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.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-05-2008, 9:31 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 32,750
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default Large-capacity magazines in California

Start here - but read the whole thread for subtleties

If you are not covered by one of the exemptions (see some of them below) ...
  • If you did not possess a large-capacity magazine in California before January 1, 2000, you may not have it now
  • If the gun (and its matching magazines) did not exist before January 1, 2000, you shouldn't have large-capacity magazines for it now
    (e.g. Springfield XD, first marketed in 2002 [as distinct from the 1999 HS2000]. You shouldn't be prosecuted for possession/use, but the timing can't be explained

    A contrary example: a legally possessed in California pre-1994 Para-Ordnance magazine may fit a post-2000 Para pistol - the gun didn't exist before 2000, but a magazine that fits the gun did -- you may have this one - no logical contradiction.)
  • No one in or out of California may transfer a large-capacity magazine to a non-LEO California resident
The relevant Penal Code is 12020(a)(2)
Quote:
12020. (a) Any person in this state who does any of the following
is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year
or in the state prison:

(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.

...
(c) (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.
(B) A .22 caliber tube ammunition feeding device.
(C) A tubular magazine that is contained in a lever-action
firearm.
This law is another effect of Mr. Perata's SB23; if you want to see what the legislature was thinking (or not thinking) see the analyses here.

Prohibited actions:
  • manufacture or cause to be manufactured
  • import into the state
  • keep for sale
  • offer or expose for sale
  • give
  • lend
Note that it is not prohibited to
  • own a large-capacity magazine
  • possess a large-capacity magazine
  • use a large-capacity magazine, in whatever gun*
  • repair a legally possessed large-capacity magazine
    (and, necessarily, to acquire the parts to make the repair --
    remember it only makes sense to buy parts kits for existing
    legally-possessed large-capacity magazines)
(* Old magazine, new-ish magazine, old gun, new gun - all irrelevant; remember also the 10-round limit on fixed magazine OLL, a different law.)

To repeat: Possession/use of a large-capacity magazine by an individual is not a crime, no matter how you acquired it.

Large-capacity magazines manufactured during the now-defunct Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device ban of 1994-2004 were marked 'Law Enforcement Only'. There are reasons one might legally have possessed them in California before 2000, but it is also legal to have the magazine bodies as repair parts for your other magazines.

There are exceptions in 12020(b), (b)(19)-(32) notably
Quote:
(23) 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 large-capacity magazine previously lawfully
possessed in the state.
(b)(19) exempts LE agencies
(b)(20) exempts LEOs
(b)(21) exempts CA-licensed FFLs
(b)(22) exempts loans so long as the lender stays nearby
(b)(27), (b)(28) and (b)(29) exempt "entities that operate armored vehicle businesses" who buy large-capacity magazines, lend them to their employees or receive them back

There is NO EXCEPTION for non-LEO visitors to the state.

Proof of a crime, however, is likely going to be difficult.
  • Magazines are not usually serialized or dated
  • Before 2000, no one would have anticipated this law, so there was no reason to retain receipts for magazine purchases
  • Not all guns in California are registered or otherwise known to the California Department of Justice, so the corresponding knowledge of likely date of possession of magazines for the guns is also missing

Note that according to the law as written, it is not prohibited to "buy" or "receive" or "find" a large-capacity magazine. I suggest that one avoid using one of those verbs or synonyms for them when offering advice on large-capacity magazines to other Calguns members. Such advice gives the appearance of encouraging others to violate the law.

There is no obvious effort in California to strictly enforce this law at the level of individual owners; there are some anecdotes suggesting DOJ agents may be observing some out of state gun shows for California buyers. Large-capacity magazines seem to be a very low-profile issue.

Large-capacity magazines and AR-type Off-List Lower (OLL) rifles

With a bullet button, you legally have a rifle that does not use 'detachable magazines'. A rifle with a bullet button and other SB23 'features' such as a pistol grip must use 10-round (or fewer) magazines. Using a large-capacity magazine in such a rifle creates/manufactures an illegal California 'assault weapon'.

To use large-capacity detachable magazines in semiautomatic centerfire rifles, the rifle must be 'featureless' - no pistol grip, fixed stock etc.
__________________
Calguns Wiki, Magazine Qs, Knife laws

Unless there is some way to amend a bill so you would support it,
the details do not matter until the Governor signs or allows the bill to become law.

Ask CA law questions in the How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me Forum
- most questions that start 'Is it legal ...' go there.

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.



Last edited by Librarian; 06-09-2009 at 1:28 PM..
  #2  
Old 10-05-2008, 9:37 PM
sorensen440's Avatar
sorensen440 sorensen440 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Livermore
Posts: 8,594
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

First I want to suggest that this be a sticky as a question that would be answered by this is asked daily

Second
Is it legal for me to purchase a standard capacity magazine for my xd-45 (Did not exist prior to ban) and keep it out of state ?

and would it be legal for me to purchase for use out of state and keep them disassembled while in state only to be assembled when back out of state?
__________________
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson
  #3  
Old 10-05-2008, 9:38 PM
11Z50 11Z50 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Madera Ranchos
Posts: 1,999
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Very well-written piece! This deserves a sticky!

Good job
  #4  
Old 10-05-2008, 10:16 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 32,750
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sorensen440 View Post
First I want to suggest that this be a sticky as a question that would be answered by this is asked daily

Second
Is it legal for me to purchase a standard capacity magazine for my xd-45 (Did not exist prior to ban) and keep it out of state ?

and would it be legal for me to purchase for use out of state and keep them disassembled while in state only to be assembled when back out of state?
Buy out of state and keep it out of state? Looks like that ought to be fine - magazines are not controlled in most places. You'd have to be sure it was cool with the other state. I don't follow much out of CA at that level of detail. (CA is complicated enough!)

