard. It is my opinion that in 3 years, I can dig those magazines up out of the ground and have no fear of using them.

The government could argue that I HAD to have illegally imported the magazine because the gun was invented after the ban, so it was impossible for me to have had one legally. My contention is that this argument only holds water for the first three years after a new design comes out. After that, the government cannot prove when the magazines were imported, so it is conceivable that they were imported prior to the 3 year SOL.

I would further argue that one could keep the receipt of an out-of-state magazine purchase so that after the 3 years SOL expires, he could prove when and where he acquired them, thereby making him immune from prosecution. The concept of whether or not the magazine is "contraband" is irrelevant in my view. While they may be considered "contraband", and he may not get his "contraband" returned to him, he still could not be prosecuted, even with a full confession and a receipt proving it, thanks to the expired SOL on prosecution.

Librarian
02-15-2012, 3:07 PM
The law really boils down to 2 statements:

1) Do you have any now? If yes, use them and enjoy them - see the wiki quote on what the legislature intended.

2) You can't have any more.

NytWolf
02-15-2012, 3:18 PM
The law really boils down to 2 statements:

1) Do you have any now? If yes, use them and enjoy them - see the wiki quote on what the legislature intended.

2) You can't have any more.

That would be too easy. That's like saying, "Sure, there are loopholes, but don't use them", e.g. don't buy an SSE handgun. Just saying ...

dkindrumr
02-15-2012, 3:23 PM
Mags acquired legally by LEO who is no longer LEO, not retired, legal? Just want confirmation.

Mesa Tactical
02-15-2012, 3:27 PM
The law really boils down to 2 statements:

1) Do you have any now? If yes, use them and enjoy them - see the wiki quote on what the legislature intended.

2) You can't have any more.

You keep that up and you will kill a third of the traffic on Calguns.

USMCCPL
02-15-2012, 3:32 PM
How would this long arm Statute work if said mag was imported from overseas and not across state lines? Just wondering or adding to the fire...Thanks :confused:

Long Arm Statute:



In CA listed as 410.10, this statute would grant the state of CA the authority to hold responsible an online retailer or out of state resident that imports a mag into the state via USPS or other carrier. It would not as it seem increase the likelyhood of the person in possession of said mag being prosecuted. It would provide a good reason to disassemble an mag that you know was sent by a friend or relative as keeping the mag assembled would serve as evidence of your family member or friends importation crime.

Again I think this boils down to a clear exposition on the uses of PC 31 in prosecuting those in possession of an illegally aquired mag.

Mac7504
02-15-2012, 3:38 PM
Gatesbox,

Just remember the product of an illegal transaction (even if legal itself) is often regarded as contraband.

The wording of these laws is broad enough along with likely judicial readings of inclusion of take with give, etc. that you should not be looking for exemptions/defenses in this area.



WE WILL GET YOU HICAP MAGS IN THE FUTURE THRU A VERY SPECIAL PATH.




IT WILL PROBABLY DOUBLE THE COST OF THE MAGS.




THERE WILL BE *NOTHING* CA CAN DO ABOUT IT.




THESE MAGS, unlike pre-2000 MAGS, CANNOT EXIT AND REENTER CALIF.
THE PATH WE WLL TAKE WILL BE DIFFERENT THAN OLL START IN 2005/2006 since we don't have supporting paperwork and we need
to prime paperwork path so folks don't get busted.


Interesting.

Carnivore
02-15-2012, 3:54 PM
That would be too easy. That's like saying, "Sure, there are loopholes, but don't use them", e.g. don't buy an SSE handgun. Just saying ...

Bad analogy...the SSE handgun is legal after the use of a loophole to have, use in a non SSE configuration. A hi cap bought as a loophole in parts and put together after the fact isn't. :facepalm:

SPaikmos
02-15-2012, 4:10 PM
The government could argue that I HAD to have illegally imported the magazine because the gun was invented after the ban, so it was impossible for me to have had one legally. My contention is that this argument only holds water for the first three years after a new design comes out. After that, the government cannot prove when the magazines were imported, so it is conceivable that they were imported prior to the 3 year SOL.

