Legality of purchasing Hi Cap Mag and Bringing into CA [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Legality of purchasing Hi Cap Mag and Bringing into CA


Glock714
01-08-2008, 09:32
I was just wondering on the legality of purchasing Hi Cap magazines and bringing them into CA? What states can you still purchase them in and do they check drivers license or anything? NV? AZ?

Just wondering.... I don't plan on breaking any laws.

Thanks to the Democraps our laws suck!

danielsand
01-08-2008, 09:37
Standard mags (they are NOT hi-capacity!), are not legal in CA. Under no circumstances should you buy them out of state, and bring them in. I live just across the state line from CA, and drive there daily. I make sure I have CA approved mags with me!

TacticalRecon
01-08-2008, 10:43
Standard mags (they are NOT hi-capacity!), are not legal in CA. Under no circumstances should you buy them out of state, and bring them in. I live just across the state line from CA, and drive there daily. I make sure I have CA approved mags with me!

He might be talking about the 33 round mags, those are hi-capacity :tongueout:

But you are right, if you want a quick reason for the sheep to throw you in jail bring standard or hi-cap mags into Kommiefornia.

Tadjman
01-08-2008, 10:52
I live in Northern Ca, a good friend has FFL right next door and the answer is:
abso-flogging-lutly not... can not buy anything over 10-shot mag and bring it in... I have asked him several times!

Maybe I oughtta move back to Arizona, eh?:whistling:

Tadjman
01-08-2008, 10:53
I live in Northern Ca, a good friend has FFL right next door and the answer is:
abso-flogging-lutly not... can not buy anything over 10-shot mag and bring it in... I have asked him several times!

Maybe I oughtta move back to Arizona, eh?:whistling:

You are, what you do, when it counts. the masao

Guns & Cockpits
01-08-2008, 10:57
Don't do it. Just don't.

I was just talking to an Orange County LEO last weekend at a shooting range who was telling me that often times, various agencies in CA will monitor bordering state stores that sell magazines with a capacity of more than 10 rounds for CA residents who go just for that purpose. I don't know how much of that I actually believe, but the costs far outweigh the benefits.

It's a crappy situation, one that we shouldn't be in, but one that we are in, and now we have to deal with it. Any breaking of the rules just makes the antis want to make more rules, if that's even possible at this point.

This is the way that it has been explained to me:

Any magazines that have a capacity of more than 10 rounds in CA must be pre-ban mags. And from what I understand, the gun that you own the mags for must also be a pre-ban gun. Supposedly, the mags go with the gun. Once you no longer own the gun, you can't own the mags, and you can't transfer ownership of the mags with the gun, either. Now, I don't pretend to know all of the rules but when I hear these little tidbits and details, I tend to pay attention because in this state, you just never know. Better safe than sorry.

Personally, I'll just avoid all of that stuff altogether until I'm the heck out of this state.

Gallium
01-08-2008, 11:19
It's cool to have hi cap mags. I just keep, oh, about 10 or so for each platform loaded.

Glock_XXI
01-08-2008, 11:47
Don't do it!

Not worth the risk, IMO.

Just buy an extra 10 rounder, e.g. 2 high-cap G19 mags =30 rounds, 3 limited also =30 rounds :cool:

dwebb210
01-08-2008, 12:54
When did this ban go into effect?

I know it has been quite a while.

I'm just wondering if my old G20 and G17 are old enough to have
"pre-ban" magazines, that might be worth something to someone in CA.

Oh wait. I see that you can't transfer them in regardless of age.

striker777
01-08-2008, 12:59
If you own a gun that was originally sold with hi cap mags like my G19 I bought in 1990 it was sold with hi caps before the ban you can own them there was never any law that said you had to relinquish them to law inforcement, you have a receit when you bought the gun you're good to go and besides as a LEO told me they would have to prove that you bought them after the ban was imposed.
Now here in Komifornia the law simply stated that there is no manufacture, sale or importation of hi cap mags if you own them prior to the ban there you'res

Cali-Glock
01-10-2008, 14:26
Don't do it. Just don't.


+1


This is the way that it has been explained to me:

Any magazines that have a capacity of more than 10 rounds in CA must be pre-ban mags.


