PDA

View Full Version : Gray area on rebuild kits?


SDmtnbkr
03-30-2013, 9:20 PM
This argument started in another section so I've been asked to redirect my question to this section.

Scenario:

A person owns several AR-15's but not one single magazine. He purchases 10 "rebuild kits". The day they arrive he gets arrested for a tip off that he's going to do something really bad (from a nosy idiot liberal neighbor that saw him cleaning his guns in his garage) and in turn his house gets searched. They find said rifles, ammo and the unopened package with parts to build 10 mags. He has NO other mags, or mag blocks, that he could be using the parts to "rebuild" or build 10 rounders. Maybe he was going to make them 10 rounders but never got around to ordering the blocks.

Is it 100% that this person has no issue and has not even the slightest chance or being found of constructive intent (not a layer, so have no idea... but charged with something) to manufacture hi-cap mags?

...so basically this person should just lean back in the chair with not a care in the world because rebuild kits are 100% legal to order.



ETA: the question isn't meant to completely analyze the scenario, I just used this scenario as a basis for the question if it was possible in any scenario, crazy or not, that someone could get charged with something illegal in regards to rebuild kits. This wasn't meant to stir anything up just to prove a point.

I'm sure some legal people could dream up a much better one in which the person would be in serious danger of being convicted of something illegal. This was just the best I could think of in my head.

NotEnufGarage
03-30-2013, 9:23 PM
I don't think you can be charged with breaking a law you haven't broken yet, even in California.

Constructive intent? What is that?

nothinghere2c
03-30-2013, 9:36 PM
still kits. not illegal (yet. we'll see after the bills that are being shoved through).

buy some mag blocks, convert one of them into a 10/30 and call it a good day.

SDmtnbkr
03-30-2013, 9:50 PM
I don't think you can be charged with breaking a law you haven't broken yet, even in California.

Constructive intent? What is that?

I'm clearly no layer.... but I was referring to the same thing you can be charged with if you have a completed lower with butt stock in the same case as a pistol upper.

still kits. not illegal (yet. we'll see after the bills that are being shoved through).

buy some mag blocks, convert one of them into a 10/30 and call it a good day.

The point wasn't to find a way to make it ok, the question was asked because in my head, there I could see some judge ruling it as the same way an SBR can be ruled if a pistol upper is stored next to a normal lower. I'm trying to find out if I'm wrong.... if this scenerio was real life and this person was going to court, would he have absolutely 100% nothing to worry about.

Intimid8tor
03-30-2013, 9:55 PM
He's talking about constructive possession similar to federal law.

My understanding is that CA law doesn't contain a constructive possession clause therefore no constructive possession can happen.

That doesn't mean a DA won't charge you for the crime you didn't commit though.

ArmedCMT
03-30-2013, 9:58 PM
This argument started in another section so I've been asked to redirect my question to this section.

Scenario:

A person owns several AR-15's but not one single magazine. He purchases 10 "rebuild kits". The day they arrive he gets arrested for a tip off that he's going to do something really bad (from a nosy idiot liberal neighbor that saw him cleaning his guns in his garage) and in turn his house gets searched. They find said rifles, ammo and the unopened package with parts to build 10 mags. He has NO other mags, or mag blocks, that he could be using the parts to "rebuild" or build 10 rounders. Maybe he was going to make them 10 rounders but never got around to ordering the blocks.

Is it 100% that this person has no issue and has not even the slightest chance or being found of constructive intent (not a layer, so have no idea... but charged with something) to manufacture hi-cap mags?

...so basically this person should just lean back in the chair with not a care in the world because rebuild kits are 100% legal to order.

I'm clearly no layer.... but I was referring to the same thing you can be charged with if you have a completed lower with butt stock in the same case as a pistol upper.



The point wasn't to find a way to make it ok, the question was asked because in my head, there I could see some judge ruling it as the same way an SBR can be ruled if a pistol upper is stored next to a normal lower. I'm trying to find out if I'm wrong.... if this scenerio was real life and this person was going to court, would he have absolutely 100% nothing to worry about.

