If you get caught with more than a 10 rnd MAG what happens?

[Quiet]

I was reading here yesterday (can't find the threads right now, sorry) that there are sections in California law, separate from the high cap mag import/mfg codes, that classify high capacity magazines as "nuisances". That allows LE to seize the mags and destroy them without actually charging the possessor with a crime. Crazy California laws. I'll try to find the threads when I get the time.

Large capacity magazines acquired via a non-exempt method (such as "finding" or admitting to importing/manufacturing after the 3 year statue of limitation) are nusiance items and can be legally confiscated.

The possesor of said large capacity magazines will not be charged with a crime, but they will not be able to legally keep said magazines.



Penal Code 32310
Except as provided in Article 2 (commencing with Section 32400) of this chapter and in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 17700) of Division 2 of Title 2, commencing January 1, 2000, any person in this state who 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 is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170.

Penal Code 32390
Except as provided in Article 2 (commencing with Section 32400) of this chapter and in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 17700) of Division 2 of Title 2, any large-capacity magazine is a nuisance and is subject to Section 18010.

Penal Code 18010
(a) The Attorney General, district attorney, or city attorney may bring an action to enjoin the manufacture of, importation of, keeping for sale of, offering or exposing for sale, giving, lending, or possession of, any item that constitutes a nuisance under any of the following provisions:
(20) Section 32390, relating to a large-capacity magazine.
(b) These weapons shall be subject to confiscation and summary destruction whenever found within the state.

[Big Ben]

So if you have a 25 year old gun, it would make sense that you have a standard capacity magazine. If you have a new gun model that wasn't manufactured until 2009, you may have a harder time explaining how you came into possession of something prior to 2000 when it wasnt manufactured until 2009.

True, but if memory serves correctly, the statute of limitations on importation/manufacturing is 3 years. So even if you have standard capacity magazines for a newer model gun, law enforcement still has to prove that you imported/manufactured within 3 years of the date of the encounter -- which is nearly impossible if you simply keep your mouth shut and don't talk yourself into an arrest.

And I hope that no one takes my comments to be me condoning/encouraging anyone to illegally import/manufacture standard cap magazines. Even if the risk of getting prosecuted is low, in my mind, a few extra rounds in the magazine isn't worth the risk of a felony conviction.

[Renaissance Redneck]

Large capacity magazines acquired via a non-exempt method (such as "finding" or admitting to importing/manufacturing after the 3 year statue of limitation) are nusiance items and can be legally confiscated.

The possesor of said large capacity magazines will not be charged with a crime, but they will not be able to legally keep said magazines.

Thanks for the reference. That's what I was reading yesterday. The nuisance stuff complicates what we THOUGHT we knew about the high-cap mag laws.

[Mesa Tactical]

True, but if memory serves correctly, the statute of limitations on importation/manufacturing is 3 years. So even if you have standard capacity magazines for a newer model gun, law enforcement still has to prove that you imported/manufactured within 3 years of the date of the encounter -- which is nearly impossible if you simply keep your mouth shut and don't talk yourself into an arrest.

If possession is a nuisance, and you will not be charged, but your magazines are confiscated anyway, what's the procedure for getting them back? Are you going to go to court and sue the PD?

[Renaissance Redneck]

If possession is a nuisance, and you will not be charged, but your magazines are confiscated anyway, what's the procedure for getting them back? Are you going to go to court and sue the PD?

I could be wrong, but I don't think there is any way to get a confiscated "nuisance" back. The item can be legally destroyed and you have no recourse.

EDIT: This nuisance thing should be placed front and center in the high-mag cap sticky. It really complicates the whole issue.

[Mesa Tactical]

I could be wrong, but I don't think there is any way to get a confiscated "nuisance" back. The item can be legally destroyed and you have no recourse.

That's my impression as well. Which seems to contradict the many voices that claim that due to the statute of limitations if you acquired your magazines illegally more than three years ago (yes, I used that word on purpose) there's nothing the PD can do about it and you can tell them to go pound sand.

Doubt that it works that way in real life. But I don't have a dog in this fight, as I don't have any such magazines (some years ago I bought an M1 Carbine and the guy gave me a couple of 15 rounders; I took them to the Phoenix gun show and swapped them for ten rounders. That was more than three years ago so you can't touch me, coppers!).

