Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #121  
Old 12-03-2011, 2:46 PM
Bhobbs's Avatar
Bhobbs Bhobbs is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Chino CA
Posts: 10,566
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter.Steele View Post
heh

That was sort of my point.
So your point is even with the legal work around the mags can be banned with future legislative action?
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 12-03-2011, 2:57 PM
wyrm2021 wyrm2021 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 227
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

And what hints has he given and based on what?
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 12-03-2011, 3:02 PM
FXR's Avatar
FXR FXR is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 504
iTrader: 21 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tripper View Post
can we declare state congress as nuisance
is there a petition for that

I'll start

State congress is a nuisance
Tripper
I'd consider our state representatives somewhere between "nuisance" and "enemy of the constitution, domestic," and leaning closer to the latter than the former.
__________________
"I'm so hard, b****, I carry TWO in the chamber!"
"Keeping people from being free is big business." -Bob Dylan
"There will be no horse-trading in the stable of civil rights. Either the Constitution means what it says, or it doesn't." -Brandon
"Most Rights that are accused of being 'created from whole cloth' exist because in fact the Bill of Rights is not limiting. Lack of liberty is statist thuggery.
If you don't like sodomy or abortion, don't do it." -Bill Wiese
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 12-03-2011, 3:06 PM
wyrm2021 wyrm2021 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 227
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Is it illegal to smith your 10/30 mags to full capacity? If you can legally buy a mag thats a 10/30, 10/20 and if its not illegal, just saying just wondering?
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 12-03-2011, 3:08 PM
Ubermcoupe's Avatar
Ubermcoupe Ubermcoupe is online now
✯ Jr Government Man
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: This information has been redacted in accordance with Title 18 USC Section 798
Posts: 13,102
iTrader: 57 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wyrm2021 View Post
Is it illegal to smith your 10/30 mags to full capacity? If you can legally buy a mag thats a 10/30, 10/20 and if its not illegal, just saying just wondering?
"Smithing” said mags = “manufacturing” in the eyes of the CA DOJ , thus still illegal by CA PC 12079
__________________
Hauoli Makahiki Hou


-------

Last edited by Ubermcoupe; 12-03-2011 at 3:10 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 12-03-2011, 3:15 PM
wyrm2021 wyrm2021 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 227
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ubermcoupe View Post
"Smithing” said mags = “manufacturing” in the eyes of the CA DOJ , thus still illegal by CA PC 12079
Is that the legal definition of manufacturing? Why would they use that landuage when "modify" is more appropriate?
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 12-03-2011, 3:17 PM
Reductio's Avatar
Reductio Reductio is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,924
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wyrm2021 View Post
Is that the legal definition of manufacturing? Why would they use that landuage when "modify" is more appropriate?
Stop trying to look at this logically.

Beginning of the process: no >10rd mags. End of process: you have >10rd mags. Illegal.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSACANNONEER View Post
Ah, the old "form over function" argument. I guess some people would rather be seen with a hot blonde who won't put out than with a "Neil 8" who will make you .
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 12-03-2011, 3:24 PM
repubconserv's Avatar
repubconserv repubconserv is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Amongst friends(Hemet)
Posts: 3,052
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wyrm2021 View Post
Is that the legal definition of manufacturing? Why would they use that landuage when "modify" is more appropriate?
Quote:
(2) 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.

(25) As used in this section, "large-capacity magazine" means any
ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than 10
rounds, but shall not be construed to include any of the following:
(A) A feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it
cannot accommodate more than 10 rounds.
If its a 10/30 mag it can not be altered by definition, because it has to be permanent. If you did modify a 10/30 (by ca definition a 10 rd) it would be manufacturing a hi-cap mag.
__________________
Though the cause of evil prosper, yet the truth alone is strong; Though her portion be the scaffold, and upon the throne be wrong; Yet that scaffold sways the future, and behind the dim unknown, Standeth God within the shadow, keeping watch above His own.

Whatever doesn't kill me... better start running.