I think complete lowers and pistol uppers is different than mag rebuild kits. As long as his AR was compliant i see it as he has a 100% legal firearm and no magazines for it, just parts.

Librarian
03-30-2013, 10:00 PM
Until recently, 'constructive possession' in CA law had been quite limited, and does not yet include 'magazine parts kits'. A recent court case seems to have allowed the judge to create such a condition for manufacturing an 'assault weapon'.

So, your original question Is it 100% that this person has no issue and has not even the slightest chance or being found of constructive intent (not a layer, so have no idea... but charged with something) to manufacture hi-cap mags? must be answered 'no' - it is possible a fact pattern and particular case analysis might create c-p for magazines via parts kits.

It doesn't seem likely, but it didn't seem likely for that earlier case, either ...

ArmedCMT
03-30-2013, 10:04 PM
^^^ ya, what that guy said.:King: lol

SDmtnbkr
03-30-2013, 10:14 PM
Until recently, 'constructive possession' in CA law had been quite limited, and does not yet include 'magazine parts kits'. A recent court case seems to have allowed the judge to create such a condition for manufacturing an 'assault weapon'.

So, your original question must be answered 'no' - it is possible a fact pattern and particular case analysis might create c-p for magazines via parts kits.

It doesn't seem likely, but it didn't seem likely for that earlier case, either ...

This is basically the point I've been trying to make, but you clearly said it much better. Thanks for your insight.

003
03-30-2013, 10:25 PM
“A person owns several AR-15's but not one single magazine. He purchases 10 "rebuild kits". The day they arrive he gets arrested for a tip off that he's going to do something really bad (from a nosy idiot liberal neighbor that saw him cleaning his guns in his garage) and in turn his house gets searched. They find said rifles, ammo and the unopened package with parts to build 10 mags. He has NO other mags, or mag blocks, that he could be using the parts to "rebuild" or build 10 rounders. Maybe he was going to make them 10 rounders but never got around to ordering the blocks.”

Unless the person in question opens his mouth, how can it be proved that he knew what was in the unopened package?

SDmtnbkr
03-30-2013, 10:29 PM
“A person owns several AR-15's but not one single magazine. He purchases 10 "rebuild kits". The day they arrive he gets arrested for a tip off that he's going to do something really bad (from a nosy idiot liberal neighbor that saw him cleaning his guns in his garage) and in turn his house gets searched. They find said rifles, ammo and the unopened package with parts to build 10 mags. He has NO other mags, or mag blocks, that he could be using the parts to "rebuild" or build 10 rounders. Maybe he was going to make them 10 rounders but never got around to ordering the blocks.”

Unless the person in question opens his mouth, how can it be proved that he knew what was in the unopened package?

What I was trying to illustrate was that they weren't parts from his old magazines laying around. He clearly ordered the rebuild kits and has no mags to rebuild him self.

Sorry I didn't mean to focus so much on any single part of the scenario, the whole point I was trying to address is that there is some kind of gray area even if it's the slightest tiniest unlikeliest little bit. You could change it any way you'd like to make it more or less likely.

MadMax
03-30-2013, 10:30 PM
I don't know why you are so hell bent on proving that rebuild kits are a grey area.

They could also arrest you for having a properly configured rifle and you could get in real trouble for it but there is about as much chance of that happening as your "scenario" that you thought of happening.

Is it possible yes grey area no.

IVC
03-30-2013, 10:34 PM
Until recently, 'constructive possession' in CA law had been quite limited, and does not yet include 'magazine parts kits'. A recent court case seems to have allowed the judge to create such a condition for manufacturing an 'assault weapon'.

That case had a lot of "color" and (if I'm not mistaken) the defendant admitted he was going to put it all together.

Either way, we are talking about uncharted waters.

mshill
03-30-2013, 10:42 PM
Two things here...

The case that the Librarian references was a felon that had the parts to build a non-compliant rifle without any compliance parts and was convicted of essentially constructive possession.

