Shipping High cap mags to Kalli?

[Roadwild17]

Is it illegal to ship high-cap mags to Kalli? Specifically 13rd glock mags.

 

[nalioth]

Anything 10 rounds capacity or more is illegal to ship to California.

 

[Quiet]

However, it is completely legal to ship magazine parts to CA.

Dissassmble the large capacity magazines into parts and ship the parts.

It is then on the reciever to comply with CA laws, by keeping the parts dissassemble & never assemble them in CA or by assembling the parts into permanent 10 round magazine.

 

[Got Stuff?]

Quiet is correct.

There is no law against repairing old magazines.

 

[Zoogster]

Quiet is correct.

There is no law against repairing old magazines.

Or building completely new ones under 10 rounds from components of higher capacity ones..
I know people that rivet or otherwise modify a regular capacity magazine so it only holds 10 rounds per California law.

Some firearms are not offered with reduced capacity magazines, and that is the only way to acquire magazines for them.
With others the regular capacity magazines are cheaper than the special reduce capacity ones, so modifying the cheaper magazine is a better deal.

 

[tube_ee]

It is also not illegal to possess magazines of greater than 10-round capacity in California, if you possessed them before the ban. They're also not registered or tracked in any way.

--Shannon

 

[Zoogster]

It is also not illegal to possess magazines of greater than 10-round capacity in California, if you possessed them before the ban. They're also not registered or tracked in any way.

Well perhaps. People who were under under 18 (or 21 for handguns) in 2000 might have a bit of trouble arguing they legally possessed many magazines for firearms they could not legally own.

Considering the ban happened in 2000, that means anyone not at least 18 if not 21 by then should probably not have possessed magazines for firearms they could not legally own.

18 would give a minimum age of about 28 as of 2010 (depending on time of year their birthday is) while a minimum age of 21, the legal minimum to own a handgun in California would give a minimum age of 31 as of 2010.

So people under 28 or 31 as of 2010 could reasonably be presumed to be in possession of illegal magazines for firearms they could not even own at the time of the ban.

 

[mlaustin]

"My parents are pro-gun and so they bought me a bunch of common magazines in 1993" isn't a good excuse for owning common, say, AR or AK magazines? I've always wondered what they would say to that, since you don't have to be 18/21 to own a magazine (or to read the news about upcoming bans).

 

[thriftyjoe]

Yup my friends in cali are under 28 and cannot claim that they are preban

Its not possiable in Cali to transfer ownership of a preban mag

 

[DevLcL]

However, it is completely legal to ship magazine parts to CA.

So let me ask you this.

Can California customers legally purchase these magazine bodies (or similar products from other companies) from CProducts?

Flat out, no "ifs, ands, or buts". Is it legal?

I'm assuming its illegal for anyone who wasn't at least 18 in 2000 to buy any large capacity magazine parts. (because the whole idea is that your replacing your old worn out pre-ban mags, right?)

 

[bdickens]

What is a "high capacity magazine?"

 

[Quiet]

What is a "high capacity magazine?"

The definition varies from firearm to firearm.
But, it's generally considered to be a magazine that has a higher capacity than the standard capacity of a firearm.

For example...
SIG P220 = standard capacity = 8 rounds. high capacity = 10 rounds.
Glock 17 = standard capacity = 17 rounds. high capacity = 33 rounds.


In CA, a "large capacity magazine" is defined by law [PC 12020(c)(25)].

Penal Code 12020
(c)(25) As used in this section, "large-capacity magazine" means any ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds, but shall not be construed to include any of the following:
(A) A feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it cannot accommodate more than 10 rounds.
(B) A .22 caliber tube ammunition feeding device.
(C) A tubular magazine that is contained in a lever-action firearm.

 

[riverdog]

DevLcL,
As I understand CA law, it is not legal to buy magazine bodies, which as I understand, define the magazine. It may be legal to replace previously owned but damaged magazine bodies, but to simply purchase a mag body and other mag parts to manufacture a >10 round magazine won't pass muster. I can buy all the floorplates, springs and followers I want for the high cap mags I own, but mag bodies are another animal.

 

[LAK Supply]

Ok... CLARIFICATION-

So people under 28 or 31 as of 2010 could reasonably be presumed to be in possession of illegal magazines for firearms they could not even own at the time of the ban.

It is 100% legal to possess hi cap mags in CA, regardless of age. There is no law banning possession, and it is up to a prosecutor to prove that you obtained them illegally. It is not up to the person involved to "prove" that they don't.

As I understand CA law, it is not legal to buy magazine bodies, which as I understand, define the magazine. It may be legal to replace previously owned but damaged magazine bodies, but to simply purchase a mag body and other mag parts to manufacture a >10 round magazine won't pass muster. I can buy all the floorplates, springs and followers I want for the high cap mags I own, but mag bodies are another animal.

Not correct. It is 100% legal to purchase mag bodies if that's what you want to do. You can purchase a complete magazine repair kit containing EVERY part of the magazine and not break any laws.

It is, however, illegal to use those parts to manufacture a new "hi capacity magazine."

So let me ask you this.

Can California customers legally purchase these magazine bodies (or similar products from other companies) from CProducts?

Flat out, no "ifs, ands, or buts". Is it legal?

I'm assuming its illegal for anyone who wasn't at least 18 in 2000 to buy any large capacity magazine parts. (because the whole idea is that your replacing your old worn out pre-ban mags, right?)

It is legal with "no ifs, ands, or buts." Age doesn't matter. Everybody keeps hammering on age, but there was NO AGE RESTRICTION to purchase magazines so anybody of any age could have purchased them. There are also ways people could have obtained them that don't fall within the "give, lend, sell, offer for sale, manufacture or import" restrictions in CA law.

Notice that "purchase" is not in there? What about somebody who leaves their mags at the range and somebody else that picks them up? "Find" is not in there as well. How about the person that has a parent die and takes possession of their hicap mags? There is nothing in CA law that would make them a criminal, and if there is no executor who made the mags change ownership who committed a crime? How about those people who are 18 years old right now and purchasing complete magazine parts kits to make 10/20 or 10/30 magazines? I have customers who buy 100's of hicap magazine repair kits at a time for conversion to 10rd capacity and resale at places like gun shows in CA.

There are also certain groups that can legally purchase hicaps... LEO, FFL's, armored car security officers. There are actually groups of people (such as FFL's) that could, theoretically, sell hicap mags in CA as they're "exempted" from the law. FFL's in CA are EXEMPTED from the "sell" portion of the law (12071), so technically they could sell hi-cap mags to private parties. I don't know of any that would, because the DOJ is the entity that renews their licenses, and the CA DOJ is well-known for jackbooted thuggery regardless of legality.



Edit- to the OP... according to the law it doesn't appear that you would be breaking the law by sending hicaps into CA. You would be the "exporter" from your state, not the "importer" into CA. The person receiving the magazine would be breaking the "import" portion of the law, however, and if the DOJ could prove you knew about that they may be able to find a conspiracy code that's applicable.