Last edited by repubconserv; 12-03-2011 at 3:27 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 12-03-2011, 3:25 PM
wyrm2021 wyrm2021 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 227
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reductio View Post
Stop trying to look at this logically.
Your real encouraging.
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 12-03-2011, 3:45 PM
Peter.Steele's Avatar
Peter.Steele Peter.Steele is offline
Calguns Addict
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: .
Posts: 7,367
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhobbs View Post
So your point is even with the legal work around the mags can be banned with future legislative action?


Yes.

But then, future legislative action could also be taken to ban Clamato, shaving, and carpet cleaners. (Actually, I sort of wouldn't be against a ban on shaving. Or Clamato.)

Gene's been VERY clear on the point that his package will simply be a legal way to import the magazines for the first time. If you take them back out of state again, you will not be able to bring them back in, as then you will be bringing a magazine into CA that was not owned here prior to 2000. Hell, if you take it apart for cleaning and then put it back together again, that would still run afoul of the manufacturing statute.

The idea that California will not be able to prevent it through action on its own part, with no outside help, is only for the importation aspect, and only for the first importation into California. It simply provides a way to legally and intentionally acquire a >10 round magazine in CA, since most of us can't reliably find them when out on a hike.

If they made simple possession illegal, then there is no workaround.
__________________
NRA Life Member

No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/signaturepics/sigpic68220_5.gif
Reply With Quote
  #131  
Old 12-03-2011, 8:23 PM
bohoki's Avatar
bohoki bohoki is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: 95492
Posts: 18,078
iTrader: 20 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter.Steele View Post

The idea that California will not be able to prevent it through action on its own part, with no outside help, is only for the importation aspect, and only for the first importation into California. It simply provides a way to legally and intentionally acquire a >10 round magazine in CA, since most of us can't reliably find them when out on a hike.

If they made simple possession illegal, then there is no workaround.
could it be as simple as driving to nevada buying them hurling them over the border then picking them up on the other side

i'm pretty sure there is no law in nevada banning flinging magazines across the border and in nevada you only have to obey nevada law

its just a thought exercise i would never do this as it is incredibly ridiculous
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 12-03-2011, 9:35 PM
Peter.Steele's Avatar
Peter.Steele Peter.Steele is offline
Calguns Addict
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: .
Posts: 7,367
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bohoki View Post
could it be as simple as driving to nevada buying them hurling them over the border then picking them up on the other side

i'm pretty sure there is no law in nevada banning flinging magazines across the border and in nevada you only have to obey nevada law

its just a thought exercise i would never do this as it is incredibly ridiculous
Nope, because you're still importing them, and California can still effectively exercise what's called "long arm jurisdiction" against you. It's an interesting concept, where a state can still act as though someone outside its borders were still within them for legal purposes. Different states define this concept differently. California, for instance, says that a "court of this state may exercise jurisdiction on any basis not inconsistent with the Constitution of this state or the United States." (Cal Civ P. Code ss410.10).

So, what you need to do is find a way to accomplish the same action - effectively flinging them across the border, to borrow your words - where, if California attempted to exercise jurisdiction over the person doing the flinging, it would be "inconsistent with the Constitution of ... the United States."
__________________
NRA Life Member

No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/signaturepics/sigpic68220_5.gif
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 12-03-2011, 9:49 PM
schneiderguy's Avatar
schneiderguy schneiderguy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: San Jose, California, U.S.A. Earth
Posts: 498
iTrader: 38 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter.Steele View Post
Nope, because you're still importing them, and California can still effectively exercise what's called "long arm jurisdiction" against you. It's an interesting concept, where a state can still act as though someone outside its borders were still within them for legal purposes. Different states define this concept differently. California, for instance, says that a "court of this state may exercise jurisdiction on any basis not inconsistent with the Constitution of this state or the United States." (Cal Civ P. Code ss410.10).

