Ambiguity in mag ruling?

[Maulerrr]

The only legal ambiguity lies with what happened to those of us that have placed orders that we don't receive until after a stay is granted.

[Tyson]

Our LGS posted a video the other night explaining his decision not to sell he does have a regular capacity permit from the state and when you sign it you enter in agreement with the state stating you will inventory all those mags and sell only to law-enforcement or at gun shows out of the state. given the liability involved for them and the agreement they’ve entered into you can certainly understand their position

[Glock21sfsd]

There is no ambiguity in the decision. Literally the entire penal code on "high capacity magazines" or "large capacity magazines" has been thrown out. All of CA PC 32310 is null and void right now.

I've bought mags from two local shops so far.

1 of my LGS won't sell them. I have not checked with the other yet, cause I don't like the way I was treated last time I went in there.

[Chewy65]

A local dealer I spoke with told me that they are getting threatened by DOJ if they sell LCMs.

[ACfixer]

The only legal ambiguity lies with what happened to those of us that have placed orders that we don't receive until after a stay is granted.

Benitez (IMO) is not going to grant a stay, and even if he does it would probably have at least a short period of time to allow for this.

[jcwatchdog]

A local dealer I spoke with told me that they are getting threatened by DOJ if they sell LCMs.

[92E2]

A local dealer I spoke with told me that they are getting threatened by DOJ if they sell LCMs.

If they try to enforce 32310 now, they are in violation of the law and can be held legally accountable accordingly.

[Featureless]

In state vendors didn't have stock to sell, and are hesitant to stock up on product which they could be banned from selling by the time it arrives.

I think this is the crux of the matter, why would CA FFL's have a bunch of "LCM"s in stock in the first place? And then, there is that "LCM" permit that FFL's apparently need in the first place even to handle a standard capacity mag in this state. I had never even heard of an "LCM" permit. The laws the insane freaks in Excremento constantly puke out never fail to amaze me.

[Featureless]

If they try to enforce 32310 now, they are in violation of the law and can be held legally accountable accordingly.

Remember though, they are lawless. Obama and his DOJ/FBI were lawless. California's last Governor and the current Governor are lawless, so of course their minions are lawless. There really is nobody who will hold them legally accountable for anything they do. Also, that douche Basura has been re-writing intiatives/propositions( that hundreds of thousand of us have signed in their original form) before they go on the ballot.
That should be TOTALLY illegal yet he continues to get away with it.

These people are lawless no two ways about it.

[-hanko]

A local dealer I spoke with told me that they are getting threatened by DOJ if they sell LCMs.

They get threatened all the time, nothing especially new, and as has been posted they are not very likely to pay for and bring in mags that conceivably be illegal soon. I don't blame them.

I'd advise getting them off the Marketplaces someplace, or order with overnight shipment from a vendor that will sell normal capacity mags to a California address. I can middle-man it and have no issues shipping to California, until and unless the recent judgement is blocked, which I pray it will not be. PM me if you need a bit of help here.

[ugimports]

Issue with in-state dealers to consider...

They most likely have a valid CA DOJ large capacity magazine permit; which was required in order to legally be able to make, import, advertise for sale, transfer, and possess 11+ round magazines.

The regulations pertaining on how they operate are still in place and are still in effect.
^The ruling didn't make those go away.

Which means the in-state dealer still needs to log everyone who acquires a 11+ round magazine from them or, when they are auditied by CA DOJ BOF, they run the risk of being put out of business by CA DOJ for failing to maintain required paperwork.

So, in order to buy from an in-state dealer, they would still need to record:
1. Date of transfer.
2. Amount and type of magazines being transferred.
3. Name of transferee.
4. Address of transferee.
5. Tansferee's valid DL/ID.


None of the above would apply to an in-state dealer that never had a CA DOJ large capacity magazine permit.
After the ruling, they would be able to legally order from a manufacturer/distributor and start selling without needing to do any record keeping.

Need some help here...so I'm reading the LCM application:

https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/firearms/forms/CLIcmpapp.pdf

Any firearms dealership licensed pursuant to Penal Code section 26700 may apply for a Department of Justice (DOJ) LargeCapacity Magazine Permit to engage in the lawful importation and exportation of large-capacity magazines and the activities associated thereto as specified in Penal Code sections 32310 through 32450.

32310 is the section that governs the sale, etc.. to normal folk..that is now considered null and void by the ruling?

That's how I would interpret it, but IANAL of course...

If we did have to keep the records we couldn't meet the requirements as stated:

A permit is not required for the lawful sale of large-capacity magazines within the state to persons authorized to obtain them under Penal Code sections 32400 through 32450, such as law enforcement agencies, peace officers, other licensed firearms dealers, armored car companies, museums, and theatrical companies. Record keeping requirements include the maintenance of records of sales for all transactions, including a copy of the photo identification of the peace officer or licensed firearms dealer, a copy of the official invoice of the law enforcement agency, or an authorization letter on the letterhead of the company to which the sale is being made. The records must be maintained at the dealership location for three years and, upon request, be made available to law enforcement.

So not sure what this means... I haven't sold any yet to non-LEO, but might be starting next week so.... I realize you may not have the answer, but I know calling DOJ won't be helpful (or maybe I'll get lucky)...

[HighCapAssaultOpinionator]

...

[nu2gunstuff]

Remember though, they are lawless. Obama and his DOJ/FBI were lawless. California's last Governor and the current Governor are lawless, so of course their minions are lawless. There really is nobody who will hold them legally accountable for anything they do. Also, that douche Basura has been re-writing intiatives/propositions( that hundreds of thousand of us have signed in their original form) before they go on the ballot.
That should be TOTALLY illegal yet he continues to get away with it.

These people are lawless no two ways about it.

Thank you for this post...are you referencing inside information or publicly available?
I guess I'm not sure what you mean by "...have signed in their original form."
Who has "signed"?

Also, great signature line!

[A-J]

I think it is more along the lines of do they want to bring in a couple of pallets of mags that won't be delivered for a couple of days. What happens when they show up on Wed. and they grant a stay on the decision, sticking them with a pallet of mags that they can't sell? A pallet of mags at 100k is a bad mistake to make. Don't hate on them for watching their own asses when we can get them shipped in with almost no effort. Your *** isn't on the line.

Also, don't they need to be state licensed "high capacity magazine dealers" as well? I could be off my rocker, but I thought that was also a thing.

[DesertDave100]

Also, don't they need to be state licensed "high capacity magazine dealers" as well? I could be off my rocker, but I thought that was also a thing.

Right you are, and the other laws that those licensed folks must follow, still exist. Record keeping and documenting purchasers are among those requirements.

So a store that wasn't previously licensed could acquire and sell some mags, if they were willing to risk being stuck with inventory. A licensed store still has other hoops they'd run their customers through, the ones I mentioned would keep many potential customers away.

Again, the wackiness of the mess of CA laws that exist create another steaming pile that no one can hardly understand.

That's why Benitez ruling included the phrase along the lines 'enough to make an Angel swear' when he described the process required for a person of average intelligence to correctly understand CA firearms laws.