Roster exemption for peace officers

[ugimports]

So Leo's may only have hi-cap mags if they owned them prior to the law passing?

Federal that is correct. Clarification is purchase. Anyone can have hicap mags.

CA LEO are still fine for purchase.

[Oldmandan]

I remember reading somewhere that Federal LEO don't get benefit for hi-cap mags. Someone else might be able to confirm PC or DOJ info around that.

I have a friend who is Federal. He tells me he can't get them locally or online, but has had to buy them direct from the manufacturer. He carries an H&K, so you can imagine what he has to pay for them direct from H&K. Hopefully they give a LEO discount...

[UnitedFinds]

Stupid California, their Leo's are okay but not federal? This states' laws are absolutely the dumbest.

[NATEWA]

It should concern everyone when CA politicians prohibit the sale of off roster handguns to retired police officers.

[ugimports]

It should concern everyone when CA politicians prohibit the sale of off roster handguns to retired police officers.

Why? I'm not sure I understand why this should be more concerning than any other citizen.

[RickD427]

As I said, "I know of no CA. Penal Code section that says it's against the law to be a "nuisance".

Now I do...thanks...

Tyke,

Let's be clear here.

There is nothing unlawful about possessing a "nuisance" magazine.

I know that sounds kinda counter-intuitive, but please go back and re-read the text of the statute.

The worst that can happen if you're caught with a nuisance magazine is that the magazine goes to jail. There is no statute under which you could go to jai.

[Tyke8319]

I know...you're exactly right. I was just not in the mood to get into philosophical/word Ping-Pong and case law.
The codes cited mention nothing abut "active LEO's confiscating Hi-cap mags as a nuisance". Confiscations takes place thru judicial process not arbitrary seizure.

[pacrat]

I know...you're exactly right. I was just not in the mood to get into philosophical/word Ping-Pong and case law.
The codes cited mention nothing abut "active LEO's confiscating Hi-cap mags as a nuisance". Confiscations takes place thru judicial process not arbitrary seizure.

Member American Z28 would beg the differ with that statement. He had exactly that happen to him in his own home.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=944866

BTW, they weren't even "high capacity" magazines. The were previously blocked to be 10 round magazines. But since the local PD Lt claimed they "looked" like High Capacity magazines they were never returned to their lawful owner.

It Happens

[Tyke8319]

Can't tell you how many items I've "confiscated" as evidence of a potential crime.
Course you're relaying the part of the story that makes your case., Hard to know all the fact at this point.

[captainkelp]

Fed LE do not get "ANY" LE perks in CA. No Hicaps or off roster

Sir, you may want to check the California Penal Code that recently changed. You are half correct, KH decided that we feds did not qualify for off-roster pistols, but that was amended and changed Jan 1, 2015 (see CA SB 363). I have bought several handguns this year that are all off-roster and purchased them from LGS that are very tight on the rules and would not sell them to us until the law changed. Now, we still cannot get hi-caps (had to swap out my Glock 19 Gen4 hi-caps for 10 rounders' to take possession of the gun), unless issued to us by our agency, and still are limited to the 1 every 30.

Edit: Yes I know that this is the 2001 law, but the changes for 2015 I put in italics.


32000.
(a) Commencing January 1, 2001, any person in this state who manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state for sale, keeps for sale, offers or exposes for sale, gives, or lends any unsafe handgun shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year.
(b) This section shall not apply to any of the following:
(1) The manufacture in this state, or importation into this state, of any prototype pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person a prototype handgun when the manufacture or importation is for the sole purpose of allowing an independent laboratory certified by the Department of Justice pursuant to Section 32010 to conduct an independent test to determine whether that pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person handgun is prohibited by Sections 31900 to 32110, inclusive, and, if not, allowing the department to add the firearm to the roster of pistols, revolvers, and other firearms capable of being concealed upon the person handguns that may be sold in this state pursuant to Section 32015.
(2) The importation or lending of a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person handgun by employees or authorized agents of entities determining whether the weapon is prohibited by this section.
(3) Firearms listed as curios or relics, as defined in Section 478.11 of Title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
(4) The sale or purchase of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person, if the pistol, revolver, or other firearm a handgun, if the handgun is sold to, or purchased by, the Department of Justice, any a police department, any a sheriff’s official, any a marshal’s office, the Youth and Adult Correctional Agency, Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the California Highway Patrol, any district attorney’s office, any federal law enforcement agency, or the military or naval forces of this state or of the United States for use in the discharge of their official duties. Nor shall anything in this section This section does not prohibit the sale to, or purchase by, sworn members of these agencies of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person. a handgun. (c) Violations of subdivision (a) are cumulative with respect to each handgun and shall not be construed as restricting the application of any other law. However, an act or omission punishable in different ways by this section and other provisions of law shall not be punished under more than one provision, but the penalty to be imposed shall be determined as set forth in Section 654.
SEC. 3.5.
Section 32000 of the Penal Code is amended to read:

32000.
(a) Commencing January 1, 2001, any person in this state who manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state for sale, keeps for sale, offers or exposes for sale, gives, or lends any unsafe handgun shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year.
(b) This section shall not apply to any of the following:
(1) The manufacture in this state, or importation into this state, of any prototype pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person a prototype handgun when the manufacture or importation is for the sole purpose of allowing an independent laboratory certified by the Department of Justice pursuant to Section 32010 to conduct an independent test to determine whether that pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person handgun is prohibited by Sections 31900 to 32110, inclusive, and, if not, allowing the department to add the firearm to the roster of pistols, revolvers, and other firearms capable of being concealed upon the person handguns that may be sold in this state pursuant to Section 32015.
(2) The importation or lending of a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person handgun by employees or authorized agents of entities determining whether the weapon is prohibited by this section.
(3) Firearms listed as curios or relics, as defined in Section 478.11 of Title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
(4) The sale or purchase of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person, if the pistol, revolver, or other firearm a handgun, if the handgun is sold to, or purchased by, the Department of Justice, any a police department, any a sheriff’s official, any a marshal’s office, the Youth and Adult Correctional Agency, Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the California Highway Patrol, any district attorney’s office, any federal law enforcement agency, or the military or naval forces of this state or of the United States for use in the discharge of their official duties. Nor shall anything in this section This section does not prohibit the sale to, or purchase by, sworn members of these agencies of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person. a handgun. A person who, under this paragraph, acquires a handgun that is not on the roster required by Section 32015, shall not sell or otherwise transfer ownership of the handgun to a person who is not exempted under this paragraph. (c) Violations of subdivision (a) are cumulative with respect to each handgun and shall not be construed as restricting the application of any other law. However, an act or omission punishable in different ways by this section and other provisions of law shall not be punished under more than one provision, but the penalty to be imposed shall be determined as set forth in Section 654.
SEC. 4.
Section 32015 of the Penal Code is amended to read:

32015.
(a) On and after January 1, 2001, the Department of Justice shall compile, publish, and thereafter maintain a roster listing all of the pistols, revolvers, and other firearms capable of being concealed upon the person handguns that have been tested by a certified testing laboratory, have been determined not to be unsafe handguns, and may be sold in this state pursuant to this part. The roster shall list, for each firearm, the manufacturer, model number, and model name.
(b) (1) The department may charge every person in this state who is licensed as a manufacturer of firearms pursuant to Chapter 44 (commencing with Section 921) of Title 18 of the United States Code, and any person in this state who manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state for sale, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person handgun in this state, an annual fee not exceeding the costs of preparing, publishing, and maintaining the roster pursuant to subdivision (a) and the costs of research and development, report analysis, firearms storage, and other program infrastructure costs necessary to implement Sections 31900 to 32110, inclusive. Commencing January 1, 2015, the annual fee shall be paid on January 1, or the next business day, of every year.
(2) Any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person handgun that is manufactured by a manufacturer who manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state for sale, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person handgun in this state, and who fails to pay any fee required pursuant to paragraph (1), may be excluded from the roster.
(3) If a purchaser has initiated a transfer of a handgun that is listed on the roster as not unsafe, and prior to the completion of the transfer, the handgun is removed from the roster of not unsafe handguns because of failure to pay the fee required to keep that handgun listed on the roster, the handgun shall be deliverable to the purchaser if the purchaser is not otherwise prohibited from purchasing or possessing the handgun. However, if a purchaser has initiated a transfer of a handgun that is listed on the roster as not unsafe, and prior to the completion of the transfer, the handgun is removed from the roster pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 32020, the handgun shall not be deliverable to the purchaser.

[kemasa]

And yes as a retired California cop with a 30 years of service it does piss me off.