Disassemble and bring back? It looks like that fits the letter of the law, I guess. Several posters have pointed out there is no 'constructive possession' for large-capacity magazine parts. It always makes me nervous, and I wouldn't do it, but I have a known low threshold of perceived risk.
__________________
Calguns Wiki, Magazine Qs, Knife laws

Unless there is some way to amend a bill so you would support it,
the details do not matter until the Governor signs or allows the bill to become law.

Ask CA law questions in the How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me Forum
- most questions that start 'Is it legal ...' go there.

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.



Last edited by Librarian; 10-05-2008 at 10:58 PM..
  #5  
Old 10-05-2008, 10:26 PM
DedEye's Avatar
DedEye DedEye is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: In Transit
Posts: 8,685
iTrader: 36 / 97%
Default

You can buy it and keep it out of state as long as that state has no laws against it, and if you bring it back for storage disassembled as parts (BEFORE entering the state), that'd be legal as well.
__________________
These posts are Fiction. They do not contain legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer. Any resemblance to real persons are pure coincidence. These posts may pose an inhalation hazard, reading can be harmful or fatal. No statements made on this forum are meant to represent any corporate or business entity, others, or myself. Especially not myself.

Stop duping answers, help expand the FAQ.

Why yes, that is me in my avatar and yes, I AM wearing a life jacket.

WTS Keltec P11
  #6  
Old 10-05-2008, 10:28 PM
69Mach1's Avatar
69Mach1 69Mach1 is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Los Angeles County
Posts: 14,867
iTrader: 397 / 100%
Default

One other thing I'd like to add. During and after the 1994 Federal Crime Bill where high capacity magazines were banned, all manufacturers could not sell their high caps to civillians, and marked them "Law Enforcement Only". Thus, if a new gun came out after 1994 with a totally new and proprietary high capacity magazine, there should be no way a CA could have one in their possession. The CA high cap ban took place before the Federal ban expired in 2004.
__________________

69Mach1
munkeeboi
TURBOELKY
antix2
WTSGDYBBR
tujungatoes
jmpgnr24K
  #7  
Old 10-05-2008, 10:47 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 32,750
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 69Mach1 View Post
One other thing I'd like to add. During and after the 1994 Federal Crime Bill where high capacity magazines were banned, all manufacturers could not sell their high caps to civillians, and marked them "Law Enforcement Only". Thus, if a new gun came out after 1994 with a totally new and proprietary high capacity magazine, there should be no way a CA could have one in their possession. The CA high cap ban took place before the Federal ban expired in 2004.
You're right - OLD, now-expired 18 USC 922 (w) said
Quote:
(w)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful
for a person to transfer or possess a large capacity ammunition
feeding device.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer
of any large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise lawfully
possessed on or before the date of the enactment of this
subsection.
(3) This subsection shall not apply to -
(A) the manufacture for, transfer to, or possession by the
United States or a department or agency of the United States or a
State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a
State, or a transfer to or possession by a law enforcement
officer employed by such an entity for purposes of law
enforcement (whether on or off duty);
(B) the transfer to a licensee under title I of the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954 for purposes of establishing and maintaining
an on-site physical protection system and security organization
required by Federal law, or possession by an employee or
contractor of such licensee on-site for such purposes or off-site
for purposes of licensee-authorized training or transportation of
nuclear materials;
(C) the possession, by an individual who is retired from
service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise
prohibited from receiving ammunition, of a large capacity
ammunition feeding device transferred to the individual by the
agency upon such retirement; or
(D) the manufacture, transfer, or possession of any large
capacity ammunition feeding device by a licensed manufacturer or
licensed importer for the purposes of testing or experimentation
authorized by the Attorney General.
so, unless some manufacturers were marking their LCAFD magazines before 1994, 10+ capacity magazines marked "Law Enforcement Only" should probably be considered a Bad Idea in California today for non-LEO.

Suppose I should add that as a bullet-point at the top of post 1?
__________________
Calguns Wiki, Magazine Qs, Knife laws

Unless there is some way to amend a bill so you would support it,
the details do not matter until the Governor signs or allows the bill to become law.

Ask CA law questions in the How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me Forum
- most questions that start 'Is it legal ...' go there.

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.



Last edited by Librarian; 10-05-2008 at 10:56 PM..
  #8  
Old 10-05-2008, 11:02 PM
69Mach1's Avatar
69Mach1 69Mach1 is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Los Angeles County
Posts: 14,867
iTrader: 397 / 100%
Default

You can have high cap mags marked "LEO only" if you used those bodies to rebuild/repair your CA preban high caps. What I'm saying is that a proprietary high cap mag designed during the Federal ban could not have been owned by a CA resident after 1994. Just like any new design made after 2000 could not also be obtained.

With regard to modifying a preban high cap mag to fit and function in another firearm, it must also continue to fit and function in the original gun it was designed for.
__________________

69Mach1
munkeeboi
TURBOELKY
antix2
WTSGDYBBR
tujungatoes
jmpgnr24K
  #9  
Old 10-05-2008, 11:55 PM
dfletcher dfletcher is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 10,917
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

How does all of this line up with possession of hi caps not being specifically illegal?

