Magazines: all the answers you need UPDATED April 2019

[Lead Waster]

Could dig out an answer, so I'll ask. Sorry if dupe.

Could you send a 10+ magazine to your CA FFL who can LEGALLY receive it, and send him a magazine block that will block down to 10 rounds and have him create a 10 round magazine for you?

I think the sticky question is that if YOU bought the magazine and YOU are no the FFL, even if the magazine will ONLY be received LEGALLY by the licensed FFL ... are you the "importer" since you caused the magazine to be imported into CA? At no time would any non-licensed-to-receive-a-high-capacity-magazine person have the magazine. So straight from out of state to a legally licensed FFL (licensed to receive high caps), then a 10 rounder from him to you?

[Darryl Licht]

Could dig out an answer, so I'll ask. Sorry if dupe.

Could you send a 10+ magazine to your CA FFL who can LEGALLY receive it, and send him a magazine block that will block down to 10 rounds and have him create a 10 round magazine for you?

I think the sticky question is that if YOU bought the magazine and YOU are no the FFL, even if the magazine will ONLY be received LEGALLY by the licensed FFL ... are you the "importer" since you caused the magazine to be imported into CA? At no time would any non-licensed-to-receive-a-high-capacity-magazine person have the magazine. So straight from out of state to a legally licensed FFL (licensed to receive high caps), then a 10 rounder from him to you?

I don't believe anyone will sell/ship hi-cap mags to anyone in California, FFL or not.

I think you could buy mag blocks ahead of time, then travel to AZ or NV buy 30 rounders and convert them prior to returning to CA. but only if you were going to that other state for another reason, otherwise your better off ordering 10/30's online! ...and I doubt you'd save any significant amount of cash!

[inbox485]

There is a hi-cap permit separate from the CA-FFL that a dealer has to have. There are still in state dealers doing in house conversions, and there are still out of state dealers shipping 10/30's.

Other option as mentioned is pre-order limiters, and add an errand to your next vacation out of state. The nuances are tedious, but I'd argue that anything from permanently modifying (ie, glue that is as strong or stronger than the material, or riveting), to part swapping (swap floor plate for integrated limiter and ditch the floor plates so that you are not returning with anything that could be assembled into a >10 round magazine so neither kit nor permanent modification clauses are triggered) covers the letter of the law, and your silence avoids "imperial entanglements" to begin with.

[Darryl Licht]

There is a hi-cap permit separate from the CA-FFL that a dealer has to have. There are still in state dealers doing in house conversions, and there are still out of state dealers shipping 10/30's.

Hmmmm... I didn't know that! But I've only seen prepackaged 10/30's for sale locally, and see them online all the time.

[MCM]

I qualified with my 15 round Glock 22 I purchased here legally in 1994. And is now one of the three on my CCW.

As far as the exact purchase date for the law, I am not sure? Was it 1996? 1999? 2001? That would be helpfull to post if someone here knows the actual date. There were so many laws thrown around back then it is easy to get it wrong. Some are still valid while others may not be.

[Librarian]

This thread is primarily concerned with State laws.

However, in 2014, there are two local laws worth knowing about.

Sunnyvale and San Francisco each have their own large-capacity magazine ban.

Sunnyvale Municipal Code section 9.44.050 bans the possession and use of common, standard-capacity “ammunition feeding devices” or “magazines” capable of holding more than ten rounds. The Ordinance took effect on December 6, 2013, ten (10) days after the Sunnyvale City Council declared the vote.

The ordinance is being challenged; see the thread on Fyock v Sunnyvale, http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=867249

On April 7, 2014, the San Francisco Ordinance took effect. It, too, bans possession of large-capacity magazines.

This ordinance, too, is being challenged (SFVPOA v. SAN FRANCISCO) ; see the thread http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=917138

Until a resolution in favor of the plaintiffs may be secured, carry of large-capacity magazines in each of San Francisco and Sunnyvale is illegal.

Please direct questions to the threads linked.

[Librarian]

Effective July 1, 2017, 'large-capacity magazines' are illegal

New law passed in 2016 changes the rules:

SB 1446

(b) 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 July 1, 2017, any person in this state who possesses any large-capacity magazine,

regardless of the date the magazine was acquired,

is guilty of an infraction

punishable by a fine not to exceed one hundred dollars ($100) upon the first offense,
by a fine not to exceed two hundred fifty dollars ($250) upon the second offense,
and by a fine not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500) upon the third or subsequent offense.

(c) A person who, prior to July 1, 2017, legally possesses a large-capacity magazine shall dispose of that magazine by any of the following means:
(1) Remove the large-capacity magazine from the state.
(2) Prior to July 1, 2017, sell the large-capacity magazine to a licensed firearms dealer.
(3) Destroy the large-capacity magazine.
(4) Surrender the large-capacity magazine to a law enforcement agency for destruction.

(d) For purposes of this section, “manufacturing” includes both
fabricating a magazine
and
assembling a magazine from a combination of parts, including, but not limited to, the body, spring, follower, and floor plate or end plate, to be a fully functioning large-capacity magazine.

