12020 (a)(2) and Top Shot

[MP301]

From the Calguns.org Wiki:

12020 (a)(2) Commencing January 1, 2000, manufactures or causes
to be manufactured, imports into the state, keeps for sale, or
offers or exposes for sale, or who gives, or lends, any large-
capacity magazine.

http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Large-capacity_magazine_restrictions

So, I was watching "Top Shot" on the history channel tonight and they have an episode where the contestants are shooting an H&K SP89. They have 20 targets they have to shoot while rotating on a wheel.

The "Top Shot" host (Colby) says each person gets a magazine with 28 rounds in it. Well, if I remember correctly, the show is filmed in southern California.

So, if its filmed in SoCal, (unless im missing some exemption for movie production and real guns or something), im thinking that the person/people responsible for "loaning" these "High Capacity Magazines" to the contestants would now be a Felon? Yes? And I dont believe there was any kind of mag lock either, or if the strap was kosher on a pistol or any of the rest of it, it may be a RAW, etc etc, so we will skip that stuff.

Is loaning a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds a crime or is there an exemption for the show?

I like the show and I personally dont give two ****s about this because the law is so stupid to begin with, but am I curious. And thinking back, its probably not the first time this has occurred.

This also brings up a question about RAWs. IIRC, you can only allow someone to borrow your RAW if your with the person , but i do believe you can loan them. But, since you cant "loan" a "High capacity magazine" (and there are no exemptions that i am aware of), would you be committing a crime if you let them shoot your RAW with the "Hi Caps" instead of 10 rounders? (Yeah Yeah, i know they are really standard capacity).

Any input?

[G60]

There is a competition exemption for assault weapons & .50 BMG rifles:

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/dwcl/12275.php

And I bet there's a competition/entertainment exemption for exploding targets, too.

[twoyellowlabs]

Entertainment Industry exemption. They get special permits to be able to use weapons we cannot.

[MP301]

There is a competition exemption for assault weapons & .50 BMG rifles:

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/dwcl/12275.php

And I bet there's a competition/entertainment exemption for exploding targets, too.

Ok, is there one for loaning magazines that hold more than 10 rounds? That is the only part I have a question about.

[G60]

Ok, is there one for loaning magazines that hold more than 10 rounds? That is the only part I have a question about.

Yes, written into 12020, and it applies to everyone, not just entertainment types.:

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/PEN/3/4/2/1/2/s12020

"(22)The loan of a lawfully possessed large-capacity magazine between two individuals if all of the following conditions are met:

(A)The person being loaned the large-capacity magazine is not prohibited by Section 12021, 12021.1, or 12101 of this code or Section 8100 or 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code from possessing firearms or ammunition.

(B)The loan of the large-capacity magazine occurs at a place or location where the possession of the large-capacity magazine is not otherwise prohibited and the person who lends the large-capacity magazine remains in the accessible vicinity of the person to whom the large-capacity magazine is loaned."

and also:

"...(31)The loan of a large-capacity magazine for use solely as a prop for a motion picture, television, or video production."

http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/FAQ#Can_I_loan_my_large-capacity_magazine_to_a_friend_at_the_range.3F

"Can I loan my large-capacity magazine to a friend at the range?
You can lend a large-capacity magazine to a friend, if you stay together, as at a range."

[MP301]

I see said the blind man! Thanks for the info. I learn something new everyday!

[erik_26]

Why would you worry about it so much?

If you were out shooting safely, minding your own business, would you want someone trying to jam you up for your legal stuff? Or would you want someone trying to make you prove your exemption?

Why is everyone so worried about everyone else? That is how we end up with all these ridiculous laws.
All because others don't want to you to do/have, what they don't like/understand.

Just enjoy the show.

