?Freedom Week? Mags Question

[paco ramirez]

During ?freedom week? I bought around $3k in magazines of various types and had them shipped to the house I stay at in CA, however I am a New Mexico resident and 07FFL/02SOT. Just want to make sure there isn?t a CA residency requirement to be able to legally use my legal mags while in CA. I?ve been out of the loop on CA firearm laws for around nine years.

Also for ammo purchase, since I’m an FFL I’m exempt from needing to do this new ammo paperwork nonsense, right?

[edgerly779]

Large cap mags still a nuisance ticket and can be seized by leos. Cannot travel with them and come back here with them. Must be blocked before entering Ca. Many posts on this.

[Calisnaps]

As for the Ammo, unless you have a California ID, Drivers LIcense or Military ID. You are going to have a hard time buying it in most stores without it. If the FFL is for a California address I would think you would be okay to have ammunition shipped to the registered address.

[paco ramirez]

Originally Posted by edgerly779

Large cap mags still a nuisance ticket and can be seized by leos. Cannot travel with them and come back here with them. Must be blocked before entering Ca. Many posts on this.

They?ve been in California the entire time, I own them, and they?ve always been in California. I want to use them in California, legally. That?s why I asked.

[Capybara]

As far as the mags, legally, I see no reason you can't go to California and use them, but I'm no Quiet, Librarian or a lawyer ;-) But yes, any cop can seize them as a nuisance, so I would only take a couple at a time out to shoot. And if you do take them out of state, can't legally "import" them back over the state line.

Judge Benitez will likely give us a good ruling on Duncan v. Bonta as far as magazines but the state will appeal it, it will go to the 9th, the 9th will support California's ban, then it will be appealed to SCOTUS. Depending on how many years that takes and what the makeup of SCOTUS is by then, then they could all become legal to do anything with buy, gift, import, etc. but that could take 2-4 years. And Commifornia will likely come up with some other bullshyte illegal and Unconstitutional law that will ban them "again". It's California, that's what our tyrants do.

[Jimi Jah]

Legal trap. I stick with 10's, ammo is expensive too.

I don't have/use blocked 30's either. I don't want any attention.

[ar15robert]

I left a couple cheap mags where I stay when I go to ca. ones that if taken under nuisance I could care less. Just a couple at mags since my armalite is still registered in ca.

[Quiet]

Originally Posted by paco ramirez

During ?freedom week? I bought around $3k in magazines of various types and had them shipped to the house I stay at in CA, however I am a New Mexico resident and 07FFL/02SOT. Just want to make sure there isn?t a CA residency requirement to be able to legally use my legal mags while in CA. I?ve been out of the loop on CA firearm laws for around nine years.

Also for ammo purchase, since I?m an FFL I?m exempt from needing to do this new ammo paperwork nonsense, right?

Since your lawfully acquired large capacity magazines have remain in CA, it is legal for you to posses and use them in a legal manner while in CA.

Use in a legal manner being they cannot be legally utilized in a manner that will cause a firearm to be a prohibited weapon (illegal assault weapon).

It is also legal for you to transport your large capacity magazines out of CA.
However, once you do so, it is illegal (felony) to bring those large capacity magazines back to CA. [PC 32310(a)]


Being an out-of-state firearm manufacturer (07-FFL/02-SOT) makes you exempt from needing to utilize a CA DOJ ammunition vendor or CA FFL dealer to acquire ammo from a non-FFL within CA. [PC 30312(c)(3)]

Being an out-of-state firearm manufacturer (07-FFL/02-SOT) makes you exempt from needing to undergo an ammo DROS and background check, but the CA DOJ licensed ammunition vendor or CA FFL dealer that you are acquiring ammo from is required to collect/copy your info (out-of-state 07-FFL) in order to process your exempt transfer. [PC 30352(e)(6) and 11 CCR 4286(a)(5)]

[tenemae]

Anyone care to weigh in on extended base plates as it pertains to a potential freedom week repeat? As far as I read 32310, there does not seem to be a constructive possession threat (just an actual construction prohibition). Nor does it seem like 32310 prohibits importation of individual parts. Have I missed another PC somewhere that covers importing something like a solitary baseplate?

