need a legal opine here... PC12020

[Cokebottle]

LEO- Where did you get these?
Me- I found them on the side of the road yesterday.

Wrong answer.

"They're legal"... or 5A.

I am saying that is subjective if you read 12020(b)(16).

And it would be if PC12020(a)(2) defined possession as being illegal.

While you are still not breaking a law, it is implied that you are to turn the items listed in 12020(a) over to LEA if you FIND them.

Since PC12020(a)(2) does not define possession as being illegal, the exemption to the illegal act provided in PC12020(b)(16) is irrelevant and does not apply.

[hoffmang]

And make sure that it can't be proved that you were out of the state for a significant period of time, because the SOL clock stops when you leave the state, which means that if they are grasping at straws and come up with that one, and your time in the state totals less than the 36 months, you will be SOL (S out of Luck).

Why do you think the SOL stops when out of state? Remember that there are no continuing crimes under the LCM laws (except maybe offering for sale.) This is a serious question and not rhetorical.

-Gene

[WDE91]

legality question under this topic

I have a Radlocked OLL everything is legal but am currently "feautured" due to my Ergo grip
though I am simply from what I believe to be a pistol grip away or lack there of from "Featureless"

Could I simply unthread the Raddlock and install a kydex grip wrap and be legal?
Heres my rifle

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd301/bjkearns/P1010126.jpg

[dieselpower]

^ Yes, I get and have said, you can not be charged with (b)(16)...its an exclusion.

I am saying if you find;
a cane gun
a wallet gun,
any ballistic knife,
any multiburst trigger activator,
any nunchaku,
any metal knuckles,
any belt buckle knife,
any leaded cane,
any shuriken,
any lipstick case knife,
any cane sword,
any shobi-zue,
any air gauge knife,
any writing pen knife,
any metal military practice handgrenade or metal replica handgrenade,
or any instrument or weapon of the kind commonly known as a blackjack, slungshot, billy, sandclub, sap, or sandbag.

you are OK to pick it up and take it to LEA because 12020(b)(16) allows that action.

I am saying if I find any of these items There is an exclusion allowing me to possess them long enough to transport and turn them over to LEA...

....and since there is no distinction in 12020(b)(16) to exclude 12020(a)(2), the found LCM must also be turned over to LEA.

Therefore without a distinction excluding a LCM the "I found it" defense is not enough to allow your continued possession of an LCM you found after 1/1/2000. No you can not be charged with a crime...BUT No they do not have to give it back to you either. The intent of the law is served by NOT giving a legal means to obtain a LCM after 1/1/2000.

Now if an LEO takes my LCMs and I didn't offer "finding" as how I obtained them, the DA MUST turn that over to me if they can not file charges. They are legally mine.

[MindBuilder]

@dieselpower - 12020(b) is an exemption to 12020(a). So (b) says that (a) "...does not apply..." if you are taking the found item to the police. If you find an item and you are not taking it to the police, then (a) still applies and maybe you could still get busted. So if you have no exemption and (a) still applies, then you have to look at (a) to see if you can get busted. But (a) doesn't appear to prohibit finding or possessing a large capacity mag. If the act is not prohibited, then no exemption is needed.

It seems to me that the bigger problem with the "found it" defense is that I doubt a jury would consider it to create reasonable doubt. Remember, just because a criminal gives an innocent explanation that is technically possible, doesn't mean the criminal will get off. For example, people caught with drugs in their car often claim it was left there by a previous passenger. No doubt that sometimes happens, probably more often than hi-caps are found, yet the driver is still convicted.

Another problem is that I think there is law in California that if you find a lost item that it is a crime not to turn it in to the cops. Though I suppose you could "find" it in a trash can.

I'm also not sure the statute of limitations would get you off. I think the clock might not start until the crime is discovered.

I'm not a lawyer so I could easily be wrong about all this.

[Stryprod]

Well yes, thats all fine due to SOL, I am talking about...

LEO- Where did you get these?
Me- I found them on the side of the road yesterday.

You can always elect not to answer that question or any other question the police ask you even assuming you legally posses the magazines.

You have a constitutional right not to incriminate yourself, let alone speak to the police before speaking with your attorney.

It is up to them to prove you broke the law.

[Mssr. Eleganté]

12020(b) provides exceptions to (a), if its not a crime under (a) you don't need an exception under (b).

Or I'm just not getting it.

You are getting it just fine.

(b) lets you avoid any crime from (a) if you are turning the item in to the police. Finding a magazine is not a crime under (a) so no exemption from (b) is required. Just because (b) says you can avoid punishment by turning in an item to the police doesn't make finding a large-cap magazine a crime.

If they added a line to the Penal Code that said "You can avoid prosecution for possession of a doughnut if you are on your way to turn that doughnut in to the police." it wouldn't make possession of a doughnut a crime. They would still need to add a separate line to the penal code making possession of a doughnut a crime.

[dieselpower]

You can always elect not to answer that question or any other question the police ask you even assuming you legally posses the magazines.

