PDA

View Full Version : Local LEO says any mag over 10 rounds illegal


OrovilleTim
08-09-2012, 9:39 AM
The following story mentions an arrest for "possession of high capacity magazines": http://www.newsreview.com/chico/more-gun-news/content?oid=7086237

“Any magazine that carries over 10 rounds is illegal in California,” said police Lt. Mike O’Brien.

Seems like someone needs a little bit of an education.

Moto
08-09-2012, 9:42 AM
another idiot p.o.

taperxz
08-09-2012, 9:48 AM
another idiot p.o.

What about the guy carrying the weapon illegally? Stupid games, stupid prizes?

OrovilleTim
08-09-2012, 9:49 AM
Here is the actual press release: http://www.chico.ca.us/police/documents/12-5422LorGunflat.pdf

It does state "Lor was placed under arrest for Possession of Concealed Firearm Upon Person and within a Motor Vehicle along with Possession of a High Capacity Firearm Magazine."

I'm hoping that there isn't something new I don't know about, but I checked the wiki (http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/Large-capacity_magazine_restrictions) and it don't seem so.

OrovilleTim
08-09-2012, 9:55 AM
What about the guy carrying the weapon illegally? Stupid games, stupid prizes?

Chances are he was/is an idiot, but phony charges are downright frightening to anyone that could be legally possessing legacy pre-ban magazines. Not to mention the statement was made by a Lt. to be politically beneficial and it got printed in the local Leftist rag to prove how the gun scare was hitting home locally.

I find a mis-informed LEO more dangerous to me and fellow gun owners personally than an idiot out at 1 AM hiding a pistol in his car.

hermosabeach
08-09-2012, 9:57 AM
Lets say he had an FN in 5.7mm
Or a springfield XD

The mag question might be clarified if we new what type of firearm was involved

Uxi
08-09-2012, 9:59 AM
More often than not, at least in criminal manners, phony charges are a far more serious concern than legit ones.

taperxz
08-09-2012, 10:01 AM
Chances are he was/is an idiot, but phony charges are downright frightening to anyone that could be legally possessing legacy pre-ban magazines. Not to mention the statement was made by a Lt. to be politically beneficial and it got printed in the local Leftist rag to prove how the gun scare was hitting home locally.

I find a mis-informed LEO more dangerous to me and fellow gun owners personally than an idiot out at 1 AM hiding a pistol in his car.

If the accused, mentioned the circumstances of obtaining those mags and it was an illegal to do so then he is guilty of obtaining them. The LEOs blanket statement is wrong. The circumstance may have triggered the poor response. OR that charge will be dropped as mere possession is not illegal.

killmime1234
08-09-2012, 10:06 AM
Lets say he had an FN in 5.7mm
Or a springfield XD

The mag question might be clarified if we new what type of firearm was involved

That doesn't really matter. It' not illegal to posses a hi cap mag even if the gun it goes to didn't exist before the ban. He might have had a friend that illegally imported some hi cap XD mags and he stole them from the guy. Then all he's guilty of is petty theft.

NytWolf
08-09-2012, 10:09 AM
Lets say he had an FN in 5.7mm
Or a springfield XD

The mag question might be clarified if we new what type of firearm was involved

"Jan Lor was found with a concealed, loaded 9mm semi-automatic gun and two illegal, high-capacity, 30- and 15-bullet clips for it."

If the gun was found loaded, then the guy was indeed an idiot.

OrovilleTim
08-09-2012, 10:29 AM
I'd put my money on this guy being an idiot, and probably a gang member. But, the police had enough to haul him in already. The whole "large capacity" thing was a bogus charge which is what I take issue with. I also suspect that the press release was done in response to the recent "large capacity magazine" witch hunt.

Here's an example of how this could go horribly wrong...

This guys says it, his department believes it. Lets say *you* are out shooting at the local Oroville range here in Butte County (where Chico also is) and you have a legally owned non-legislatively reduced capacity magazine and are shooting it in your featureless rifle. One of this department's officers is also out there too and counts more than 10 rounds so he dials up his buddy at the county SO who comes out and arrests you on same "charges" (although I wonder what PC they would write down.) Now you have to get bailed out, prove your innocence, get your guns and magazines back, and have an arrest on your record for something that wasn't illegal in the first place.

Yeah, this is an extreme possibility, but it exists. I do not in any way wish to make it seem like I am defending the guy arrested and don't want it to be about this particular suspect. What I am saying though is that the officers who did the charge, the Lt., and possibly the department, is woefully misinformed and should be educated to prevent the possibility of people within the law being subject to an invalid arrest.

ap3572001
08-09-2012, 10:50 AM
The following story mentions an arrest for "possession of high capacity magazines": http://www.newsreview.com/chico/more-gun-news/content?oid=7086237



Seems like someone needs a little bit of an education.

