Freedom Week Magazines

[RickD427]

If you bought them you During free I'm weak you're allowed to have AM and take him to a shooting range and a cop can not take him away from youSent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

You're only half-right here.

There is nothing in Judge Benitez' order that prevents a LEO from seizing your "Freedom Week" magazines pursuant to PC 32390. I'd be surprised to see that happen though. LE agencies tend to be respectful of the purpose of court order while an issue is being litigated.

[Librarian]

Only if you purchased/imported/assembled during freedom week as well. Both of you have to be exempt.

That doesn't quite scan.

OP asked about getting Freedom Week mags from the possessor, now, after Freedom Week. There is no 'both'.

Now, if the question were about 'any LCM at all', transfer under current law (restored-after-Freedom-Week) would indeed require an exemption from that law's restrictions, which is principally LEO in CA.

[NATO762]

https://crpa.org/news/blogs/crpa-alert-moving-forward-with-large-capacity-magazine-court-ordered-stay/

Casting a common sized firearm magazine able to hold more than 10 rounds as a nuisance, as a way around the Second Amendment, is like banning a book as a nuisance, as a way around the First Amendment. It conjures up images from Ray Bradbury’s novel, Fahrenheit 451, of firemen setting books on fire, or in this case policemen setting magazines on fire.
In the coming days, CRPA attorneys will be sending a letter to various law enforcement channels in the State explaining Section 32390 ‘s unenforceability. If you or anyone you know has a “large-capacity” magazine seized by law enforcement on the basis that it is a nuisance under Section 32390, we urge you to contact CRPA attorneys immediately by sending an email to helpdesk@michellawyers.com or by calling (562) 216-4444.

I will politely inform any LEO that confiscation of my SCM will result in all of us being the test case for the constitutionality of the nuisance law. I will hand them a copy of the orders to LEO from the court, and a copy of the above article along with my SCM. I bet they hand them back.

[RickD427]

https://crpa.org/news/blogs/crpa-ale...-ordered-stay/



I will politely inform any LEO that confiscation of my SCM will result in all of us being the test case for the constitutionality of the nuisance law. I will hand them a copy of the orders to LEO from the court, and a copy of the above article along with my SCM. I bet they hand them back.

That's groovy, but its not going to change anything.

As a practical matter, I don't really see where any LE agency would be seizing large-capacity magazines during the pendency of Judge Benitez' order. Agencies tend to be respectful of both the letter and the spirit of court orders while in effect. Even though PC 32390 nuisance seizures are not covered by the letter of the court order, they do fall within the spirit of the order.

For the record, I do believe that the CPRA attorneys have a good understanding of how the nuisance statute evolved. It really was out of legislative fiat and not deliberate design. But the statute remains facially valid until successfully challenged. That ain't happened yet.

As to presenting an LEO with the CPRA document and/or threatening a lawsuit, I would not even waste the effort. Every officer has some rehearsed version of the following line - "There's just a few folks that I take orders from, you're not one of them and neither is your attorney, am I understood?"

[NATO762]

Granted, all the above. My point being I'm perfectly happy to be the "successful challenger" and I'd like them to know that. Most of the LEOs I know would rather be enforcing laws than sitting in court. Nobody who has a SCM should live in fear of taking it out of their house, exactly like a "banned book". We should all be sporting them at the ranges whenever possible.

And I wouldn't threaten a lawsuit, more like a promise. I am always extremely polite and pleasant when interacting with law enforcement. Actually I try to be that way with everyone...

[SCVlongstroke]

Safer is not an issue. The nuisance law only allows a LEO to take the magazines. No arrest, no citation, no charges.

Now, if the injunction goes against us, then just mere possession would be against the law. No matter when you purchased the LCM's.

[Fishslayer]

As to presenting an LEO with the CPRA document and/or threatening a lawsuit, I would not even waste the effort. Every officer has some rehearsed version of the following line - "There's just a few folks that I take orders from, you're not one of them and neither is your attorney, am I understood?"

Won't cost the LEO a dime... why should he GAF?

[67Cuda]

but any sensible person would advise to wait out the appeal rather than jeapordize your firearms rights for life. YMMV

Is this appeal underway?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TRICKSTER]

Just carry the ones you stole, that way you don't lose money if they are confiscated.

[BigPimping]

Is that you Gavin????