Legality of "hi-cap" mags

[Spyguy]

I know that mags greater than 10 rounds are legal if owned pre-ban. Fortunately, I had the foresight to purchase a number of (so-called) "hi-cap" AR mags before the ban went into effect, even though I didn't own an AR rifle at the time.

But in a legal sense, how does one prove that hi-caps they were purchased pre-ban? Sales receipts? What if you don't have receipts (or other proof of pre-ban ownership)? More importantly, how would the DA prove that you didn't own them pre-ban?

Now for some hypothetical questions...

1. What is to prevent someone from traveling out-of-state, purchasing hi-cap mags, bringing them back, and claiming they are pre-ban? Let's assume the guy isn't stupid and only buys mags that really were manufactured pre-ban.

2. Isn't it legal for someone to move into California and bring his hi-cap mags with him? Isn't it also legal for him, now as a California resident, to privately sell his hi-cap mags? Again, how would the DA be able to distinguish these from hi-cap mags that someone brought into the state from travel?

I'm not suggesting anyone try to break or circumvent any laws, I'm just trying to figure out how these STUPID (and unconstitutional) laws are being applied.

[Merc1138]

1. Nothing stops this till you forget the 5th I suppose, but the reality is that it's still not legal.

2. Illegal. Even if you owned the LARGE CAP mags(as defined by p.c., damn I hate "hi-cap" being used to describe normal capacity magazines, not sure why that bugs me so much, but whatever) prior to the ban, if you didn't have them here you can't bring them with you, and you certainly can't sell them here.

[Dismal_Scientist]

Welcome to Calguns

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...21&postcount=5

[Lateralus]

Originally Posted by Spyguy

I know that mags greater than 10 rounds are legal if owned pre-ban. Fortunately, I had the foresight to purchase a number of (so-called) "hi-cap" AR mags before the ban went into effect, even though I didn't own an AR rifle at the time.

But in a legal sense, how does one prove that hi-caps they were purchased pre-ban? Sales receipts? What if you don't have receipts (or other proof of pre-ban ownership)? More importantly, how would the DA prove that you didn't own them pre-ban?

Fortunately, the phrase innocent until proven guilty still applies here. More importantly, there is NO LAW prohibiting ownership of standard capacity magazines. If you get asked about them, tell them the truth: that you had them before the ban. If a LEO (or DA) wanted to prosecute you for them, they would have to PROVE that you imported, bought, loaned, manufactured, or borrowed them. You dont need proof. They would.

Now for some hypothetical questions...

Go for it.

1. What is to prevent someone from traveling out-of-state, purchasing hi-cap mags, bringing them back, and claiming they are pre-ban? Let's assume the guy isn't stupid and only buys mags that really were manufactured pre-ban.

Because Importation of standard capacity magazines into the state is ILLEGAL. What stops you from shoplifting? Same thing.

2. Isn't it legal for someone to move into California and bring his hi-cap mags with him? Isn't it also legal for him, now as a California resident, to privately sell his hi-cap mags? Again, how would the DA be able to distinguish these from hi-cap mags that someone brought into the state from travel?

I honestly do not know 100% about the first part. My knee-jerk reaction is no, he cannot, because that would be importation. He could disassemble them and bring them in as parts. Again, Im not 100% sure.

As for the second part, he could sell them if he wants to risk going to jail over 30 bucks. Very illegal.

I'm not suggesting anyone try to break or circumvent any laws, I'm just trying to figure out how these STUPID (and unconstitutional) laws are being applied.

Poorly.

[bwiese]

Originally Posted by Spyguy

I know that mags greater than 10 rounds are legal if owned
pre-ban. Fortunately, I had the foresight to purchase a number
of (so-called) "hi-cap" AR mags before the ban went into effect,
even though I didn't own an AR rifle at the time.

Good man! Many of us had the foresight to buy mags for guns we didn't even own.

But in a legal sense, how does one prove that hi-caps they were
purchased pre-ban? Sales receipts? What if you don't have receipts
(or other proof of pre-ban ownership)? More importantly, how would
the DA prove that you didn't own them pre-ban?

Burden of proof is on the prosecution, innocent until proven guilty. You don't have to say anything - THEY have to prove criminal importation, acquisition or manufacture. And the law is clear that possession is legal.

In fact the law was written such that you just needed to possess/acquire the mags for a microsecond within CA before 1/1/2000 - no residency required.