I understand the logic - the mag specific semi auto gun didn't exist before 2000 therefore any magazines must have been aquired post ban. But without mere possession being illegal, how does one get pinched?

Regarding "LE Only" the mag rebuild approach is one way to go - but again, we get back to possession not being specifically illegal.
  #10  
Old 10-05-2008, 11:59 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 32,750
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

A clarification of
  • If the gun (and its matching magazines) did not exist before January 1, 2000, you may not have large-capacity magazines for it now (e.g. Springfield XD, as distinct from the 1999 HS2000. A contrary example: a legally possessed in California pre-2000 Para-Ordnance magazine may fit a post-2000 Para pistol - the gun didn't exist, but a magazine that fits the gun did.)

In the case of the Springfield XD line, it never existed before 2000. Presuming that only XD mags fit XD pistols, it would be impossible to own large-capacity XD magazines before January 1, 2000 -- because none had yet been manufactured. Claiming to have owned such before PC 12020(a)(2) went into effect is not going to pass the laugh test. (I'll ignore the HS2000 magazines here.)

On the other hand, ParaOrdnance has been in business since 1985. If
  • you possessed in CA a large-capacity magazine for a P14-45 in 1992
  • and in 2008 you own a different Para designed after 2000
  • and the old P14-45 magazine fits the new model
you still can use that 1992 magazine in the 2000+ gun, because you owned it here legally before 2000 (and before the 1994 AW/LCAFD "ban").

Similarly, AR15/M16 magazines have been manufactured since the early 60's (1959 for the very first, but I dunno if those are usable in today's models). There must be millions of the things in circulation. If one owns an OLL or other .223/5.56x45 weapon that accepts AR15/M16 type magazines - no matter when the weapon was manufactured - it's possible to have owned large-capacity magazines for it before January 1, 2000. If you owned them then, you can use them now, in whatever weapon the magazine might fit and function.

Of course, with OLLs you do have to worry about that little 'assault weapon' configuration problem, but here I'm just talking about the legality of the magazines themselves.
__________________
Calguns Wiki, Magazine Qs, Knife laws

Unless there is some way to amend a bill so you would support it,
the details do not matter until the Governor signs or allows the bill to become law.

Ask CA law questions in the How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me Forum
- most questions that start 'Is it legal ...' go there.

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


  #11  
Old 10-06-2008, 12:18 AM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 32,750
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dfletcher View Post
How does all of this line up with possession of hi caps not being specifically illegal?

I understand the logic - the mag specific semi auto gun didn't exist before 2000 therefore any magazines must have been aquired post ban. But without mere possession being illegal, how does one get pinched?
Well, I'm kinda hopin' nobody does get pinched.

I think the enforcement is lax on the ownership end because it is so difficult to prove (but not impossible if one makes the wrong kind of mistake). A plausible explanation will, I think, hold up. Practically, this looks like just another in a laundry-list of things to throw at someone arrested for being a Bad Guy™ . (To get a supplier or confederate, of course.)

But we already know magazines are 'expendable', if not quite 'disposable'. They do wear out. I speculate that our Fine Legislature has calculated that, in the long run, choking off the supply will drop the numbers down to negligible.

That such a result has no positive public safety consequence is not relevant to their calculations.
__________________
Calguns Wiki, Magazine Qs, Knife laws

Unless there is some way to amend a bill so you would support it,
the details do not matter until the Governor signs or allows the bill to become law.

Ask CA law questions in the How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me Forum
- most questions that start 'Is it legal ...' go there.

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.



Last edited by Librarian; 10-06-2008 at 12:25 AM..
  #12  
Old 10-06-2008, 1:37 AM
sigsauer887 sigsauer887 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 743
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

You forgot to add that :

Magazine rebuild kits are legal to possess as long as your intended purpose is to make permanent 10 round magazines, or keep them disassemble with the intended use to rebuild the magazines out of state.

This will keep 99% of thesa threads popping up. Great job.
  #13  
Old 10-06-2008, 3:29 AM
aplinker's Avatar
aplinker aplinker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: West LA
Posts: 16,828
iTrader: 92 / 100%
Default

You missed two exemptions of note... this has been hashed out ad-nauseum, but since you're wanting a FAQ that is complete...

Quote:
(27) The sale of, giving of, lending of,
importation into this state of, or purchase of, any
large-capacity magazine, to or by entities that operate
armored vehicle businesses pursuant to the laws of this
state.
The preceding would indicate that the entities who operate an armored vehicle business are legally exempt from importing, buying and selling large capacity magazines.

I believe your connecting of (27) and (28) is incorrect. No other exemption requires two codified exemptions. (27) is quite clear that it exempts armored truck operators from both buying and selling.

Quote:
(21) The sale or purchase of any large-capacity
magazine to or by a person licensed pursuant to Section
12071.
12071 is FFLs. This would indicate that an FFL is exempt from buying and selling large capacity magazines.

In both cases no "special class" of buyer is listed, as in this example:
Quote:
(20) The sale to, lending to, transfer to,
purchase by, receipt of, or importation into this state of,
a large capacity magazine by a sworn peace officer as
defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830)
of Title 3 of Part 2 who is authorized to carry a firearm
in the course and scope of his or her duties.
Since buying is not a prohibited act, both a FFL and an armored truck entity operator could sell mags to otherwise non-exempt parties. Only the armored truck operator could import, unless the FFL had a large capacity magazine permit.