I am an LEO , I dont see anything in PC that says that having std cap magazines is illegal.

Not sure what they are talking about ? Maybe I dont know something....

Uxi
08-09-2012, 10:51 AM
"Jan Lor was found with a concealed, loaded 9mm semi-automatic gun and two illegal, high-capacity, 30- and 15-bullet clips for it."


So that's 1 x 30-rounder and 1 x 15-rounder for a total of 2 magazines? Including the one that was loaded?

ap3572001
08-09-2012, 10:54 AM
Looked again. I can't find anything about ILLEGAL magazines.... I can just immagine what will happen if I arrest and book someone for HAVING a magazine.

taperxz
08-09-2012, 10:57 AM
Looked again. I can't find anything about ILLEGAL magazines....

They would be illegal if LE was able to prove they were obtained illegally.

IE the person arrested said he purchased them in Nevada last week;)

Uxi
08-09-2012, 10:58 AM
Wonder if they asked when he got them. And if he was dumb enough to talk.

ap3572001
08-09-2012, 10:58 AM
They would be illegal if LE was able to prove they were obtained illegally.

IE the person arrested said he purchased them in Nevada last week;)

Great. Well, I have a lot more to do than run around and ask people when and how they got their magazines. I can see my bosses faces if I bring in a guy in handcuffs to be booked and tell them that He bought a magazine at the gun show somewhere.

NytWolf
08-09-2012, 11:05 AM
So that's 1 x 30-rounder and 1 x 15-rounder for a total of 2 magazines? Including the one that was loaded?

That seems to be correct, two "high-capacity" magazines for a 9mm semi-auto.

OrovilleTim
08-09-2012, 11:05 AM
They would be illegal if LE was able to prove they were obtained illegally.

IE the person arrested said he purchased them in Nevada last week;)

The important point folks worried about "how they could be illegal" are missing is the quote from the Lt.: '“Any magazine that carries over 10 rounds is illegal in California,” said police Lt. Mike O’Brien.'

That misconception is most likely led to the "possession" charge. They didn't charge him with importing, selling, transferring, etc., they charged him with "possession", which is not illegal.

I would like to know what the actual PC violation that they cited was.

taperxz
08-09-2012, 11:06 AM
Great. Well, I have a lot more to do than run around and ask people when and how they got their magazines.

Don't you need to keep the context of the situation in check? Loaded concealed weapon, in a vehicle and simply ask where he got the hicaps? If it was that simple and the guy talked... You add the charge. NO? Criminals aren't always the smartest folks. You know that.

motorwerks
08-09-2012, 11:07 AM
Wonder if they asked when he got them. And if he was dumb enough to talk.

That was my guess.

taperxz
08-09-2012, 11:08 AM
The important point folks worried about "how they could be illegal" are missing is the quote from the Lt.: '“Any magazine that carries over 10 rounds is illegal in California,” said police Lt. Mike O’Brien.'

That misconception is most likely led to the "possession" charge. They didn't charge him with importing, selling, transferring, etc., they charged him with "possession", which is not illegal.

I would like to know what the actual PC violation that they cited was.

Like said before, that blanket statement is wrong. LEOs aren't lawyers either FWIW.

ap3572001
08-09-2012, 11:11 AM
Don't you need to keep the context of the situation in check? Loaded concealed weapon, in a vehicle and simply ask where he got the hicaps? If it was that simple and the guy talked... You add the charge. NO? Criminals aren't always the smartest folks. You know that.

Loaded ,concealed weapon is enough trouble. I guess someone may ask how old the magazines are......

ap3572001
08-09-2012, 11:17 AM
Let me say something....

I think the whole magazine thing is weird.

I think MANY people DO NOT understand it .

taperxz
08-09-2012, 11:22 AM
Let me say something....

I think the whole magazine thing is weird.

I think MANY people DO NOT understand it .

Agreed! Blanket statements like in the OP convolute the reality.

I was actually trying to cut LE some slack because of the nature of the arrest and the lack of full circumstances involved.

the_quark
08-09-2012, 11:23 AM
This is a common misconception, even by people who should know better. We've had guys charged with "high capacity magazine possession", before. Obviously those are easy to get dismissed when we point out it's not illegal, but it's still annoying.

Wherryj
08-09-2012, 11:43 AM
I am an LEO , I dont see anything in PC that says that having std cap magazines is illegal.

Not sure what they are talking about ? Maybe I dont know something....

Perhaps you don't know that you aren't supposed to be READING the penal code? I think that you're just supposed to go by what your LT says is correct?

Only citizens are expected to know and completely understand ALL of the laws. Thanks for going that extra mile!

451040
08-09-2012, 11:49 AM
The important point folks worried about "how they could be illegal" are missing is the quote from the Lt.: '“Any magazine that carries over 10 rounds is illegal in California,” said police Lt. Mike O’Brien.'