So, what you need to do is find a way to accomplish the same action - effectively flinging them across the border, to borrow your words - where, if California attempted to exercise jurisdiction over the person doing the flinging, it would be "inconsistent with the Constitution of ... the United States."
1. Acquire dog
2. Strap standard capacity magazines to dog on Nevada side of the border
3. Step over to California
4. Dog follows you, bringing the magazines into California

Can they put a dog in jail for importing standard capacity magazines?
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 12-03-2011, 10:45 PM
Uxi's Avatar
Uxi Uxi is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,123
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter.Steele View Post
Nope, because you're still importing them, and California can still effectively exercise what's called "long arm jurisdiction" against you. It's an interesting concept, where a state can still act as though someone outside its borders were still within them for legal purposes. Different states define this concept differently. California, for instance, says that a "court of this state may exercise jurisdiction on any basis not inconsistent with the Constitution of this state or the United States." (Cal Civ P. Code ss410.10).

So, what you need to do is find a way to accomplish the same action - effectively flinging them across the border, to borrow your words - where, if California attempted to exercise jurisdiction over the person doing the flinging, it would be "inconsistent with the Constitution of ... the United States."
Heh, perhaps our friends on the Arizona and Nevada borders could randomly fling magazines across and not tell anyone. They could then be found legitimately without attempting conspiracy (like the dog trick mentioned would be convicted as).
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -- Thomas Jefferson

9mm + 5.56mm =
.45ACP + 7.62 NATO =
10mm + 6.8 SPC =


Et Verbum caro factum est et habitavit in nobis; Jn 1:14
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 12-04-2011, 2:55 AM
nobody_special nobody_special is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,041
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter.Steele View Post
Nope, because you're still importing them, and California can still effectively exercise what's called "long arm jurisdiction" against you.
The experts all say that, and that sending magazines into the state from across the state line would get you imprisoned.

That may be the case, but I keep pointing out that PC 32310 reads (emphasis added):

Quote:
any person in this state who [...] imports into the state
That language would seem to preclude long-arm jurisdiction.

Even if jurisdiction is given and charges brought, how is it that a person who was not physically in California could be convicted under a law which explicitly only applies to a "person in this state"?

I don't think this can be reasonably read as "person who, in this state, imports."

Of course, a recipient in California would still be vulnerable. Though shipping to themselves from out of state would be an interesting situation if my interpretation were correct...
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edmund G. Brown
There are certain rights that are not to be subject to popular votes, otherwise they are not fundamental rights. If every fundamental liberty can be stripped away by a majority vote, then it's not a fundamental liberty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffyhog
When the governor vetoes a bill that would make it a felony to steal a gun, but signs a bill into law that makes it a felony not to register a gun you already legally own, you know something isn't right.
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 12-04-2011, 6:04 AM
Meplat's Avatar
Meplat Meplat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 6,920
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter.Steele View Post
Yes.

But then, future legislative action could also be taken to ban Clamato, shaving, and carpet cleaners. (Actually, I sort of wouldn't be against a ban on shaving. Or Clamato.)
You, Sir, are obviously not a true aficionado of shrimp cocktail!
__________________
Take not lightly liberty
To have it you must live it
And like love, don't you see
To keep it you must give it

"I will talk with you no more.
I will go now, and fight you."
(Red Cloud)
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 12-04-2011, 7:00 AM
dantodd dantodd is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Carlos
Posts: 9,362
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwiese View Post
That's why the legal prep work is necessary.

Proper papers will be waveable.
We need a "lightbulb going on" emoticon
__________________
Coyote Point Armory
341 Beach Road
Burlingame CA 94010
650-315-2210
http://CoyotePointArmory.com
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 12-04-2011, 9:11 AM
theicecreamdan theicecreamdan is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 190
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by schneiderguy View Post
1. Acquire dog
2. Strap standard capacity magazines to dog on Nevada side of the border
3. Step over to California
4. Dog follows you, bringing the magazines into California

Can they put a dog in jail for importing standard capacity magazines?
IMO A dog is property, your scenario is not very different from asking them to put your car into jail because the mags were in the trunk

As far as not being able to clean and reassemble, when I put magazines back together, my intent is for them to be used for the same purpose as when they were purchased.
Also, if I leave the state and return, I am not illegally importing magazines, returning with magazines that I intend to use in the same way they were originally imported.