Separate notes:
It's important that you make it clear that even LEO marked magazine bodies can be used to legally rebuild large capacity magazines
__________________

Google Map of OLL Dealers

List of CA-friendly Manufacturers, Dealers, Middlemen, and Magazine rebuild kit dealers
Click me-->So you're a n00b and you want to build an AR? <--Click me
This post is based on actual events. Some facts may be altered for dramatic purposes. All posts are pure opinion. All persons, living and dead, are purely coincidental, and should not be construed.

Last edited by aplinker; 10-06-2008 at 3:44 AM..
  #14  
Old 10-06-2008, 3:37 AM
aplinker's Avatar
aplinker aplinker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: West LA
Posts: 16,828
iTrader: 92 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sigsauer887 View Post
You forgot to add that :

Magazine rebuild kits are legal to possess as long as your intended purpose is to make permanent 10 round magazines, or keep them disassemble with the intended use to rebuild the magazines out of state.

This will keep 99% of thesa threads popping up. Great job.
You need not have any intended purpose with rebuild kits. It's sufficient to say that all magazine parts are legal until they are used as component to a large capacity magazine.
__________________

Google Map of OLL Dealers

List of CA-friendly Manufacturers, Dealers, Middlemen, and Magazine rebuild kit dealers
Click me-->So you're a n00b and you want to build an AR? <--Click me
This post is based on actual events. Some facts may be altered for dramatic purposes. All posts are pure opinion. All persons, living and dead, are purely coincidental, and should not be construed.
  #15  
Old 10-06-2008, 5:56 AM
Cali80 Cali80 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 159
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

The restriction of importing magazines.

How does this law effect others if you owned high caps(prior to 2000 Jan,1., but moved out of the state and are now returning to CA?
Can they still be brought in if then?
Importing sounds ambigious.

Any clarification would be nice.
  #16  
Old 10-06-2008, 6:28 AM
stphnman20's Avatar
stphnman20 stphnman20 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: SCV
Posts: 6,603
iTrader: 26 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali80 View Post
The restriction of importing magazines.

How does this law effect others if you owned high caps(prior to 2000 Jan,1., but moved out of the state and are now returning to CA?
Can they still be brought in if then?
Importing sounds ambigious.

Any clarification would be nice.
If importing a "high cap" mag from another state, you must disassemble that mag before entering CA..

re-read this thread and you will find your answer..

Last edited by stphnman20; 10-06-2008 at 7:20 AM..
  #17  
Old 10-06-2008, 6:58 AM
motorhead's Avatar
motorhead motorhead is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: DAGO
Posts: 3,411
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

good thread. there will still be "what ifs" though.
  #18  
Old 10-06-2008, 8:14 AM
FortCourageArmory's Avatar
FortCourageArmory FortCourageArmory is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Simi Valley, CA
Posts: 1,002
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

I, as an FFL, have a CA-issued Large Capacity Magazine Permit that exempts me from the manufacture or cause to be manufactured, import into the state,
keep for sale, offer or expose for sale prohibitions. Now, I realize I have limitations on who I can sell to, but I am exempt on a limited basis.
__________________
NRA Life Member
Tim & the gang
Fort Courage Armory
1518-B Los Angeles Avenue
Simi Valley, CA 93065
(805) 526-6563
www.fortcouragearmory.com
  #19  
Old 10-06-2008, 8:26 AM
stphnman20's Avatar
stphnman20 stphnman20 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: SCV
Posts: 6,603
iTrader: 26 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackrazor View Post
Wrong. Nothing illegal about buying high capacity magazines, anyone can do it any time they like. Even felons can buy high capacity magazines in CA without breaking any laws.
HUH?
  #20  
Old 10-06-2008, 8:27 AM
MonsterMan's Avatar
MonsterMan MonsterMan is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: L.A.
Posts: 1,524
iTrader: 28 / 100%
Default

There was talk about this before. If you are a ffl and have the hicap mag license and are exempt from importing/manufacturing Hi-Cap magazines, and it is not illegal to "sell/keep for sale" (because you are exempt) hi-cap mags, wouldn't it be legal for you to "sell" (since you are exempt) mags to regular people since it is not illegal for someone to "buy"?
-------------------------------------------------------
12020. (a) Any person in this state who does any of the following
is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year
or in the state prison:

(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. (It does not say "BUY" anywhere").
--------------------------------------------------------
It seems the law was written to discourage individuals with no importation/sale permits to sell mags, but it clearly leaves off "buy" in the law. Would it be breaking the law to sell mags since you are exempt? I know Wes at Ten Percent Firearms was playing with this idea at one point, but I think he forgot about it because he is so busy.

Show me where in the law it says that it is illegal for someone to buy a hi cap magazine from a ffl who has a license to import/sell hi-cap mags. I think we have all just assumed that it is illegal and just left it at that (us being the general public and not us at calguns specifically).
__________________
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid." -Han Solo

Last edited by MonsterMan; 10-06-2008 at 8:48 AM..
  #21  
Old 10-06-2008, 8:38 AM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,732
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackrazor View Post
Wrong. Nothing illegal about buying high capacity magazines, anyone can do it any time they like. Even felons can buy high capacity magazines in CA without breaking any laws.
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".
__________________

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.
  #22  
Old 10-06-2008, 8:42 AM
goathead goathead is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Edmond, OK
Posts: 3,629
iTrader: 27 / 100%
Default

good info
  #23  
Old 10-06-2008, 8:51 AM
FortCourageArmory's Avatar
FortCourageArmory FortCourageArmory is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Simi Valley, CA
Posts: 1,002
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MonsterMan View Post
There was talk about this before. If you are a ffl and have the hicap mag license and are exempt from importing/manufacturing Hi-Cap magazines, and it is not illegal to "sell/keep for sale" (because you are exempt) hi-cap mags, wouldn't it be legal for you to "sell" (since you are exempt) mags to regular people since it is not illegal for someone to "buy"?
-------------------------------------------------------
12020. (a) Any person in this state who does any of the following
is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year
or in the state prison:

(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. (It does not say "BUY" anywhere").
--------------------------------------------------------
It seems the law was written to discourage individuals with no importation/sale permits to sell mags, but it clearly leaves off "buy" in the law. Would it be breaking the law to sell mags since you are exempt? I know Wes at Ten Percent Firearms was playing with this idea at one point, but I think he forgot about it because he is so buys.