I would further argue that one could keep the receipt of an out-of-state magazine purchase so that after the 3 years SOL expires, he could prove when and where he acquired them, thereby making him immune from prosecution. The concept of whether or not the magazine is "contraband" is irrelevant in my view. While they may be considered "contraband", and he may not get his "contraband" returned to him, he still could not be prosecuted, even with a full confession and a receipt proving it, thanks to the expired SOL on prosecution.

I believe you are working under the idea of "innocent until proven guilty". As in, you feel the govt needs to prove you are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

IMHO, that does not really exist in our judicial system any more. Sure, they may not be able to produce a conviction in the end, but they could certainly find ways to hassle you during the process. And, do you want to risk the possibility that an overzealous DA may be able to charge you with another crime related to this one? Perhaps there's some obscure statute on the books about conspiracy, smuggling, defrauding the govt, etc (IANAL, I don't know the technical terms.)

It's not like a DA would simply look at your receipt and say "oh, you bought these more then 3 years ago so I'll drop the charges and off you go". I'm guessing it'll be a series of court motions and other things before you finally go, and even then, you might have an arrest or something on your record, no? And if you wanted to get THAT expunged too, then I'm sure it'll cost you more time and money to do it.

It's a fine line that people walk. Even the OLL guys are still getting popped every now and again and spend some time in cuffs. Isn't there a CGer that got arrested TWICE in the same county for his legal rifles? You may ultimately be exonerated and even win a civil suit, but that won't get you your time back and the possible damage to your reputation during the process.

The idea of relying on the SOL to save your arse seems like playing with fire to me. That may be the law as it's written, and I'm curious just how it works in practice. Kind of like the Castle Law as it's written in the CA penal code vs. what actually flies in court.

SPaikmos
02-15-2012, 4:11 PM
Bad analogy...the SSE handgun is legal after the use of a loophole to have, use in a non SSE configuration. A hi cap bought as a loophole in parts and put together after the fact isn't. :facepalm:

Exactly. The crime would be manufacturing a HCM.
And relying on the Statute of Limitations to "make it legal" seems dicey at best.

bwiese
02-15-2012, 4:12 PM
Let's say I purchase a Keltec PMR-30 (.22 mag pistol), and then I run to Oregon and purchase several 30 round magazines for it and I bury them in my back yard. It is my opinion that in 3 years, I can dig those magazines up out of the ground and have no fear of using them.


No fear?

That's a modern post-2000 gun with what I believe are unique mags that do not fit/were not marketed for pre 2000 guns.

A DA could easily decide to charge and have a fair chance on that.

Now, let's say full defense goes in, you STFU, etc. And lets' say no convictions or case dropped..

I'm not clear an FFI could be gotten at the end of the day.

I'm pretty certain that 'being not guilty' does not let one get this contraband back: escape from prosecution/guilt does not mean contraband returned.

After that, the government cannot prove when the magazines were imported, so it is conceivable that they were imported prior to the 3 year SOL.

It would be very easy to show a unique mag/gun design occurring after 2000 did not occur before 2000 - certainly sufficiently enough for a DA to have confidence in continuing the case, in and a judge to accept that it was thus new and must have been imported ("magic reappearance" and "spontaneous generation" won't fly).


I would further argue that one could keep the receipt of an out-of-state magazine purchase so that after the 3 years SOL expires, he could prove when and where he acquired them, thereby making him immune from prosecution.

Yes, but remember you're making the rope to hang yourself if caught beforehand. We already have had such drama with one individual and this one relatively minor matter affected a much larger victory we could have had with DOJ.

Noonanda
02-15-2012, 4:26 PM
Has anyone been busted for "importing of HC Mags", isnt this one of those "strap hanger type laws" similar to 922R.
Like when the cops say "We arrested him for possession of a pound of cocaine, possession of a unregistered fully automatic weapon, and BTW he also did not have the correct us made parts count on the weapon and also had magazines made after 2000." the DOJ aint gonna kick down your door just to check the date of your mags, but if they come there for "other reasons" they can add the charges on.

E Pluribus Unum
02-15-2012, 4:27 PM
No fear?

That's a modern post-2000 gun with what I believe are unique mags that do not fit/were not marketed for pre 2000 guns.

