G20SF for carry in California... [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : G20SF for carry in California...


Opie 1 Kenopie
06-18-2012, 22:36
A little over a year ago I bought a G29SF and it has quickly become my favorite Glock and easily my most carried.

Listening to all of you on the 10 Ring talk up the G20, I decided to take the plunge and get one. This morning I bought a new G20SF from an idaho dealer through Gunbroker. $549 out the door. I'm getting the original capacity mags, not the BS California versions.

I've been wanting a 20 for cold weather CCW, nightstand gun and backpacking since I first bought the 29. I have a Gen3 G21 with a really beat up frame that I can now drop right into this lower and have a new G21SF too. Damn life is good, two fer one!

So thanks, boys, for talking me into it. When the balloon goes up, a big bore Glock will be right there on my side.

orangeride
06-18-2012, 22:39
Sorry bud, but your California FFL won't give you the gun with the hi caps. You might as well start looking for some 10 rounders.

WeeWilly
06-19-2012, 00:06
Congratulations, I love my G20SF. I shoot it as well as my best 1911.

I have only been shooting my G20SF a few months. I loved it so much, I got another just the other day. I sure hope this doesn't turn into some sort of habit...

zippyhuntin
06-19-2012, 00:25
I don't think the hi-cap ban applies to LEO's.
Congrats on the G20!

dm1906
06-19-2012, 00:31
I don't think the hi-cap ban applies to LEO's.
Congrats on the G20!

It doesn't. Doesn't apply to criminals, either. Brilliant legislation.

zippyhuntin
06-19-2012, 00:39
Brilliant legislation.


A classic oxymoron.:whistling:

dm1906
06-19-2012, 00:46
A classic oxymoron.:whistling:

Yep....

Maine1
06-19-2012, 10:47
if a CA resident does not have regular cap mags, they are just not trying hard enough.
Still, glad that i left though the country was grand up north.

dm1906
06-19-2012, 14:25
if a CA resident does not have regular cap mags, they are just not trying hard enough.
Still, glad that i left though the country was grand up north.
Getting them is easy. Staying out of jail if you get caught with them, not so easy. There are very few exceptions.

WeeWilly
06-19-2012, 18:00
Getting them is easy. Staying out of jail if you get caught with them, not so easy. There are very few exceptions.

Actually, I don't think it is illegal to have them or even use them. I think the law centers around the criminalization of the process of bringing them into the state for sale to those that are not exempt. That is, if you are not an exempt person and happen to find a bag full of high cap magazines near the dumpster, there is nothing stopping you from keeping them and using them. At least, that was my understanding of the law.

The reason I thought the above was correct was because it jives perfectly with my understanding of how California views criminals, you know, the people who own a business and sell things. Certainly not the poor soul who, through no fault of their own, found themselves holding a gun during the commission of a crime. :upeyes:

dm1906
06-19-2012, 19:24
Actually, I don't think it is illegal to have them or even use them. I think the law centers around the criminalization of the process of bringing them into the state for sale to those that are not exempt. That is, if you are not an exempt person and happen to find a bag full of high cap magazines near the dumpster, there is nothing stopping you from keeping them and using them. At least, that was my understanding of the law.

The reason I thought the above was correct was because it jives perfectly with my understanding of how California views criminals, you know, the people who own a business and sell things. Certainly not the poor soul who, through no fault of their own, found themselves holding a gun during the commission of a crime. :upeyes:

Good luck with your dumpster-diving.
You are essentially correct, and your second paragraph is spot-on.

However, your dumpster find notwithstanding, you have to acquire it from someone. This includes not only selling, but lending, giving, trading, bartering, and importing. "Large-capacity magazines" are listed in the "generally prohibited weapon" list, after "A firearm that is not immediately recognizable as a firearm", and before "A leaded cane or an instrument or weapon of the kind commonly known as a billy, blackjack, sandbag, sandclub, sap, or slungshot".

The only exception for non-exempt persons is, if they lawfully possessed the magazine prior to January 1, 2000. All other exceptions are law enforcement officers and certain special licensed individuals.