Your scenario did not specify 1) whether the person in question was a prohibited person, or 2) whether the ARs are compliant (featureless or BB).

If the person is not a prohibited person and the rifles are compliant then there is a good chance that the persons intent was to comply with the law and block the mags or never use them. The DA would have to demonstrate unlawful intent which would be difficult since the rifles are compliant. If indeed his intent was evil the rifles would not have BBs on them.

This can all be debated, but like someone else said, the DA could make the charge and let the court sort it all out. I certainly can't afford that fight.

SDmtnbkr
03-30-2013, 10:52 PM
I don't know why you are so hell bent on proving that rebuild kits are a grey area.

They could also arrest you for having a properly configured rifle and you could get in real trouble for it but there is about as much chance of that happening as your "scenario" that you thought of happening.

Is it possible yes grey area no.

Two things here...

The case that the Librarian references was a felon that had the parts to build a non-compliant rifle without any compliance parts and was convicted of essentially constructive possession.

Your scenario did not specify 1) whether the person in question was a prohibited person, or 2) whether the ARs are compliant (featureless or BB).

If the person is not a prohibited person and the rifles are compliant then there is a good chance that the persons intent was to comply with the law and block the mags or never use them. The DA would have to demonstrate unlawful intent which would be difficult since the rifles are compliant. If indeed his intent was evil the rifles would not have BBs on them.

This can all be debated, but like someone else said, the DA could make the charge and let the court sort it all out. I certainly can't afford that fight.

Not hell bent on the Gray area I guess... my point was just that we do not fully know until it plays out in court. And like mshill wrote... I wouldn't want to be in that fight.

I just think it's ubsurd to think that there is no way possible, in any scenario, crazy or not, that a negative situation could play out in the court room. Things like this happen for other types of offenses all the time. Obviously it would have to be one of those 1-in a million situations, but the fact still remains, that that 1 is still "possibly" out there, we just don't know. That's all, didn't mean to stir anything up. Courts are scary places and I have no place in them.

snobord99
03-30-2013, 10:54 PM
“A person owns several AR-15's but not one single magazine. He purchases 10 "rebuild kits". The day they arrive he gets arrested for a tip off that he's going to do something really bad (from a nosy idiot liberal neighbor that saw him cleaning his guns in his garage) and in turn his house gets searched. They find said rifles, ammo and the unopened package with parts to build 10 mags. He has NO other mags, or mag blocks, that he could be using the parts to "rebuild" or build 10 rounders. Maybe he was going to make them 10 rounders but never got around to ordering the blocks.”

Unless the person in question opens his mouth, how can it be proved that he knew what was in the unopened package?

That's pretty easy. Just prove he ordered it. Sure, he may not KNOW what's in the box, but there's such a thing as "should have known" which is often enough to prove knowledge.

snobord99
03-30-2013, 11:04 PM
Until recently, 'constructive possession' in CA law had been quite limited, and does not yet include 'magazine parts kits'. A recent court case seems to have allowed the judge to create such a condition for manufacturing an 'assault weapon'.

So, your original question must be answered 'no' - it is possible a fact pattern and particular case analysis might create c-p for magazines via parts kits.

It doesn't seem likely, but it didn't seem likely for that earlier case, either ...

I wouldn't rule out the possibility of an attempt charge. Remember, he's talking about a person with no mag blocks and no mags to actually rebuild. I'm assuming OP is talking about 30-round rebuild kits.

RonnieP
03-30-2013, 11:19 PM
@OP

First thing first, did the gun owner in your scenario asked the cops if they had a Warrant?

Sir Stunna Lot
03-30-2013, 11:29 PM
Question:
Can you have enough spare parts to assemble a new hi-cap magazine provided they are unassembled and intended for use as replacement parts?

