PDA

View Full Version : Is it legal to photograph a rifle with a 30 rd mag body inserted?


SilverK20A3
12-01-2013, 9:59 AM
Hey all. Would this be legal in CA? Photographing a rifle with 30 rd mag body sourced from a rebuild kit inserted? No follower, no spring. Maybe add just the floor plate to make it look complete. Thanks!

billofrights
12-01-2013, 10:00 AM
Without a spring or follower it's not a complete magazine, so snap away.

Drair
12-01-2013, 10:06 AM
Sure just don't forget the bullet button lol

vintagearms
12-01-2013, 10:20 AM
Hey all. Would this be legal in CA? Photographing a rifle with 30 rd mag body sourced from a rebuild kit inserted? No follower, no spring. Maybe add just the floor plate to make it look complete. Thanks!

This has been covered before. Not legal. Please do not take the advice about adding a BB and inserting an over 10+ mag!

Rickrock1
12-01-2013, 10:31 AM
Don't do the crime if you don't have the time.

NastyNate
12-01-2013, 10:57 AM
Why not just use a 10/30?

NastyNate

4DMASTR
12-01-2013, 10:58 AM
Agreed, use a 10/30

ifilef
12-01-2013, 11:13 AM
One is dealing with 1st Amendment issues when one photographs.

In direct response to the inquiry, I am not aware of any problems merely photographing much of anything, including a post-ban fully assembled 30-rd large capacity magazine. Photographing does not make it a crime, unless it's perhaps child pornography, snuff killings, etc., and that's another set of issues extremely fact-dependent.

The fellow who fully assembles the magazine, that is another issue not addressed by the question. We all know that is a 'no-no' unless it's pre-ban.

My understanding is that it's not a large capacity magazine if it's missing a crucial part rendering it inoperable or it's say, a 10/30, or magazine rebuild kit (at least until the end of the year).

junior40er
12-01-2013, 11:24 AM
lol no....it could be a magblocked mag for all everyone knows.

MrTokarev
12-01-2013, 12:03 PM
One is dealing with 1st Amendment issues when one photographs.

In direct response to the inquiry, I am not aware of any problems merely photographing much of anything, including a post-ban fully assembled 30-rd large capacity magazine. Photographing does not make it a crime, unless it's perhaps child pornography, snuff killings, etc., and that's another set of issues extremely fact-dependent.

The fellow who fully assembles the magazine, that is another issue not addressed by the question. We all know that is a 'no-no' unless it's pre-ban.

My understanding is that it's not a large capacity magazine if it's missing a crucial part rendering it inoperable or it's say, a 10/30, or magazine rebuild kit (at least until the end of the year).

In the other thread, the consensus seemed to be that since the magazine body still had the feed lips, you could still push ammunition up into it with your fingers or that it could be flipped upside down and gravity fed.

Not that anyone thought that these things would work well but that this view of things might be used against you in court.

The legality doesn't have anything to do with taking the photo but with what could be perceived by the courts as constructing an assault weapon. Photographing it wouldn't be a crime but they might use it as evidence against you I guess.

Springfield45
12-01-2013, 12:07 PM
No. Nothing is legal in California.

Intimid8tor
12-01-2013, 12:13 PM
No. Nothing is legal in California.

FTW.

Librarian
12-01-2013, 12:57 PM
One is dealing with 1st Amendment issues when one photographs.

[1] In direct response to the inquiry, I am not aware of any problems merely photographing much of anything, including a post-ban fully assembled 30-rd large capacity magazine. Photographing does not make it a crime, unless it's perhaps child pornography, snuff killings, etc., and that's another set of issues extremely fact-dependent.

[2] The fellow who fully assembles the magazine, that is another issue not addressed by the question. We all know that is a 'no-no' unless it's pre-ban.

[3] My understanding is that it's not a large capacity magazine if it's missing a crucial part rendering it inoperable or it's say, a 10/30, or magazine rebuild kit (at least until the end of the year).

These are the issues; re: [3], what is the difference between a broken large-capacity magazine and a partially assembled/disassembled one? I don't know. I do know I do not want to find out from a jury, as unlikely as that seems to be.

No. Nothing is legal in California.

Pretty much.

BTW, this question is not "Political Discussion & Activism" belongs in "Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion", so moved.