If you drove in from Arizona and bought a hicap in 1995 at the Pomona show, you - as an Arizona resident - can still bring that hicap mag back into CA! You can leave and reenter CA anytime with those pre-2000 hicap mags you owned/acquired in CA: maybe you moved out in 1998 with those mags and are returning today, or maybe you just left CA for a 2 day shooting trip.
Duration of leaving CA is irrelevant - only that you had the mags in CA before 2000.

In fact, the only folk busted for hicap mag violations are ones that get popped for stupid crap like getting stopped crossing the NV or AZ border coming back from a gunshow, having credit card info showing mail order purchases of hicap mags, openly admitting illegal acquisition, etc.

If questioned by anyone about your mags' status, the only acceptable truthful answer (beyond "Get a fookin' lawyer!") is, "Penal Code section 12020(a)(2) only bans acquisition or manufacture after 2000; I am allowed to continue to possess these magazines because they were acquired by me in California before 2000." Period.

I will note that a person who lies/perjures himself about hicap mag issues may be committing worse crime(s) than any mag issues. If in doubt about mag status, the only answer is "Shuddup and talk to my lawyer." Period.

And while we do keep saying "possession is legal", only stupid folks would assert that possession of a hicap for a gun that didn't exist until after 2000 is kosher. Sorry, that just smells bad right off the bat - that might be one of the cases where you'd really have to prove otherwise (which you can't).

1. What is to prevent someone from traveling out-of-state,
purchasing hi-cap mags, bringing them back, and claiming
they are pre-ban? Let's assume the guy isn't stupid and
only buys mags that really were manufactured pre-ban.

Nothing. Most all laws are like this - nothing stops you other than fear of getting caught, and the felony charges, and prospective penalties.

2. Isn't it legal for someone to move into California and
bring his hi-cap mags with him?

Generally, NO.

But there's one exception: if that person did acquire some mags in CA before 2000, he can bring back those particular hicap mags into CA today. Calif. residency, or lack thereof, is not an issue - only that the individual was paired with the magazine in CA before 2000 and remains paired with it today.

Isn't it also legal for him, now as a California resident, to
privately sell his hi-cap mags?

If a person has legal hicap mags in CA (i.e, acquired before 2000 in CA), he cannot sell them to other ordinary Californians. He may be able to sell them outta state - that's a bit murky, IIRC, but I don't think LEs/DAs really dislike hicap mags leaving CA. The mags could also be disassembled and sold as spare parts to anyone for either lawful magazine repair purposes, or for creation of permanently-restricted 10rd magazines. (Many folks make "looks like 30" mags holding only 10rds.)

Again, how would the DA be able to distinguish these from
hi-cap mags that someone brought into the state from travel?

He can't. Even date stamps and toolmarks are irrelevant since modern post-2000 parts might well be used to repair a worn 1980s magazine. In fact, some highly worn magazines might eventually have all parts replaced in them over time with new post-2000 parts. (perfectly legal)

But please don't confuse illegality vs. abilty to get caught vs. a law that's essentially unenforceable (except for the stupid and talkative).

The DA can't, unless the possessor screws up & leaves tracks.

[thedrickel]

[leelaw]

Originally Posted by Spyguy

But in a legal sense, how does one prove that hi-caps they were purchased pre-ban? Sales receipts? What if you don't have receipts (or other proof of pre-ban ownership)? More importantly, how would the DA prove that you didn't own them pre-ban?

You don't need to prove ownerhsip, the DA needs to prove you broke the law.

1. What is to prevent someone from traveling out-of-state, purchasing hi-cap mags, bringing them back, and claiming they are pre-ban? Let's assume the guy isn't stupid and only buys mags that really were manufactured pre-ban.

Ethics, a conscience, morals.. the things that also keep you from robbing the liquor store when you go grab a beer.

2. Isn't it legal for someone to move into California and bring his hi-cap mags with him? Isn't it also legal for him, now as a California resident, to privately sell his hi-cap mags? Again, how would the DA be able to distinguish these from hi-cap mags that someone brought into the state from travel?

Illegal to import, illegal to expose for sale.

[gn3hz3ku1*]

Originally Posted by bwiese

Good man! Many of us had the foresight to buy mags for guns we didn't even own.

uhhh i didnt do it by foresight.. i did it because i thought they
were cool thank god i was such a poser then... hey i was young! but then i guess i am still a poser

[xrMike]

Originally Posted by bwiese

Good man! Many of us had the foresight to buy mags for guns we didn't even own.