A DA could easily decide to charge and have a fair chance on that.

Now, let's say full defense goes in, you STFU, etc. And lets' say no convictions or case dropped..

I'm not clear an FFI could be gotten at the end of the day.

I think a FFI is unimportant. If no charges are filed, it would only show up on the arresting agency's arrest record; if charges were filed, but dismissed, the record would show it and would not be damaging and would only be accessible by a select few; unless the docket contained other charges that were plead out, a public records search would not show the charge.

All this is moot, because I think it would be dismissed at arraignment anyway.


I'm pretty certain that 'being not guilty' does not let one get this contraband back: escape from prosecution/guilt does not mean contraband returned.

I never spoke of getting contraband back; I'm talking about being prosecuted. I would think certainly any magazines in this case would be destroyed as a public nuisance or "acquired" by the PD.


It would be very easy to show a unique mag/gun design occurring after 2000 did not occur before 2000 - certainly sufficiently enough for a DA to have confidence in continuing the case, in and a judge to accept that it was thus new and must have been imported ("magic reappearance" and "spontaneous generation" won't fly).

I think with a simple statement of "My client imported the magazines on 1-1-09", even a public pretender could get the charge dismissed at arraignment.


Yes, but remember you're making the rope to hang yourself if caught beforehand. We already have had such drama with one individual and this one relatively minor matter affected a much larger victory we could have had with DOJ.

As I said in the example; keep the receipts and the mags... and bury them for 3 years. If the DOJ somehow acquired a warrant to dig up your back yard, and found receipts for illegally imported magazines, you've got bigger problems that lead a court to grant such a warrant... :)

bwiese
02-15-2012, 4:31 PM
I think a FFI is unimportant....
All this is moot, because I think it would be dismissed at arraignment anyway.

1. Some people may need an FFI for job situations/security clearances

2. Maybe dismissed in Kern County. Some chance of dismissal in a metro area with a GOOD lawyer.


I never spoke of getting contraband back; I'm talking about being prosecuted.

OK as long as you understand. Some of the Paulestinian types can't comprehend the separation and would be worrying about getting the mags back and make steps that might self-incriminate in certain situations

bwiese
02-15-2012, 4:36 PM
Has anyone been busted for "importing of HC Mags", isnt this one of those "strap hanger type laws" similar to 922R.


I'm tired of this crap - shuddup if you don't know WTF you're talking about.

Every half year or so the DOJ observes mag purchases in Reno at the Big Show and busts some people in CA - usu in Truckee because that's where the police facility is. There was a big bust in Feb and Nov. of last year too.

This August, one such indvidual was observed buying hicaps in Reno show but instead of popping him at Truckee they followed him home to his Bay Area residence and let him bring the mags in.

That was enough for a warrant, so they went in and also found an OLL AR that had a red "MagMagnet" installed. Now Mr. Bright Boy not only has the mag charges but also a 12280 AW charge.

These are NOT tack on charges. Remember, sonny, you're in California.

In LA, some LAPD Gun Unit officers are co-sworn as US Marshals and can cruise the Phoenix and Las Vegas gun shows without local permission/cooperation.

ke6guj
02-15-2012, 4:39 PM
Bill, you do know what this means, CGF needs to get the "special path" method in gear ASAP. I know that other cases have taken priority, but as long as the "special path" is two weeks away or more (haven't we been waiting on this for two years now since it was first mentioned?), you are going to continue to get people trying to play felony games.

E Pluribus Unum
02-15-2012, 4:44 PM
1. Some people may need an FFI for job situations/security clearances

Very true... and most of the very few people that meet that exception can get a job-related high cap mag permit, and the rest get paid so well, they should not risk their very niche, high-paying job, for an extra 20 rounds of fun. :)

2. Maybe dismissed in Kern County. Some chance of dismissal in a metro area with a GOOD lawyer.

I'm sorry, but I just don't see that. As soon as the statement is made, I see it as an affirmative defense, for which the prosecution has no remedy. Unless, of course, they can produce evidence which disproves it. I know of no California case law that absolves any court from statute of limitations rules.