^ THIS

ap3572001
08-09-2012, 11:49 AM
[QUOTE=Wherryj;9095999]Perhaps you don't know that you aren't supposed to be READING the penal code? I think that you're just supposed to go by what your LT says is correct?

Only citizens are expected to know and completely understand ALL of the laws. Thanks for going that extra mile![/QU

For sure. I hope the SB249 will not pass..... That would be a weird one to understand.

OleCuss
08-09-2012, 12:14 PM
There's a good chance that he obtained them illegally - and told the LEO that he did.

In that case, it's a matter of semantics. "Illegally obtained magazines" vs "Illegal magazines".

One would hope that any charges are recorded correctly in the official documents.

dfletcher
08-09-2012, 12:22 PM
It seems to me that with respect to consequences "ignorance of the law is no excuse" ought to be a two way street.

CS Sports
08-09-2012, 12:27 PM
Great. Well, I have a lot more to do than run around and ask people when and how they got their magazines. I can see my bosses faces if I bring in a guy in handcuffs to be booked and tell them that He bought a magazine at the gun show somewhere.

Next time there is an opening in the Woodland Police Department or the Yolo County Sheriff's Department, please apply!

No animus towards either of those departments, I'd just love to have more good, reasonable LEOs around.

Decoligny
08-09-2012, 1:15 PM
Don't you need to keep the context of the situation in check? Loaded concealed weapon, in a vehicle and simply ask where he got the hicaps? If it was that simple and the guy talked... You add the charge. NO? Criminals aren't always the smartest folks. You know that.

If it went down as you suggest, the charge would still have to be "illegally importing large capacity magazines, not "possession of illegal large capacity magazines".

Merc1138
08-09-2012, 1:18 PM
^ THIS

What do you mean "^ THIS"? That statement is false.

repubconserv
08-09-2012, 1:30 PM
Lets say he had an FN in 5.7mm
Or a springfield XD

The mag question might be clarified if we new what type of firearm was involved

Nope. It is still not illegal to possess a hi-cap mag. period.

Now what is the likelihood that he legally acquired a 5.7 hi-cap mag? who knows. He could have just found it on the street, picked it up and kept it... totally legal

Roy Mustang
08-09-2012, 1:36 PM
I found it lying around at the gun range

451040
08-09-2012, 1:44 PM
The important point folks worried about "how they could be illegal" are missing is the quote from the Lt.: '“Any magazine that carries over 10 rounds is illegal in California,” said police Lt. Mike O’Brien.'^ THIS

What do you mean "^ THIS"? That statement is false.


The bold was in OrovilleTim's original post. It was not my addition. Let's try it bolded like this:

The important point folks worried about "how they could be illegal" are missing is the quote from the Lt.: '“Any magazine that carries over 10 rounds is illegal in California,” said police Lt. Mike O’Brien.'


^ CLEAR?

a1c
08-09-2012, 1:52 PM
Has the guy been charged? Just because you're arrested for something doesn't mean the charges don't get dropped. Happens all the time.

I know of a specific case in my area (next door) where some people were charged with a variety of crimes, and high capacity magazines were not among them (even though they had some when arrested). Prosecution probably didn't want to bother, and had plenty already to throw the book at them.

wildhawker
08-09-2012, 1:57 PM
CGF PRAR underway.

-Brandon

taperxz
08-09-2012, 2:35 PM
If it went down as you suggest, the charge would still have to be "illegally importing large capacity magazines, not "possession of illegal large capacity magazines".

I already mentioned that. LEO was making a wrong statement and the only way the arrested could have been charged for anything (for mags) was if he made a statement to incriminate himself

morfeeis
08-09-2012, 2:39 PM
Lets say he had an FN in 5.7mm
Or a springfield XD

The mag question might be clarified if we new what type of firearm was involved
Wouldn't matter, it would be a different charge. he would have to be charged with import/manufacture of a "hicap" magazine. You can have a magazine for a pistol that was made yesterday and it's up to the state to prove that you didn't just find it while on a walk in the field somewhere.

nicki
08-09-2012, 3:47 PM
If you are illegally carrying a gun that is not registered to you, you may have a hard time explaining how you bought magazines for a gun back in 1999.

If you were say 20 in 2000, today you would be 32.

If you are say 22, do you think you can get the judge to believe you bought the hi cap magazines in 2000 when you were 12.

Sounds like Glock mags, a smart DA would just ask someone how much they paid, unless you payed attention, the going price for Glock pre bans was around 100 dollars each and the 30 rounds were even higher.

I would expect the DA to go for the max.

Nicki

CSACANNONEER
08-09-2012, 3:53 PM
If you are illegally carrying a gun that is not registered to you, you may have a hard time explaining how you bought magazines for a gun back in 1999.