Cali DOJ:
Whether the scenario you describe constitute possession of magazine parts with the intent to manufacture or with the intent to repair a large capacity magazine depends upon legal opinion of the prosecutor in the jurisdiction where the acts occur. You could be charged with a felony PC12280a2 if a prosecutor believed that you were manufacturing a large capacity magazine.

without any other legal high cap magazine to rebuild, it'll be difficult to argue against a charge of "intent to manufacture" since there's nothing to "repair".

http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/DOJ-large-cap-magazines-2005-11-10.pdf

sreiter
03-31-2013, 12:51 AM
Until recently, 'constructive possession' in CA law had been quite limited, and does not yet include 'magazine parts kits'. A recent court case seems to have allowed the judge to create such a condition for manufacturing an 'assault weapon'.

So, your original question must be answered 'no' - it is possible a fact pattern and particular case analysis might create c-p for magazines via parts kits.

It doesn't seem likely, but it didn't seem likely for that earlier case, either ...

can i ask what you're basing the "it isnt quite illegal yet" position?

The Allison letter specifically says even disassembled mags are illegal when imported UNLESS you already have a mag and are using the parts specifically for rebuild.

eville
03-31-2013, 8:29 AM
Keep the garage door down. No need for the neighbors to see the guns. Regardless of their political beliefs.

sevendayweekend
03-31-2013, 8:36 AM
i would imagine the owner of the rebuild kits uses them for his out of state shooting trips

bbgughj
03-31-2013, 8:47 AM
Yeah , This person should clean his weapons behind closed doors ........If your playing with your weapons for the whole neighbor hood to see, you probably deserve a visit from LEO .

CSACANNONEER
03-31-2013, 8:48 AM
Why would he need to order blocks to make them 10 round mags? The simple fact is that they could be made into legal 10 round mags without ordering anything else if he has some very basic tools.

colossians323
03-31-2013, 8:49 AM
I don't think you can be charged with breaking a law you haven't broken yet, even in California.

Constructive intent? What is that?

Exactly

CSACANNONEER
03-31-2013, 8:51 AM
Yeah , This person should clean his weapons behind closed doors ........If your playing with your weapons for the whole neighbor hood to see, you probably deserve a visit from LEO .

BS. If you're not doing anything illegal, why would you deserve a visit from your local LEA? It's your type of thinking that has helped to turn this state into what it is.

dieselpower
03-31-2013, 9:02 AM
I don't know what everyone else said, since what they said isnt going to alter what I am about to explain to you...
'
Yes, a DA can and probably will charge with manufacturing a LCM. It would be up to a Judge to decide if the charge moves forward to be heard by a Jury...and more then likely a Judge will allow that, so the Jury would determine your fate.

Please keep in mind the law is not decided by a computer program or a sheet with boxes to check off. In a very recent well published case ; The Judge, the Defense Lawyer and the Prosecuting Attorney all agreed the Defendant would serve a sentence in a Jail that didn't even exist in the whole of the US.

Bill Weise has said this 1,000 times here... "they can arrest you for eating a Ham sandwich if they want." Now I say based on that, If the Judge and DA are vegetarians, you will be charged with a crime. You better hope someone on the Jury likes Ham sandwiches.

dieselpower
03-31-2013, 9:05 AM
BS. If you're not doing anything illegal, why would you deserve a visit from your local LEA? It's your type of thinking that has helped to turn this state into what it is.

fairly easy nowadays to spot the anti-2nd A guys here...LOL :facepalm:

smittty
03-31-2013, 9:05 AM
Keep the garage door down. No need for the neighbors to see the guns. Regardless of their political beliefs.


That's is the first thing that came to mind...shut the door! And flashing the gun around increases your chances of getting robbed. Why would you do this?

MadMax
03-31-2013, 9:10 AM
Not hell bent on the Gray area I guess... my point was just that we do not fully know until it plays out in court. And like mshill wrote... I wouldn't want to be in that fight.

I just think it's ubsurd to think that there is no way possible, in any scenario, crazy or not, that a negative situation could play out in the court room. Things like this happen for other types of offenses all the time. Obviously it would have to be one of those 1-in a million situations, but the fact still remains, that that 1 is still "possibly" out there, we just don't know. That's all, didn't mean to stir anything up. Courts are scary places and I have no place in them.