(excellent discussion of the finer details of Hi/Std Cap mags deleted... )

The DA can't, unless the possessor screws up & leaves tracks.

This post (or its distilled contents) along with the Allison Merrilees letter (linked to earlier in this thread) should be combined and made into a sticky. It would answer just about every POSSIBLE question, real and hypothetical, about Hi/Std Cap Mags in California.

[MasterYong]

I'm sure this has been asked in other threads but since we have a new thread today why not:

Has anyone actually been charged and convicted with importation, sale, or manufacture since the ban?

It just seems that unless you had a terrible lawyer, or the prosecuting attorney had receipts, that it would be nearly impossible to prosecute one of these cases seeing how rebuilds are legal (even replacing 100% of parts), and possession is not a crime. I'm not asking to encourage anyone to break the law- it just seems that with the "high-cap" magazine laws the deck is really stacked against the prosecutors.

Every time I read one of these threads it makes me want to dig my granpa's old war stuff out of storage. He died somewhere around 95 I think (can't remember, but it was definitely pre-2000) and when we split up his stuff I took all his military gear (because I was very young and thought it was SOOOO COOOOOLLLL). I know there's a helmet (maybe two I think), some ammo cans, uniforms, a knife, tools of some kind, ammo of some kind (that has the tips painted red, white, and blue- I don't know why but he told me when I was young that they weren't live as he pulled the bullets and removed the powder a long time ago... don't know why), and all kinds of other neat relics. It would be so cool if I inadvertently had mags that would fit my M1A or an AR variant and not even know it. I don't think I ever even went through all of the ammo cans, though I do remember that there are some shell casings and medals in one (purple heart and such). I think I have three whole boxes of the stuff he kept from his service. One of these days I'll check I guess, it's in the very very back of storage so it'd be a damn pain to get. Seems unlikely there'd be any AR mags though- I think he was only in the military until the very early 60s and the last war he was in was Korea. Even if there were any in there I don't think I'd ever use them- I'm too young to reasonably convince an LEO that I had them pre-ban.

[Scratch705]

you can be a baby and have pre-ban magazines. you only need to be born to have them.

magazine purchase/ownership doesn't have an age limit....

[ap3572001]

I heard this topic before. Its easy, if You give a specific example. If say You own a Beretta 92 or Sig 226 and have several high caps its one thing. If You got and XD45 with few Hi Caps it will tough to explain how You got them.

[DisgruntledReaper]

Here is another angle no one has mentioned...from 1994/5 til 2004 (correct me on the time frame if needed) NEWLY made 'hicap' mags had to be stamped with a date of mfr or were stamped 'leo/military use only'(what a bunch of F&*^K) -sorry anyway- IF you have ANY magazine bodies that are IN ANYWAY marked that they were made AFTER 2000 then you BETTER have an old beatup mag body to prove you are using the new body AS A REPLACEMENT/REPAIR part..otherwise you are in some bad JUJU.....I think the nimrods who have been busted for mags have had newly made ones with date stamps or other id markings indicating post 2000 mfr.

Also,yea if you buy a FN-P pistol or some other post 2000 firearm and have 'standard mags'- as opposed to the 'decreased capacity'-ie 10 rd mags, with you and you get in trouble..you cant say they were preban because they did not exist then. Thats why tommy guns,HK 91,93,94, AR,FAL,M1A,AK,any PRE 2000 existing firearm is desireable ....

Also, if you have and take any 'std capacity' mags wiht you out of PRK and come back with them...dont have ANY receipts,gunshow tickets, any papers that may get you in trouble EVEN if you did not buy any mags....just wen to look or stop by on the road trip. Cops and DA's ARE NOT your 'friends' in this situation.....and remember your rights and dont give them up..ever...

Hope this helps also

[stix213]

Originally Posted by Spyguy

But in a legal sense, how does one prove that hi-caps they were purchased pre-ban? Sales receipts? What if you don't have receipts (or other proof of pre-ban ownership)? More importantly, how would the DA prove that you didn't own them pre-ban?

You don't have to prove anything, law enforcement has to prove you imported or manufactured the high-cap mag. Although if you do have receipts that certainly would go a long way to proving your innocence if you are facing a false charge.

