Saw this on craigslist...

[Dr Rockso]

Just to inject some dissent, courtesy of bwiese in other similar threads:

Originally Posted by bwiese

WRONG. DON'T DO THIS.

Someone offering or exposing for sale the hicap (in other than one of the few exempt manners) would make the transaction illegal.

There are no such things as "legal half-transactions".

Originally Posted by bwiese

And they keep repeating it no matter how much we refute it. Somehow they believe "half transactions" can be illegal with the other half legal.

Originally Posted by bwiese

While some of the above posters insist that buying, selling, lending but not import after 1/1/2000 is not illegal, law does not allow "half-crimes" in CA where part of transaction is legal but the other half isn't. Much akin to knowingly receiving money from a bank robbery even though raw money itself is legal to possess Don't go there.

The half-legal theory strikes me as being pretty flimsy.

[pdq_wizzard]

It seems to me the biggest thing with standard mags is we can't get them anymore (just what you had before 2k) and it just makes people want to have them more.

I have some but don't use them because ammo it too $$$ and I don't have as much time to reload right now.

[snobord99]

Originally Posted by Dr Rockso

The half-legal theory strikes me as being pretty flimsy.

I disagree. I think he's right. I've never seen anything like a "half-legal transaction." A transaction is either legal or it is not. Where he's DEAD wrong is his instance that "transaction" is somehow the operative word.

[Mike's Custom]

Sorry for spelling errors, I had to type it out. Yes, I should have run it through SPELL CHECK.

This can be found in the DOJ Firearms page under FAQ:

9. [b]If I have a large-capacity magazine, do I need to get rid of it?

No. Continued possession of large-capacity magazines (able to accept more than 10 rounds) that you owned in California
before January 1, 2000, is not prohibited. However as of January 1, 2000, it is illegal to buy, manufacture, import, keep for
sale, expose for sale, give or lend any large-capacity magazine in California except by law enforcement agencies, California
peace officers, or licensed dealers.

(PC Section 12020 (b)(19-29))

So, according to the above it is illegal to transfer Hi-cap mags. In the cases listed above, give, lend, sale, a TRANSFER of ownership is taking place. If you go to the penal code above you can read the full text.

I have done gun shows for years (I stopped 4 years ago) and I watched the DOJ arrest people and sieze inventories including a motorhome used to transport Hi-Caps as well as individuals transfering them to other individuals at gun shows in Bakersfield and Fresno since Jan. 1, 2000.

[snobord99]

Originally Posted by Mike's Custom

Sorry for spelling errors, I had to type it out. Yes, I should have run it through SPELL CHECK.

This can be found in the DOJ Firearms page under FAQ:

9. [b]If I have a large-capacity magazine, do I need to get rid of it?

No. Continued possession of large-capacity magazines (able to accept more than 10 rounds) that you owned in California
before January 1, 2000, is not prohibited. However as of January 1, 2000, it is illegal to buy, manufacture, import, keep for
sale, expose for sale, give or lend any large-capacity magazine in California except by law enforcement agencies, California
peace officers, or licensed dealers.

(PC Section 12020 (b)(19-29))

So, according to the above it is illegal to transfer Hi-cap mags. In the cases listed above, give, lend, sale, a TRANSFER of ownership is taking place. If you go to the penal code above you can read the full text.

I have done gun shows for years (I stopped 4 years ago) and I watched the DOJ arrest people and sieze inventories including a motorhome used to transport Hi-Caps as well as individuals transfering them to other individuals at gun shows in Bakersfield and Fresno since Jan. 1, 2000.

I don't think you understand what everyone is saying. It is illegal to sell hi-cap mags, but not illegal to buy it (assuming it's already in the state).

Cal Penal Code §12020(a)(2) says: "Commencing January 1, 2000, manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives, or lends, any large-capacity magazine." (Note first that nowhere in there does the word "transfer" appear) I'll break it down for you one by one:

• Manufactures: a seller might manufacture, but a buyer certainly does not.
• Causes to be manufactured: again, maybe the seller does. There's an argument that by buying it, you're causing it to be manufactured, but that's a very weak connection and I highly doubt it would be interpreted that way by any court.
• Imports into the state: a seller may have imported it, but the buyer doesn't (again, assuming the mag was already in the state).
• Keeps for sale: seller, yes, they probably had it for at least one second where they said "I'm going to sell it" so that will probably qualify as "keeping for sale"; buyer is not selling or keeping for sale, they're purchasing it.
• Offers: seller, yes, probably; buyer is not offering it unless you're arguing that they're offering to buy it. That probably won't be the interpretation since the text of the statute makes it pretty clear that what they're preventing is the sale, not the purchase of magazines.
• Exposes for sale: seller, yes; buyer, no, they're not exposing it for sale. They're buying it.
• Gives: seller, yes; buyer, not, they're receiving, not giving.
• Lends: seller, no, they're selling, not lending; buyer, no, they're receiving, not lending.

And even in the DOJ FAQ you're citing, the word "transfer" does not appear anywhere. They use basically the same words used in the statute (if not the same).

Conclusion:
Seller: prison? Maybe.
Buyer: prison? No. Not illegal.

[Mike's Custom]

I under stand it completely. But you can't BUY one if no one can SELL one. So, if selling one is a crime the buying one is aiding and abetting in a crime. It couls also be construed as a conspiray to commit a crime. But hey, buy one if you want to.

[CSACANNONEER]

Originally Posted by Mike's Custom

I under stand it completely. But you can't BUY one if no one can SELL one. So, if selling one is a crime the buying one is aiding and abetting in a crime. It couls also be construed as a conspiray to commit a crime. But hey, buy one if you want to.

That is why no one here will advise anyone to try this. You're right that buying COULD be construed as a conspiracy but, the actual act of buying, in and of itself, is not illegal under Ca law.

[WeekendWarrior]

Maybe it's a FED or agent of CA doing some fishing

[trickyvic]

This thread is very enlightening. I didn't know it wasn't illegal to purchase them, I still wouldn't take the chance.