[Quiet]

Originally Posted by tenemae

Anyone care to weigh in on extended base plates as it pertains to a potential freedom week repeat? As far as I read 32310, there does not seem to be a constructive possession threat (just an actual construction prohibition). Nor does it seem like 32310 prohibits importation of individual parts. Have I missed another PC somewhere that covers importing something like a solitary baseplate?

If the magazine extension increases the magazine's capacity and its installation will cause the magazine to have a capacity of greater than 10 rounds, then it is considered a large capacity magazine conversion kit [PC 32311(b)]; which, starting 01-01-2014, is illegal to import, make, advertise for sale, or transfer in CA [PC 32311(a)].

During "Freedom Week" it was CA legal to import and install them on magazines, because during that time it was legal to make large capacity magazines.
After "Freedom Week" ended, it became illegal to import, make, advertise for sale, or transfer them in CA.
If they were acquired during "Freedom Week", but were never used, then they are legal to possess but illegal to install (because doing so will be making illegal large capacity magazines).


Penal Code 32311
(a) Except as provided in Article 2 (commencing with Section 32400) of this chapter and in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 17700) of Division 2 of Title 2, commencing January 1, 2014, any person in this state who knowingly manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives, lends, buys, or receives any large capacity magazine conversion kit is punishable by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000) or imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed six months, or by both that fine and imprisonment. This section does not apply to a fully assembled large-capacity magazine, which is governed by Section 32310.
(b) For purposes of this section, a ?large capacity magazine conversion kit? is a device or combination of parts of a fully functioning large-capacity magazine, including, but not limited to, the body, spring, follower, and floor plate or end plate, capable of converting an ammunition feeding device into a large-capacity magazine.

[tenemae]

Originally Posted by Quiet

it is considered a large capacity magazine conversion kit [PC 32311(b)];

I had a feeling there was something about parts but I was unable to find it (been away from calguns too long and I got rusty).

Thanks for the reminder. It's greatly appreciated.

[RickD427]

Originally Posted by paco ramirez

During ?freedom week? I bought around $3k in magazines of various types and had them shipped to the house I stay at in CA, however I am a New Mexico resident and 07FFL/02SOT. Just want to make sure there isn?t a CA residency requirement to be able to legally use my legal mags while in CA. I?ve been out of the loop on CA firearm laws for around nine years.

Also for ammo purchase, since I?m an FFL I?m exempt from needing to do this new ammo paperwork nonsense, right?

There's no distinction in the law resulting from your being a New Mexico resident.

The possession of large-capacity magazines, regardless of when and how obtained still remains illegal in California, however enforcement of the simple possession clause of the law has been enjoined by the federal court. That makes things practically the same as if they were legal, and I would not be concerned about their possession so long as the order enjoining enforcement remains in place.

However, please note that the order does not prevent enforcement of the importation clause of the law.

The court order also does not cover the law permitting the nuisance seizure of large-capacity magazines, but so long as the order is in place, I don't foresee any LE agency venturing down that road. LE agencies tend to be very respectful of the spirit of court orders, and even if the letter of the order doesn't prohibit such seizures, the spirit of the order does.

[bwiese]

Originally Posted by RickD427

However, please note that the order does not prevent enforcement of the importation clause of the law.

Or formerly allowed (pre Prop63) 'reimporation' of your property.

This is why you don't travel outside of CA with your legit pre2000 or Freedom
Week hicaps because you can't bring them back again.

The court order also does not cover the law permitting the nuisance seizure of large-capacity magazines, but so long as the order is in place, I don't foresee any LE agency venturing down that road. LE agencies tend to be very respectful of the spirit of court orders, and even if the letter of the order doesn't prohibit such seizures, the spirit of the order does.