There is a possibility you could get in trouble for all kinds of things that are perfectly legal, there is no sense in dwelling on it or you may as well not do anything.

Rebuild kits at this point in time are legal end of story.

offdeez
03-31-2013, 9:18 AM
Maybe we should separate parts, wouldn't want anyone frustrated over a bad raid, snapping a floor plate on. Never thought of this till now???

offdeez
03-31-2013, 9:19 AM
Separate as in incomplete rebuild kits in one home??

1981
03-31-2013, 9:34 AM
if CA anti-human rights terrorists are successful with passing AB48 as written today, rebuilt kits will be history...

This bill would make it a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not
more than $1,000 or imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed 6
months, or by both that fine and imprisonment, to knowingly
manufacture, import, keep for sale, offer or expose for sale, or give
or lend any device that is capable of converting an ammunition
feeding device into a large-capacity magazine.

The bill would revise the definition of "large-capacity magazine" to mean any ammunition
feeding device with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds, including a readily restorable, as defined, disassembled
large-capacity magazine, and an oversize magazine body that appears to hold in excess of 10 rounds.

dieselpower
03-31-2013, 9:40 AM
if CA anti-human rights terrorists are successful with passing AB48 as written today, rebuilt kits will be history...

This bill would make it a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not
more than $1,000 or imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed 6
months, or by both that fine and imprisonment, to knowingly
manufacture, import, keep for sale, offer or expose for sale, or give
or lend any device that is capable of converting an ammunition
feeding device into a large-capacity magazine.

that law is impossible to comply with..it makes a screwdriver illegal in CA.

1981
03-31-2013, 9:55 AM
that law is impossible to comply with..it makes a screwdriver illegal in CA.

that's not going to stop them from trying...

retiredAFcop
03-31-2013, 10:44 AM
Yeah , This person should clean his weapons behind closed doors ........If your playing with your weapons for the whole neighbor hood to see, you probably deserve a visit from LEO .

When we cower and hide while exercising our rights, we make it easy for others to believe that "normal people" do not own guns.

Creating an atmosphere of fear around legally and safely exercising your rights is part of what Holder calls "shaming" gun owners.


Let's look at one of the most successful campaigns for changing public perception in America in recent years. Gay rights advocates have been very successful at changing public perception of same-sex marriage by ensuring that most people come into contact (either personally or on TV, movies, etc.) with positive examples of gay people and same-sex couples. The more people saw individual gay people and gay couples as "normal" and non-threatening, the more of them changed their attitudes about gay marriage. In about a decade, popular support for gay marriage bans has turned almost 180 degrees into support for gay marriages. This would never have happened if gay people had to hide their orientation and relationships.

When people assume that gun owners are strange and different people - using "rednecks", "hillbillies", "hicks form the sticks", or other stereotypes to portray gun owners as ignorant, backwards people clinging fearfully to their guns - they are more supportive of restrictions on the 2A. When people know that gun owners are "normal" people, who they work alongside, go to church with, socialize with, and otherwise like, they are more supportive of the 2A rights of those friendly, "normal", safe people that they know.

snobord99
03-31-2013, 10:51 AM
That's is the first thing that came to mind...shut the door! And flashing the gun around increases your chances of getting robbed. Why would you do this?

Is it safe to assume you believe Gun Free Zone signs actually prevent crime?

Drew Eckhardt
03-31-2013, 10:57 AM
I'm clearly no layer.... but I was referring to the same thing you can be charged with if you have a completed lower with butt stock in the same case as a pistol upper.


No.

