Legality of AK Maglatch in CA..

California firearms laws are a real mess to decipher, even for the LEOs charged with enforcing them.

California's Assault Weapon statutes define two different type of "Assault Weapons." The "evil by name" Assault Weapons are defined by their manufacturer and model. Possession of an "Evil by Name" Assault Weapon is felony if not registered and cannot be changed by making the magazine fixed. California also defines "Evil by Design" Assault Weapons. An "Evil by Design" Assault Weapon is a centerfire rifle having a detachable magazine and any of the listed evil features. "Evil by Design" Assault Weapons can be made legal either by removing all evil features or by making the magazine fixed. California defines a fixed magazine as one that requires disassembly of the action in order to remove.

If a rifle were fitted with a "Maglatch" magazine that could not be removed without disassembling the action, I would personally hold the opinion that the weapon would be legal. It has complied with the statute. The fact that it could later be fitted with a different magazine that would render it an "Assault Weapon" is irrelevant. The statute does not define a fixed magazine in terms of capability to insert a removable magazine. It defines it in terms of the ability to remove the installed magazine.

But, as I will point out, my personal opinion don't count for much. Possession of an unregistered Assault Weapon is a felony in California. There are 59 different state agencies that can file felony charges against a defendant, and they all operate independently. There is no common policy they have to follow (and that doesn't even include the various federal prosecuting agencies that can bring cases in federal court, for the violation of California state law on federal properties under the Assimilative Crimes Act). All you need is for just one of those folks to hold an opinion differ from mine, and you're facing felony charges.

There's a good example of this in People v Nguyen. California's Assault Weapon statute does not include "Constructive Possession" language. For a great many years, this led folks to believe that it was OK to possess the component parts of an Assault Weapon provided they were not assembled and the receiver was not an "Evil by Name" one. Then Mr. Nguyen gets arrested for having the parts to make an Assault Weapon. Under the conventional view, Mr. Nguyen was not guilty of possessing an Assault Weapon. A creative District Attorney charged him with the crime of "Attempted Possession of an Assault Weapon" and won a conviction that was upheld on appeal. See where I'm going here?

There's also a caution for California folks who have installed various devices on the AR platform weapons that are intended to make the magazines "fixed." These are designed such that the action must be "opened" in order for the magazine to be released. If you accept that "opening" the action is the same as "disassembling" the action, then you're OK. By the same D.A. that filed on Mr. Nguyen (or his cousin) could very well argue that "opening" an action is not the same as "disassembling" the action. Then you're back to felony charges. When figuring out things like this, courts look to the legislative intent. It's pretty clear that legislative intent behind the "disassembly" provision is that they wanted it to be a PITA to remove a magazine. The advertising materials for these devices show how easy it is to remove the magazine. Whadda you think the Appellate Court is going to do with that one?

Keep in mind that some designs are legal while in place, but if you remove the magazine, even at the gun range to put in a different magazine or load that magazine or to store that firearm or transport that firearm while the rest of the firearm is fully assembled you are making and possessing an assault weapon.

Just because you can continue to legally own it with a given configuration does not mean you can continue to use it normally in that configuration. The maglatch even says to use stripper clips or top loading. So even they are hinting at the fact that you cannot take that magazine out of the firearm according to them and remain in compliance.
You can no longer swap magazines in the state of California, but according to them can continue to own it and use it as a stripper clip or top loaded firearm.

In your hypothetical you have the magazine already outside of the firearm, and it is a firearm that can allow other magazines to be inserted and ejected normally. That means you had an assault weapon. It only gets around the law while that magazine is still in place.
Even a cop removing that magazine is making an unlawful assault weapon.

The California firearm laws should be found unconstitutional if our system even works at the federal level.

9mmepiphany said:

If any magazine...not just your modified one...can be inserted and then easily removed, you're in possession of a rifle capable of accepting a detachable magazine

Click to expand...

Please keep in mind that the words "Capable of accepting a detachable magazine" no longer appear in California's "Evil by Feature" Assault Weapon status. That's no longer a relevant test for whether a weapon is illegal. The current law simply requires that the weapon have a fixed magazine. Please refer to California Penal Code section 30515 as amended by SB880.

Brandon B said:

Ok so basically what your saying is even with an AR15 with one of the available “maglock” devices installed, you must leave that magazine installed even when storing, unless the rifle is disassembled? Wow I must have missed that part. That’s good to know

Click to expand...

Yes, that part is actually in there. The way the statute is worded is that a weapon "that does not have a fixed magazine" and does have any of the "Evil Features" is an Assault Weapon.

Brandon B said:

Yikes. So my ARs with maglock must have the magazine installed when storing. Or else the rifle itself does not have a fixed magazine. I guess that technically would mean when I use the rifle at the range, I can no longer release the mag, close the rifle, load the mag and re-insert. I must either top load or keep the rifle disassembled while loading the removed magazine, then insert said magazine into the rifle with it disassembled!
Ohhhh California

Click to expand...

