question about the law (detchable magazines)

[chokeagoat]

I was reading the pdf " 2007 ca firearms laws" onhttp://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/Cfl2007.pdf
and its saying "rifle that has the CAPICITY to accept a detachable magazine"
than later it says "'Magazine' shall mean any ammunition feeding device"

So to me it seems like if your gun can even possable hold a mag tht can detach its illegal.

so im wondering why is the bullet button a loophole? it seems like it should be illegal

[boxbro]

I was reading the pdf " 2007 ca firearms laws" onhttp://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/Cfl2007.pdf
and its saying "rifle that has the CAPICITY to accept a detachable magazine"
than later it says "'Magazine' shall mean any ammunition feeding device"

So to me it seems like if your gun can even possable hold a mag tht can detach its illegal.

so im wondering why is the bullet button a loophole? it seems like it should be illegal

Because by definition, a bullet button makes it not have the capacity to accept a detachable magazine, due to the fact that it requires a tool to remove it.

If it can be removed without the use of a tool then it has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine.

[chokeagoat]

but the gun can still accept it. cant it, wether a tool is needed or not.

thanks for the reply im just worried about getting in trouble with the law

[Librarian]

but the gun can still accept it. cant it, wether a tool is needed or not.

thanks for the reply im just worried about getting in trouble with the law

No.

The issue is that the gun itself is modified, with the magazine locking device, so that the magazine once inserted cannot be removed without a tool. Any magazine inserted is NOT detachable, by legal definition, because it requires that tool to disassemble the magazine from the gun.

That magazines go in and come out is not relevant; requiring the tool is.

[chokeagoat]

interesting,ok. thank you guys alot. but do u know where it says anything about the tool?
in ca legal documents?

[billybob_jcv]

Isn't the bullet button based on the "commonly accepted definition of detachable"? So, in other words, if you accept that "detachable" is defined as "not requiring a tool", then it follows that anything requiring a tool is "non-detachable". I suppose if someone had freakishly pointy, skinny & strong fingers, we might be in trouble...

[RivCoFireman]

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=429902

[Librarian]

interesting,ok. thank you guys alot. but do u know where it says anything about the tool?
in ca legal documents?

Isn't the bullet button based on the "commonly accepted definition of detachable"? So, in other words, if you accept that "detachable" is defined as "not requiring a tool", then it follows that anything requiring a tool is "non-detachable". I suppose if someone had freakishly pointy, skinny & strong fingers, we might be in trouble...

It's in California Code of Regulations, Title 11 Section 5469

The following definitions apply to terms used in the identification of assault weapons pursuant to Penal Code section 12276.1:
(a) "detachable magazine" means any ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with neither disassembly of the firearm action nor use of a tool being required. A bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool. Ammunition feeding device includes any belted or linked ammunition, but does not include clips, en bloc clips, or stripper clips that load cartridges into the magazine.

The problem is one has to focus on the weapon, not the magazine.

See the wiki -- http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/in...able_magazines

[curtisfong]

Would wolverine's claws be considered a tool?

[chokeagoat]

Would wolverine's claws be considered a tool?

thats awesome!!!
i gotta make one of those.

Thank you all again for the replys. im now confident that i will be relatively safe with the law.
also...awesome forum

[torquefliteterror]

don't worry about it. it was decided along time ago in a court case. just enjoy the fruits of someone elses labor. guns and ammo magazine even put out a CALI LEGAL issue. bullet buttons and offlist guns are here to stay.

[CSACANNONEER]

don't worry about it. it was decided along time ago in a court case. just enjoy the fruits of someone elses labor. guns and ammo magazine even put out a CALI LEGAL issue. bullet buttons and offlist guns are here to stay.

Please cite this long ago case you speak of. I really think you are wrong here. The fact is that long ago (long before magazine locks were even a concept and there was no such thing as an OLL), the state of California defined what a detachable magazine was. They wrote the law in such a way as to exclude SKSes with normal fixed SKS mags. So, long before any case law that you might think set a precident, the written law was very clear about the legallities of mag locks including those which can release a magazine with the use of a tool.

[Librarian]

I suspect he's remembering Haynie v Pleasanton -

However, there is now clear evidence that the California Department of Justice opines on the record that properly installed bullet buttons with 10 round or less magazines create legal AR type firearms in California.

[CSACANNONEER]

I suspect he's remembering Haynie v Pleasanton -

No charges filed means no court case. So, this obviously can't be what he's refering to. Also, that "case" wasn't "a long time ago".