Are pre-ban HiCap mags legal in post ban guns (CA)?

[Sir Aardvark]

Maybe someone would like to chip in here...

A police officer buddy of mine, who owns a large firearms training business, states that it is illegal to use pre-ban HiCap mags in a post ban gun (in the wonderful state of California). I've checked over the state laws, and I have not seen specific language on this, so.......what do you guys know of this?

 

[Gung-Ho]

Ask him to show it to you in writting. I have read and re-read the law, (And the book by the title of "How To Own A Gun In California And Stay Out Of Jail.) and what he is telling you is complete Horse Hockey. As long as you owned the mag before the ban went into effect, it is legal. You might also want to show your "buddy" a copy of the second admendment, and ask him which part applies to what he said. :banghead:

 

[MrTuffPaws]

No, if you owned a hi-cap mag before the ban, it is legal, but you can't sell it, trade it, give it away, inherit it, dispose of it, or do any other thing with it, other than own and use it. Honestly, I don’t know what happens if you die or want to get rid of it.

 

[Librarian]

Sell the standard-capacity mags out of state - but not via EBay, since that's 'exposing for sale'. That's the only way to transfer them to someone else.

 

[whm1974]

There are quite a few people who will tell you this or that is illegal when it is not. Firearms are the worst subject about this due to grey areas and everyone tryes to CYA.

-Bill

 

[El Rojo]

You might also want to show your "buddy" a copy of the second admendment, and ask him which part applies to what he said.

Why? He is obviously not speaking out of opinion, but out of his flawed knowledge of PRK gun laws. PRK gun laws that have yet to be sticken down by the Supreme Court. So until a Supreme Court case overthrows all of these laws, they are legal and valid and you most certainly won't be able to use the "2nd Amendment" to keep you out of jail if you get caught.

As has already been said, there is nothing in the law that states anything about magazines capable of accepting more than 10 rounds in guns made since the 2000 ban. You just claim you bought them before the ban. If they say, "You didn't even have that gun yet!" Tell them you bought a bunch of magazines before the ban with cash at a gun show with the idea one day that you could use them. Lets see them convict you.

 

[Gung-Ho]

So until a Supreme Court case overthrows all of these laws, they are legal and valid and you most certainly won't be able to use the "2nd Amendment" to keep you out of jail if you get caught.

Uhhhhh yeah.....IMHO, just because the supreme court has not overturned a law, does not make it legal in my book. So, just to make sure we are on the same page....if the state of California outright BANS all firearms, and demands that they immediately be turned in for destruction, this is OK with you until the supremes say otherwise?

 

[seed]

El Rojo wrote:

As has already been said, there is nothing in the law that states anything about magazines capable of accepting more than 10 rounds in guns made since the 2000 ban. You just claim you bought them before the ban. If they say, "You didn't even have that gun yet!" Tell them you bought a bunch of magazines before the ban with cash at a gun show with the idea one day that you could use them. Lets see them convict you.

Exactly. I actually did this with my Glock 23. I bought a bunch of standard cap mags in the mid 90's from some dealer based in Fresno. Two years later, I bought my 23. All of it was legit and totally officially legal. But I've had my eye on something else which shall remain nameless. If I happened to have bought standard cap mags for it before 2000 from a friend who happens to be living out of state (if you know what I mean), how on earth could it be proven that they weren't purchased before the state ban?

 

[Guns_and_Labs]

There are quite a lot of Californians who bought all the standard capacity mags they could before the ban, including mags for guns they didn't have yet. I'm sure Para, Glock, Sig and some others doubled their accessory sales in shipments to CA.

In other words, if you owned the mags before the ban, you're golden.

 

[El Rojo]

Uhhhhh yeah.....IMHO, just because the supreme court has not overturned a law, does not make it legal in my book. So, just to make sure we are on the same page....if the state of California outright BANS all firearms, and demands that they immediately be turned in for destruction, this is OK with you until the supremes say otherwise?

Your book has nothing to do with me staying out of jail. I never said I was ok with these laws. However, until they are ruled unconstitutional, if I choose to willfully violate these laws and I get caught, I will go to prison. And until my case gets to the Supreme Court, I am still convicted and still spending my time and money defending it. The consequences for failure might also be more serious if I get convicted of a felony. So again, claim the 2nd Amendment all you want, it won't keep you out of jail and it won't nullify your felony conviction and bring back your complete loss of gun rights.

