PDA

View Full Version : Pre-ban extended mags


DoubleCab
11-27-2012, 1:53 PM
Am I ok to use +10 mags on a range if the mags were in my possession prior to the ban? Do I have to be able to prove it?

keenkeen
11-27-2012, 1:56 PM
Nope...they have to prove otherwise if they want to convict you...

But your range may have rules against them...ask.

DoubleCab
11-27-2012, 1:57 PM
SORRY...I just looked up and saw the "MAGAZINES...all you need to know" sticky. Doh!

JeremyS
11-27-2012, 2:17 PM
Yeah, and it has nothing to do with any ban or when you got them or anything. There's nothing in the law preventing ownership or use. The things that are illegal are importing, manufacturing (which includes assembling one from parts), selling, loaning... So IF you were ever questioned about it you should say nothing more than "I own these legally" and otherwise keep your mush shut. If the state decided to prosecute, they would have to prove that you did one of those illegal activities. Even with a brand new gun that didn't exist and mags that fit it didn't exist until well after the ban (say, a gun just came out last month with proprietary 18-round mags), you are legally okay owning and using those "hi-cap" mags as long as you had nothing to do with the banned activities being broken. Maybe you found it in the woods or whatever.

SA227driver
11-27-2012, 2:20 PM
SORRY...I just looked up and saw the "MAGAZINES...all you need to know" sticky. Doh!

No worries...welcome to Calguns!!! :D

Oceanbob
11-27-2012, 3:05 PM
Am I ok to use +10 mags on a range if the mags were in my possession prior to the ban? Do I have to be able to prove it?

Hey, Welcome to Cal Guns..!!

Plenty of good people and good conversation here. :D

No one is going to ask you. Never do. If someone did ask the only answer is:

"I own these"

Nothing else.

Falstaff
11-27-2012, 3:22 PM
Not arguing with any of the above posts, but people are being arrested Very frequently for PC 32310. As stated above, 32310 does not criminalize possession or use but the police don't care, they will arrest for mere possession.
However, because the people getting arrested are unsavory characters and usually breaking other laws (causing the LEO contact) Calguns doesn't care. In fact, the Calguns position seems to be, if you're an "unsavory" character, ( read between the lines) and charged with other crimes then you deserve the 32310 charge even though you havent technically broken that law...

If you're a " savory" character, and you're not being contacted for other reasons, it's unlikely extendomatics will get you in trouble. ( especially if you're capable of shutting your mouth when talking to police).

keenkeen
11-27-2012, 3:27 PM
Not to argue with the post above...but I would dispute that "people are being arrested Very frequently for PC 32310".

I guess it depends on the definition of "very frequently"...but in general it seems "very rare" to me.

Librarian
11-27-2012, 3:31 PM
Not arguing with any of the above posts, but people are being arrested Very frequently for PC 32310. As stated above, 32310 does not criminalize possession or use but the police don't care, they will arrest for mere possession.

However, because the people getting arrested are unsavory characters and usually breaking other laws (causing the LEO contact) Calguns doesn't care. In fact, the Calguns position seems to be, if you're an "unsavory" character, ( read between the lines) and charged with other crimes then you deserve the 32310 charge even though you havent technically broken that law...

If you're a " savory" character, and you're not being contacted for other reasons, it's unlikely extendomatics will get you in trouble. ( especially if you're capable of shutting your mouth when talking to police).

I think that's a misrepresentation.

Since possession is not illegal for the non-felon, there is nothing to deserve or not deserve with 32310. Police should not be arresting those folks for possession - possession is not illegal. Those officers need retraining.

But if one is a felon or other prohibited person, it's STILL not right to charge 32310 - it's 30305.

Your last paragraph is key.

Falstaff
11-27-2012, 4:45 PM
I stand by the last paragraph, but I should have finished it. The balance should read:
Although its unlikely, it should be pointed out to the OP that there is a risk of being charged for PC 32310 by poorly "trained" police. I have scores of magazines I acquired before 2000, I regularly take them to the range, to national forest areas etc. I know the law, and I can afford the "ride" if it comes to that, but the fact remains, no matter how much we prattle on here about the text of 32310, most police think 32310 bans possession. Be prudent.

JeremyS
11-27-2012, 5:23 PM
I understand why it can be a scary thing to skirt legality, if you feel like you are, but I have never actually seen any evidence that anyone has been arrested only for having/using a "hi-cap" magazine. I have seen court cases where the charge was added to other charges; those other charges being the actual reason the person was arrested, then the hi-cap mag charge was added to it in order to create more bargaining room or a better case for the prosecution and/or to up a misdemeanor charge to something more serious by tacking on additional charges.

Certainly, I would LOVE to see a court case where somebody was charged on only 32310 (somebody without a record who wasn't involved in an illegal or sketchy activity at the time). I haven't even heard of an arrest for this and only this, on here or anywhere else. We all know many people who openly use "hi-capacity" magazines at ranges, during competitions, etc, including many instances with police presence and I have never even heard of anyone being hassled except by other citizens at the range who are curious.

I would not argue that the possibility DOES exist that you could be arrested by an officer who thinks you have done something illegal. I do not think you would actually be charged and ever see a court room. Not if you kept your big mouth shut and didn't incriminate yourself accidently.

mxadam579
11-27-2012, 5:33 PM
can he use those mags in a ar or ak without a bullet button

RANGER295
11-27-2012, 7:15 PM
This topic has been beat do death more times than my first gen Cummins has miles on it. There are plenty of threads that are easy to find that cover this topic.