Purchased a legal high-cap handgun magazine, can I use it legally?

[TheKyleRC]

[71MUSTY]

Ask your IA. Some don't care others do.

[Yugo]

acquired lawfully = use lawfully just remember that if a LEO takes it it will be claimed public nuisance and you will never see it again.

and always remember ITS SHUT THE FK UP FRIDAY everyday when talking to LEO.

[sbo80]

you're mixing two concepts. "legally": it is still legal to own and use lawfully acquired magazines. "policy": as regarding use in CCW that could be up to the issuing authority to place restrictions/conditions on use of certain items such as magazines, changing out triggers etc. Has nothing to do whether it's legal. But it depends on who issues your CCW, the rules are not common statewide. If you broke the rules, it's not a "crime" to be charged but you could have your CCW revoked.

[9Cal_OC]

[Quiet]

Since you lawfully acquired them, you can legally utilize them in a manner that would not violate CA assault weapons laws.

Your issuing agency may have policies that prohibits use with the handgun that is listed on the carry permit they issued you. So, you need to check you issuing agency's policies on this issue, because violating their policy could result in your permit not being renewed or revoked.


Also be aware that...

It is legal to take your legal large capacity out of CA, but it is not legal to bring them back to CA and the only way they can be legally be brought back to CA, by a non-exempt person, is if they are permanently altered into 10 or less round magazines.

[WOODY2]

Shot placement and this subject will be moot?

[AregularGuy]

Since you lawfully acquired them, you can legally utilize them in a manner that would not violate CA assault weapons laws.

Your issuing agency may have policies that prohibits use with the handgun that is listed on the carry permit they issued you. So, you need to check you issuing agency's policies on this issue, because violating their policy could result in your permit not being renewed or revoked.


Also be aware that...

It is legal to take your legal large capacity out of CA, but it is not legal to bring them back to CA and the only way they can be legally be brought back to CA, by a non-exempt person, is if they are permanently altered into 10 or less round magazines.

Technically isn't it illegal to possess but enforcement currently prohibited? Or am I thinking of something else?

[Megalomegalodon]

Check with local laws outside your county. I think LA has a max 10 mag count law so I carry 10 rounders if I happen to be in LA. I'm not sure if it only affects residents or anyone in the county.

[ARDude]

Technically isn't it illegal to possess but enforcement currently prohibited? Or am I thinking of something else?

You are correct.

[ARDude]

Check with local laws outside your county. I think LA has a max 10 mag count law so I carry 10 rounders if I happen to be in LA. I'm not sure if it only affects residents or anyone in the county.

L.A.'s 10 round limit was done away with when the state enacted statewide law. But, enforcement of the law is on hold for now.

[johncage]

the likelihood of it being a problem is low, this is due in part to several past cases where the charges were dropped and the magazines were returned to the owner. thus people have come to realize these anti gun activists moonlighting as district attorneys have no teeth and have started to use their freedom week mags without fear, which is the whole point of freedom week. likewise the bureaucrats in the legal system have realized they can no longer con people into pleading without being able to prove they broke the law.

see their whole game is to play chicken with you hoping you're ill informed on the law and hoping you'll squeal under pressure and cop a plea. trust the law and trust the fact that they need to prove you broke the law, don't panic and fall for the bait.

use these mags while it's still legal to do so

[Quiet]

Technically isn't it illegal to possess but enforcement currently prohibited? Or am I thinking of something else?

Technically...

Possession is illegal [PC 32310(c)], but enforcement of this is stayed until Court case finalizes.

Making, importing, advertising for sale, and transfer is illegal [PC 32310(a)] and enforcement of this is still on going, because it has not been stayed by the Courts.

Large capacity magazines that were made, imported, or transferred via an illegal or non-exempt method are still considered nuisance items [PC 32390], which are subject to confiscation and destruction [PC 18010], and enforcement of this is still on going, because it has not be stayed by the Courts.

[MountainLion]

Large capacity magazines that were made, imported, or transferred via an illegal or non-exempt method are still considered nuisance items [PC 32390], which are subject to confiscation and destruction [PC 18010], and enforcement of this is still on going, because it has not be stayed by the Courts.

Technically, this includes all large-capacity magazines owned or possessed by "normal people" (excluding law enforcement, FFLs, armored car companies ...). It also includes all large-capacity magazines bought before their possession was banned (even though, as you correctly point out, the prohibition on their possession is not currently not enforced). It also includes all large-capacity magazines bought during "freedom week".

So while an individual who possesses such a magazine can currently not be prosecuted for mere possession, the magazine can technically be confiscated and destroyed.

Whether this is likely to happen is a different question.

[RickD427]

acquired lawfully = use lawfully just remember that if a LEO takes it it will be claimed public nuisance and you will never see it again.

So while an individual who possesses such a magazine can currently not be prosecuted for mere possession, the magazine can technically be confiscated and destroyed.

Whether this is likely to happen is a different question.

I don't foresee any LE agency seizing Large-Capacity Magazines under the "Nuisance" seizure authority while the federal court injunction is in effect.

It is quite interesting that Judge Benitez did not include the nuisance provision in his injunction. But he did address it in his original opinion. LE agencies tend to be very respectful of the federal courts, and are not going to act in a manner that would likely offend the court while an issue is before it.

There have only been two seizures of Large-Capacity Magazines that I am aware of following the issuance of the injunction. Neither case made it to trial (although one did go to a prelim). And I understand that magazines were returned in both cases.

In neither case did the LE agency pursue a "Nuisance" seizure of the involved magazines.