Last edited by theicecreamdan; 12-04-2011 at 9:15 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 12-04-2011, 9:52 AM
Ubermcoupe's Avatar
Ubermcoupe Ubermcoupe is online now
✯ Jr Government Man
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: This information has been redacted in accordance with Title 18 USC Section 798
Posts: 13,102
iTrader: 57 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

If it was your dog and you were present when the dog crossed you’d most likely be arrested on conspiracy charges (especially if you attached said mags to the dog).
__________________
Hauoli Makahiki Hou


-------
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 12-04-2011, 1:34 PM
mrdd mrdd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay
Posts: 1,675
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ubermcoupe View Post
If it was your dog and you were present when the dog crossed you’d most likely be arrested on conspiracy charges (especially if you attached said mags to the dog).
I don't think you can have a conspiracy with your dog. Conspiracy requires two or more persons.
Reply With Quote
  #141  
Old 12-04-2011, 1:42 PM
mrdd mrdd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay
Posts: 1,675
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by theicecreamdan View Post
Also, if I leave the state and return, I am not illegally importing magazines, returning with magazines that I intend to use in the same way they were originally imported.
Actually, the law is very specific about this. You can not import any large-capacity magazines you did not legally possess within the state at some time prior to 1/1/2000.

PC 32420. Section 32310 does not apply to the importation of a
large-capacity magazine by a person who lawfully possessed the
large-capacity magazine in the state prior to January 1, 2000,
lawfully took it out of the state, and is returning to the state with
the same large-capacity magazine.

Last edited by mrdd; 12-04-2011 at 1:47 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 12-04-2011, 1:56 PM
Peter.Steele's Avatar
Peter.Steele Peter.Steele is offline
Calguns Addict
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: .
Posts: 7,367
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meplat View Post
You, Sir, are obviously not a true aficionado of shrimp cocktail!
This is correct. If something came from the factory with more than 4 legs or less than two, I'm not eating it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by theicecreamdan View Post
IMO A dog is property, your scenario is not very different from asking them to put your car into jail because the mags were in the trunk

Actually, I'd argue that it's completely different, because you are in control of the car, in that it has no will of its own other than what you as the operator do with it. The dog, on the other hand, unless it's on a leash, may (or may not) actually follow or come when it's called.

On the other hand, though, 12020 doesn't seem to set out intent as an element of importation. As such, it would not be a violation of due process to instruct a jury that "a person may be presumed to intend the ordinary consequences of his or her voluntary actions." (Where intent is an element of the crime, it must be proven as a fact, and cannot be presumed.)

If you have a dog which is accustomed to following you around without a leash on, and you strap something to it (a voluntary action), and it follows you across the border, a jury will more than likely be instructed that it may presume you intended for things to work out the way they did.



Quote:
As far as not being able to clean and reassemble, when I put magazines back together, my intent is for them to be used for the same purpose as when they were purchased.
Also, if I leave the state and return, I am not illegally importing magazines, returning with magazines that I intend to use in the same way they were originally imported.

This is irrelevant, unfortunately.

Unless you legally possessed the magazine(s) in question within the borders of the state of California prior to 1/1/2000, it doesn't really matter how they came to be within the state in the first place ... if you take them out and bring them back, it is effectively a new importation, and therefore a new crime. Arguably, the same issue arises for assembly of a magazine that you had disassembled, if it was not legally possessed within the borders of the state of California prior to 1/1/2000.

I'd certainly rather be the prosecutor than the defense on that issue, to say the least.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Ubermcoupe View Post
If it was your dog and you were present when the dog crossed you’d most likely be arrested on conspiracy charges (especially if you attached said mags to the dog).