Well, to be blunt, perhaps you and other LEO should have thought of that and fought against the stupid laws even if it did not affect you at the time, such as the roster and the so-called high capacity magazine bans. If LE had been against it, then it is likely it would not have passed due to politics, but since LE was exempt, they did not care about the violation of Rights and what it meant to the rest of us. Now you are with the rest of us.You should have been pissed off when it was passed, not just when it personally affects you.

In other words, I don't for sorry for you in the least. You are now have your Rights violated like the rest of us. Can you explain, in a logical manner, why a LEO should be exempt from the roster for a non-duty firearm, such as a .22 pistol? If not, then ...

[Tyke8319]

Well, to be blunt, perhaps you and other LEO should have thought of that and fought against the stupid laws even if it did not affect you at the time, such as the roster and the so-called high capacity magazine bans. If LE had been against it, then it is likely it would not have passed due to politics, but since LE was exempt, they did not care about the violation of Rights and what it meant to the rest of us. Now you are with the rest of us.You should have been pissed off when it was passed, not just when it personally affects you.

In other words, I don't for sorry for you in the least. You are now have your Rights violated like the rest of us. Can you explain, in a logical manner, why a LEO should be exempt from the roster for a non-duty firearm, such as a .22 pistol? If not, then ...

Just like the rest of the Calif. population, LE is comprised of both left and right thinking people. Since this state houses more left (liberal) thinkers and since that is the population source that LE draws from, many in LE are either is a bit to the left (concerning firearms) or have no interest in the shooting sports at all. Frankly, those of us who enjoy shooting sports are in a minority.

The legislative mouth peace for the rank and file cop is PORAC, Peace Officers Research Association of California. Their "mission statement" is broad and comprehensive. To quote a portion of the organizations objective, "Our duty is to provide Californians with the safety and security they need to feel protected in their homes and on our streets. It is PORAC’s mission to identify the public safety needs in our communities and provide programs to adequately meet those changing needs. Because, if our families aren’t safe, nothing else matters."
That being the case, much of what is supported by PORAC, to my mind (and yours, I suspect), is anti-gun! Consider the fact that PORAC supported Kamala Harris for a second term, I'm ashamed to say. Certainly nothing I nor any other pro-gun supporter would have endorsed.

Given the fact that the Federal Government felt sufficiently confident in Honorably Retired Peace Officer's to pass HR 218 ( which, in short, allows qualified, Honorably Retired LEO's to carry concealed nation wide) the only stumbling block to Honorably Retired Calif. PO's being afforded broader consideration (when it comes to exemptions and restrictions) is the same radically liberal legislative body that restricts every Calif. citizen from their firearms Rights and Freedoms.

You can no more blame me or any other retired LEO for the restrictions we are subjected to than I can blame you or any other FFL for not having defeated the restrictive legislation that emanates from Sacramento and that we have been subjected to for years...

And, neither I nor any other retired LEO need your sympathy.

[kemasa]

Well, you will get no sympathy when you say that you are pissed because as a 30 year retired LEO that you have to follow the laws that the rest of us do. If you don't want a response, then don't mention it.

[Sleighter]

Can't tell you how many items I've "confiscated" as evidence of a potential crime.
Course you're relaying the part of the story that makes your case., Hard to know all the fact at this point.

LOL. Classic LEO speak. In response to a situation that exactly outlines in real world experiences what people are discussing your response is basically:

[Sleighter]

Retired Cops in California are not exempt from the 10 round limit on purchasing magazines. Retired cops can of course keep, use and repair any and all magazines they personally owned prior to retirement. Retired cops can use high capacity magazines in any and all weapons they own with the exception of California listed AW's, unless they are legally registered with Ca DOJ. Any California FFL that sells, gives or otherwise supplies a high capacity magazine to a retired cop is breaking the law.

And yes as a retired California cop with a 30 years of service it does piss me off.

Yeah, well the rest of us have been pissed off since Jan. 1, 2000 about the law. So welcome to the party. Unfortunately the majority of these laws weren't able to be passed until LEO exemptions were put in place and then all of a sudden they had the support of all the LEO orgs. Same as what's happening in LA currently. Nobody is willing to support the laws on home storage until LEOs get exempt, then they'll fall in line and grant their endorsements.

Explain to me why a LEO needs to be exempt from safe gun storage requirements in their home with firearms that aren't on their person. Are their kids magically more safe around unattended firearms? It just doesn't make any sense.