CA extradition from other states precedent?

[shaocaholica]

Let me preface this post in that its purely academic.

If someone from another state sends an CA banned firearm related item into CA and said item is not regulated in the origin state nor is it relegated at a federal level, did the sender break any laws? I fully understand any importer/receiver would be in breach of CA law but technically, since the sender did not do anything inside CA or at a federal level, could CA DOJ extradite them? Would a conspiracy charge even apply in this case?

[Spanky8601]

Federal Law requires that a firearm from outside the state be sent to a FFL within California.

[P5Ret]

Let me preface this post in that its purely academic.

If someone from another state sends an CA banned firearm related item into CA and said item is not regulated in the origin state nor is it relegated at a federal level, did the sender break any laws? I fully understand any importer/receiver would be in breach of CA law but technically, since the sender did not do anything inside CA or at a federal level, could CA DOJ extradite them? Would a conspiracy charge even apply in this case?

You need to be a bit more specific what you mean by "banned firearm related item". If your talking about magazines, the state can go after the seller civilly, criminally would be a long shot at best. Keep in mind that an extradition hearing has to take place in the state where the exporter is. Convincing a judge in another state to grant extradition for a violation of Ca law when the person was not in Ca, good luck with that.

[baggss]

Federal Law requires that a firearm from outside the state be sent to a FFL within California.

He didn't say "firearm" he said "banned firearm related item" that is only "banned" in CA, not the originating state. Something perhaps like a silencer....

[fiddletown]

He didn't say "firearm" he said "banned firearm related item" that is only "banned" in CA, not the originating state. Something perhaps like a silencer....

Bad example. A silencer (suppressor) is pretty heavily regulated under federal law.

[shaocaholica]

Well technically the exercise could apply to any item regulated in CA but unregulated in another state and unregulated federally. Doesn't have to be firearm related.

[keenkeen]

I'm gonna guess magazines over 10 rounds...

Yawn, so boring.

[Cokebottle]

Well technically the exercise could apply to any item regulated in CA but unregulated in another state and unregulated federally. Doesn't have to be firearm related.

Which currently would be pretty limited. Even martial arts tools and other tools listed as "dangerous weapons" have many exemptions, and CA law is written to prohibit possession (in non-exempted situations), not purchase.

Currently, the only thing not federally regulated that would be illegal to import (firearms related) would be magazines, and perhaps ivory grips.

Moving forward, once Newsom's ballot proposition passes, ammo will be on that list except for those with an 03FFL and COE... and if 2017 is anything like 2010, Cheaper Than Dirt, Sportsman's Guide, and many other sellers won't honor that exemption anyways for fear of being harassed by the California DOJ.

Large companies are run by attorneys. They aren't going to risk CA going after them and generating bad PR.
Small companies have too much to lose, so I would not expect them to be willing to ship.

[DSB]

I don't answer hypotheticals. What are you going to actually do?

[Cokebottle]

I don't answer hypotheticals. What are you going to actually do?

Ya, I should have resisted.... it always devolves into "but what if..."

Only answer for that is "Would you and your friend from another state like to be the test case?"

Conspiracy is a very real possibility.