I'm sure Para, Glock, Sig and some others doubled their accessory sales in shipments to CA.

Do you mean before the ban was effective? No one ships mags to California anymore. However, you might see increased shipments to every state next to California!

The funny thing is I bought a whole ton of AR mags before the ban. I figured someday there would be a PRK legal semi-auto rifle that accepted AR magazines. What do you know? The SU-16 came along! I should tell fortunes!

Another thought? Might SU in the SU-16 be short for "screw u"? This deserves a new thread asking this question.

 

[Travis McGee]

Reading this thread gives me a headache, and this thought:

If the ICE and the ATF switched their agents, every illegal alien in the USA would be arrested, shot or deported in one month.

And we could fire full auto machine guns in our backyards with no paperwork, and no problemos at all with the goobermint.

 

[gunsmith]

I know tons of cops in SF & NYC

If you want legal advice,all of them freely admit "get a lawyer" however they can tell you what they might arrest someone for-whether it sticks is something else-

 

[Gung-Ho]

Your book has nothing to do with me staying out of jail. I never said I was ok with these laws. However, until they are ruled unconstitutional, if I choose to willfully violate these laws and I get caught, I will go to prison. And until my case gets to the Supreme Court, I am still convicted and still spending my time and money defending it. The consequences for failure might also be more serious if I get convicted of a felony. So again, claim the 2nd Amendment all you want, it won't keep you out of jail and it won't nullify your felony conviction and bring back your complete loss of gun rights.

The Founding Fathers must be spinning in their graves these days. So much for "we pledge: our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor".....So, from what I can tell you answered yes to my question. There is no "line in the sand" for you, the law is the law. BTW, I'm not telling you or anyone else they should break the law. All I'm saying is that it may come down to that, and that there NEEDS to be a "line in the sand."

 

[El Rojo]

All I'm saying is that it may come down to that, and that there NEEDS to be a "line in the sand."...There is no "line in the sand" for you, the law is the law.

Nice assumption. The line in the sand for me is most certainly not assault weapons or high capacity magazines. Sorry, I am finding ways around the ban and means to make due. It is not time to rise up and use the 2nd Amendment yet. I know you wouldn't rise up over this either, so quit acting all high and mightier and most certainly stop acting like you know me. As long as we can still vote, speak our minds, and move about the country, the line in the sand has not been reached. I choose to stay and fight in the PRK, I am not running. I also am smart enough to know that drawing a line in the sand and telling them I have the 2nd Amendment so they can't touch me is going to result in my complete loss of rights. It is hard to vote as a felon. Representatives don't give much credibility to convicted felons in prison. I can't own battle rifles with a felony on my hands. I even have a CCW permit, I could probably kiss that good bye with a misdemeanor high capacity conviction.

You shouldn't assume that just because I advise people not to hide behind the 2nd Amendment doesn't mean I am not willing to break the law. I just don't chose to pick the most assinine way to justify breaking the law. "I have the 2nd Amendment, so I brought the magazines in and you can't touch me!" Congratulations, welcome to prison. Or as I have stated numerous times, "I bought these before the ban at a gun show and I paid cash so I have no receipt." Which one is more likely to keep you out of prison and enable you to continue to fight the fight in order to avoid reaching the line in the sand?

Your attitude is most certainly Gung-Ho! This fight doesn't require blind determination, it requires careful thought and discretion. The time might come where we have to be Gung-Ho, but it isn't right now.

 

[Travis McGee]

It's an interesting philosophical point. I'm not willing to leave my young children for prison, over a magazine, that's for sure. OTOH, I won't give up my "homeland defense rifle" under any circumstances. That means I don't always take everything to the public range...a sacrifice to be sure. Where is the line in the sand? I hope we can recognize it when it arrives. Also, I'm moving from Cali to West Floribama next year, so I'm sort of voting with my feet on my own RKBA.

 

[MudPuppy]

Travis, that would be funny if not so true. (I'll be stealing that quote, thank you).

Its very true that the constitution is not law. Laws must conform (according to judicial review) to the consititution, but its still a law until it is struck down.

