Magazines: all the answers you need UPDATED April 2019

[Librarian]

The wiki has a long article: Large-capacity magazine restrictions and there is a long thread here at Calguns but for those people who find themselves unable to click on a link:

Legal Considerations

1. California restricts certain things about magazines greater than 10 rounds; it has created a silly legal name for them - "large-capacity magazines" - and says we 'regular people' cannot import, sell, buy (effective 2014), or manufacture them. ("Dealer" FFLs may get licenses from DOJ for these activities; curio and relic licensees cannot.) The restriction applies to both centerfire and rimfire weapons.
   
   
2. There was language in 2013's AB 48 that would have banned large-capacity magazines; that language did not become law for 2014. But one other change did occur through that bill: the Penal Code was amended to prohibit 'buy'[ing]' a large-capacity magazine; that had been omitted before.
   2014: There are now some laws in place - Sunnyvale and San Francisco - banning possession of large-capacity magazines; these are being challenged, but while in court, they are still in effect.
   
   September 19, 2015, the City of Los Angeles ordinance banning possession took effect. The lawsuit challenging this was filed Oct 23, 2015: Bosenko v City of Los Angeles; see the litigation forum for events in the case. ** UPDATE ** Los Angeles has allowed its ban to expire, effective 1 July 2017.
   

   2017: Current Penal Code requires getting rid of all 'large capacity magazines' before July 1, 2017 - Penal Code 32310(c)

   A lawsuit, Duncan v Becerra, has resulted in an injunction against enforcement of the 'possession' language.
   
3. Those who own "large-capacity magazines" are not required to keep records or receipts, and not required to explain how they got them.
   
   
4. The age of the magazine and the age of the gun mean nothing. The critical item is possession of the magazine(s) in California before January 1, 2000.
   
   
5. Yes, you can go out of state and buy magazines of any capacity - but you may not bring "large-capacity magazines" back to CA - that would be importing and that can be charged as a felony. 'Importing' ALSO applies to moving here or visiting here. Buying and disassembling and bringing the magazines back to California after JAN 1, 2014 (AB 48) appears to be illegally importing a 'kit' .
   
   
6. YES, you may keep any 'parts kits' you own before Jan 1, 2014. It appears that acquiring a 'parts kit' by any means is illegal from 2014 forward.
   
   Separate parts: We do not know, nor can we guess, what is the definition of a 'large capacity magazine conversion kit'. We do not know if just a body, or just a spring, or just a baseplate, or just a follower might be enough. Until we get a court case with clarification - and I promise, such a case will get very prominent discussion! - there is no point in asking the FAQ.
   
   
7. Yes, you can take one of those kits you possessed in California before Jan 1, 2014 and create a 10-round magazine from the parts and some method of blocking the capacity; (Example deleted - bit rot). The modification is supposed to be 'permanent', but there is no guidance on what that means in law, regulation, or court cases. Use your best judgement.
   
   
8. You can have "large-capacity magazines"; no one may give them or sell them to you in California, and you may not give or sell them to anyone else in California; the law changed to be more specific in 2014: you may not buy or receive them. This includes sales from LEO and intrafamilial transfers - that can be charged as a felony. (See also the law change noted above, effective July 1, 2017)
   
   
9. There is no such thing as a "pre-ban" or "post-ban" "large-capacity magazine", and it doesn't matter. Markings on magazines have no legal meaning.
   
   
10. If you acquire large-capacity magazines legally, for example as a Law Enforcement Officer (LEO), yes, you may keep those magazines and continue to use them when/if you are no longer a LEO.

If you think your legal question has not been answered, follow the links at the top of this post and read the articles, then re-read items (2) and (3) above several times. Other questions are addressed below.


* Note: it is not a part of the "large-capacity magazine" law, but part of the 'assault weapon' law that says a semiautomatic, centerfire rifle with a fixed magazine that holds more than 10 rounds is an 'assault weapon'. (This is not a magazine restriction, this is an assault weapon restriction, that happens to include magazine capacity.)

That means that

• if your otherwise legal semiautomatic, centerfire rifle has a magazine lock, such as a 'bullet button',
• and you use a "large-capacity magazine" in that weapon, (which, because of the magazine lock is effectively a fixed magazine rifle)
• then you will have manufactured an 'assault weapon'.
• That's a felony. Don't do that.
  
  NOTE: A Registered Assault Weapon (RAW) is already an 'assault weapon', and not included in this problem. If you have a RAW, use any magazine you legally own.

Sept 8, 2011 ETA

Political and Meta-legal items

• No, there is no 'expiration date' or 'sunset' on the magazine law.
• No, there is no possibility the law will be repealed with the Legislature we have in 2015.
• No, there is no current lawsuit in place or planned on the topic - mostly because gun rights litigators in CA have higher priorities. There are lawsuits in progress regarding the Sunnyvale and San Francisco 'possession ban' but not yet any challenges to the State law on large-capacity magazines.

The 'nuisance' language in the renumbered Penal Code: this appears to be worrisome; please see this later post in this thread for a longer discussion.

ETA - The Penal Code was renumbered effective Jan 1 2012 - for magazines see http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...r=5.&article=1., PC 32310 and following.

[Librarian]

An off-topic question: Is it legal to join two 10-round magazines (via bands/clips) in order to make quick changes easier?
I see these bands advertised, but don't know whether it's one of those things that 'everyone else' gets to play with -- just not Californians.

So long as the mags remain separate devices, legal.

[Librarian]

Sorry, I didn't see it posted yet, but...

Can you take a .40 magazine (10 rounds) and use it in a 9mm gun with 9mm ammo and load it with 12 rounds?

To me this seems like you're creating a hi-cap magazine for the gun you're using it in.

Sure, you can do that.