If you read the law strictly for content, it's actually worse than that. During the time that your rifle is opened, and lying on the bench, with the magazine removed, it would meet the definition of an "Assault Rifle." once you put the magazine back in, then it would cease being an "Assault Rifle."

It times like this that I really have contempt for the manner in which the legislature has drafted a number of laws, having been responsible for their enforcement.

If there is any "saving grace" in all of this, it's the enforcement guidance provided by California Penal Code section 4. Here it is:

More than once, I've been requested to enforce the letter of the law, when to do so would have been inappropriate. PC4 provided me the ability to say "Nope, I'm not going to do that."

(Enacted 1872.)

Brandon B said:

Ok so basically what your saying is even with an AR15 with one of the available “maglock” devices installed, you must leave that magazine installed even when storing, unless the rifle is disassembled? Wow I must have missed that part. That’s good to know

Click to expand...

AR's have the advantage of not being an AW when the upper is removed (codified in writing by CA DOJ, just don't have the reference handy) ... so there is a legal path to installing a non-removable magazine, such as Franklin Armory's solution, in that platform.

AK's, however, don't have that capability.

CA regulations further define a "fixed magazine" as an ammunition feeding device that is contained in a firearm and the ammunition feeding device can not be removed without disassembling the firearm's action or the ammunition feeding device is permanently attached to the firearm's magazine well.

If the firearm with the magazine lock is assembled and does not have a magazine in it, then it does not meet the definition of a "fixed magazine" because there is no magazine contained in the firearm.

Removal and replacement of the magazine is only legal when the firearm's action is disassembled.

For an AR15 style rifle with a fixed magazine:
1. Hinge apart the receivers.
2. Remove and replace magazine.
3. Hinge close the receivers.

For an AK style rifle with a fixed magazine:
1. Remove top cover, recoil spring assembly, and bolt-carrier group.
2. Remove and replace magazine.
3. Install bolt-carrier group, recoil spring assembly, and top cover.

Brandon B said:

Basically the maglatch device installs with the firearm disassembled and makes it so your AK Maglatch COMPATIBLE magazines cannot be removed without removing the action of your Ak47. But they base their whole sales pitch on being able to use your old standard magazines in your rifle outside of California with no modification, but using the Maglatch compatible magazines in CA.

Any input?

Click to expand...

It would be prudent to do the following...

While in CA, do not store or transport unmodified AK magazines with a semi-auto AK style firearm equiped with the AK MagLatch.

... and/or...

Only own/possess modified AK magazines in CA.

Your standard (unmodified) AK magazines should be stored outside of CA.
If you legally acquired them in CA, then you can still legally possess them in CA. However, if you take them outside of CA, then you can not legally bring them back to CA. The exemption that allowed re-importation of legally owned large capacity magazines for non-exempt persons was removed (effective 01-01-2017) and the Court ordered injunction concerning large capacity magazines did not bring that exemption back. So, if you (non-exempt person) legally own large capacity magazines in CA and take those magazines outside of CA and bring them back to CA, then you will be (felony) importing large capacity magazines.

Quiet said:

The exemption that allowed re-importation of legally owned large capacity magazines for non-exempt persons was removed (effective 01-01-2017) and the Court ordered injunction concerning large capacity magazines did not bring that exemption back. So, if you (non-exempt person) legally own large capacity magazines in CA and take those magazines outside of CA and bring them back to CA, then you will be (felony) importing large capacity magazines.

Click to expand...

Is that including if they are only taken out of CA for a few days on vacation?

Or is it that you can't move out of CA and then move back with them?

Or is it that it doesn't make any distinction so therefore it's all of the abovery type thing?

danez71 said:

Is that including if they are only taken out of CA for a few days on vacation?

Or is it that you can't move out of CA and then move back with them?

Or is it that it doesn't make any distinction so therefore it's all of the abovery type thing?

Click to expand...

Duration does not matter, it applies if they are every taken out-of-state.

Unless you are an exempt person (LEO or CA FFL with large capacity magazine permit), once you take your legally own large capacity magazines outside of CA, you can only legally bring them back to CA as permanently modified 10 round magazines.

There used to be an exemption (valid from 2000-2016) that allowed CA resident that legally owned large capacity magazines to take them out-of-state and bring them back to CA, but that exemption was removed (effective 01-01-2017).

The Court ordered injunction stopping enforcement of possessing of large capacity magazines, did not bring back that exemption.

Therefore, if a non-exempt CA resident that legally owned large capacity magazines takes them out-of-state and brings them back to CA, they can be charged with felony importation of large capacity magazines.