If you'd like all the California Penal Code references, I'll provide them.

Reswob
06-19-2012, 19:44
The only exception for non-exempt persons is, if they lawfully possessed the magazine prior to January 1, 2000. .

And how can you prove someone didn't have them before?

WeeWilly
06-19-2012, 20:16
...If you'd like all the California Penal Code references, I'll provide them.

Nah, I got them, but I do have to say they are getting smaller, lately been using a page here or there to light the BBQ. ;)

dm1906
06-19-2012, 20:42
And how can you prove someone didn't have them before?

Good question. In many cases, we can't, and don't necessarily want to. In my opinion, an otherwise law abiding citizen shouldn't be bothered with such minutia. Magazine capacity is no indication of intent, or evidence of malice. The bad guys don't follow the rules (laws), anyway. There are many conditions that may eliminate lawful possession, such as the age of the offender.

I have a good example of the general consensus..... I respond to a domestic incident that spilled into several neighbor's homes. One of them is armed, and draws on an "intruder" (his neighbor). Once the neighbor is identified, the homeowner holsters, and we show up. During the investigation, he is interviewed in the street. He does the right thing, identifies himself, advises he is carrying, and had drawn on his neighbor while inside his home. He produces the handgun (for documentation purposes). He hands me his Gen2 Glock 19. I clear the weapon, and notice it's a hi-cap. I say, "please tell me you've had this mag since before January, 2000". He hesitates, then says yes. Case closed. No further questions about the weapon or mag. I've had no other incidents involving hi-caps and lawful citizens. Bad guys...plenty.

Now, if this were to happen today, and the homeowner produced a gen4 Glock, with gen4 hi-cap mags, it would be different. I haven't seen this happen, and not sure how I'd handle it. I might not notice the capacity, in certain circumstances.

dm1906
06-19-2012, 20:43
Nah, I got them, but I do have to say they are getting smaller, lately been using a page here or there to light the BBQ. ;)

Gotcha. Mine are getting smaller, for that, and other reasons.

Reswob
06-19-2012, 20:53
Good question. In many cases, we can't, and don't necessarily want to. In my opinion, an otherwise law abiding citizen shouldn't be bothered with such minutia. Magazine capacity is no indication of intent, or evidence of malice. The bad guys don't follow the rules (laws), anyway. There are many conditions that may eliminate lawful possession, such as the age of the offender.

I have a good example of the general consensus..... I respond to a domestic incident that spilled into several neighbor's homes. One of them is armed, and draws on an "intruder" (his neighbor). Once the neighbor is identified, the homeowner holsters, and we show up. During the investigation, he is interviewed in the street. He does the right thing, identifies himself, advises he is carrying, and had drawn on his neighbor while inside his home. He produces the handgun (for documentation purposes). He hands me his Gen2 Glock 19. I clear the weapon, and notice it's a hi-cap. I say, "please tell me you've had this mag since before January, 2000". He hesitates, then says yes. Case closed. No further questions about the weapon or mag. I've had no other incidents involving hi-caps and lawful citizens. Bad guys...plenty.

Now, if this were to happen today, and the homeowner produced a gen4 Glock, with gen4 hi-cap mags, it would be different. I haven't seen this happen, and not sure how I'd handle it. I might not notice the capacity, in certain circumstances.

You're one of the good guys, they're lucky to have you out there! I doubt many would let it go so easily.

dm1906
06-19-2012, 21:57
You're one of the good guys, they're lucky to have you out there! I doubt many would let it go so easily.
Thanks, but I didn't let anything go. I conducted an investigation, documented the facts as known to me, and moved on. A good investigation is a collection of facts and evidence, which may lead to a conclusion. Nowadays, it seems the course is to develop a conclusion, then search for the facts and evidence to support it. We called it the CSI generation. Fewer cases go to trial (case denied by the D/A, or tossed out by the court), and fewer cases that get convictions. Crime rates haven't decreased. Only successful prosecutions, and the way they count the beans. It's gotten to the point that people are reporting them less, as well. The wrong direction, in my opinion. What should the result be, when we criminalize victims, and call the real criminals victims?