(e) The provisions of this section are cumulative and shall not be construed as restricting the application of any other law. However, an act or omission punishable in different ways by different provisions of this code shall not be punished under more than one provision.

and one usable exception for the commoners

(f) A person lawfully in possession of a firearm that the person obtained prior to January 1, 2000,

if no magazine that holds 10 or fewer rounds of ammunition is compatible with that firearm

and the person possesses the large-capacity magazine solely for use with that firearm.

ETA - Blocked magazines are legal to buy, sell, own and use, if the capacity is 10 or fewer and the block-method is 'permanent'.

That was in several of the prior posts, but not as an explicit statement.

No, it's still the case that no one really knows what 'permanent' might mean.

[Librarian]

First post updated: City of LA got rid of the city's magazine ban effective 1 July 2017.

[Librarian]

16 more posts deleted; almost all relied on pre-2017 law on possession for accuracy - they were fine when posted, but out of date in 2018.

And maybe I'll get to revise this yet again to restore 'possession' as legal, pace the nuisance language.

[Librarian]

Update after 'magazine week' - yes, it's legal to use those mags

It has always been legal to use large-capacity magazines, and it remains legal.

The magazine 'possession' language in the Penal Code has been stayed by Judge Benitez - that means it cannot be enforced while that order remains in effect (and see the Duncan thread in CA 2A Litigation for news about that.)

There are a few limitations, however.

There is still a small likelihood of seizure as a nuisance; if that happens, please contact Michel & Associates, helpdesk@michellawyers.com

IF you modified your rifle to the new 'fixed magazine' configuration - that is, now you must open the action to change mags - you MUST NOT use an LCM in those rifles. The 'assault weapon' law is not affected, and using a LCM in a fixed-mag rifle creates an 'assault weapon' - that's a FELONY.

Yes, if you registered your rifles as 'assault weapons' - RAW - you may use LCMs.

Yes, if you still have 'featureless' rifles, you may still use LCMs - that seems to have been the principal point of 'featureless' guns.

Yes, you may legally take your LCMs out to a range; some ranges may have their own rules, so call ahead.

Yes, you may legally use LCMs in your CCW guns; your issuing agency may have an opinion, so follow their rules.

Yes, you may use LCMs in self-defense.

Yes, you may lend your LCMs to another person, if you stay with them. Think 'range trip'; PC 32415

Yes, if you had magazine 'kits', it was legal to assemble them into magazines during the week. It's not legal now - don't do it.

Yes, if you have magazine 'extension' parts, it is legal to assemble them to LCMs. It is NOT legal to assemble them to 10-round or fewer mags - that would be 'manufacturing'; it is also not legal - and was not legal during the week - to get a kit or an extension device - the law on 'large capacity magazine conversion kits' is not affected by this lawsuit.

NO, you cannot take your newly acquired LCMs out of state to use, and then bring them back to CA. There used to be an exception to the the 32310 'importing' prohibition for legally-owned-in-CA pre-2000 mags; Prop 63 deleted that. Now, bringing the LCMs into CA is simple 'importing', and that is forbidden.

[Librarian]

See also this from the CRPA: https://crpa.org/news/blogs/crpa-ale...-ordered-stay/

I. CAN I STILL PURCHASE MAGAZINES CAPABLE OF HOLDING MORE THAN 10 ROUNDS IN CALIFORNIA?
II. CAN I CONTINUE TO POSSESS THE MAGAZINES I LAWFULLY ACQUIRED?
III. CAN I USE THE MAGAZINES I LAWFULLY ACQUIRED AT A SHOOTING RANGE?IV. CAN I CARRY THE MAGAZINES I LAWFULLY ACQUIRED WITH A FIREARM PURSUANT TO A CARRY LICENSE?
VII. CAN I TRAVEL WITH THE MAGAZINES I LAWFULLY ACQUIRED OUTSIDE OF CALIFORNIA?

NO! Prior to the enactment of Proposition 63 in 2016, California law allowed individuals to travel with their lawfully acquired magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds outside of California and then return with them.2 But this provision was repealed with the enactment of Proposition 63. As a result, individuals can no longer travel outside of California with their lawfully acquired magazines unless they plan on leaving their magazines out of California.

[Librarian]

December of 2021

This keeps appearing - someone thinks 'standard magazines' is a synonym for CA's legal definition of 'large-capacity magazines' -

16740.

As used in this part, “large-capacity magazine” means any ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds, but shall not be construed to include any of the following:

(a) A feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it cannot accommodate more than 10 rounds.

(b) A .22 caliber tube ammunition feeding device.

(c) A tubular magazine that is contained in a lever-action firearm.

'Standard capacity' might be best thought of as the capacity of magazines supplied by the manufacturers 'in the box' in free states.

Standard capacity is weapon-dependent.

For all the 1911 type handguns, 'standard capacity' is SEVEN. If you care to look, I'm sure you can come up with a dozen or so whose standard capacity mags are less than 10 rounds.

No doubt most people will understand what you mean in a casual conversation; use whatever term you like there.

But in a discussion of California law, the term is 'large-capacity magazine', as defined in PC 16740, and to use other terms really does create confusion.

Remember, we lost that terminology battle in 2000.