You have a constitutional right not to incriminate yourself, let alone speak to the police before speaking with your attorney.

It is up to them to prove you broke the law.

we are not (or at least I am not) fishing for an excuse to break the law.

I am also not asking for opinions on what not to tell LEO...

I am asking for opinions on 12020(b)(16) as it doesn't exclude LCMs as a problem for people who are under the assumption the "finding" excuse is sound.

[dieselpower]

@dieselpower - 12020(b) is an exemption to 12020(a). So (b) says that (a) "...does not apply..." if you are taking the found item to the police. If you find an item and you are not taking it to the police, then (a) still applies and maybe you could still get busted. So if you have no exemption and (a) still applies, then you have to look at (a) to see if you can get busted. But (a) doesn't appear to prohibit finding or possessing a large capacity mag. If the act is not prohibited, then no exemption is needed.

It seems to me that the bigger problem with the "found it" defense is that I doubt a jury would consider it to create reasonable doubt. Remember, just because a criminal gives an innocent explanation that is technically possible, doesn't mean the criminal will get off. For example, people caught with drugs in their car often claim it was left there by a previous passenger. No doubt that sometimes happens, probably more often than hi-caps are found, yet the driver is still convicted.

Another problem is that I think there is law in California that if you find a lost item that it is a crime not to turn it in to the cops. Though I suppose you could "find" it in a trash can.

I'm also not sure the statute of limitations would get you off. I think the clock might not start until the crime is discovered.

I'm not a lawyer so I could easily be wrong about all this.

agreed as the same as Coke's read on it. The fact remains without an exclusion LCMs are included in (b)(16).

[Mssr. Eleganté]

agreed as the same as Coke's read on it. The fact remains without an exclusion LCMs are included in (b)(16).

Yes, LCM's are included in (b)(16). But (b)(16) doesn't criminalize anything.

[dieselpower]

Yes, LCM's are included in (b)(16). But (b)(16) doesn't criminalize anything.

again agreed, its written to allow possession long enough to transport an item listed in 12020(a) that were FOUND to LEA.

[Mssr. Eleganté]

again agreed, its written to allow possession long enough to transport an item listed in 12020(a) that were FOUND to LEA.

No. It's written to allow possession long enough to transport an items listed in 12020(a) THAT ARE ILLEGAL TO POSSESS UNDER 12020(a), that were found to LEA.

Granting an exemption from prosecution under certain circumstances to something that is not illegal doesn't make that thing illegal under other circumstances. There has to first be penal code that makes the act illegal.

Your reasoning follows this logic...

It is illegal to stick a banana in your nose.
It is illegal to possess an orange.
It is illegal to possess an apple.

If you find any illegal fruit you are exempt from prosecution for possession of that fruit if you are turning it into the police.

Therefore, possession of a banana is illegal.

[Cokebottle]

....and since there is no distinction in 12020(b)(16) to exclude 12020(a)(2), the found LCM must also be turned over to LEA.

Nor is there a distinction in 12020(b)(16) to exclude 12020(a)(3) or 12020(a)(4), therefore, applying your logic, any found "dirk or dagger" (which would include a screwdriver) is only legal to possess long enough to turn in to LE.

Now if an LEO takes my LCMs and I didn't offer "finding" as how I obtained them, the DA MUST turn that over to me if they can not file charges. They are legally mine.

Which is why you don't offer ANY "excuse".
If you feel that you have to say anything, simply say "I am in legal possession"
Make them make their case. Don't give them anything to work with.

[Cokebottle]

It seems to me that the bigger problem with the "found it" defense is that I doubt a jury would consider it to create reasonable doubt. Remember, just because a criminal gives an innocent explanation that is technically possible, doesn't mean the criminal will get off. For example, people caught with drugs in their car often claim it was left there by a previous passenger. No doubt that sometimes happens, probably more often than hi-caps are found, yet the driver is still convicted.

Difference being, possession is prohibited.

Question 1 - Did you possess the drugs? Yes/no? If yes, go to jail
Question 2 - How did you obtain those drugs? Passenger left them. Go to jail for 1 year instead of 2.

Another problem is that I think there is law in California that if you find a lost item that it is a crime not to turn it in to the cops.

Only if the value is =>$100.

I'm also not sure the statute of limitations would get you off. I think the clock might not start until the crime is discovered.

CGF attorneys have used the SoL to force charges to be dropped a number of times (adding, the cases CGF took did in fact involve magazines owned prior to the ban, they were 100% legal without question).

[erik_26]

I wish people would stop wasting all their energy debating this topic. Clearly the majority of us would like to see this law reversed.

Last time I checked, "We the people...." own our government and can make changes to laws we aren't happy with.

Instead of arguing on here, I would strongly urge you to contact your representative and inform them on your stance. Request for them to present legislation to overturn the current law. And inform them that if they fail to take action on this issue, they will not be receiving your vote. And that you will try to encourage others to not support them with their votes.

It is not easy.

Clearly, it is much easier to sit on the computer at home and complain.