"Large" Capacity Magazines

[Bowery]

So as a Military Police Officer would I be considered Law enforcement there for would I be allowed to buy "LCMs"?

[RickD427]

Originally Posted by Bowery

So as a Military Police Officer would I be considered Law enforcement there for would I be allowed to buy "LCMs"?

Please refer to Penal Code section 32405 for your answer. The key point being if you are a "sworn federal law enforcement officer" as that term is used in the statute.

Methinks the answer is gonna be "No" based on prior experience with the question when the LEOSA was revised to include Military MP's. MP's are not generally regarded as "Federal Law Enforcement Officers" because they lack statutory powers of arrest. The original LEOSA did not include MP's because they lacked the "Statutory Powers of Arrest" that were required of officers to be covered by the LEOSA. When Congress sought to include MP's in the LEOSA, they amended it to also include folks that had "Powers of Apprehension" under the UCMJ.

But powers of "Apprehension" are different than powers of "Arrest" and I think that's gonna knock you out of being considered as a "sworn federal law enforcement officer."

[BAJ475]

Originally Posted by Bowery

So as a Military Police Officer would I be considered Law enforcement there for would I be allowed to buy "LCMs"?

I would say no if you live in CA, but what gives? Are you asking for the same rights as ordinary citizens in free states? What next will you ask for? No doubt it will be off roster handguns and modern sporting rifles.

[Quiet]

AFAIK...
Only DOD/Military personnel that have graduated (gone through) FLETC are considered exempt as Federal LEOs.

DOD/Military personnel that have not graduated FLETC are not considered exempt Federal LEOs.
^The Mil agency can legally acquire and issue large capacity magazines for official use to their personnel, who can legally retain possession/use them. This is because their personnel does not own them, their agency owns them.

[sheepdawg]

Originally Posted by Quiet

The Mil agency can legally acquire and issue large capacity magazines for official use to their personnel, who can legally retain possession/use them. This is because their personnel does not own them, their agency owns them.

What’s the Californian law that allows military agencies to possess standard-capacity magazines? It it’s the organization that possesses the magazines and not the individuals, then does that mean that trusts or employees of businesses with large-capacity magazines can acquire and possess large-capacity magazines?

[Librarian]

PC 32400 is on point, but there's more at https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...r=5.&article=2.

32400.

Section 32310 does not apply to the sale of, giving of, lending of, possession 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.

"trusts or employees of businesses" seem not to be "any federal, state, county, city and county, or city]agency that is charged with the enforcement of any law"

[RickD427]

Originally Posted by sheepdawg

What’s the Californian law that allows military agencies to possess standard-capacity magazines? It it’s the organization that possesses the magazines and not the individuals, then does that mean that trusts or employees of businesses with large-capacity magazines can acquire and possess large-capacity magazines?

There ain't no California law that allows military agencies, or their members, to possess large-capacity magazines.

Persons serving as agents of the federal government, which would include military members, are exempt from state laws that conflict with their federal duties. Please refer to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision In re Neagle, thus there is no need for a state law on the issue.

I'm not knowledgeable on the legal aspects of trusts. I'll leave that question for someone who is.

As to employees of businesses that own large-capacity magazines, those employees would be in violation if they personally possess large-capacity magazines owned by their employer, but that is a moot question at present because enforcement of the possession clause of PC 32310 is currently enjoined.

[Librarian]

Originally Posted by RickD427

.

As to employees of businesses that own large-capacity magazines, those employees would be in violation if they personally possess large-capacity magazines owned by their employer, but that is a moot question at present because enforcement of the possession clause of PC 32310 is currently enjoined.

One exception - armored vehicle businesses - https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...ctionNum=32435.

32435.

Section 32310 does not apply to any of the following:

(a) The sale of, giving of, lending of, possession of, importation into this state of, or purchase of, any large-capacity magazine, to or by any entity that operates an armored vehicle business pursuant to the laws of this state.

(b) The lending of large-capacity magazines by an entity specified in subdivision (a) to its authorized employees, while in the course and scope of employment for purposes that pertain to the entity’s armored vehicle business.

(c) The possession of any large-capacity magazines by the employees of an entity specified in subdivision (a) for purposes that pertain to the entity’s armored vehicle business.

(d) The return of those large-capacity magazines to the entity specified in subdivision (a) by those employees specified in subdivision (b).

But the individual employees are not authorized to buy LCMs, at least not based on that employment.