1. What is to prevent someone from traveling out-of-state, purchasing hi-cap mags, bringing them back, and claiming they are pre-ban? Let's assume the guy isn't stupid and only buys mags that really were manufactured pre-ban.

Fear of prison *** rape can be a powerful motivator. I'd have a stack of illegal high caps if prison consisted of video games and high class prostitutes provided by the state, but unfortunately it doesn't. So the fact that not having to change mags every ten rounds isn't really worth being pinned down and.... (use imagination here for why it is better to change mags every 10 rounds than experience prison love)

2. Isn't it legal for someone to move into California and bring his hi-cap mags with him? Isn't it also legal for him, now as a California resident, to privately sell his hi-cap mags? Again, how would the DA be able to distinguish these from hi-cap mags that someone brought into the state from travel?

You had to have owned them in California before the ban, which probably means you didn't just drive through but were a resident for at least a small period of time. If you legally own high caps you still can't privately sell them though, unless you want a taste of that prison love thing again.

I'm not suggesting anyone try to break or circumvent any laws, I'm just trying to figure out how these STUPID (and unconstitutional) laws are being applied.

In a nutshell, if you don't already have them you aren't going to get them unless you just happen to stumble on some old rusted one out in the woods or what I am really hoping for is if you are accidentally shipped a high cap when you ordered a 10 round mag.

[nstuyt]

Isnt their a clause somewhere that they can be "grandfathered" to you if you weren't born at the time the ban went into effect?

[stix213]

Originally Posted by MasterYong

I'm sure this has been asked in other threads but since we have a new thread today why not:

Has anyone actually been charged and convicted with importation, sale, or manufacture since the ban?

It just seems that unless you had a terrible lawyer, or the prosecuting attorney had receipts, that it would be nearly impossible to prosecute one of these cases seeing how rebuilds are legal (even replacing 100% of parts), and possession is not a crime. I'm not asking to encourage anyone to break the law- it just seems that with the "high-cap" magazine laws the deck is really stacked against the prosecutors.

Every time I read one of these threads it makes me want to dig my granpa's old war stuff out of storage. He died somewhere around 95 I think (can't remember, but it was definitely pre-2000) and when we split up his stuff I took all his military gear (because I was very young and thought it was SOOOO COOOOOLLLL). I know there's a helmet (maybe two I think), some ammo cans, uniforms, a knife, tools of some kind, ammo of some kind (that has the tips painted red, white, and blue- I don't know why but he told me when I was young that they weren't live as he pulled the bullets and removed the powder a long time ago... don't know why), and all kinds of other neat relics. It would be so cool if I inadvertently had mags that would fit my M1A or an AR variant and not even know it. I don't think I ever even went through all of the ammo cans, though I do remember that there are some shell casings and medals in one (purple heart and such). I think I have three whole boxes of the stuff he kept from his service. One of these days I'll check I guess, it's in the very very back of storage so it'd be a damn pain to get. Seems unlikely there'd be any AR mags though- I think he was only in the military until the very early 60s and the last war he was in was Korea. Even if there were any in there I don't think I'd ever use them- I'm too young to reasonably convince an LEO that I had them pre-ban.

If you have pre-ban mags for any rifle in your storage, like for his M14 or something, if it were me I would go buy the rifle to fit the mags and not worry about them fitting your AR.

[stix213]

Originally Posted by nstuyt

Isnt their a clause somewhere that they can be "grandfathered" to you if you weren't born at the time the ban went into effect?

Nope

[bwiese]

Originally Posted by MasterYong

I'm sure this has been asked in other threads but since we have a new thread today why not:

Has anyone actually been charged and convicted with importation, sale, or manufacture since the ban?

I'm fairly certain people have been popped for importation.
There may even be some ongoing cases.

There have been bogus hicap charges where cop/DA does not know that possession of a pre-2000 hicap is indeed legal. CGF represented a Calgunner in that situation and a SoCal PD has been reeducated: he has his guns and mags back (or is in LEGR stage - gotta check we made it to completion).

It just seems that unless you had a terrible lawyer, or the prosecuting attorney had receipts, that it would be nearly impossible to prosecute one of these cases seeing how rebuilds are legal (even replacing 100% of parts), and possession is not a crime. I'm not asking to encourage anyone to break the law- it just seems that with the "high-cap" magazine laws the deck is really stacked against the prosecutors.