[SamsDX]

I don't know what OP's motivation was to bring up the issue, but for me, it comes down to a fundamental question of fairness. Why is it that some select groups get a free pass from the legislature, when an average guy (like me, for instance), who has not hurt anyone with standard capacity magazines, modern sporting rifles, etc., does not? If Top Shot or other entertainment company is exempt from certain California laws, I would want them to prove their exemption and go through all the proper legal channels. Otherwise, they should lobby to get the law repealed altogether so everyone can enjoy the same rights. Sure, they probably bring in a lot of economic advantages to the state of California, but since when was a fundamental right subject to how much tax revenue your activity brings in?

[a1c]

I don't know what OP's motivation was to bring up the issue, but for me, it comes down to a fundamental question of fairness. Why is it that some select groups get a free pass from the legislature, when an average guy (like me, for instance), who has not hurt anyone with standard capacity magazines, modern sporting rifles, etc., does not? If Top Shot or other entertainment company is exempt from certain California laws, I would want them to prove their exemption and go through all the proper legal channels. Otherwise, they should lobby to get the law repealed altogether so everyone can enjoy the same rights. Sure, they probably bring in a lot of economic advantages to the state of California, but since when was a fundamental right subject to how much tax revenue your activity brings in?

You're not going to get anywhere with this reasoning.

While I see where you're coming from, it just doesn't fly.

I see guys driving 90 mph on downtown streets in movies. Is it unfair that I can't do it?

California laws are the problem. Exemptions is something that exists for firearms, but also for a whole lot of other things in the entertainment industry.

[Crom]

Why would you worry about it so much?

I don't know what the OP's motivation was for this thread... But I think most people witnessing the persistent evisceration of their gun rights and simultaneous exemptions carved out for Hollywood would make most people pissed off.

[YubaRiver]

Blow guns on one show.

[Quiet]

I don't know what OP's motivation was to bring up the issue, but for me, it comes down to a fundamental question of fairness. Why is it that some select groups get a free pass from the legislature, when an average guy (like me, for instance), who has not hurt anyone with standard capacity magazines, modern sporting rifles, etc., does not? If Top Shot or other entertainment company is exempt from certain California laws, I would want them to prove their exemption and go through all the proper legal channels. Otherwise, they should lobby to get the law repealed altogether so everyone can enjoy the same rights. Sure, they probably bring in a lot of economic advantages to the state of California, but since when was a fundamental right subject to how much tax revenue your activity brings in?

The entertainment industry and other groups get certain exemptions from various CA laws, because they supported passage of the laws they got exemptions to.

Why would they lobby to repeal something they are exempt to?

If they didn't get their exemptions, the law would not have passed in the first place. So, politicans make deals (exemptions to the laws they want to pass) with the unions to ensure what they want to get passed does.

[curtisfong]

The entertainment industry and other groups get certain exemptions from various CA laws, because they supported passage of the laws they got exemptions to.

Why would they lobby to repeal something they are exempt to?

If they didn't get their exemptions, the law would not have passed in the first place. So, politicans make deals (exemptions to the laws they want to pass) with the unions to ensure what they want to get passed does.

Exactly.

[dantodd]

the idea is that if we are to all be treated equally under the laws of the state then we need to work to make the "exemptions" apply to everyone. If the state doesn't want "large capacity magazines" in CA then they can kiss the money brought in by motion picture productions good-bye too.

It isn't like "Top Shot" will go out of production, if it is a good show it will still be in demand and will move production to NV or some other place.

It is patently inappropriate to compare the safe use of a "large capacity" magazine or a .50 BMG rifle to driving 90 MPH in a chase on city streets. One is perfectly safe and legal in most states, the other is a danger to the public.

[BlindRacer]

I also believe that, for shows like this, there is an armourer who maintains control over the weapons, and only gives them to the contestants to use at the time of their competition. This would probably be the easiest way to get around these problems. Also, in many of the shows, the owner of the firearms are usually the 'expert' during the practice time (and probably around during competition). At least for the less common, or 'illegal' arms.

So anyways, I see a few ways that they remain legal while producing this show, other than the fact that it's Hollywood.