 

[Gung-Ho]

The line in the sand for me is most certainly not assault weapons or high capacity magazines.

You mean so called assault weapons, and normal capacity mags right?

Your attitude is most certainly Gung-Ho!

Why thank you. Travis makes a good point, and you do also. I think we are really not that far apart, if we are not indeed on the same page. I also have no desire to throw myself on the proverbial grenade when it is not absolutely nessarary......but dang, I sure do get pee'owed sometimes over all this infringement. :banghead:

 

[El Rojo]

Are you in the PRK too Gung-Ho? Then we both know what crap it is. We know it better than anyone else. The problem is we are outnumbered and it is an uphill battle. You do what you can and you keep on keeping. The anti's are smart though, there probably won't be a line in the sand. The line will just keep blowing closer and closer, but it will never really go too far.

I am glad we are on the same team. I understand your frustration. Trust me. You want proof? I own a FAB-10!!! :banghead:

 

[Gung-Ho]

Yeah that line in the sand does seem to move around quite a bit in the wind dont it? That 'ole water will probably just keep getting hotter and hotter 'till that 'ole frog just up and dies. Though I do like the climate (weather-wise) that I live in now, I have my eye on SE Wyoming. Wyoming only has TWO state guns laws, and they are in the process of repealing one of them. Now I'm not sure just how many California has, but considering there are 65.5 PAGES of them in my C&R state laws book, I would assume there is quite a bit more than TWO. (Looks like hundreds.) BTW, I carry a "Free State Wyoming" coin in my pocket to remind me of this.

 

[Guns_and_Labs]

Or as I have stated numerous times, "I bought these before the ban at a gun show and I paid cash so I have no receipt."

What a coincidence! So did I.

 

[billwiese]

Several comments... I'm not a lawyer, but geeez... just read the CPC.

• There's NO Calif. law banning the use of legal hicap magazines in ANY firearm in California.
  
• If you had hicap mags in CA on or before 12/31/1999, they are legal to keep, use, transport. You just can't sell or transfer them (with very limited exceptions to certain FFLs etc) to folks inside CA. You can, however, sell them to folks out of CA. The comment above about not being able to post them for sale on EBay is BS: as long as your ad text says something like "Not for sale in CA or to CA residents" you're fine.
  
• You can bring in any non-assault-weapon into CA during travel. Just
  DO NOT bring in any hicaps!!! Multiple hicaps could result in multiple escalated counts of 'importation' of hicap.
  
• If you live in CA, you can legally exit and reenter with hicaps. I do it all the time.
  
• You shouldn't have brought hicap mags into CA on or after 1/1/2000. Persons moving to CA since 1998 have been required to file 'Personal Handgun Importer' papers. So there is a bit of a paper trail that could lead gov't to figure out elevated likelihood of illegal hicap possession - guns of a certain serial # range were certainly likely sold with hicaps.
  
• If anyone of official nature asks about your hicaps, DO NOT LIE. That's obstructing justice, impeding an investigation, etc. As many lawyers will tell you, many folks talk themselves into jail during questioning. Sometimes it's easier to charge with the peripheral issue than with the original main issue at hand. Just do NOT answer and get a lawyer - even if they threaten to arrest you. (If they wanted to arrest you they would have already.)
  
• Relying on a cop to know detailed law is like relying on a plumber to diagnose your digestive problems. The cop's more concerned about the details of his parasitic million+-dollar retire-at-50 pension.

Bill Wiese
San Jose CA

 

[longeyes]

Point of information:

Do recent "hi-cap" Glock mags look different from old, pre-ban Glock hi-cap (or, if you prefer, standard-cap) mags? Can they be easily distinguished?

 

[railroader]

Longeyes it wouldn't matter on the glock mags because it is legal to rebuild mags already in your possession prior to 1/1/2000 but I wouldn't rebuild them with law enforcement only bodies though if you are in cali. Mark

 

[docfubar]

Bill you are right on all but one acount, "The comment above about not being able to post them for sale on EBay is BS: as long as your ad text says something like "Not for sale in CA or to CA residents" you're fine." Ebay is technically a CA company and has rules about not posting high caps on it So you can't sell them on ebay.

 

[Kevlarman]

I've seen plenty of high caps on eBay; the trick is in the wording of the article.

Will hold10 rounds!