Show me where in the law it says that it is illegal for someone to buy a hi cap magazine from a ffl who has a license to import/sell hi-cap mags. I think we have all just assumed that it is illegal and just left it at that (us being the general public and not us at calguns specifically).
MMG,
While it may not be illegal for you to buy a hi-cap mag in CA, it is certainly illegal for me (an FFL holder and in possession of a hi-cap permit) to sell a hi-cap mag to anyone that is listed under the exemption PC.

As a possible side issue, this could also subject the buyer to CA's murky conspiracy laws. Conspiracy to commit a misdemeanor is a felony. That kind of thing. Not 100% likely, but possible. All it takes is an over-eager ADA and we all have a bad day.
__________________
NRA Life Member
Tim & the gang
Fort Courage Armory
1518-B Los Angeles Avenue
Simi Valley, CA 93065
(805) 526-6563
www.fortcouragearmory.com
  #24  
Old 10-06-2008, 8:57 AM
CHS's Avatar
CHS CHS is offline
Moderator Emeritus
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Santa Ana, CA
Posts: 11,329
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackrazor View Post
Where's the confusion? It's very simple, nowhere in any law in CA is it illegal to buy a high capacity magazine.

Not if they were one of the exempted class of people who can sell high capacity mags. Since when has it been the buyer's responsibility to check on the legal status of the vendor? The last time you ordered a beer in a restaurant, did you check and make sure their liquor license was valid?

The difference is that a restaurant/bar typically has their liquor licenses on display and it is perfectly reasonable for you to assume that the license is valid. Therefore, if you are 21 and purchase alcohol even if it's an illegal sale there is no legal burden on you. The restaurant/bar might have an expired license but is somehow hiding that from customers.

Legislatively, governments almost always go after sellers rather than buyers due to sellers being "bigger potatoes", but in a situation of a non-exempt seller and a "legal buyer", unless you as the buyer have very good reason to believe that the seller is valid (like the restaurant/bar scenario), you can't just assume.

And since everyone knows in CA that standard capacity mags are illegal'ish, buying one from a guy on the street in and of itself may not be illegal for the buyer, but it does come down to conspiracy because you know or have reason to believe that the seller is not legal.





Now, if I went into a gun shop with their FFL on the wall and everything, and they sold me a standard capacity mag, then I am most likely free and clear on the transaction because there is no conspiracy if I can reasonably assume that the seller is in line with the law. If the seller is going out of his way to hide the fact that he doesn't have a valid FFL, or hi-cap mag permit, or otherwise non-exempt (so that I believe he is "ok") then the legal burden falls entirely on him. Plus, since there is nothing barring someone from "receiving" a mag, I'd probably be allowed to keep it
__________________
Please read the Calguns Wiki
Quote:
Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.
--Cesare, Marquis of Beccaria, "On Crimes and Punishment"

Last edited by CHS; 10-06-2008 at 9:01 AM..
  #25  
Old 10-06-2008, 8:57 AM
MonsterMan's Avatar
MonsterMan MonsterMan is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: L.A.
Posts: 1,524
iTrader: 28 / 100%
Default

Ok. I just wanted someone to show it to me in writing. I posted what I said because I remember this discussion from a while back and I never heard the resulting conclusion. I am not conspiring, I am just discussing the law and how it applies to us. That is how we get to the bottom of things and that is how we are now where we are with our OLL's.

But I will leave it alone and take your word for it....



Quote:
Originally Posted by FortCourageArmory View Post
While it may not be illegal for you to buy a hi-cap mag in CA, it is certainly illegal for me (an FFL holder and in possession of a hi-cap permit) to sell a hi-cap mag to anyone that is listed under the exemption PC.

As a possible side issue, this could also subject the buyer to CA's murky conspiracy laws. Conspiracy to commit a misdemeanor is a felony. That kind of thing. Not 100% likely, but possible. All it takes is an over-eager ADA and we all have a bad day.
__________________
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid." -Han Solo

Last edited by MonsterMan; 10-06-2008 at 9:00 AM..
  #26  
Old 10-06-2008, 9:04 AM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,732
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackrazor View Post
Not if they were one of the exempted class of people who can sell high capacity mags. Since when has it been the buyer's responsibility to check on the legal status of the vendor? The last time you ordered a beer in a restaurant, did you check and make sure their liquor license was valid?