Nope, because a dog can't consent, you cannot have a true agreement between the parties to commit a crime. I'd LOVE to be the defense on that one.

(Now, if someone else attached the magazines to the dog, you could easily make the argument for conspiracy with that party.)



Quote:
Originally Posted by nobody_special
The experts all say that, and that sending magazines into the state from across the state line would get you imprisoned.

That may be the case, but I keep pointing out that PC 32310 reads (emphasis added):

Quote:
any person in this state who [...] imports into the state
That language would seem to preclude long-arm jurisdiction.

Even if jurisdiction is given and charges brought, how is it that a person who was not physically in California could be convicted under a law which explicitly only applies to a "person in this state"?

I don't think this can be reasonably read as "person who, in this state, imports."

Of course, a recipient in California would still be vulnerable. Though shipping to themselves from out of state would be an interesting situation if my interpretation were correct...

Actually, I'd never thought about this aspect of it before, and a close reading actually brings up an interesting question that I'd never noticed before.

Quote:
(2)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.
Manufacturing is a crime, if done within California. Causing manufacturing is a crime, if done within California. Importing is a crime, if done within California ... but ...

It doesn't say anything about causing the import of a large-capacity magazine.


So how is mail order of "large-capacity magazines" actually illegal?
__________________
NRA Life Member

No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/signaturepics/sigpic68220_5.gif
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 12-04-2011, 1:58 PM
Ubermcoupe's Avatar
Ubermcoupe Ubermcoupe is online now
✯ Jr Government Man
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: This information has been redacted in accordance with Title 18 USC Section 798
Posts: 13,102
iTrader: 57 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrdd View Post
I don't think you can have a conspiracy with your dog. Conspiracy requires two or more persons.
Who cares about conspiracy with the dog it could be with a doorknob for all i care, its conspiracy to commit a crime
__________________
Hauoli Makahiki Hou


-------
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 12-04-2011, 2:06 PM
GaryV's Avatar
GaryV GaryV is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 886
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ubermcoupe View Post
If it was your dog and you were present when the dog crossed you’d most likely be arrested on conspiracy charges (especially if you attached said mags to the dog).
Unless there's another person involved, you cannot be charged with conspiracy. You can't legally conspire with a dog.
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 12-04-2011, 2:09 PM
mrdd mrdd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay
Posts: 1,675
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ubermcoupe View Post
Who cares about conspiracy with the dog it could be with a doorknob for all i care, its conspiracy to commit a crime
OK, so where is the other person? Conspiracy requires two or more persons. You cannot conspire with yourself.

Or, are you saying you are a different person in Nevada than you are within California?
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 12-04-2011, 2:12 PM
GaryV's Avatar
GaryV GaryV is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 886
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ubermcoupe View Post
Who cares about conspiracy with the dog it could be with a doorknob for all i care, its conspiracy to commit a crime
Conspiracy means to "agree with others to do something", not simply to plan to do something by yourself. You cannot have a conspiracy without at least two people. Simply planning on your own to commit a crime is generally not in itself illegal, though there are some exceptions for certain crimes.
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 12-04-2011, 2:14 PM
Ubermcoupe's Avatar
Ubermcoupe Ubermcoupe is online now
✯ Jr Government Man
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: This information has been redacted in accordance with Title 18 USC Section 798
Posts: 13,102
iTrader: 57 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryV View Post
Unless there's another person involved, you cannot be charged with conspiracy. You can't legally conspire with a dog.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrdd View Post
OK, so where is the other person? Conspiracy requires two or more persons. You cannot conspire with yourself.

Or, are you saying you are a different person in Nevada than you are within California?
I stand corrected about the two (or more) persons, my mistake.
__________________
Hauoli Makahiki Hou


-------
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 12-04-2011, 7:46 PM
diginit's Avatar
diginit diginit is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Santa Clara,Ca
Posts: 3,345
iTrader: 77 / 100%
Default

Gene, Wish it would have worked, What a drag....Ca. is sooo wierded... Nice try though... Gotta give you credit for attempting to introduce in Ca. what every other state in the US already allows since the Federal ban expired...
__________________
Anyone Can Get An Illegal Gun
.
We Cannot Leave Ourselves Defenseless!


