Magazine question

[Falconis]

Let's say I finally kick the bucket and for whatever insane reason my wife decides to stay in California. As a cop I've made numerous purchases over my career such as a lot of high capacity magazines.

With California being a communal property state and us being married for over the 3 year time limit for statutes, wouldn't she be in legal possession of said magazines by default?

[SVT-40]

Don't think so... Unless she too is a leo.

[Falconis]

Nope, regular civy. But since there is no law for simple possession, and all statutes expire after 3 years and you can't prosecute, what's the authority to do anything at that point?

[Spyder]

I'd say it was an unlawful transfer, with zero authority to charge or prosecute?

[Falconis]

I'd say it was an unlawful transfer, with zero authority to charge or prosecute?

how about an attempt to confiscate legally? and how is the transfer unlawul? Not being a jerk BTW, just trying to debate the issue for lack of a better term.

[Ron-Solo]

No one is going to come stomping down her door. California is a community property state, so what I own, my wife also owns.

She will have many more real concerns at that time.

[Falconis]

This is just for hypothetical and discussion purposes Ron. I am well aware of her other concerns, like how will she ever get Toby Keith's attention now that I am gone

[Ron-Solo]

Facebook?

[Librarian]

how about an attempt to confiscate legally? and how is the transfer unlawul? Not being a jerk BTW, just trying to debate the issue for lack of a better term.

Bequest is a gift - illegal to give large-capacity magazines.

[Big D]

But if the one giving the magazines is dead then who are you going to charge with the crime?

[Falconis]

Librarian, she is simply taking sole possession of items bought during the marriage. Property being communal, who's to say what so to speak.

Would the mags have to be passed down in any manner?
Would it even be necessary to classify it as a gift or inheritence
Is there a transfer taking place
Does communal property have any bearing
Does the time of marriage have any factor

to simplify factors, let's say no kids

[Falconis]

What if the transfer occurred through inheritance? The law does not say that it is illegal to "testate" or "probate" a large-capacity magazine (I've turned those nouns into active verbs here. And inheritance is legally quite distinct from "gift".

An interesting question for attorneys. Maybe this thread should be moved to (or duplicated in) the 2A forum. But then, the 2A forum has to a large extent turned into a politician-bashing forum, where little reasoned legal discourse takes place, so maybe this thread should stay here.

yeah, I really don't want to deal with the 2nd stringer OT element in the 2A forum.

[TRICKSTER]

I pass, my wife "finds" a box full of magazines in my work room.
What law has been broken?

[Librarian]

What if the transfer occurred through inheritance? The law does not say that it is illegal to "testate" or "probate" a large-capacity magazine (I've turned those nouns into active verbs here. And inheritance is legally quite distinct from "gift".

An interesting question for attorneys. Maybe this thread should be moved to (or duplicated in) the 2A forum. But then, the 2A forum has to a large extent turned into a politician-bashing forum, where little reasoned legal discourse takes place, so maybe this thread should stay here.

Actually, CA doesn't use the term 'bequest'! It's "property which may be taken or disposed of" and Probate Code uses two forms - and

designated in a will to receive a devise.

and

intestate succession under this code.

So it would appear that proper usage would be 'property devised to person X' or 'property taken by heir Y'.

Each is logically a kind of gift - no post-death quid quo pro or a 'pay on death' arrangement.

I'll suggest that Probate Code and Family Code are outside the scope of the even pretended expertise of non-lawyers, myself included, and this discussion about transfer of magazines really can't go much farther.

That is, +1 to "An interesting question for attorneys."

[TRICKSTER]

yeah, I really don't want to deal with the 2nd stringer OT element in the 2A forum.

The 2A Forum has become the hang out for all those trolls banned from OT.