For the most part, correct! If you (as a California resident) owned pre Sept 1994 mags at the time of the 2000 California ban, then those mags are legal for you continue to own and use.


And from what I understand, the gun that you own the mags for must also be a pre-ban gun. Supposedly, the mags go with the gun.


Incorrect: You can own those mags even though you don't own a gun to "match". For example if you owned some 30 round AR-15 mags prior to the 2000 ban, and you still own those mags, and two weeks ago purchased a Keltec SU-16 you can go out this weekend and shoot your Keltec using your old 30 round AR-15 mags. 100% legal under California law.



Once you no longer own the gun, you can't own the mags,


Incorrect. You can own mags for guns you don't own. Many California residents do so (legally). You can own pre-ban normal capacity mags for guns you have never owned, or for guns you have sold.



and you can't transfer ownership of the mags with the gun, either.


Correct, assuming 1: you are talking about pre-ban normal capacity mags, and 2: you are talking about selling the gun to a fellow Californian.


Now, I don't pretend to know all of the rules but when I hear these little tidbits and details, I tend to pay attention because in this state, you just never know. Better safe than sorry.


Why not just read the regs on the DOJ website (http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/sb23indx.php)?

TKM
01-17-2008, 13:57
The Calguns guys have recently had some .gov types trolling. Trying to get someone to encourage, conspire or assist in illegal acts.

Just sayin'.

Cali-Glock
01-22-2008, 13:39
I used to know a guy at the DOJ firearms division; who's job it was to focus on AR-15 regulatory issues; he said he would spend a lot of time at AR15.com to figure out what we were thinking and trying to do to out think the DOJ, so he and his employers the DOJ could out think us.

He died a couple of years ago.

10mmAuto
01-23-2008, 00:25
+1



For the most part, correct! If you (as a California resident) owned pre Sept 1994 mags at the time of the 2000 California ban, then those mags are legal for you continue to own and use.



Incorrect: You can own those mags even though you don't own a gun to "match". For example if you owned some 30 round AR-15 mags prior to the 2000 ban, and you still own those mags, and two weeks ago purchased a Keltec SU-16 you can go out this weekend and shoot your Keltec using your old 30 round AR-15 mags. 100% legal under California law.




Incorrect. You can own mags for guns you don't own. Many California residents do so (legally). You can own pre-ban normal capacity mags for guns you have never owned, or for guns you have sold.




Correct, assuming 1: you are talking about pre-ban normal capacity mags, and 2: you are talking about selling the gun to a fellow Californian.



Why not just read the regs on the DOJ website (http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/sb23indx.php)?

Cali-Glock is 100% correct. As far as buying hi-caps in other states??? I tried to buy some in Las Vegas and they wanted ID. When they saw I was from CA, they said, "no sale."

It's funny because CA laws can't prohibit a CA citizen to purchase a LEGAL product in a state that ALLOWS the sale of hi-cap magazines. Either way, I wanted the magazines for my vacation house up in Wyoming. Oh well, it's no big deal because I can buy the magazines in WY and just keep them there at my other house.

When I retire, I'm moving out of this God-forsaken state!

Wulfenite
01-24-2008, 22:38
I used to know a guy at the DOJ firearms division; who's job it was to focus on AR-15 regulatory issues; he said he would spend a lot of time at AR15.com to figure out what we were thinking and trying to do to out think the DOJ, so he and his employers the DOJ could out think us.

He died a couple of years ago.

Karma?

bug_eyedmonster
01-27-2008, 06:35
I've got a seperate situation that I've been wondering as well that falls along similar lines... I think. My father bought a G17 I think in 1991-92. He has a total of three 17 round magazines, and I use one or two of them on occasion when I go to the range when I bring my G17, which I bought several years ago. I clearly could not have purchased the standard 17 round mags then, I was still very young, but he legally bought them, and I use them.

I've asked several forms of LEO, FFLs, and a couple of people at ranges, and no one has been able to give me a real answer, so I keep using them. Can I actually get in touble for this?

Wulfenite
01-27-2008, 12:20
First, there's no minimum age to own a magazine. Anyone born before 2000 could concievably own a high-cap that existed in the state at that time.