OK as long as you understand. Some of the Paulestinian types can't comprehend the separation and would be worrying about getting the mags back and make steps that might self-incriminate in certain situations

Oh, I understand fully. I think that if it ever became an issue, retention of a few $20 magazines would be the least concern. Especially considering that if my logic is sound, one would be free to make another trip to Oregon. :)

E Pluribus Unum
02-15-2012, 4:51 PM
Bill, you do know what this means, CGF needs to get the "special path" method in gear ASAP. I know that other cases have taken priority, but as long as the "special path" is two weeks away or more (haven't we been waiting on this for two years now since it was first mentioned?), you are going to continue to get people trying to play felony games.

The plain and simple fact is that if one gets popped with an illegal importation charged, and gets convicted of it, he's probably an idiot. With so-called "rebuild kits", it's easier to acquire magazines than it is to ditch jury duty.

I think state-wide shall-issue CCW is 100x more important to civil rights. Right now no "commoners" (no ccw, no leo) can practically carry a weapon in this state for self-defense. Make it so they can carry a concealed firearm with a 10 round magazine before you start worrying about whether they can have 11+.

If the "standard capacity magazine ban" delays shall issue CCW even one day, it's a compromise that's not worth it.


P.S.
12020 Magazine importation is a misdemeanor... not a felony... right?

GettoPhilosopher
02-15-2012, 4:55 PM
Bill, you do know what this means, CGF needs to get the "special path" method in gear ASAP. I know that other cases have taken priority, but as long as the "special path" is two weeks away or more (haven't we been waiting on this for two years now since it was first mentioned?), you are going to continue to get people trying to play felony games.


+2

I don't mean to complain in the slightest, and Brandon knows I am VERY grateful for the Sunshine Initiative and related work, but I get confused when people talk like Shall Issue is years away and the Mag workaround is relatively "easy" and then put the mags on hold indefinitely.

Magazines aren't just a range plinking toy, they have legitimate security implications as well (for some people more than others).

Noonanda
02-15-2012, 5:29 PM
I'm tired of this crap - shuddup if you don't know WTF you're talking about.

I was asking a question not giving my opinion. I apologize for failing to use a Question mark, didnt realize bad punctuation is grounds for telling someone to Shut up and being a jerk.

Better not misspell a word, might get told to GFMS or get banned. I have always respected you Bill until this, Get off your high horse man. I would say something else but thats just not polite:mad:

E Pluribus Unum
02-15-2012, 5:43 PM
I was asking a question not giving my opinion. I apologize for failing to use a Question mark, didnt realize bad punctuation is grounds for telling someone to Shut up and being a jerk.

Better not misspell a word, might get told to GFMS or get banned. I have always respected you Bill until this, Get off your high horse man. I would say something else but thats just not polite:mad:

While I agree that he was a bit harsh, you have to understand that sometimes it gets frustrating having the same argument with multiple people, and then you bring up bad arguments with things that are not binding... coupled with a bad day, it can contribute to things like this.

I'm sure he didn't mean anything personal by it.

<Group Hug>

Noonanda
02-15-2012, 6:38 PM
Maybe I jumped into the wrong thread(seemed like as good a thread as any since it is related to HCM), and did use poor punctuation to show I was asking a question but dang sure didnt expect to get pretty much told "STFU you dont know anything"

MudCamper
02-15-2012, 6:56 PM
I certainly don't understand the fascination so many folks hereabouts have with disassembled magazines.

Which reminds me, at the Vallejo gun show last weekend there were literally thousands of large capacity magazine kits for sale there. Every other vendor had them. Clearly they are being purchased for illegal manufacturing. This makes me wonder if this will cause LEO to run crying to the legislatures and get a the law changed, much the same as they did with Open Carry.

ke6guj
02-15-2012, 7:02 PM
P.S.
12020 Magazine importation is a misdemeanor... not a felony... right?wobbler, chargable as a felony which is why the "3 years" number is thrown around.

32310. Except as provided in Article 2 (commencing with Section
32400) of this chapter and in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section
17700) of Division 2 of Title 2, commencing January 1, 2000, any
person in this state who manufactures or causes to be manufactured,
imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for
sale, or who gives, or lends, any large-capacity magazine is
punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or
in the state prison.