I'm coming around to the idea that the magazine law is not a product so much of incompetence and lack of knowledge as it is intended to confuse those who actually know something. It sure is working well at that!

GMONEY
12-01-2013, 12:57 PM
Not legal we just had a similar thread. Could be called a gravity fed magazine apparently.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=853660

junior40er
12-01-2013, 1:08 PM
no illegal, they are 10/30 mags. Now if you post ACTUALL 30 round mags then you just provided evidence.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b282/junior40er/20131027_165509_zps0f862d19.jpg (http://s21.photobucket.com/user/junior40er/media/20131027_165509_zps0f862d19.jpg.html)

sunnydelight
12-01-2013, 1:16 PM
But if they're blocked 10/30 mags how does that work?? I mean who's to make the call and say those ARENT blocked?

junior40er
12-01-2013, 2:00 PM
innocent until proven guilty. stop living in fear.

Skidmark
12-01-2013, 3:20 PM
It's not illegal to capture an image with a camera, period.

However, if that image contains material that could be considered illegal in a particular jurisdiction, then one should think very carefully about broadcasting or disseminating said image.

e90bmw
12-04-2013, 4:37 PM
It's not illegal to capture an image with a camera, period.

However, if that image contains material that could be considered illegal in a particular jurisdiction, then one should think very carefully about broadcasting or disseminating said image.

What he said...

lt05deluxe
12-04-2013, 4:39 PM
featureless

spalterego
12-05-2013, 4:37 PM
It is impossible to tell from your question.

Possession of a Large Capacity Magazine is NOT currently illegal in California. However, affixing a Large Capacity Magazine to a rifle MAY convert it into a prohibited Assault Weapon per California law.

It is unlawful for any person to manufacture, cause to be manufactured, import into the state, keep
for sale, or offer or expose for sale, or give or lend, any large-capacity magazine. (Penal Code
12020(a)(2).)

A large capacity magazine means any ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more
than 10 rounds, but shall not be construed to include a feeding device that has been permanently
altered so that it cannot accommodate more than 10 rounds, a tubular magazine that is contained in
a lever-action firearm, or a .22 caliber tube ammunition feeding device. (Penal Code
12020(c)(25).)

With respect to Assault Weapons the relevant questions are whether the Rifle in question is a centerfire rifle and the Magazine in question is a Detachable Magazine, or a Permanently Fixed Magazine and whether the Rifle has enough of the other components to make it an Assault Weapon under Calif. law.

based on Definition and not a Listed Assault Weapon, a Rifle is an Assault weapon IF (look at the Flow Chart):

(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon.
(B) A thumbhole stock.
(C) A folding or telescoping stock.
(D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(E) A flash suppressor.
(F) A forward pistol grip.

In this case, if the magazine you are talking about is detachable, it is illegal to attach it to any semi-auto rifle regardless of how many rounds it holds if the rifle has any of the other features (basically any AR series rifle that is not a monsterman grip etc. and that has not been bullet buttoned)

(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

If it is a fixed magazine (which includes bullet buttoned ARs) then it is illegal to affix your 30 round magazine (unless it has been permanently altered to accept only 10 or fewer rounds) to any semi-auto rifle (so if you have a 30 rd. magazine for a bolt, lever or pump action rifle then you should be good)


(3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches.

If your rifle is semi-auto and is less than 30 inches in overall length then it is an assault weapon regardless of the size of the magazine you have and regardless of whether you attach the magazine to it.

(4) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer.
(B) A second handgrip.
(C) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel that allows the bearer to fire the weapon without burning his or her hand, except a slide that encloses the barrel.
(D) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.
(5) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(6) A semiautomatic shotgun that has both of the following:
(A) A folding or telescoping stock.
(B) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon, thumbhole stock, or vertical handgrip.
(7) A semiautomatic shotgun that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine.California Firearms Laws 2007 11
(8) Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder.

None of the above apply since you specified Rifle, not pistol or shotgun.

So it is really only under (2) that the capacity of the magazine comes into play:

(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

So, in order to have an AR style rifle w/o a monsterman grip, we are forced to install a bullet button or similar device. This converts the magazine to a "fixed magazine" in which case the 10 round limit applies and we can't affix magazines larger than 10 or we have created an "Assault Rifle".