Secondly, "lending" magazines is specifically not allowed.

Thirdly, I would not use the magazines out of the presence of your father, and certainly not admit that I had borrowed them, unless you and your father can come to the determination that you became owner or at least co-owner of the magazines prior to 2000.

10mmAuto
01-28-2008, 12:30
I clearly could not have purchased the standard 17 round mags then, I was still very young...

Says who? Like the previous poster said, there is no age limit on owning a hicap magazine.

I don't know about you, but when my friend was 7 years old, he got his first semi-auto handgun. Albeit it was a Ruger .22lr hand gun, but it was his first gun his dad got him.

When he turned 10, he got his first Mini-14 with hicap magazines. Albeit, he didn't shoot it until he was about 14, but it was his first rifle with hicaps. Also, he got the gun and magazines way before this state had any hicap/assault weapon bans.

Are you sure dad didn't give you the same type of gift way back when???? I believe many dads across America have given several guns to their sons/daughters at a young age with the understanding that when they're "old enough" to shoot them, they would. (With the proper supervision of course).

Another example is when my nefew was very very young just before the CA assault rifle ban went into effect. My nefew's father intentionally stocked up on Beretta 92 and Glock 17 hicap mags and gave them to his son as a gift before the ban went into effect. Years later, my nefew was old enough to purchase the two handguns (A Glock and Beretta) and use the hicaps that he always possessed legally.

Maybe you should talk to your dad and ask him to refresh your memory. I'm betting he gave them to you long ago and you just plum forgot.:wavey:

Wulfenite
01-28-2008, 14:58
Are you sure dad didn't give you the same type of gift way back when???? I believe many dads across America have given several guns to their sons/daughters at a young age with the understanding that when they're "old enough" to shoot them, they would. (With the proper supervision of course).

I know I did. I said "kick your mom twice in the bladder if you want these mags, once if you dont want them."

bug_eyedmonster
01-28-2008, 15:21
Says who? Like the previous poster said, there is no age limit on owning a hicap magazine.

I don't know about you, but when my friend was 7 years old, he got his first semi-auto handgun. Albeit it was a Ruger .22lr hand gun, but it was his first gun his dad got him.

When he turned 10, he got his first Mini-14 with hicap magazines. Albeit, he didn't shoot it until he was about 14, but it was his first rifle with hicaps. Also, he got the gun and magazines way before this state had any hicap/assault weapon bans.

Are you sure dad didn't give you the same type of gift way back when???? I believe many dads across America have given several guns to their sons/daughters at a young age with the understanding that when they're "old enough" to shoot them, they would. (With the proper supervision of course).

Another example is when my nefew was very very young just before the CA assault rifle ban went into effect. My nefew's father intentionally stocked up on Beretta 92 and Glock 17 hicap mags and gave them to his son as a gift before the ban went into effect. Years later, my nefew was old enough to purchase the two handguns (A Glock and Beretta) and use the hicaps that he always possessed legally.

Maybe you should talk to your dad and ask him to refresh your memory. I'm betting he gave them to you long ago and you just plum forgot.:wavey:


I think you are 100% correct. It's funny, I called my dad about it yesterday, and he told me to take the Glock since he's got a nice revolver for home defense now. I will be transferring it into my name soon enough.

Jerry

10mmAuto
01-29-2008, 00:37
I think you are 100% correct. It's funny, I called my dad about it yesterday, and he told me to take the Glock since he's got a nice revolver for home defense now. I will be transferring it into my name soon enough.

Jerry

Just check all of your storage boxes.... Make sure that he's not giving you hicap mags with your newly aquired Glock now. I'm betting that you've owned those hicap mags for years and you just left them unpacked in some old moving boxes when you moved out of your house.

What'ya know? You found those old hicaps! You've had them all along and forgot all about them. Right?:whistling:

Wulfenite
01-29-2008, 09:27
As an aside. They've been keeping pretty close tabs on this subject over at cal-guns and the only people that have been prosecuted for hi-cap possession, have put themselves in that position based on what came out of their mouth, not because of the evidence of guilt that the state brought to the table. If you know this law inside and out, keep your mouth shut its virtually impossible to prosecute based on this law absent some elaborate cross border buy-bust operation run by Cal-DOJ.