I would guess that those who wrote the law, whom we know are not well-educated in firearms, did not anticipate that this situation would be physically possible.

You bought it as a 10-rounder. It still works as a 10-rounder. You're making no physical modifications to the factory condition in which you bought it. But I really hope you own a .40 pistol that such a mag fits in, and have it with you when you use such a mag.

[rromeo]

Does the high-cap 10 round limit apply to rimfires, i.e. 22 rifles? 22 pistols? Or just centerfire calibers?

Yes, rimfires too. According to this: http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/in...e_restrictions which is on the first line of the first post of this thread.

[Librarian]

No.

If your relative and you go to a range together, he/she can lend you a large-capacity magazine for that range session.

LEO is not exempt from the prohibition on transferring away from him/herself, except to other LEO.

[Librarian]

what about ammo belts...can we have more than 10 rnds linked together?

If they were linked before 2000, you can expend and reload that belt as often as you like.

Otherwise, even those are subject to this silly law.

ETA and near certainly these linked rounds are also subject to the 'possession' ban of 2017.

[Vanilla Gorilla]

can I put +2 extensions on my legally owned/ obtained high cap glock mags or would this be considered construction of high cap mags?

[Librarian]

No, but you can add capacity to your existing legally owned large-capacity magazines.

Once over 10 rounds, there's no legal difference.

(I don't own any extensions, since I hear they have an annoying feature - they fall off sometimes.)

========

Aug 7, 2014 Addendum

Remembering that we do not know for certain, magazine 'extensions' are designed to add capacity to an existing magazine, so they are a really good candidate to qualify for a 'large capacity magazine conversion kit'.

If that were to be so - and I think the CYA position should be that it is - such extensions would be illegal to buy, sell or import in 2014.

[Exile Machine]

hi cap mags cannot be loaned.

Yes they can...

ETA: new code number is 32415, effective 12 Jan 2012

12020. (a) Any person in this state who does any of the following is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or in the state prison:

(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.

(b) Subdivision (a) does not apply to any of the following:

(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.

So lending is OK if the borrower is not prohibited from having guns and ammo, and the place is not off limits, and you stay close to the lender.

[Citadelonline]

Subparagraph (B) allows for an exception to the lend restriction in very specific and restricted terms, i.e the true owner must be physically present at all times during the duration of the loan. ("remains in the accessible vicinity")
Which for all practical circumstances would limit the actual use to a range or other property where a firearm may be legally discharged, and both lender and borrower are present.

I'm fairly certain the asker had a somewhat longer "loan" in mind, as in the traditional and broad sense of the term "borrow".

[Davidwhitewolf]

Nazrico, welcome and interesting! Looks like the question was answered in that thread you posted.

I have another question:

A buddy of mine, an international rimfire steel competitor, was wondering if, as a non-California resident, bringing his greater-than-ten-rounds rimfire magazines to a rimfire match in California and then leaving would not constitute "importing," on the following grounds:

In Europe, bringing weapons into a country for a sporting event (read: match) is not considered importing at all, and no import paperwork is required. You ARE required to take your weapons back out of the country, though, within a few days of the end of the match.

So, the question is, is bringing a hi cap magazine into California for a match, then leaving the state right after the match "Importing" or not?

If I drive my car to California, visit Disneyland, and them drive home, have I "Imported" my car into California? I would submit, and common sense would suggest, that a temporary visit is exactly that, and not a case of importation at all.

If I remember correctly, the Cal. DMV does have a definition, of sorts, of "Importation" for motor vehicles, such that if you bring your car into California for over a certain amount of time, you need to change the license and license it in California. If the vehicle is in the state for less than that amount of time,, you do not have to re-license it, as you are only visiting..

It seems to me that the argument that bringing an item into California, and then taking that item back out of the state a few days later constituting "Importation" is very weak.

Your thoughts?

I told him I didn't think that would fly (especially given this post by Librarian in this thread) but I thought his argument intriguing enough to toss it out here for consideration.

What do you say, winning argument or pipe dream?

[Librarian]

There is simply no exception in the law for competitors.

That would expose the weakness of the law as a practical measure; can't have that.

[Librarian]

so if it is not explicitly spelled out in law it should be legal. ?

That's the way it's supposed to work, but see below ...

Librarian, Thanks for your insight. this is definitely a very grey area as the law is silent concerning the details. My thought is that if it is not expressly forbidden, then it is permissible. I'm just trying to use interpretation & manipulating powers for good!

The good advice you will see here is intentionally biased towards keeping people out of jail.

The risk you take must be balanced with the reward you expect; once informed, each person needs to decide whether to accept the risk.

Here are the risks:
a very, very small chance of detection and apprehension, but if convicted
at least a year in prison (if felony 3 years) [and each questioned magazine could be charged as a separate offense!]
legal expenses
loss of second amendment rights
loss of job
loss of reputation
and other effects of imprisonment on the interpersonal relationships with friends and family (variable).

That's no light catalog.

Before assuming that risk, I would certainly consult my own attorney and pay for good advice.

[Librarian]

Just a procedural note:

This thread hopes to answer the big FAQs about magazines (and I confess myself bemused at the questions that get posted in it!).

Questions and answers are 'in scope' but long conversations deserve their own threads.

[Librarian]

I'm in the military and I'm moving to California in a few weeks. I have many hi capacity magazines for the M4 and M9 that were issued to me by the Army and I use them only for work. I don't own either of those weapon systems. What would I have to do to not get in trouble for this.

Your Uncle issued them to you, and expects you to have them.

I'd buy a ticket to the court hearing where a Federal judge explained that to any CA LE agency, but that's an explicit exemption to the goofy law.

Just don't use them in privately owned weapons that have 'features' - see footnote in first post.