[QuarterBoreGunner]

All of your magazine related questions are answered here:

http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/FAQ#Magazine_Questions

[Big Ben]

That's my impression as well. Which seems to contradict the many voices that claim that due to the statute of limitations if you acquired your magazines illegally more than three years ago (yes, I used that word on purpose) there's nothing the PD can do about it and you can tell them to go pound sand.

I'm not sure that we've got the "nuisance" portion of the penal code figured out quite yet. I believe that language showed up when they renumber the penal code a year or two back, and I've seen some debate here about what the additional language actually means.

I have yet to hear reports of anyone having magazines confiscated under the nuisance provision. Either way, it would seem to me that the LEO would need to demonstrate that they are illegally possessed to be able to confiscate them -- which again, would be impossible if the owner keeps his/her mouth shut.

Like you, this entire discussion is academic for me, as I own 2 "standard" capacity magazines that came with a handgun I purchased 15 years ago. Beyond that, I've got nothing but neutered 10 rounders.

[curtisfong]

That's my impression as well. Which seems to contradict the many voices that claim that due to the statute of limitations if you acquired your magazines illegally more than three years ago (yes, I used that word on purpose) there's nothing the PD can do about it and you can tell them to go pound sand.

The "nuisance" clause seems to say that if you ADMIT you "found" the mag, or that you acquired it illegally more than 3 years ago, the mag can be confiscated.

I am not a lawyer. YMMV.

Incidentally, the CGF mag FAQ doesn't really touch on this subject at all... perhaps it needs some updating

[IVC]

If you have a new gun model that wasn't manufactured until 2009, you may have a harder time explaining how you came into possession of something prior to 2000 when it wasnt manufactured until 2009.

There is a 3 year statute of limitation, which means that even if you tell them you imported/created/bought it illegally, but it was more than 3 years ago, they cannot convict you of anything.

That said, it's never up to you to explain how you got it. It's up to the LEO to arrest you and up to DA to charge you based on what they can prove. If you just keep quiet, the DA has to show when and how that magazine came into your possession and that it happened within the last 3 years. That's a tall order, but anything you say can and will make the case for DA out of nothing.

Finally, don't be stupid about the standard capacity magazines. Just because you cannot get caught or convicted, it doesn't make it right to brake the law. Even if the law is stupid. As law abiding gun owners, we are held to higher moral and ethical standards than to look for what we can get away with. If there was an actual loophole, by all means jump on it. However, this is not a loophole - this is breaking the law and not getting caught.

[A-J]

Penal Code 18010
(a) The Attorney General, district attorney, or city attorney may bring an action to enjoin the manufacture of, importation of, keeping for sale of, offering or exposing for sale, giving, lending, or possession of, any item that constitutes a nuisance under any of the following provisions:
(20) Section 32390, relating to a large-capacity magazine.
(b) These weapons shall be subject to confiscation and summary destruction whenever found within the state.

IMO, this would seem to trump everything else. I've read the super long high cap thread a few times, and I never come up with a different interpretation.

[curtisfong]

I have yet to hear reports of anyone having magazines confiscated under the nuisance provision. Either way, it would seem to me that the LEO would need to demonstrate that they are illegally possessed to be able to confiscate them -- which again, would be impossible if the owner keeps his/her mouth shut.

IMO, if the cops think they have enough evidence to justify confiscating the magazines, they probably would have enough evidence to try to prosecute you anyway.

Bottom line, do NOT get into this situation to start with. Don't do anything illegal. Don't tell stories about "finding" mags. If you did do something illegal, don't tell the cops about it (even if you think the statute of limitations has run out).

[Renaissance Redneck]

All of your magazine related questions are answered here:

http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/in...zine_Questions

Not really. The NUISANCE provisions in the law are missing from that sticky, unless I missed it.

[curtisfong]

IMO, this would seem to trump everything else. I've read the super long high cap thread a few times, and I never come up with a different interpretation.

I don't think that trumps everything else:

Penal Code 32390
Except as provided in Article 2 (commencing with Section 32400) of this chapter and in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 17700) of Division 2 of Title 2, any large-capacity magazine is a nuisance and is subject to Section 18010.

[hnoppenberger]

Possession of a standard cap mag is legal.