I'm retired, now. Old school. The new crop is very different, and probably wouldn't survive under the conditions I've seen. It's been that way and getting worse over about the last 20 years. I think it has a lot to do with the technology advancements (reliance, rather than utilization), and the thriving vermin population (lawyers).

Opie 1 Kenopie
06-20-2012, 08:42
dm1906 is right about an officer using his "discretion" when investigating an incident. For those of you wondering, I'm a full time sworn state trooper in CA and also my area's range master. We DO get to own, possess and shoot "regular" capacity magazines just like the rest of you. Pistols and rifles. Department owned AND personally owned. We also get CCW 100% of the time, which out here is a rarity. It's the best part of this job outside of the paycheck.

Just like 1906, I've come across a lot of things that aren't technically legal here. But since the laws are so contradictory and confusing here, it's pretty commonplace to "leave well enough alone." I look at it the same way he does, "how am I supposed to know when this magazine was made?!" (wink).

Its all about common sense which isn't very common here anymore. I'm proud to be one of the Good Ol' Boys who let good people get on with their lives and don't need to jam them up over stupid liberal laws designed to catch good guys and protect the bad ones.
-Opie Out.

21/4life
06-20-2012, 13:42
When I took my CCW reneal class I asked the Deputy giving the class if i could carry my hi caps with my G19 she said no. I said so i can never use them? She replied save them for the apocolypse.

dm1906
06-20-2012, 13:46
When I took my CCW reneal class I asked the Deputy giving the class if i could carry my hi caps with my G19 she said no. I said so i can never use them? She replied save them for the apocolypse.

There's no gray area. They are either legal or not legal. No law prevents you from using/carrying high capacity mags you possess legally.

dm1906
06-20-2012, 13:53
Also.....
Any high capacity magazine sold in CA is supposed to be stamped "LE/GOV'T USE ONLY". If you get or see one that's new since 2000, it's an out of state import. I've seen a lot of these in several calibers/brands, so they aren't really tracking them very close.

If you have any of these, and aren't an exempt person, definitely save them for the apocalypse.

Opie 1 Kenopie
06-20-2012, 23:51
Maybe I'm naive, but if I were limited to 10 round magazines, I'd still feel pretty well armed with a spare on my belt. That's 21 rounds of your favorite bad guy repellent on board, and we should all be practicing lighting fast reloads anyway.

I know it sucks when you buy your new Über-Glock and it only comes with limited capacity mags, I guess I'd feel cheated too. But I often carry a G27 with 9 round magazines and a Kimber Custom II with 8 rounders. As long as I have a spare at hand, I don't feel the least bit under gunned. Now if my ARs were stuck at 10 rounds... We'd have a problem. :)

Lots of guys won lots of gunfights for a lot of years with a standard 1911 or a 6 round revolver. I think I could fight my way through an incident if I had to.

dm1906
06-21-2012, 01:00
Not naive. Good argument, and correct. But, I'm greedy (did I say that?). More is better, in this case. Remember Newhall? North Hollywood? They changed policy. I carried a wheel gun until the 90's (so did you or your agency, with a few exceptions). Nothing could pry that .357 out of my hand, until...... I was asked to attend a training session, and given the G22. Fired about 500 rounds that day, flawlessly I might add. Perfect and accurate right out of the box. I left the gvt. issued revolver behind. I didn't have to. I could have kept the antique. I had 1911's, but chose to not carry them (the only other approved weapon at the time, except for the 645 on my dime, with its mag disconnect). Less accurate, less powerful. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love all my firearms equally. They have their place. Much of the time, I CC a model 12 Airweight (no small 5-shots for me!) or CZ83 (don't underestimate that one). The G20 is never out of reach, but hardly as concealable. A G29 or G30 isn't much better, IMO. In coat weather, the G20 is there. I have a healthy collection of magnums I shoot just as often. A .460 is on my short list. My first retail purchase was a S&W Model 57 (about 1980), still in frequent service (CC'd before the G20). My son carries it hunting. It's probably the most impressive handgun I have, for reasons I'll explain another time.