If you are not hung up on having an AR style rifle you could go featureless. Look at the flowchart, once you get to "Does it have a Pistol grip or not (b/c it has a Monster man grip" if you answer NO, then the flow chart doesn't ask if your magazine is 10 or more, it is not an Assault Rifle and is legal.


The second part of your question addresses the fact that you decommissioned the magazine by removing the spring and follower. The question then is is it still a "magazine" if it is still a magazine then it is illegal under the circumstances listed above for creating an "assault weapon". If by decommissioning it in this manner it is no longer a "magazine" then attaching it to the rifle won't convert it into an "assault weapon" if it wasn't already an assault weapon.


The following definitions shall apply relative to defining assault weapons:
(1) "Magazine" shall mean any ammunition feeding device."

The question you have to ask yourself is do you feel lucky, well do you punk?

I would think the answer should be no a magazine decommissioned in the manner you describe doesn't really function as an "ammunition feeding device." As some have said, if you turn the rifle upside down then conceivably it could be gravity fed (assuming we are talking about an AR styl rifle). If that is the case however then conceptually and logically merely turning such a rifle upside down and putting a hand on the rifle while simultaneously holding more than 10 cartridges in your hands or pockets would convert it into an Assault Rifle. By holding the rifle you are "affixed" to the rifle and you yourself function as the magazine by being able to feed the ammunition into it. (although it would certainly not be semi-auto in this mode)

But again, while we may argue, that this is ridiculous, a Prosecutor who wants to make your life miserable could similarly argue that it is at least possible that such a magazine would, under some conditions actually feed ammunition into the rifle. (I'm sure the physics is such that the cyclic rate of an AR style rifle is so fast that the bolt would cycle faster than the force of gravity could feed the next round and thus it would no longer be semi-auto, however if your freedom depends on this I wouldn't go forward)

Putting all of that aside, I'm not sure how a person observing the photograph could tell that such a magazine was a 30 round magazine and not a blocked 10/30. Additionally, unless your photo has GPS tagging (which many modern comeras have) I am not sure how anybody viewing the photo could tell that it occurred within California as opposed to someplace else where this would be legal.

I think the risks are low but, as you should now understand, if you have made it this far, there is no real clear cut yes or no answer. It depends on whether a prosecutor wanted to go to the effort of trying to make an example of you and argue for a very strained interpretation of the statute, but an interpretation which is not physically or logically impossible, merely unlikely.

njineermike
12-05-2013, 4:40 PM
In California, if you have to ask, it's probably illegal.

Mp5marley
12-05-2013, 4:55 PM
take the pictures while you Arizona! oh wait, there's GPS data embedded in all Iphone or smart phone pictures.... They are watching!

Niviticus
12-05-2013, 5:56 PM
It wouldn't be legal if you took the pics of actual 30 rnd mags fully assembled in the state of California unless they are pre ban. However it is perfectly legal to take pics of your 10/30 mags that look identical. If you want pics of your AR looking cool with 30 rnd mags then get some 10/30 mags or put in your rebuild kit without the spring or without the follower. Any piece that would keep it from functioning.

Skidmark
12-05-2013, 6:50 PM
It wouldn't be legal if you took the pics of actual 30 rnd mags fully assembled in the state of California unless they are pre ban. However it is perfectly legal to take pics of your 10/30 mags that look identical. If you want pics of your AR looking cool with 30 rnd mags then get some 10/30 mags or put in your rebuild kit without the spring or without the follower. Any piece that would keep it from functioning.

How is it illegal to take a picture, any picture? Answer: it's not.

It's the things one takes pictures of, or the possession of those things, that might be illegal... but it's not against the law to capture an image with your camera.

njineermike
12-05-2013, 6:53 PM
How is it illegal to take a picture, any picture? Answer: it's not.

It's the things one takes pictures of, or the possession of those things, that might be illegal... but it's not against the law to capture an image with your camera.

This entire conversation should send chills up the spine of everyone. We're discussing whether it's illegal to take a picture of an inanimate object. That's how far down the rabbit hole we are now.

kcbrown
12-05-2013, 7:38 PM
I'm coming around to the idea that the magazine law is not a product so much of incompetence and lack of knowledge as it is intended to confuse those who actually know something. It sure is working well at that!