That might be a mitigating fact for a defense, but it doesn't make the transaction legal.
__________________

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.
  #27  
Old 10-06-2008, 9:49 AM
bohoki's Avatar
bohoki bohoki is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: 95492
Posts: 17,836
iTrader: 20 / 100%
Default

so an armored car buisness could have a spiffy side buisness of selling large capacity magazines on the side?

heck i would go on a armored car run for a factory mini14 20 rounder
__________________
  #28  
Old 10-06-2008, 10:19 AM
vandal vandal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Walnut Creek
Posts: 2,156
iTrader: 154 / 100%
Default

What would be the problem with admitting to illegally acquiring LEO-restricted magazines from 1994 - 1999?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 69Mach1 View Post
One other thing I'd like to add. During and after the 1994 Federal Crime Bill where high capacity magazines were banned, all manufacturers could not sell their high caps to civillians, and marked them "Law Enforcement Only". Thus, if a new gun came out after 1994 with a totally new and proprietary high capacity magazine, there should be no way a CA could have one in their possession. The CA high cap ban took place before the Federal ban expired in 2004.
  #29  
Old 10-06-2008, 11:20 AM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 32,750
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default Consolidated answers....

Quote:
Originally Posted by vandal View Post
What would be the problem with admitting to illegally acquiring LEO-restricted magazines from 1994 - 1999?
Most people would find "admitting to illegally acquiring" something somewhat disquieting.

In this case, it would have been a violation of Federal law, one which has now sunset, and again it would merely be possible evidence of an illegal transfer - possession was not a crime under the LCAFD restriction. Any alleged illegal (under Federal law) transfer would have been in or prior to 1999. 1999 to 2008 is 9 years - is there a statute of limitations on such things?

Quote:
so an armored car buisness could have a spiffy side buisness of selling large capacity magazines on the side?
No, they can transfer them to their employees, and receive them back. Nothing in the law says they have to get them back, though.

Quote:
The restriction of importing magazines.

How does this law effect others if you owned high caps(prior to 2000 Jan,1., but moved out of the state and are now returning to CA?
Can they still be brought in if then?
Importing sounds ambigious.
The exemption for this behavior was explicitly quoted in the first post.

Quote:
I believe your connecting of (27) and (28) is incorrect. No other exemption requires two codified exemptions. (27) is quite clear that it exempts armored truck operators from both buying and selling.
(29) allows the transfer by employees back to the operator - it isn't a matter of buying and selling - but I typoed (27) and (28) for (28) and (29) - fixed, thanks.// Fixed AGAIN, since it's (27) for the operator to buy, (28) to lend to employees, and (29) to get them back.

I added the FFL exemption.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackrazor View Post
Wrong. Nothing illegal about buying high capacity magazines, anyone can do it any time they like. Even felons can buy high capacity magazines in CA without breaking any laws.
Following bwiese, there is no way that transaction is legal within California; that the buyer has committed no crime does not mean he has not participated in one.
__________________
Calguns Wiki, Magazine Qs, Knife laws

Unless there is some way to amend a bill so you would support it,
the details do not matter until the Governor signs or allows the bill to become law.

Ask CA law questions in the How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me Forum
- most questions that start 'Is it legal ...' go there.

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.



Last edited by Librarian; 10-06-2008 at 11:25 AM..
  #30  
Old 10-06-2008, 11:25 AM
stphnman20's Avatar
stphnman20 stphnman20 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: SCV
Posts: 6,603
iTrader: 26 / 100%
Default

This should be a sticky!
  #31  
Old 10-06-2008, 11:36 AM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 32,750
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by uclaplinker View Post

Quote:
(27) The sale of, giving of, lending of,
importation into this state of, or purchase of, any
large-capacity magazine, to or by entities that operate
armored vehicle businesses pursuant to the laws of this
state.
The preceding would indicate that the entities who operate an armored vehicle business are legally exempt from importing, buying and selling large capacity magazines.
I don't think that's right, but I do think the language is sloppy.

I read it as
The sale of, giving of, lending of, ... any large-capacity magazine, to entities that operate armored vehicle businesses

and

purchase of any large-capacity magazine, by entities that operate armored vehicle businesses

but excluding
The sale of, giving of, lending of ... by entities that operate armored vehicle businesses

While a drafting error is certainly possible - they started with a conceptual error - I would be surprised if it was legislative intent to set up armored vehicle businesses as secondarily large-capacity magazine vendors.
__________________
Calguns Wiki, Magazine Qs, Knife laws

Unless there is some way to amend a bill so you would support it,
the details do not matter until the Governor signs or allows the bill to become law.

Ask CA law questions in the How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me Forum
- most questions that start 'Is it legal ...' go there.

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


  #32  
Old 10-06-2008, 12:00 PM
aplinker's Avatar
aplinker aplinker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: West LA
Posts: 16,828
iTrader: 92 / 100%
Default

Tim,

It's been a while since this was originally hashed, and I read the hi-cap permit sections, but this exemption states FFL holders are exempt from buying and selling restrictions:
Quote:
(21) The sale or purchase of any large-capacity
magazine to or by a person licensed pursuant to Section
12071.
Can you show me code where it says otherwise?

I'm NOT suggesting FFLs start selling hi-caps tomorrow.

Both Gene and Wes were highly involved in this original discussion and came to the same conclusion, though things could have changed/further information found since then.



Quote:
Originally Posted by FortCourageArmory View Post
MMG,
While it may not be illegal for you to buy a hi-cap mag in CA, it is certainly illegal for me (an FFL holder and in possession of a hi-cap permit) to sell a hi-cap mag to anyone that is listed under the exemption PC.

