berettaprofessor
Member
Okay, he's a felon in possession....but to be charged with having the magazine, don't they have to have proof that it was bought after the law went into effect?
So much for the law not being enforced.
MachIVshooter said:My guess is the mag charge will be one of the first bumped off in a plea, and should a deal not be made, it and the other minor charges may not even be brought into a trial. When they're going after someone for multiple felonies, trying to also convict of moderate misdemeanors is a low priority.
Coloradoan said:Specific language under the law notes that a person who "sells, transfers or possesses a large-capacity magazine commits a Class 2 misdemeanor." Large-capacity is defined as a magazine that is designed to accept or can be converted to hold more than 15 rounds of ammunition.
Legally speaking, the charge rises to the level of a Class 6 felony in this case because Moscow reportedly possessed the magazine during the commission of a felony — a measure built into the criminal code at the time of its adoption.
http://www.coloradoan.com/story/new...acity-magazine-charge-filed-larimer/74887236/
In 10 years we will have 30 states with laws against any magazine that hold more than 10 rounds. Sign of the times. We will also have 30 states with UBC.
The therapist felt the threat was credible and notified campus officials and Fort Collins police. Moscow was taken in for a 72-hour hold after an Oct. 23 traffic stop.
Investigators searched his home and vehicle and located an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle, a Glock .40-caliber handgun and hundreds of rounds of ammunition. As a convicted felon, Moscow is barred from possessing weapons. Officers also found hydrocodone pills for which Moscow lacked a prescription and amphetamines, court records show.
Sure they have. A number of them too. And blatantly.I don't believe any CLEO has flat out said that they wouldn't do it...
The only reason I could think that maybe the magazine could be an issue, is if he moved to the state after the ban went into affect.
Im not a lawyer, but im fairly certain that is the case.I certainly hope that's not the case; because then no one who has a 30 round magazine should ever move to the state.....not that I'm going there anytime soon.
He was released with an ankle monitor? Maybe the LE folks here can explain how this works, does it have an internal GPS that someone has to monitor all the time to see where he goes? Or would he be ordered to be confined to his house and it just alerts authorities if he leaves? Then what?
A good bit of inaccurate information flowing in the recent posts here....if he moved to the state after the ban went into affect.I certainly hope that's not the case; because then no one who has a 30 round magazine should ever move to the state...Im not a lawyer, but im fairly certain that is the case.
Which, of course, is by design. A ban by eventual attrition. The magazines in question are not "dated", but birthdays and ownership/occupancy documents sure are.
It is not simply a law that can be enforced. The magazine charge in this case will be dropped because of this fact. I guess it is a false charge as well, if the reports are true that there is absolutely no proof that the magazine(s) were unlawfully obtained after 07/01/2013; just the DA's assumption. If that's the reason the charge gets dropped, shame on the DA for bringing an unfounded, false charge.To add to that...
In the long run, I think the Sheriffs are maybe doing us a disservice in not enforcing the law...
Not exactly.Magpuls all have date stamps on them. Makes things pretty easy for enforcement...
I think it is 100% completely impossible to look at a magazine and know for certain that the parts were all made and all acquired as a completed magazine after any particular date.I don't think it's too hard to figure out when most commercial magazines were made...
if we don't get this undone, nobody born after 07/01/2013 can ever legally possess a >15 round magazine in this state.
Just curious, would that also be true if the person inherited it from a parent?