Turo
02-15-2012, 7:48 PM
Which reminds me, at the Vallejo gun show last weekend there were literally thousands of large capacity magazine kits for sale there. Every other vendor had them. Clearly they are being purchased for illegal manufacturing. This makes me wonder if this will cause LEO to run crying to the legislatures and get a the law changed, much the same as they did with Open Carry.

I'd like to see proof of this before you start calling all the people that buy rebuild kits criminals.

gatesbox
02-15-2012, 7:53 PM
I know it's foolish for the ignorant to second-guess the educated, but being ignorant is an excuse for foolishness.... right? :) I beg to differ on your logic:

Let's say I purchase a Keltec PMR-30 (.22 mag pistol), and then I run to Oregon and purchase several 30 round magazines for it and I bury them in my back yard. It is my opinion that in 3 years, I can dig those magazines up out of the ground and have no fear of using them.

The government could argue that I HAD to have illegally imported the magazine because the gun was invented after the ban, so it was impossible for me to have had one legally. My contention is that this argument only holds water for the first three years after a new design comes out. After that, the government cannot prove when the magazines were imported, so it is conceivable that they were imported prior to the 3 year SOL.

I would further argue that one could keep the receipt of an out-of-state magazine purchase so that after the 3 years SOL expires, he could prove when and where he acquired them, thereby making him immune from prosecution. The concept of whether or not the magazine is "contraband" is irrelevant in my view. While they may be considered "contraband", and he may not get his "contraband" returned to him, he still could not be prosecuted, even with a full confession and a receipt proving it, thanks to the expired SOL on prosecution.


The very fact that these scenarios are cruising through peoples minds is why I think it might still be important to spell out the various facts of law pertaining to high cap importation and manufacture. Obviously no one can or should reccomend the above situation as a work around, this in and of itself would drift into PC 31 territory... But for those who want to understand, these elements should be flushed out a bit more than just, you are an idiot if you find a mag, or discover that you accidentally imported. I can see the above situation occurring without forethought, by the number of "I am moving to CA threads" and some truly eye rolling conversations at the range, true negligence.....

E Pluribus Unum
02-15-2012, 8:16 PM
The very fact that these scenarios are cruising through peoples minds is why I think it might still be important to spell out the various facts of law pertaining to high cap importation and manufacture. Obviously no one can or should reccomend the above situation as a work around, this in and of itself would drift into PC 31 territory... But for those who want to understand, these elements should be flushed out a bit more than just, you are an idiot if you find a mag, or discover that you accidentally imported. I can see the above situation occurring without forethought, by the number of "I am moving to CA threads" and some truly eye rolling conversations at the range, true negligence.....

On the contrary. I think it can be, and should be, exploited to the fullest extent to insure that constitutionally-protected rights be realised in this state. I am of the firm opinion that it is neither illegal, nor immoral, to violate a law that is unconstitutional. Just as members of the underground rail-road violated the "law" to minimise the unconstitutional reality of slavery, I too consider myself a passive freedom fighter determined to undermine any law that is unconstitutional, short of doing something that would put me or someone else in jail.

I am one of the fortunate few that owned high capacity magazines for all of my guns before the ban. For this reason, I have nothing to fear about speaking about circumventing the law, because I have always been within the law. That being said, if all of my magazines spontaneously combusted, and I were forced to replace them, I would have no problem replacing them in the manner I have described.

gatesbox
02-15-2012, 8:30 PM
On the contrary. I think it can be, and should be, exploited to the fullest extent to insure that constitutionally-protected rights be realised in this state. I am of the firm opinion that it is neither illegal, nor immoral, to violate a law that is unconstitutional. Just as members of the underground rail-road violated the "law" to minimise the unconstitutional reality of slavery, I too consider myself a passive freedom fighter determined to undermine any law that is unconstitutional, short of doing something that would put me or someone else in jail.

I am one of the fortunate few that owned high capacity magazines for all of my guns before the ban. For this reason, I have nothing to fear about speaking about circumventing the law, because I have always been within the law. That being said, if all of my magazines spontaneously combusted, and I were forced to replace them, I would have no problem replacing them in the manner I have described.