Constructive possession is only illegal when there are laws specifically prohibiting it as with machine guns at the federal level


26 USC § 5845(b) Machinegun
The term “machinegun” means
...
and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.


and short barreled rifles in California


PC 17170 As used in Sections 16530 and 16640, Sections 17720 to 17730, inclusive, Section 17740, Article 1 (commencing with Section 27500) of Chapter 4 of Division 6 of Title 4, and Article 1 (commencing with Section 33210) of Chapter 8 of Division 10 of Title 4, "short-barreled rifle" means any of
the following:
...
or any combination of parts from which a device defined in subdivisions (a) to (c), inclusive, may be readily assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person.


Such a law does not (yet) exist for magazines.

RRangel
03-31-2013, 11:04 AM
can i ask what you're basing the "it isnt quite illegal yet" position?

The Allison letter specifically says even disassembled mags are illegal when imported UNLESS you already have a mag and are using the parts specifically for rebuild.

Do you own any off list lowers? There are millions of them in California. Why would magazine parts be construed to constitute a whole magazine if possessing parts for an "assault weapon" are not?

chip3757
03-31-2013, 1:23 PM
can i ask what you're basing the "it isnt quite illegal yet" position?

The Allison letter specifically says even disassembled mags are illegal when imported UNLESS you already have a mag and are using the parts specifically for rebuild.

I feel, the only way her statement would be valid is if you could be convicted of thinking about building an illegal magazine. And even then a crime has not been committed until you physically put that illegal mag together. IANAL...

kaligaran
03-31-2013, 1:35 PM
Yeah , This person should clean his weapons behind closed doors ........If your playing with your weapons for the whole neighbor hood to see, you probably deserve a visit from LEO .

Cleaning a weapon is now considered playing with it?

I guess if I mop my kitchen floor I'm playing with the tiles?

/fail

IVC
03-31-2013, 1:45 PM
I guess if I mop my kitchen floor I'm playing with the tiles?

No, you're being a good wife. Said a Misogynist. :).

CSACANNONEER
03-31-2013, 2:58 PM
Cleaning a weapon is now considered playing with it?

I guess if I mop my kitchen floor I'm playing with the tiles?

/fail

You can play with my tiles anytime you want to! OK, I have an old linolium floor in the kitchen but, you're still welcome to come up and mop it!

morfeeis
03-31-2013, 3:55 PM
This can all be debated, but like someone else said, the DA could make the charge and let the court sort it all out. I certainly can't afford that fight.

The biggest point i take from this thread is ion bold. close your garage doors.

bbgughj
03-31-2013, 5:18 PM
Common sense will take you a long ways in life !

Is it okay to watch Porn in my garage with the doors wide open , TV full blasted?

Peter.Steele
03-31-2013, 5:42 PM
Common sense will take you a long ways in life !

Is it okay to watch Porn in my garage with the doors wide open , TV full blasted?




I think so. After all, we want to start spreading the message that porn isn't just for weirdos, it's for normal, everyday, upstanding citizens. What better way to do that than to get your neighbors accustomed to seeing you enjoying it frequently and in public view?

zoid52
03-31-2013, 5:52 PM
I think so. After all, we want to start spreading the message that porn isn't just for weirdos, it's for normal, everyday, upstanding citizens. What better way to do that than to get your neighbors accustomed to seeing you enjoying it frequently and in public view?

Yea, just about everthing is GTG in Ca!

Southbay
03-31-2013, 6:41 PM
Yeah , This person should clean his weapons behind closed doors ........If your playing with your weapons for the whole neighbor hood to see, you probably deserve a visit from LEO .

So you are saying if I am seen cleaning my guns in my garage I deserve a visit from the police, you sound like and anti,

bbgughj
03-31-2013, 8:53 PM
BS. If you're not doing anything illegal, why would you deserve a visit from your local LEA? It's your type of thinking that has helped to turn this state into what it is.

So you are saying if I am seen cleaning my guns in my garage I deserve a visit from the police, you sound like and anti,


:facepalm:
What you do behind closed doors is your business !
No , I am not anti gun , Just hate stupid people ....

hellayella
03-31-2013, 9:09 PM
why on earth would u be cleaning all your guns in front of nosy neighbors in beyond my comprehension, do u realize where we live and what site this is? CALGUNS...(ring a bell?)