The DOJ knows that two guys with semi autos that have a folding or collapsable stock, or pistol grip could take out California's entire police force, SWAT, and the National Guard. Jeeze, that pistol grip and stock are really dangerous...
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 12-04-2011, 7:53 PM
repubconserv's Avatar
repubconserv repubconserv is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Amongst friends(Hemet)
Posts: 3,052
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by diginit View Post
Gene, Wish it would have worked, What a drag....Ca. is sooo wierded... Nice try though... Gotta give you credit for attempting to introduce in Ca. what every other state in the US already allows since the Federal ban expired...
wut? They are still working on it as I understand. PS, not every other state allows hi-cap mags.... sounds like you're trollin recently
__________________
Though the cause of evil prosper, yet the truth alone is strong; Though her portion be the scaffold, and upon the throne be wrong; Yet that scaffold sways the future, and behind the dim unknown, Standeth God within the shadow, keeping watch above His own.

Whatever doesn't kill me... better start running.
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 12-04-2011, 7:54 PM
dantodd dantodd is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Carlos
Posts: 9,362
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by diginit View Post
Gene, Wish it would have worked, What a drag....Ca. is sooo wierded... Nice try though... Gotta give you credit for attempting to introduce in Ca. what every other state in the US already allows since the Federal ban expired...
Huh? Wish what "would have worked?"
__________________
Coyote Point Armory
341 Beach Road
Burlingame CA 94010
650-315-2210
http://CoyotePointArmory.com
Reply With Quote
  #151  
Old 12-04-2011, 7:58 PM
HowardW56's Avatar
HowardW56 HowardW56 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Torrance
Posts: 5,864
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by diginit View Post
Gene, Wish it would have worked, What a drag....Ca. is sooo wierded... Nice try though... Gotta give you credit for attempting to introduce in Ca. what every other state in the US already allows since the Federal ban expired...

Huh?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 12-04-2011, 8:13 PM
Maestro Pistolero's Avatar
Maestro Pistolero Maestro Pistolero is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 3,890
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

No change has been announced in the work around, and there are other states with mag capacity limits. Are you ok?
__________________
www.christopherjhoffman.com

The Second Amendment is the one right that is so fundamental that the inability to exercise it, should the need arise, would render all other rights null and void. Dead people have no rights.
Magna est veritas et praevalebit

Last edited by Maestro Pistolero; 12-04-2011 at 8:16 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 12-04-2011, 9:07 PM
diginit's Avatar
diginit diginit is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Santa Clara,Ca
Posts: 3,345
iTrader: 77 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro Pistolero View Post
No change has been announced in the work around, and there are other states with mag capacity limits. Are you ok?
Guess I forgot about Illinois and N.Y., But this post was meant as a complement. By the posts above mine I've read, a change seemed to have taken place.
__________________
Anyone Can Get An Illegal Gun
.
We Cannot Leave Ourselves Defenseless!


The DOJ knows that two guys with semi autos that have a folding or collapsable stock, or pistol grip could take out California's entire police force, SWAT, and the National Guard. Jeeze, that pistol grip and stock are really dangerous...

Last edited by diginit; 12-04-2011 at 9:10 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 12-04-2011, 9:53 PM
Dreaded Claymore Dreaded Claymore is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,240
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default All according to plan

Having read this thread, the California DoJ has sent agents to the Nevada border to scout for the magazine-launching catapult that they believe Gene has set up to "import" magazines. Meanwhile, Gene and all those who have seen his package are sitting around somewhere wearing smoking jackets, sipping scotch, and sniggering uncontrollably.
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 12-04-2011, 10:19 PM
GettoPhilosopher's Avatar
GettoPhilosopher GettoPhilosopher is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Lake Forest, CA
Posts: 1,812
iTrader: 64 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreaded Claymore View Post
Having read this thread, the California DoJ has sent agents to the Nevada border to scout for the magazine-launching catapult that they believe Gene has set up to "import" magazines. Meanwhile, Gene and all those who have seen his package are sitting around somewhere wearing smoking jackets, sipping scotch, and sniggering uncontrollably.
Dude, get it right. It's a catapult that launches an armored car full of magazines over the border.