By reccomending burrying mags, anytime someone was pinched before 3 years you would be culpable as well...if Calguns did this they would get pinched every time a mag was unearthed before 3 years.

E Pluribus Unum
02-15-2012, 8:38 PM
By reccomending burrying mags, anytime someone was pinched before 3 years you would be culpable as well...if Calguns did this they would get pinched every time a mag was unearthed before 3 years.

I'm not recommending anything. If I were to recommended something, that would be offering legal advice and I would be "pinched" for that, whether they actually did it or not.

I am simply offering a legal theory in general and challenging anyone else to prove me wrong: hypothetically speaking, of course.

My legal theory is simplified as this:

1) Possession and use of standard capacity magazines is legal regardless of how they were obtained.

2) Short of a confession, or evidence proving illegal manufacture or importation, the government's burden to prove their case is near impossible.

3) After three years, the government cannot prosecute anyone for illegal importation.

Any other inferences or assumptions that are made are beyond the scope of my theory.

I have yet to find anyone, lawyer or otherwise, to be able to say I'm wrong.

gatesbox
02-15-2012, 8:42 PM
I'm not recommending anything. If I were to recommended something, that would be offering legal advice and I would be "pinched" for that, whether they actually did it or not.

I am simply offering a legal theory in general and challenging anyone else to prove me wrong: hypothetically speaking, of course.

My legal theory is simplified as this:

1) Possession and use of standard capacity magazines is legal regardless of how they were obtained.

2) Short of a confession, or evidence proving illegal manufacture or importation, the government's burden to prove their case is near impossible.

3) After three years, the government cannot prosecute anyone for illegal importation.

Any other inferences or assumptions that are made are beyond the scope of my theory.

I have yet to find anyone, lawyer or otherwise, to be able to say I'm wrong.

I agree with you 100% but anyone reccomending the hypothetical scenario as a work around, would be reccomending and possibly "counseling" someone as to the means to commit a crime.... "counseling" would get any institution or individual into potential hot water.

This is why my suggestion is a full and exhaustive explanation of the applicable PC, including 31, 410.10 (I think long arm), then anyone who feels that they have a defendable position can roll the pay the price and take their chances.

E Pluribus Unum
02-15-2012, 8:48 PM
I agree with you 100% but anyone reccomending the hypothetical scenario as a work around, would be reccomending and possibly "counseling" someone as to the means to commit a crime.... "counseling" would get any institution or individual into potential hot water.

This is why my suggestion is a full and exhaustive explanation of the applicable PC, including 31, 410.10 (I think long arm), then anyone who feels that they have a defendable position can roll the pay the price and take their chances.

If I am "counselling someone as to the means to commit a crime" by explaining the pitfalls of the magazine law as written, then something needs to be done about TrueTV; all of their Crime Documentaries can be consolidated and described as "Murder 101". ;)

gatesbox
02-15-2012, 8:57 PM
On the contrary. I think it can be, and should be, exploited to the fullest extent to insure that constitutionally-protected rights be realised in this state. I am of the firm opinion that it is neither illegal, nor immoral, to violate a law that is unconstitutional. Just as members of the underground rail-road violated the "law" to minimise the unconstitutional reality of slavery, I too consider myself a passive freedom fighter determined to undermine any law that is unconstitutional, short of doing something that would put me or someone else in jail.

First off E, we are most Definately on the same page and looking for the same position to be clearly stated, I am sure of that. But providing information and encouraging the breaking of the law are clearly different. In the case of the underground railroad, I'd like to think I would have been willing to pay the price, sadly I don't know if I'm willing to pay that price for a high cap mag, nor do I think my incrimination would carry much political significance.

Librarian
02-15-2012, 9:09 PM
Abusing deceased equines, except for this bit: I offer this post to inquire if it is worth adding to the Wiki an additional explanation of P.C. 31. And to find clarity on the degree of "Knowledge of Crime" necessary,

I think that treads perilously close to trying to give legal advice without a license. The wiki can't address anything specific for an individual; it CAN be a reasonable starting point for an attorney new to the subject area, but a criminal defense attorney is surely a better source of how to maneuver inside California law than a wiki entry.