Government Issue Standard Capacity Magazines

[Decoligny]

I have an interesting question. When we deploy someone, we supply them with certain expendable supply issue items that are basically considered to be worn out upon completion of the deployment. These things are usually held onto by the returning member.

Some of the items are web belts, drop leg holsters, magazine holders, etc., usually stuff that would be pretty worn by a year in the desert, and unsuitable to be issued to anyone else.

Just recently we had to for the very first time provide one of our guys a couple of standard capacity Baretta M9 magazines (15 round).

Since these were issued to him by the Government, what would be the repercussions if he were to keep them after return? Could the California Penal Code be applied to the U.S. Government? Or, should we be looking at requiring these magazine to be returned and destroyed?

Thoughts?

[yellowfin]

The person may not even want to return to CA in the first place. If I were abroad fighting to preserve our country's liberty, I wouldn't come back to a place that so blatantly trashes it.

[Decoligny]

The person may not even want to return to CA in the first place. If I were abroad fighting to preserve our country's liberty, I wouldn't come back to a place that so blatantly trashes it.

No real choice in the matter. The unit he deployed from is here, upon completion of his deployemnt, he returns here, then he may be moved to another station.

[unusedusername]

I think it would be a question of who imported them into CA.

If he/she and the mags were shipped back into the states on a plane that landed in CA, then perhaps the military imported them.

If he/she and the mags were shipped back into the states on a plane that landed not in CA, then the service-person rented a car privately and drove the mags into CA, then it would be asking for trouble.

(I am not a lawyer, and I have a low post-count, so I'm probably wrong.)

[Untamed1972]

No real choice in the matter. The unit he deployed from is here, upon completion of his deployemnt, he returns here, then he may be moved to another station.

Well my initial response would be the CA statutes only specify penalties for those that give, lend, sell, or import hi cap mags. The is no penalty to the receiver, and mere possession is not a crime. I also believe the statutes state that the military and members there of are exempt from those statutes. Hence I wouldn't think there could be much the state could do since the military is legally allowed to import, give or lend hi cap mags.

[Untamed1972]

I think it would be a question of who imported them into CA.

If he/she and the mags were shipped back into the states on a plane that landed in CA, then perhaps the military imported them.

If he/she and the mags were shipped back into the states on a plane that landed not in CA, then the service-person rented a car privately and drove the mags into CA, then it would be asking for trouble.

(I am not a lawyer, and I have a low post-count, so I'm probably wrong.)

But if the person was still a service member and returning to their duty station with issued military equipment I would think the state would be hard pressed to pursue it since the state has no authority to resctrict the movement of military equipment across state lines by service members acting in behalf/under lawful orders of the government. Now as far as what the gov't expects that person to do with the equipment once they return to their duty station should be between them and the gov't. Just my uneducated opinion though. If the mags were legally issued to you in conjuction with military service I think the state would be hardpressed to have any say in the matter.

[tyrist]

I think technically he would be importing the magazines into California.

[Saigon1965]

What if he has an assault weapons permit as some of our service members do -

I think technically he would be importing the magazines into California.

[unusedusername]

But if the person was still a service member and returning to their duty station with issued military equipment I would think the state would be hard pressed to pursue it since the state has no authority to resctrict the movement of military equipment across state lines by service members acting in behalf/under lawful orders of the government. Now as far as what the gov't expects that person to do with the equipment once they return to their duty station should be between them and the gov't. Just my uneducated opinion though. If the mags were legally issued to you in conjuction with military service I think the state would be hardpressed to have any say in the matter.

I agree that if the person returned to duty in CA, and was then discharged in CA, and did not have to cross state lines after bring discharged with said magazines then the state probably could not do anything about it except go after the military for giving high-capacity magazines in violation of state law. I doubt that would happen.

The only issue would be if the serviceman/servicewoman was discharged in another state, then traveled across state lines with the magazines.

Again insert the I am not a lawyer disclaimer...

[Tyler]

When I was in the Air Force we had to return all of these items (web belts, drop leg holsters, magazine holders) as they were us government property... no matter how warn out they were.

[Decoligny]

I agree that if the person returned to duty in CA, and was then discharged in CA, and did not have to cross state lines after bring discharged with said magazines then the state probably could not do anything about it except go after the military for giving high-capacity magazines in violation of state law. I doubt that would happen.

The only issue would be if the serviceman/servicewoman was discharged in another state, then traveled across state lines with the magazines.

Again insert the I am not a lawyer disclaimer...

I think that another issue was brought up on another thread, if the person (after discharge) leaves California with the magazine, he can't legally bring it back with him.

[Cal45man]

He is in US military he is excempt because he works for the government the high cap mag law does not apply to him.Government and LEO and armored car guards are excempt from this law in California from what I read from the law.I do not think DOJ has more power than the federal government in regards to state laws vs military excemption.