I keep telling people, and for some reason they don't believe me: Hanlon's Razor is not the proper one to apply to government legislation. The reverse of it is: never attribute to stupidity that which can be attributed to malice.

Those who sit in power in government are not there for us. They're there to exercise power for their own aggrandizement. They will happily take away every liberty you have if you let them, because for them it's enjoyable.

hellayella
12-05-2013, 8:44 PM
unless there's proof where the pic was taken and a time stamp etc..for all it matters the pic could have been taken outta state

kcheung2
12-06-2013, 11:37 AM
^ Yeah exactly, you took the picture during your last trip to NV right?

67goat
12-06-2013, 12:57 PM
How is it illegal to take a picture, any picture? Answer: it's not.

It's the things one takes pictures of, or the possession of those things, that might be illegal... but it's not against the law to capture an image with your camera.

Actually, it is illegal to take all sorts of pictures. Child pornography for one (which has already been mentioned). Using taking pictures of people in their homes from the outside without their knowledge is a criminal misdemeanor in several states if the person can be identified, and civilly actionable in most states regardless of whether the subject can be identified. Taking photos on other people's property where photography has been expressly forbidden is also illegal in most places. It is illegal to take commercial pictures in California state parks without a permit and insurance. There are many restrictions on how and when pictures can be taken in medical facilities.

That being said, in this case taking the picture in an of itself would not be illegal, but might be used as evidence of the illegal activity (depending on other factors). It is also important to note (especially for people thinking they could just say it was taken in another state, without actually taking it in another state) that while most people think of "prove" in a more scientific sense, in court "prove" has a much looser meaning.

BKinzey
12-06-2013, 2:27 PM
no illegal, they are 10/30 mags. Now if you post ACTUALL 30 round mags then you just provided evidence.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b282/junior40er/20131027_165509_zps0f862d19.jpg (http://s21.photobucket.com/user/junior40er/media/20131027_165509_zps0f862d19.jpg.html)

I think this is important to consider. If junior40er had not said these are 10/30 mags how would you go about proving they were, or they weren't? Of course beyond a reasonable doubt? For all I know they could be solid blocks of rubber, plastic, or resin.

Having said that personally I would purchase a 10/30 to use in case I was ever questioned. I think it would be much easier to produce said magazine to whomever is investigating and hopefully stop the investigation right there rather than tell the investigator "I want to speak to my lawyer" and possibly start that train running.

67goat
12-06-2013, 4:26 PM
I think this is important to consider. If junior40er had not said these are 10/30 mags how would you go about proving they were, or they weren't? Of course beyond a reasonable doubt? For all I know they could be solid blocks of rubber, plastic, or resin.

Having said that personally I would purchase a 10/30 to use in case I was ever questioned. I think it would be much easier to produce said magazine to whomever is investigating and hopefully stop the investigation right there rather than tell the investigator "I want to speak to my lawyer" and possibly start that train running.

Relying on a California jury to be able to distinguish between gun related nuances to a point of reason is like betting your life savings on 31 black. What the words "reasonable doubt" mean in the dictionary and the court room are not always the same thing.

MontClaire
12-06-2013, 4:27 PM
Sure just don't forget the bullet button lol

:rofl2:

johnny1290
12-07-2013, 8:41 AM
Relying on a California jury to be able to distinguish between gun related nuances to a point of reason is like betting your life savings on 31 black. What the words "reasonable doubt" mean in the dictionary and the court room are not always the same thing.

This is what I don't get. Why people think they won't get arrested and prosecuted and have to prove they're legal.

If you can't afford to do this, then don't even play the game.

That also means even having any "trigger devices" , etc, in your home but not installed.

This is CA. CA hates guns, and gun owners. All they need is an excuse.

cpatbay
12-07-2013, 9:37 AM
How can anyone tell if the photo was taken in CA or in Arizona? And how could they tell if there was actually anything illegal that can be proven in court? Even if they can convict a person just by a photo in CA, it will not likely to go far in appeal. Just my opinion ...

Spyguy
12-07-2013, 11:00 AM
If you really want to avoid any harassment from overzealous LEO's and DA's, just take an old magazine body (preferably one that is no longer reliable) and fill it with catalyzed plastic resin. Now you have a prop.