IIRC, a Fresno area dude was popped post-Duncan rulings and got his mags
back.

[CSACANNONEER]

Originally Posted by bwiese

Or formerly allowed (pre Prop63) 'reimporation' of your property.

This is why you don't travel outside of CA with your legit pre2000 or Freedom
Week hicaps because you can't bring them back again.




IIRC, a Fresno area dude was popped post-Duncan rulings and got his mags
back.

Post Duncan, there was a Ventura County case were they got their confiscated, legally owned, +10 round mags back. There might have been a Fresno case too.

[automat is Brett]

Originally Posted by tenemae

Anyone care to weigh in on extended base plates as it pertains to a potential freedom week repeat? As far as I read 32310, there does not seem to be a constructive possession threat (just an actual construction prohibition). Nor does it seem like 32310 prohibits importation of individual parts. Have I missed another PC somewhere that covers importing something like a solitary baseplate?

I use it mainly to troll. I have a 10 round body that i stick a giant 3d printed base plate on for "faster reload". So far no bites.

[Flouncer]

I wondered why the magazines sold out almost instantly and left almost all of us in the lurch. Just like the guys buying toilet paper at Costco at the start of the pandemic. Cheers.

[mshill]

I think Quiet covered the issue of law. Since freedom week, while I was still in CA, I used my (legally acquired) 11+ rond magazines with impunity in my handguns and featureless rifles. Prior to freedom week they were nearly ubiquitous due to all the pre-2000 mags around, after, they were super ubiquitous. Nearly everyone I know that shoots either ordered a ton or went to Scheels in Sparks and spent hundreds of $$$$ on mags.

[Gofflord]

Had a 13 rnd factory mag "confiscated" by a local gun shop during my PPT recently - my fault for leaving it in gun...
Stated reason was "everything in the shop is on audio/video now , & it feeds into a DOJ site"... Wonder if all CA. shops are having to do this.?
They offered to block the mag to 10 rnds and return it tho' , for $30 plus parts...
Live & learn...

[RickD427]

Originally Posted by Gofflord

Had a 13 rnd factory mag "confiscated" by a local gun shop during my PPT recently - my fault for leaving it in gun...
Stated reason was "everything in the shop is on audio/video now , & it feeds into a DOJ site"... Wonder if all CA. shops are having to do this.?
They offered to block the mag to 10 rnds and return it tho' , for $30 plus parts...
Live & learn...

Saw this in your other post.

Something is wrong here. Local gun shops lack any form of "Confiscation" authority.

What was the gun shop that supposedly did this?

[GiveMeMo2A]

Originally Posted by Gofflord

Had a 13 rnd factory mag "confiscated" by a local gun shop

The word is stolen. You should explain you want your property back or you will sue them. Ask the if they are a LEO, if they say yes, their taking might be lawful, but file a claim of theft against them, unless they turned in the mag for destruction. IA or DA should be able to tell if they stole it. If stolen, ask for your property to be returned to you. If not, ask for a copy of the police report and the paper work for the surrender of the mag to them.

If they aren't an LEO, theft. Since no amount of money can replace it, I'd claim $2000 damages to make it a felony. Ask them if they want the matter to be prosecuted as felony theft. Also, talk to their boss, owner. Get their help in resolving the situation. If they don't, ask them if they want to be involved in the lawsuit as well. I'd file a small claims suit for $2000.

Video tape everything. Appear in person. Bring Friend in suit, have him write notes on a legal pad and have him not say anything, don't introduce him. Let them think he is a lawyer. At a minimum you have a witness.

[BearCreekRoad]

Originally Posted by GiveMeMo2A

The word is stolen.
...
If they aren't an LEO, theft.

The poster voluntarily handed the mag to the gun store employee. Please explain how that is "theft", because it isn't. Theft is when someone takes a thing unjustly, which is not what happened here; the rightful owner gave the thing.

Hint: If the gun store were capable of returning it, and refused, then it might be conversion instead of theft. Conversion is a civil law concept. The equivalent criminal law concept might be larceny or fraud.