Sent from my Galaxy S II. Please overlook any typos.
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 12-04-2011, 10:42 PM
jeep7081's Avatar
jeep7081 jeep7081 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Tree House
Posts: 1,541
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

delete
__________________
-If you insult me for my grammar errors, what makes you think I understand the insult?
-Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Are we done
-Voting is like falling off your bike. Sidewalk or street. Both are painful to fall on. But, the sidewalk (Mitt) is closer to the green grass.

Last edited by jeep7081; 06-27-2012 at 10:17 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 12-04-2011, 10:50 PM
repubconserv's Avatar
repubconserv repubconserv is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Amongst friends(Hemet)
Posts: 3,052
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeep7081 View Post
I read the whole thread Question?

1. John goes to the desert (in California) and shoots his AR or AK. Does a mag dump and looses one or two of the mags. Paul comes along a year later and finds it. Legal to own?

2. Kevin orders some re-build kits online or walks into local gun shop. Takes them home. Leaves them as rebuild kits. Goes to his buddies house in AZ. Assembles them in AZ, let's off some stress. Disassembles them in AZ, then returns to CA. Legal?

3. Tom gets a few hi-caps prior to 2000. Decides last month to you use them after a purchase of a new AR or AK he bought. He finds out the mags are in poor shape and orders a rebuild kit to fix them. Legal?
1. Yes,

BUT!!!! don't put them in maglocked rifle though. Taking them out of Cali and bringing them back in is also a bad idea

2. As long as they are "kits" and not a completed mag. They can never be assembled magazines while in CA, unless they are replacing a legally owned hi cap

3. As long as he ends up with the same amount of hi-caps as he had before he ordered the rebuild kits.
__________________
Though the cause of evil prosper, yet the truth alone is strong; Though her portion be the scaffold, and upon the throne be wrong; Yet that scaffold sways the future, and behind the dim unknown, Standeth God within the shadow, keeping watch above His own.

Whatever doesn't kill me... better start running.
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 12-04-2011, 11:17 PM
rp55's Avatar
rp55 rp55 is online now
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,585
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

If this does come to fruition it will most likely be an unintended consequence of something Bill Clinton did eighteen years ago. I can just imagine when Kamala Harris gains a complete understanding of the ramifications of this. She will yell OMFG! in Sacramento and they will hear her all the way to DC.
__________________
http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j302/rpwhite55/guns/member13443.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 12-04-2011, 11:23 PM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,855
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreaded Claymore View Post
Having read this thread, the California DoJ has sent agents to the Nevada border to scout for the magazine-launching catapult that they believe Gene has set up to "import" magazines. Meanwhile, Gene and all those who have seen his package are sitting around somewhere wearing smoking jackets, sipping scotch, and sniggering uncontrollably.

We have made certain key parties that we cordially talk to at DOJ BoF aware that we have a workaround on this. They don't believe it's possible, but then Alison didn't believe there'd be 350K - 400K OLLs in CA either.
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 12-04-2011, 11:25 PM
greasemonkey greasemonkey is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: www.CalgunsFoundation.org
Posts: 2,526
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

That's a bunch of BS! They're sipping Kentucky's goodness; only Bourbon comes from Kentucky, the rest is just whisky

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreaded Claymore View Post
Having read this thread, the California DoJ has sent agents to the Nevada border to scout for the magazine-launching catapult that they believe Gene has set up to "import" magazines. Meanwhile, Gene and all those who have seen his package are sitting around somewhere wearing smoking jackets, sipping scotch, and sniggering uncontrollably.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:21 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.