ETA: If you do this, don't fill it so high that you can't load the prop into your firearm on a closed bolt.

The Gleam
12-07-2013, 11:22 AM
no illegal, they are 10/30 mags. Now if you post ACTUAL 30 round mags then you just provided evidence.

Yet not everyone is prescribed the same limitations as everyone else in this state, but as time marches on, the general connotation of what is the norm bleeds into expectation; invariably there are many, many people alive and well in California that have "RAWs" at their disposal and can post pics from now until the end of this century - (pending Obama, Feinstein, Schumer, Bloomberg, Clinton, or some future NeoSocialist doesn't get their way of pure totalitarianism bans and confiscation) - without any worry of having to post a disclaimer, explanation, warnings, validation, or instructions to the viewer and audience to take their anti-panic medication before viewing said pics, for fear of causing a heart-attack or heat-stroke!

It's no different than the annoying assumptions of do-gooders at the range, who seem intent on applying their vast wisdom, interrupting you while in the middle of unloading a 30-round magazine, but kvetching and hiccuping their own limitations.

Worry me not; what me worry. Prove it.

catmman
12-07-2013, 12:03 PM
Turn off exif on your phone/camera anyway!

67goat
12-07-2013, 1:11 PM
Yet not everyone is prescribed the same limitations as everyone else in this state, but as time marches on, the general connotation of what is the norm bleeds into expectation; invariably there are many, many people alive and well in California that have "RAWs" at their disposal and can post pics from now until the end of this century - (pending Obama, Feinstein, Schumer, Bloomberg, Clinton, or some future NeoSocialist doesn't get their way of pure totalitarianism bans and confiscation) - without any worry of having to post a disclaimer, explanation, warnings, validation, or instructions to the viewer and audience to take their anti-panic medication before viewing said pics, for fear of causing a heart-attack or heat-stroke!

It's no different than the annoying assumptions of do-gooders at the range, who seem intent on applying their vast wisdom, interrupting you while in the middle of unloading a 30-round magazine, but kvetching and hiccuping their own limitations.

Worry me not; what me worry. Prove it.

No, it wouldn't apply to everybody. But I'm pretty sure anybody that had a RAW wouldn't have to ask the question. And yes, I realize that is an assumption.

The War Wagon
12-07-2013, 1:46 PM
Here in Pittsburgh? SURE it's legal - see? :D

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc305/The_War_Wagon/New%20build/RIFLE1.jpg

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc305/The_War_Wagon/New%20build/100_7566.jpg

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc305/The_War_Wagon/New%20build/BCM_rifle.jpg

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc305/The_War_Wagon/New%20build/100_8368.jpg


How'd that Listerine get there... :o

command_liner
12-07-2013, 6:08 PM
In the other thread, the consensus seemed to be that since the magazine body still had the feed lips, you could still push ammunition up into it with your fingers or that it could be flipped upside down and gravity fed.

Not that anyone thought that these things would work well but that this view of things might be used against you in court.

The legality doesn't have anything to do with taking the photo but with what could be perceived by the courts as constructing an assault weapon. Photographing it wouldn't be a crime but they might use it as evidence against you I guess.

Interesting thing about gravity fed mags. When the original mag ban went in a long time ago, I did write to the AG and legislators telling them it was
very problematic because of the concept of gravity fed magazines.

What is a 10' long section of pipe? Held at the right angle, and filled
with 22 shorts, that is a 200 round magazine, as the original law was
drafted. Similarly, a plastic feed lip taped to a box of ammo can be
considered a "high capacity magazine" if just the first round can be
chambered. There is no provision in the law stating that the magazine
must be capable of feeding all the rounds it holds.

The right thing to do is to hang all the people that drafted, passed and signed this law. Clearly they are not upholding their oaths. The right to keep
and bear arms is certainly being infringed.

Fern
12-07-2013, 6:16 PM
A couple tack welds and you have a zero round mag.

BKinzey
12-08-2013, 10:22 AM
Relying on a California jury to be able to distinguish between gun related nuances to a point of reason is like betting your life savings on 31 black. What the words "reasonable doubt" mean in the dictionary and the court room are not always the same thing.