Yes but never underestimate the stupidity of folks to talk without a lawyer present.

[bwiese]

Originally Posted by DisgruntledReaper

Here is another angle no one has mentioned...from 1994/5 til 2004 (correct me on the time frame if needed) NEWLY made 'hicap' mags had to be stamped with a date of mfr or were stamped 'leo/military use only'(what a bunch of F&*^K) -sorry anyway- IF you have ANY magazine bodies that are IN ANYWAY marked that they were made AFTER 2000 then you BETTER have an old beatup mag body to prove you are using the new body AS A REPLACEMENT/REPAIR part..otherwise you are in some bad JUJU.....I think the nimrods who have been busted for mags have had newly made ones with date stamps or other id markings indicating post 2000 mfr.

Wrong. Marked items on mag tubes are not probative since it's entirely legal to replace mag parts for repair.

The hicap mag cases I know of were just bogus ones because they thought all hicaps were banned - or there was evidence of importation or manufacture.

Remember burden of proof is on the prosecution.

The only really worrisome situation is hicap mags for guns that weren't in production til after 2000.

Also,yea if you buy a FN-P pistol or some other post 2000 firearm and have 'standard mags'- as opposed to the 'decreased capacity'-ie 10 rd mags, with you and you get in trouble..you cant say they were preban because they did not exist then.

True, as I pointed out above.

if you have and take any 'std capacity' mags wiht you out of PRK and come back with them...dont have ANY receipts,gunshow tickets, any papers that may get you in trouble EVEN if you did not buy any mags....just wen to look or stop by on the road trip. Cops and DA's ARE NOT your 'friends' in this situation.....and remember your rights and dont give them up..ever...

I travel to NV from CA, sometimes I bring an AR or two (reg'd CA AW) and hicap mags to shoot in the NV desert or at Pyramid range. And I may or may not go to an NV gunshow on that particular trip.

I'd love to be pulled over crossing the CA border and popped for possession of my own property.

[hkdad]

hi cap = normal or regular capacity
10 rounds = castrated regular capacity magazine

IMHO, calling a regular or normal capacity magazine is not hi cap.
and i agree with you. Kalifornia has BS gun laws!

[just4fun63]

Originally Posted by bwiese

I'd love to be pulled over crossing the CA border and popped for possession of my own property.

It would be a opportunity to do some education on the subject. Not to mention your early retirement do to a unexpected cash influx.

[RobT2K]

Originally Posted by thedrickel

Not getting the reference.
Anyone?

[MasterYong]

Originally Posted by stix213

If you have pre-ban mags for any rifle in your storage, like for his M14 or something, if it were me I would go buy the rifle to fit the mags and not worry about them fitting your AR.

LOL of course!

It would just be mighty convenient if I inadvertently had mags for guns I already own. Knowing my grandfather's dates of service, any mags in his stuff were probably for guns I'm not that interested in- though it is possible there're M14 mags in there. I didn't even really think about it until last week or so...

[Librarian]

Originally Posted by hkdad

hi cap = normal or regular capacity
10 rounds = castrated regular capacity magazine

IMHO, calling a regular or normal capacity magazine is not hi cap.
and i agree with you. Kalifornia has BS gun laws!

Except in the California legal context, the statutory term is 'large-capacity magazine' and when talking CA law, it is necessary to use CA legal terms, no matter how divorced from objective reality those terms may be.

Use whatever you want in other conversations.

Updated the Wiki FAQ http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/in...t_MAGAZINES%3F to add this thread as a discussion.

[aplinker]

Originally Posted by leelaw

Ethics, a conscience, morals.. the things that also keep you from robbing the liquor store when you go grab a beer.

So legality is what dictates right and wrong?

That's a pretty narrow, and I'd argue wrong, view of morals & ethics.

I would say a better answer is, "Not wanting to commit a crime."

[Spyguy]

Originally Posted by Merc1138

... LARGE CAP mags(as defined by p.c., damn I hate "hi-cap" being used to describe normal capacity magazines, not sure why that bugs me so much, but whatever)

Concur. That's why I wrote: (so-called) "hi-cap" mags. Sorry, I forgot the California legal term is "large capacity". But whatever the word, "large" or "high", used to describe ANY capacity magazines (much less "standard issue" capacity magazines), it's still BS. And that's why it bugs us so.