As a possible side issue, this could also subject the buyer to CA's murky conspiracy laws. Conspiracy to commit a misdemeanor is a felony. That kind of thing. Not 100% likely, but possible. All it takes is an over-eager ADA and we all have a bad day.
__________________

Google Map of OLL Dealers

List of CA-friendly Manufacturers, Dealers, Middlemen, and Magazine rebuild kit dealers
Click me-->So you're a n00b and you want to build an AR? <--Click me
This post is based on actual events. Some facts may be altered for dramatic purposes. All posts are pure opinion. All persons, living and dead, are purely coincidental, and should not be construed.
  #33  
Old 10-06-2008, 12:00 PM
aplinker's Avatar
aplinker aplinker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: West LA
Posts: 16,828
iTrader: 92 / 100%
Default

Again, intent is irrelevant. The language is clear.

I think you're again reading into a clear phrasing something that isn't there.

How can you make that conclusion below? I would never do that based upon the quotation for any other law. You're adding something that's not in the words, based upon a preconceived intent you think the legislature wanted to make?

There's no ambiguity in "or" - each of those actions to an armored vehicle operator is exempt. Each of those actions by an armored vehicle operator is exempt.

Quote:
(27) The sale of, giving of, lending of,
importation into this state of, or purchase of, any
large-capacity magazine, to or by entities that operate
armored vehicle businesses pursuant to the laws of this
state.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
I don't think that's right, but I do think the language is sloppy.

I read it as
The sale of, giving of, lending of, ... any large-capacity magazine, to entities that operate armored vehicle businesses

and

purchase of any large-capacity magazine, by entities that operate armored vehicle businesses

but excluding
The sale of, giving of, lending of ... by entities that operate armored vehicle businesses

While a drafting error is certainly possible - they started with a conceptual error - I would be surprised if it was legislative intent to set up armored vehicle businesses as secondarily large-capacity magazine vendors.
__________________

Google Map of OLL Dealers

List of CA-friendly Manufacturers, Dealers, Middlemen, and Magazine rebuild kit dealers
Click me-->So you're a n00b and you want to build an AR? <--Click me
This post is based on actual events. Some facts may be altered for dramatic purposes. All posts are pure opinion. All persons, living and dead, are purely coincidental, and should not be construed.

Last edited by aplinker; 10-06-2008 at 12:04 PM..
  #34  
Old 10-06-2008, 1:01 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 32,750
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by uclaplinker View Post
Again, intent is irrelevant. The language is clear.

I think you're again reading into a clear phrasing something that isn't there.

How can you make that conclusion below? I would never do that based upon the quotation for any other law. You're adding something that's not in the words, based upon a preconceived intent you think the legislature wanted to make?

There's no ambiguity in "or" - each of those actions to an armored vehicle operator is exempt. Each of those actions by an armored vehicle operator is exempt.
I have to agree that, based on what I've seen elsewhere, if that bit came before a judge I would expect he'd say "Well, that's the way they wrote it." Intent doesn't trump clear language. (It sometimes trumps murky language.)

And (b)(21), as you've already noted, allows FFLs to buy and sell large-capacity magazines.

Let me put up the whole set of exceptions here - I didn't think there was room in the first post:
Quote:
(b) Subdivision (a) does not apply to any of the following:
...
(19) The sale of, giving of, lending of, importation into this
state of, or purchase of, any large-capacity magazine to or by any
federal, state, county, city and county, or city agency that is
charged with the enforcement of any law, for use by agency employees
in the discharge of their official duties whether on or off duty, and
where the use is authorized by the agency and is within the course
and scope of their duties.
(20) The sale to, lending to, transfer to, purchase by, receipt
of, or importation into this state of, a large-capacity magazine by a
sworn peace officer as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with
Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2 who is authorized to carry a
firearm in the course and scope of his or her duties.
(21) The sale or purchase of any large-capacity magazine to or by
a person licensed pursuant to Section 12071.

(22) The loan of a lawfully possessed large-capacity magazine
between two individuals if all of the following conditions are met:
(A) The person being loaned the large-capacity magazine is not
prohibited by Section 12021, 12021.1, or 12101 of this code or
Section 8100 or 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code from
possessing firearms or ammunition.
(B) The loan of the large-capacity magazine occurs at a place or
location where the possession of the large-capacity magazine is not
otherwise prohibited and the person who lends the large-capacity
magazine remains in the accessible vicinity of the person to whom the
large-capacity magazine is loaned.
(23) 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 large-capacity magazine previously lawfully
possessed in the state.
(24) The lending or giving of any large-capacity magazine to a
person licensed pursuant to Section 12071, or to a gunsmith, for the
purposes of maintenance, repair, or modification of that
large-capacity magazine.
(25) The return to its owner of any large-capacity magazine by a
person specified in paragraph (24).
(26) The importation into this state of, or sale of, any
large-capacity magazine by a person who has been issued a permit to
engage in those activities pursuant to Section 12079, when those
activities are in accordance with the terms and conditions of that
permit.
(27) The sale of, giving of, lending of, importation into this
state of, or purchase of, any large-capacity magazine, to or by
entities that operate armored vehicle businesses pursuant to the laws
of this state.
(28) The lending of large-capacity magazines by the entities
specified in paragraph (27) to their authorized employees, while in
the course and scope of their employment for purposes that pertain to
the entity's armored vehicle business.
(29) The return of those large-capacity magazines to those
entities specified in paragraph (27) by those employees specified in
paragraph (28).
(30) (A) The manufacture of a large-capacity magazine for any
federal, state, county, city and county, or city agency that is
charged with the enforcement of any law, for use by agency employees
in the discharge of their official duties whether on or off duty, and
where the use is authorized by the agency and is within the course
and scope of their duties.
(B) The manufacture of a large-capacity magazine for use by a
sworn peace officer as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with
Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2 who is authorized to carry a
firearm in the course and scope of his or her duties.
(C) The manufacture of a large-capacity magazine for export or for
sale to government agencies or the military pursuant to applicable
federal regulations.
(31) The loan of a large-capacity magazine for use solely as a
prop for a motion picture, television, or video production.
(32) The purchase of a large-capacity magazine by the holder of a
special weapons permit issued pursuant to Section 12095, 12230,
12250, 12286, or 12305, for any of the following purposes:
(A) For use solely as a prop for a motion picture, television, or
video production.
(B) For export pursuant to federal regulations.
(C) For resale to law enforcement agencies, government agencies,
or the military, pursuant to applicable federal regulations.
(b)(19) through (b)(25) are pretty obvious.