Press Check
03-31-2013, 9:45 PM
So, if AB-48 is passed, what happens to all of the existing 30rd rebuild kits?

1981
03-31-2013, 10:26 PM
So, if AB-48 is passed, what happens to all of the existing 30rd rebuild kits?

this is what those anti-human rights terrorists want to do:

SEC. 6. Section 32390 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
32390. (a) 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, and in subdivision (b), any
large-capacity magazine is a nuisance and is subject to Section
18010.
(b) Subdivision (a) does not apply to the possession of a readily
restorable disassembled large-capacity magazine or an oversize
magazine body that has been permanently altered so that the magazine
cannot accommodate more than 10 rounds by a person who lawfully
possessed the magazine prior to January 1, 2014.

RonnieP
04-01-2013, 12:46 AM
Common sense will take you a long ways in life !

Is it okay to watch Porn in my garage with the doors wide open , TV full blasted?

You know it's perfectly legal to watch porn at a public library. Yep, your tax dollars are paying for computers so that people can view porn. Isn't America great?

SDmtnbkr
04-01-2013, 1:30 AM
You all are just proving the point i was trying to make in another thread.... that there is no black and white. The scenario i created was obviously ridiculous.

The "point" I was arguing was that another individual was hell bent on telling me that in NO POSSIBLE WAY in ANY circumstance could anyone ever have even a thought of getting in trouble.

To which my point was simply... until someone gets hauled up in front of a judge you have no idea what can happen or how the court could rule. Obviously it would have to be a 1-million situation, but to say that there is 100% absolutely no chance ever in this universe just because it's never happened before (his point) is just, IMHO, ignorant. Especially in this state.

morfeeis
04-01-2013, 2:32 AM
blah blah blah you can do it with the garage open
well that's a different story. I wouldn't clean my guns in my garage with the door open so i don't end up having to shoot someone later. I have sex with my wife too, but you don't see me putting that on display in my garage (with the door open:50::50:).

MadMax
04-01-2013, 7:04 AM
You all are just proving the point i was trying to make in another thread.... that there is no black and white. The scenario i created was obviously ridiculous.

The "point" I was arguing was that another individual was hell bent on telling me that in NO POSSIBLE WAY in ANY circumstance could anyone ever have even a thought of getting in trouble.

To which my point was simply... until someone gets hauled up in front of a judge you have no idea what can happen or how the court could rule. Obviously it would have to be a 1-million situation, but to say that there is 100% absolutely no chance ever in this universe just because it's never happened before (his point) is just, IMHO, ignorant. Especially in this state.

Your point has no point, you could say that about anything so why dwell on it

ap3572001
04-01-2013, 7:20 AM
I have to jump in on this one:) LOL

How about this...

A person who NEVER owned a Beretta 92FS and a Ruger MIni 14 , buys both of them at His LGS and in ten days , at the range He is using std. capacity magazines in both . (Older ones , from the 80's and 90's).

How is He gona get in trouble?



IMHO , the whole magazine/rebuild kit topic is getting really old.....

sreiter
04-10-2013, 5:08 PM
Do you own any off list lowers? There are millions of them in California. Why would magazine parts be construed to constitute a whole magazine if possessing parts for an "assault weapon" are not?

Because the lower can be made into several different legal configurations...because we have regulations defining detachable magazines..
We have several DOJ letters say OLL's are legal. How many things fell in place until we got to a place where we're sure OLL's a legal?


None of that exists for 30 round mag parts. What we have is a DOJ letter saying if you import a 30 round mag, even in pieces, its a violation of the law

gh429
04-10-2013, 5:12 PM
You guys are on an EXTREMELY gray area for high cap mags. If you're not 30 you shouldn't have high cap mag parts. You guys want to own them, fine but you are playing with fire. I personally know DAs that would certainly charge you with high caps if you got arrested for other charges (assuming they know their way around firearm laws, actually most DAs I know don't haha). Even most FFLs won't transfer parts kits, that should tell you something.

kaligaran
04-10-2013, 5:18 PM
No, you're being a good wife. Said a Misogynist. :).