10mmAuto
01-29-2008, 13:36
I agree 100%. I would never advocate breaking the law. I'm only suggesting that one makes his/her own choices based on their own personal knowlledge of what the did or did not have in one's own personal armory inventory.

Like, if you had the hicaps before the ban went into effect, you're okay. Just look deep in your garage, closet, safe, storage boxes etc.... You might find those long lost magazines you put there years ago and simply forgot about them.

PicardMD
02-19-2008, 17:56
Keep in mind that some magazines have "date code" on them... Some manufactures simply did not exist before 2001.

For instance, P-Mag's and C-product mags for AR-15 did not exist before the ban... Many military contract mags have date codes on them...

P

jgraham7897
02-19-2008, 23:43
My understanding is that only LEO's can purchase standard cap mag's.

carnush
02-20-2008, 03:15
A friend of mine has some pre-ban standard mags that have a stamp on them that says, "Law Enforcement Only". There no governments stamp, no emblems, just those words stamped in the metal.
Does that make any difference? Does that have any impact? Can he use them if he had them pre-ban, but was never in Law Enforcement? Or could his fetus if willed to her pre-ban?
Never heard of that special restriction, if it exists. If not, why would they have beeen stamped like that?

PicardMD
02-20-2008, 07:51
A friend of mine has some pre-ban standard mags that have a stamp on them that says, "Law Enforcement Only". There no governments stamp, no emblems, just those words stamped in the metal.
Does that make any difference? Does that have any impact? Can he use them if he had them pre-ban, but was never in Law Enforcement? Or could his fetus if willed to her pre-ban?
Never heard of that special restriction, if it exists. If not, why would they have beeen stamped like that?

Preban = manufactured before 1994's federal assault weapon ban.

So... there are no "pre-ban" magazines with "law enforcement only" stamp on them. What your friend has is a "high cap" magazine manufactured during the 1994-2004 federal assault weapon ban. This means that the magazine is NOT manufactured before 1994, which makes it illegal in California. If your friend is caught with it in California, he is screwed. He is lying if he says he got it before 1994. And since sunsetting of federal AWB has no effect in California, these "LEO mags," while now legal in the rest of the country, are not legal in California... and it's an easy way for CA prosecutors to prove that these stemped mags were not "pre-ban."

P

Wulfenite
02-20-2008, 08:02
Keep in mind that some magazines have "date code" on them... Some manufactures simply did not exist before 2001.

For instance, P-Mag's and C-product mags for AR-15 did not exist before the ban... Many military contract mags have date codes on them...

P

Makes no difference. Its perfectly legal to buy replacement mag bodies of new manufacture, to repair magazines you owned before 2000. If you want to replace the body of a crappy old malfunctioning 30 round ar mag with a new pmag body.....and then replace the spring follower and base plate with similarly upgraded components its perfectly legal.

As far as the LEO/MILL stamped mags go..... the prohibition on owning those bodies expired with the FEDERAL AW ban (2004?). So the path by which a Ca. resident would have to obtain them would go like this. Joe has a high cap glock mag purchased in 199#. Some time after 2004, that mag is damaged or starts giving him trouble. He then repairs the mag with a replacement body that happens to have the LEO/MIL stamp, and throws out the old body. He ends up with the same number of mags he started with. Such things do occur occasionally, usually when a department switches from one brand of gun to another. My understanding is that when that happens the wholsaler that's selling the new guns, buys up the departments existing stock of guns and mags. The guns get refurbished and sold with 2 mags, the extra mags get sold off separately. Also, when the federal ban expired, out of state gun dealers moved their LEO/Mil stock onto the regular shelves to take advantage the pent up demand for high-caps that drove up prices while the high cap production lines got back up to speed.

mace85
03-09-2008, 19:43
Man I feel bad for you guys. I can't imagine living in a state where the state gov't actually trolls the internet looking to put people in jail for such stupid stuff.

FYI The housing market in AZ just tanked to record lows. So if you refugees are looking for a time to move to a friendlier place, now is the time.