If you were say 20 in 2000, today you would be 32.

If you are say 22, do you think you can get the judge to believe you bought the hi cap magazines in 2000 when you were 12.

Sounds like Glock mags, a smart DA would just ask someone how much they paid, unless you payed attention, the going price for Glock pre bans was around 100 dollars each and the 30 rounds were even higher.

I would expect the DA to go for the max.

Nicki

Uh, you're not going back far enough. I have undocumented handguns and +10 round mags which I legally aquired before the current DROS system was in place. So, both the undocumented handgun and the mags were purchased well before 1-1-2000. Also, prior to 1994, +10 round Glock mags were pretty cheap. It wasn't until around 1998 or so when +10 round mags started exculating in price.

CitaDeL
08-09-2012, 4:02 PM
CGF PRAR underway.

-Brandon

:43:

tbhracing
08-09-2012, 4:16 PM
Thank you to the two posters who commented on the article and stated the proper facts.

safewaysecurity
08-09-2012, 4:34 PM
Not illegal to find high caps and keep em. Also there are 3 words I would like to say that have to so worth theIraq ability to prosecute but I know that mentioning it is a nono on calguns.

Ron-Solo
08-09-2012, 7:06 PM
Also, the media is famous for adding quotes to statements that were never actually said, or they twist things around to fit the story they want to tell.

I was misquoted more times than they got it right.

wildhawker
08-09-2012, 7:14 PM
Also, the media is famous for adding quotes to statements that were never actually said, or they twist things around to fit the story they want to tell.

I was misquoted more times than they got it right.

This time. they were quoting a PD press release that I quoted back to them in my PRAR this afternoon.

-Brandon

BigDogatPlay
08-09-2012, 7:48 PM
This time. they were quoting a PD press release that I quoted back to them in my PRAR this afternoon.

-Brandon

Pointing out another deep and gaping flaw with our modern times.... a thoroughly lazy press.

Got the popcorn on for the PRAR results.

Ron-Solo
08-10-2012, 12:33 AM
This time. they were quoting a PD press release that I quoted back to them in my PRAR this afternoon.

-Brandon

Figures. LASD's media liaison is clueless too. Stuff like that gives me a Popsicle headache.

SgtDinosaur
08-10-2012, 9:57 AM
Long before I joined Calguns I knew my standard capacity magazines were grandfathered. I knew it at the time of the ban. Of course, if the guy was too young to have any grandfathered mags that could be a problem, but on the surface the officer's statement is flat out wrong.

707FreedomFan
08-10-2012, 11:46 PM
Hmm, maybe someone should search the statute for "bullet clips"... :whistling:

wildhawker
08-11-2012, 12:35 AM
The City of Chico has acknowledged my PRAR. Start the clock.

-Brandon

GOEX FFF
08-11-2012, 2:13 AM
The City of Chico has acknowledged my PRAR. Start the clock.

-Brandon

:thumbsup:

http://www.animated-gifs.eu/time-alarm-clocks-4/0001.gif

OrovilleTim
08-11-2012, 11:18 AM
The City of Chico has acknowledged my PRAR. Start the clock.

-Brandon

Nice! :punk:

cmichini
08-11-2012, 1:34 PM
The following story mentions an arrest for "possession of high capacity magazines": http://www.newsreview.com/chico/more-gun-news/content?oid=7086237



Seems like someone needs a little bit of an education.

I hope the others laughed right in his face, accompanied with a 'Bless your heart', which I've learned means southern for 'poor ignorant fool'.

FalconLair
08-11-2012, 2:19 PM
If you are illegally carrying a gun that is not registered to you, you may have a hard time explaining how you bought magazines for a gun back in 1999.

If you were say 20 in 2000, today you would be 32.

If you are say 22, do you think you can get the judge to believe you bought the hi cap magazines in 2000 when you were 12.

Sounds like Glock mags, a smart DA would just ask someone how much they paid, unless you payed attention, the going price for Glock pre bans was around 100 dollars each and the 30 rounds were even higher.

I would expect the DA to go for the max.

NickiNicki the burden or proof is on the DA to prove you took possession after 2000, the defendant doesnt have to explain anything, either way there would be no way of knowing how old you were when you got the magazine, I dont think there is an age limit for having one

A father could very well have given his son a gun magazine at birth and who could prove it didnt happen? I believe that is how it works, unless someone can show me where I'm wrong???? In essense, the DA would have to PROVE that magazine was manufactured after 2000, the only 100% sure way to show you took possession after that date. A smart defendant doesnt have to say anything :D

hornswaggled
08-11-2012, 2:25 PM
Police: "We found these magazines on the suspect."
DA: "Any proof he bought them after the ban?"
Police: "Um..."
DA: "Thanks for nothing. No case."