You can play with my tiles anytime you want to! OK, I have an old linolium floor in the kitchen but, you're still welcome to come up and mop it!

Wow how did I miss these responses!
Touché!
:D


You guys are on an EXTREMELY gray area for high cap mags. If you're not 30 you shouldn't have high cap mag parts. You guys want to own them, fine but you are playing with fire. I personally know DAs that would certainly charge you with high caps if you got arrested for other charges (assuming they know their way around firearm laws, actually most DAs I know don't haha). Even most FFLs won't transfer parts kits, that should tell you something.

This is incorrect from a legal standpoint. Whether you think it's a good idea or not, there's no law against having magazine parts (YET).

People have been arrested for lots of things that aren't actually illegal (bullet buttoned rifle is a good example) because the cop or whomever doesn't know the laws. Are you going to suggest having a bullet buttoned rifle is also a bad idea or playing with fire?

Most FFLs don't want to deal with keeping up with the ever changing CA laws and honestly, who can blame them. /shrug
Anyhow, it's perfectly legal to own parts from a standard capacity magazine at this time.

soopafly
04-10-2013, 6:31 PM
None of that exists for 30 round mag parts. What we have is a DOJ letter saying if you import a 30 round mag, even in pieces, its a violation of the law
Ummm...no
LETTER FROM THE CA DOJ
the complete letter is here:
http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/DOJ-large-cap-magazines-2005-11-10.pdf
http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/DOJ-large-cap-magazines-2005-11-10.pdf

bwiese
04-10-2013, 6:46 PM
Given what happened in the Nguyen 'intent' case in AWs, there is some worry that this could happen to mag parts.

Remember intent is fairly different than constructive possession.

And buying labelled mag parts kits from CA FFL may offer some protection.

But several things to note that similarly apply to avoid Nguyen-like outcomes:
- don't be a FELON;
- like gun parts kits, mag parts kits can have legit destiantions (10/30s etc);
- you should be able to articulate this at time of conflict;
- I'd recommend possessing blocking devices & epoxy to show intent to comply;

sreiter
04-11-2013, 5:52 PM
Ummm...no
LETTER FROM THE CA DOJ
the complete letter is here:
http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/DOJ-large-cap-magazines-2005-11-10.pdf
http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/DOJ-large-cap-magazines-2005-11-10.pdf

Umm yeah, Q4. and A4.

goober
04-11-2013, 6:23 PM
Ummm...no
LETTER FROM THE CA DOJ
the complete letter is here:
http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/DOJ-large-cap-magazines-2005-11-10.pdf
http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/DOJ-large-cap-magazines-2005-11-10.pdf

we've discussed at length the lameness that is the "there are 58 counties in California and we're leaving it up to each of them to interpret the law as they see fit, since we refuse to explicitly spell out what is legal and what is not."

but beyond that...
isn't it great the way that ms. merilees repeatedly makes statements like


Whether the scenario you describe constitutes <insert crime here> depends upon the legal opinion of the prosecutor in the jurisdiction where the acts occur.

when it would be MUCH more appropriate to say:

Whether the scenario you describe is grounds for arrest or charges to be filed for <insert crime here> depends upon the legal opinion of the prosecutor in the jurisdiction where the acts occur.

The prosecutor doesn't get to decide whether you've committed a crime or not. That's what a trial is for. The prosecutor gets to decide whether they think you've committed a crime; but until they convince a judge and/or jury of that, you've committed no crime.
just extra lame sauce i guess. :rolleyes:

tonelar
04-11-2013, 8:12 PM
OP fails to mention that mag repair kits can also be used to make legal 10rnd magazines (often times for cheaper than buying 10rnd magazines).

Raystonn
04-11-2013, 9:01 PM
__________The Golden Rule of Congressional Safety_________
"ALL BILLS ARE ALWAYS LOADED." -Me