... but file a claim of theft against them, ...

Can you find an entry in the civil code for for theft?

IA or DA should be able to tell if they stole it.

The answer that low enforcement or prosecution will come up with is obvious: The poster voluntarily gave his property to the gun store. The gun store didn't steal it. There might be a civil matter between the poster and the gun store, but neither IA or DA will deal with that. You seem to be consistently confused between civil and criminal law.

... ask for your property to be returned to you.

That is impossible and illegal. The magazine in question is a large capacity magazine. If the gun store has possession of it right now, they can not give it back to the poster, because that is explicitly illegal. See PC 32310: "Any person in the state [here the gun store] ... who gives ... any large-capacity magazine ..." The poster already violated that section once, as did the gun store when they received the item. Demanding that the gun store violate the section again is simply not going to lead anywhere.

Since no amount of money can replace it, I'd claim $2000 damages to make it a felony.

First, that claim would be in a civil suit: Poster vs. gun store. Civil suits have nothing to do with felony versus misdemeanor. Second, the limit in California for felony theft is $950, not $2000. Third, the actual value of the magazine is actually near zero, not high, since the poster can not possible sell it, and usually the value of an item is defined as the market value.

Bring Friend in suit, have him write notes on a legal pad and have him not say anything, don't introduce him. Let them think he is a lawyer.

I deal with lawyers a lot. They very rarely wear suits, except in court. But they do tend to dress up a little bit. So I would bring a friend in dockers, New Balance running shoes, and with an Oxford shirt. Also, make sure the friend enjoys a trespassing charge, because the first thing the gun store is going to do is to ask you two to leave, and if you don't leave fast enough, LE will be there to escort you away and process the trespassing ticket.

Seriously: If someone who has a large-capacity magazine voluntarily gives it away, they simply can not expect it to be returned. That fails the reality check. Making drama out of it will just fall back on the person performing the drama.

[Sniper3142]

Originally Posted by Gofflord

Had a 13 rnd factory mag "confiscated" by a local gun shop during my PPT recently - my fault for leaving it in gun...
Stated reason was "everything in the shop is on audio/video now , & it feeds into a DOJ site"... Wonder if all CA. shops are having to do this.?
They offered to block the mag to 10 rnds and return it tho' , for $30 plus parts...
Live & learn...

Hmmm...

Another Brand New Member with a low post count, and a Story to tell that would rile up others.

I'm sure there is NOTHING fishy or suspicious about any of this.

[sirdutch]

To Gofflord: Why would you bother with any of this. Let it go. You messed up by leaving a so-called hi-cap with the firearm. Perhaps the FFL thought it might be a trap!

I would take this incident as a "lesson learned" and move on.

[OlderThanDirt]

Originally Posted by Gofflord

Had a 13 rnd factory mag "confiscated" by a local gun shop during my PPT recently - my fault for leaving it in gun...
Stated reason was "everything in the shop is on audio/video now , & it feeds into a DOJ site"... Wonder if all CA. shops are having to do this.?
They offered to block the mag to 10 rnds and return it tho' , for $30 plus parts...
Live & learn...

Sure the camera feeds into a DOJ site. The DOJ has a data center filled with employees watching video feeds from gun stores and quick reaction teams in place to respond to gun crimes in progress. They also monitor street light cameras to watch for gun crimes in your neighborhood. The DOJ also maintains a call center so they can promptly respond to gun owner questions.

[Scratch705]

Originally Posted by Gofflord

Had a 13 rnd factory mag "confiscated" by a local gun shop during my PPT recently - my fault for leaving it in gun...
Stated reason was "everything in the shop is on audio/video now , & it feeds into a DOJ site"... Wonder if all CA. shops are having to do this.?
They offered to block the mag to 10 rnds and return it tho' , for $30 plus parts...
Live & learn...

I would have asked them for a hammer then destroyed the mag. You know one of the store employees took that mag home.