I'd say you got it just backwards. The chances of you being actually charged based on the sole evidence of a photograph, not being able to convince LEO of the folly in this charge, not being able to convince the DA the folly of this charge, not being able to convince a judge to toss this case out and finally sitting in a court room having to rely on a CA jury to distinguish between gun related nuances to a point of reason, is closer to betting your life savings on 31 black.

So, if you had all the photos in front of you that people in CA took where it was questionable as to the legality of the mag inserted in the firearm, do you think you could find any which led to somebody sitting in front of a jury on the sole basis of a photograph? Now think of Las Vegas, and only the past year. If you had every instance of someone betting on 31 black, how many winners would you have?

Life is a gamble. There is literally a chance to be struck by lightning, but every day I go outside I give very little thought to the concern of being struck by lightning.

67goat
12-08-2013, 12:16 PM
I've seen many people charged and convicted with less evidence than that. You may not worry about lightning striking you, but I doubt you walk around holding a lightning rod in a rain storm.

rambutan316
12-08-2013, 12:17 PM
Completely legal

BKinzey
12-08-2013, 12:59 PM
I've seen many people charged and convicted with less evidence than that. You may not worry about lightning striking you, but I doubt you walk around holding a lightning rod in a rain storm.

People claim to see bigfoot.

Can you point to anyone in CA who has been charged by a DA for possession of an AW based solely on a photograph? How about someone who was arrested for possession of an AW with the sole evidence being a photograph?

ant21b
12-09-2013, 5:29 AM
Its perfectly legal as long as the photo was taken in Nevada or Arizona.

18Dmedic
12-09-2013, 8:28 AM
Start a blog and snap away. Call it freedom of the press. Lol

FIDO

taperxz
12-09-2013, 9:17 AM
Would not be illegal. AW's are not illegal in this state as long as they are registered.

Many out there own AW's and take pics of them.

Whats the problem?

Simi-Surfer
12-09-2013, 9:53 AM
:facepalm:

Germz
12-09-2013, 10:27 AM
One is dealing with 1st Amendment issues when one photographs.

In direct response to the inquiry, I am not aware of any problems merely photographing much of anything, including a post-ban fully assembled 30-rd large capacity magazine...

no such thing, and no such thing as pre-ban for that matter either. Don't know about you but none of my Mags have dates on them, and I don't know anyone who "registered" mags. :)

taperxz
12-09-2013, 10:45 AM
no such thing, and no such thing as pre-ban for that matter either. Don't know about you but none of my Mags have dates on them, and I don't know anyone who "registered" mags. :)

Oh YES there is!

CrazyCobraManTim
12-09-2013, 1:06 PM
Not against the law to take a picture of your piece, though it may invite unwanted scrutiny.

In public:
30 rounder + featureless black rifle = :)

11, 15, 20 or 30+ rounder + evil AW black rifle = bondage.

bRiT636
12-09-2013, 2:48 PM
This entire conversation should send chills up the spine of everyone. We're discussing whether it's illegal to take a picture of an inanimate object. That's how far down the rabbit hole we are now.

This.. It blows my mind.

Ishooter
12-09-2013, 8:51 PM
innocent until proven guilty. stop living in fear.
It's like standing in the middle of the intersection during rush hour. Nothing is happened yet. But how long can you stand still without getting hit? That's the question. Lol. :confused:

The Cable Guy
12-11-2013, 9:38 AM
This thread has brought up a few interesting issues.

#1 - Empty mag body, how is this considered a high capacity feeding device?

"You could technically turn it upside down or use your finger to push it up to feed."

True, but you could also take a gun and go shoot someone for no reason. You could easily drive your car on the wrong side of the road to intentionally kill someone. Just because there's a possibility of doing it doesn't mean it's illegal does it? Are we in the movie Minority Report where we can get arrested and prosecuted for crimes we haven't committed for fear that we might commit them?

#2 - Good luck in court trying to prove it's legal

"This is what I don't get. Why people think they won't get arrested and prosecuted and have to prove they're legal. "

This is what I don't get. Since when did we have to prove our innocence in court? I remember it being the other way around where evidence is presented to prove you're guilty. "Innocent until proven guilty" comes to mind. You don't go to court to prove you're innocent. From a defense standing, you're there to provide reasonable doubt that the evidenced used against you is inaccurate, non-factual, inadmissible, etc.

Am I at least in the general realm of being right, or have I completely missed the mark here?