[Spyguy]

Originally Posted by Dismal_Scientist

Welcome to Calguns

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...21&postcount=5

Thanks for the welcome and the informative link. I'm a member of other firearms forums and I've been lurking here a while so I didn't realize this was my first post on Calguns.net. I'm really glad to be here!

[leelaw]

Originally Posted by uclaplinker

So legality is what dictates right and wrong?

That's a pretty narrow, and I'd argue wrong, view of morals & ethics.

I would say a better answer is, "Not wanting to commit a crime."

Would that not be an ethical choice on your part?

Somehow Kant comes to mind on that one..

[bwiese]

Originally Posted by just4fun63

It would be a opportunity to do some education on the subject. Not to mention your early retirement do to a unexpected cash influx.

Probably not, or just trivial amount + lawyer's fees..

However, I'm most glad to help gun attorneys be well-compensated by the state.

Anytime you can slap an LE agency, you do it.

[Spyguy]

Originally Posted by TomV

Welcome !

Cool name "SpyGuy". Are you really a spy ?

Thank you and thank you.

In a previous career, I was a military intelligence officer. An ex-gf gave me the nickname.

[Sniper3142]

Originally Posted by DisgruntledReaper

Here is another angle no one has mentioned...from 1994/5 til 2004 (correct me on the time frame if needed) NEWLY made 'hicap' mags had to be stamped with a date of mfr or were stamped 'leo/military use only'(what a bunch of F&*^K) -sorry anyway- IF you have ANY magazine bodies that are IN ANYWAY marked that they were made AFTER 2000 then you BETTER have an old beatup mag body to prove you are using the new body AS A REPLACEMENT/REPAIR part..otherwise you are in some bad JUJU

As someone already said...

WRONG

Date stamps mean Nothing. You can LEGALLY replace any or all parts of your 10+ round magazines with Brand New parts. That includes magazine parts made AFTER 2000 (PMag is a common example).

And you don't need to keep receipts or the old magazine parts either.

[McCrown]

I'm going to throw another wrench in here:

What is inheriting or finding a family member's, who has passed on, magazines?

[hkdad]

Originally Posted by McCrown

I'm going to throw another wrench in here:

What is inheriting or finding a family member's, who has passed on, magazines?

or finding a couple of magazines in the dumpster or you found it at a range or or or.... like they said... DA has to prove it that it is illegal.

[Spyguy]

Originally Posted by Lateralus

Because Importation of standard capacity magazines into the state is ILLEGAL. What stops you from shoplifting? Same thing.

Sorry, but I disagree. I think most good people do not do wrong because they know it is wrong, not because the wrongful act has been codified and made "ILLEGAL". On the other hand, it is common for people to violate capricious laws when those laws have no moral or ethical basis.

Originally Posted by leelaw

Ethics, a conscience, morals.. the things that also keep you from robbing the liquor store when you go grab a beer.

You are correct in that I do not steal or rob because it is ethically and morally wrong to do so (NOT because there is a law dictating that I shouldn't).

But is there anything ethically and morally wrong with possessing a "large-capacity" magazine? Clearly there is not, even by California's cockeyed standards, as it's lawful for some California residents to own and use large-capacity magazines (seems to me that this law could be fought on an equal protection clause, but I'm not a lawyer).

As for capricious, I can think of no better example than "10 or less rounds = Good, 11 or more rounds = Evil". Last I heard, the only thing morally significant about the number ten had to do with stone tablets and the word of God.

Now let's take this argument a step further... what if the law is not only capricious, but is also unjust and violates an even higher law? Despite the word-smithing, parsing, and revisionist "living document" interpretation of modern day would-be tyrants (and their useful idiots), the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution clearly states that our right to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed. I read no exception in that amendment for so-called "large capacity" magazines.

What most people fail to realize is that the Bill of Rights does not grant us any rights. It affirmatively declares that we, the people, innately possess these INALIENABLE natural rights by birth and by existence. The purpose of the Bill of Rights is NOT to tell us what we can do, but to RESTRICT THE GOVERNMENT from violating our natural rights.