(b)(26) refers to 12079
Quote:
12079. (a) Upon a showing that good cause exists, the Department of
Justice may issue permits for the possession, transportation, or
sale between a person licensed pursuant to Section 12071 and an
out-of-state client, of large capacity magazines.
-- an FFL licensed to import/export large-capacity magazines

Purchase is explicitly mentioned for LE agencies (19), individual LEOs (20), FFLs (21), "armored vehicle businesses" (27), and "holder of a special weapons permit" (32).

I think it odd that purchase is not a prohibited act in general but some purchasers are excepted from 12020(a)(2). It's as if the writers do think purchase is prohibited.

Since FFLs are exempted, maybe it's only private individuals who are prevented from selling to other individuals?

That would be a refreshing conclusion ...
__________________
Calguns Wiki, Magazine Qs, Knife laws

Unless there is some way to amend a bill so you would support it,
the details do not matter until the Governor signs or allows the bill to become law.

Ask CA law questions in the How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me Forum
- most questions that start 'Is it legal ...' go there.

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


  #35  
Old 10-06-2008, 1:18 PM
aplinker's Avatar
aplinker aplinker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: West LA
Posts: 16,828
iTrader: 92 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
....snip....

I think it odd that purchase is not a prohibited act in general but some purchasers are excepted from 12020(a)(2). It's as if the writers do think purchase is prohibited.

Since FFLs are exempted, maybe it's only private individuals who are prevented from selling to other individuals?

That would be a refreshing conclusion ...
That's the conclusion that was come to here:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=48794

It gets interesting around post #70
__________________

Google Map of OLL Dealers

List of CA-friendly Manufacturers, Dealers, Middlemen, and Magazine rebuild kit dealers
Click me-->So you're a n00b and you want to build an AR? <--Click me
This post is based on actual events. Some facts may be altered for dramatic purposes. All posts are pure opinion. All persons, living and dead, are purely coincidental, and should not be construed.
  #36  
Old 10-06-2008, 1:18 PM
MonsterMan's Avatar
MonsterMan MonsterMan is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: L.A.
Posts: 1,524
iTrader: 28 / 100%
Default

That was my point as well. Maybe they only wanted the sale of magazines to be done so by legal hi-cap mag license holders, not for individual to individual.
__________________
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid." -Han Solo
  #37  
Old 10-06-2008, 1:21 PM
aplinker's Avatar
aplinker aplinker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: West LA
Posts: 16,828
iTrader: 92 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MonsterMan View Post
That was my point as well. Maybe they only wanted the sale of magazines to be done so by legal hi-cap mag license holders, not for individual to individual.
12071 refers to FFLs - not even hi-cap license holders - so a better way to state it would be something along the lines of "only hi-cap license holders and armored truck carriers can import, but all FFLs and armored truck carriers can sell."

While this is a rehash of a year old discussion, it hasn't been brought up again, and perhaps should be...
__________________

Google Map of OLL Dealers

List of CA-friendly Manufacturers, Dealers, Middlemen, and Magazine rebuild kit dealers
Click me-->So you're a n00b and you want to build an AR? <--Click me
This post is based on actual events. Some facts may be altered for dramatic purposes. All posts are pure opinion. All persons, living and dead, are purely coincidental, and should not be construed.
  #38  
Old 10-06-2008, 1:58 PM
Jpach's Avatar
Jpach Jpach is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Santa Clarita
Posts: 4,721
iTrader: 27 / 100%
Default

Ok, it seems yall are swinging back and forth with your interpretations on the aforementioned written laws. So how many believe that it is indeed legal for FFLs with highcap mag permits to SELL to the average Joe. Note how Im not asking who thinks its a good idea for them to do so, so please give answers relevent to my question and list exactly why you believe you are correct. No "Hater" comments allowed.
  #39  
Old 10-06-2008, 2:18 PM
jacques jacques is offline
Senior Member
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Goleta
Posts: 2,484
iTrader: 24 / 100%
Default

So, who is going to be the first FFL to start selling "Hi cap" magazines?
  #40  
Old 10-06-2008, 2:21 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 32,750
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by uclaplinker View Post
That's the conclusion that was come to here:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=48794

It gets interesting around post #70
Fer Pete's sake, 589 posts and I never looked at it (I just used Search to see if I had ever posted in it - seems no - and I don't recall reading that). Goes off on an interesting tangent on OLLs about post 320.
__________________
Calguns Wiki, Magazine Qs, Knife laws

Unless there is some way to amend a bill so you would support it,
the details do not matter until the Governor signs or allows the bill to become law.

Ask CA law questions in the How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me Forum
- most questions that start 'Is it legal ...' go there.

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


Closed Thread

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 6:16 PM.




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.