That said, I am not saying that I intend to violate SB 23, as capricious and unjust and unconstitutional as it may be. Even though my natural inalienable rights trump ANY laws written by the city, state, or federal governments, I do not have the resources to solely fight the growing tyranny of our current governments. Nor am I advocating that anyone else do so either. (Although we should do everything possible to overturn this law and every other unconstitutional infringement on our rights.) My point for this thesis is to convince you that it is not analogous to compare the "illegal" act of possessing post-ban large capacity magazines with that of shoplifting or robbing a liquor store.

[Spyguy]

Originally Posted by MasterYong

ammo of some kind (that has the tips painted red, white, and blue- I don't know why but he told me when I was young that they weren't live as he pulled the bullets and removed the powder a long time ago... don't know why)

I wouldn't trust that ammo to be inert until you personally have the bullets pulled and the primers removed. After that, I would drill the cases before replacing the bullets so the cartridges could never be confused with live ammo.

[Librarian]

Originally Posted by McCrown

I'm going to throw another wrench in here:

What is inheriting or finding a family member's, who has passed on, magazines?

An illegal transfer.

Originally Posted by hkdad

or finding a couple of magazines in the dumpster or you found it at a range or or or.... like they said... DA has to prove it that it is illegal.

I keep trying to tell people and it keeps not getting through: here's a case where "don't ask, don't tell" works. As a general rule, no LEO is going to try to prosecute LCMags because it's so difficult to prove.

If one is arrested for some other gun-related charge, then it's likely a mag charge might be tossed in to see if it would 'stick'.

[DisgruntledReaper]

from bwiese-
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledReaper
Here is another angle no one has mentioned...from 1994/5 til 2004 (correct me on the time frame if needed) NEWLY made 'hicap' mags had to be stamped with a date of mfr or were stamped 'leo/military use only'(what a bunch of F&*^K) -sorry anyway- IF you have ANY magazine bodies that are IN ANYWAY marked that they were made AFTER 2000 then you BETTER have an old beatup mag body to prove you are using the new body AS A REPLACEMENT/REPAIR part..otherwise you are in some bad JUJU.....I think the nimrods who have been busted for mags have had newly made ones with date stamps or other id markings indicating post 2000 mfr.

Wrong. Marked items on mag tubes are not probative since it's entirely legal to replace mag parts for repair.

The hicap mag cases I know of were just bogus ones because they thought all hicaps were banned - or there was evidence of importation or manufacture.

Remember burden of proof is on the prosecution.

What I meant was ,as i was informed on more than 1 occasion, is that IF you have a mag body dated post 2000 and for some stupid reason you get arrested or charged with illegal hicaps DUE to the date on a mag body,if you retain the original mag body to basically tell them to eff off because it is a replacement part and NO NEW MAG was made..that is the point i was trying to make. By having a post 2000 hicap mag body mag in your possession gives them cause to say tou illegally obtained it ,even though they have to prove it..would they not use the dated part AS PROOF to someone's supposed guilt? if someone produced a beat or damaged body,it would negate the accusation right there....correct me if wrong....

[DisgruntledReaper]

Originally Posted by Sniper3142

As someone already said...

WRONG

Date stamps mean Nothing. You can LEGALLY replace any or all parts of your 10+ round magazines with Brand New parts. That includes magazine parts made AFTER 2000 (PMag is a common example).

And you don't need to keep receipts or the old magazine parts either.

Well i guess the legal advice i received years ago which WAS confirmed with a call to the DOinJ in BallSacramento is totally wrong..BUT i am not the one who is going to test that theory.......i have all the effed up mag bodies so IF i EVER get hauled up for this crap..'BINGO' here are the old parts, so go shove off and go actually get some bad guys....you da twerp...

BTW-glad to see a fellow member in Tustin..I am located here also...howya doin?

[DeanW66]

On a related note: is there any legal concern using large cap mags in a firearm that did not originally come with those? Two hypotheticals specifically come to mind:

scenario A: owner of a Gen 1 or Gen 2 Glock Model 22. Purchased in CA, came with 15 (or 16? I don't recall now) round mags. Owner purchases a Glock 35C, which come with 10-round mags. Mags are essentially identical other than number of rounds - is it trouble if the G22 mag is used with the G35?

scenario B: owner of pre-ban hi-cap Mini-30 mags purchases a Ruger mini-68; the Mini-30 mags sort of work in the Mini-68. Any legal troubles there?

[Scratch705]

i think as long as the magazines are not modified to the point where you can't use them in the original gun that the pre-ban mags were made for, it is ok to use them in other guns that can take the magazines.