Rimfire High Capacity Mags Proof of Purchase

[tecstar1]

How do you prove your magazine was purchased prior to 2000 since I don't have the receipts. I have the 50 round drum magazine that I use on my 10/22 as well as the 25 round magazine. I have put them in the gun safe and never pulled them back out for fear of not being able to prove my purchase.

Ron

[Scratch705]

burden of proof is on the state.

[speeedracerr]

I think as long as your firearm was purchased before the hi-caps ban, you should be ok. BUT... "please dont quote me on this" as I would suggest you look into this further.

I too have purchased a Smith and Wesson Sigma SW9F which at the time only came with Hi-Caps so if anything, my reason is that these are the magazines that came with the gun when purchased in the early 90's.

Not sure if this reason is valid... But it is absolutely true! I figured its a pre-ban gun with pre-ban mags. Anyone else who can clarify on this?

[troysland]

Originally Posted by Scratch705

burden of proof is on the state.

Exactly! well said!

[Scratch705]

Originally Posted by speeedracerr

I think as long as your firearm was purchased before the hi-caps ban, you should be ok. BUT... "please dont quote me on this" as I would suggest you look into this further.

I too have purchased a Smith and Wesson Sigma SW9F which at the time only came with Hi-Caps so if anything, my reason is that these are the magazines that came with the gun when purchased in the early 90's.

Not sure if this reason is valid... But it is absolutely true! I figured its a pre-ban gun with pre-ban mags. Anyone else who can clarify on this?

you can have purchased the "hi-cap" mags before you owned the guns. there are many cal-gunners here that bought many "hi-cap" mags for AR, AK, etc before the 2000 ban, even before they owned the guns.

[brassburnz]

I have a bunch of 10+ mags for my 10/22's. I'm old and I've had some of these mags for over 20 years. I don't have any problem using them. My problem will be figuring out a way to pass them down to my kids.

[tecstar1]

If you go out to the range to shoot with a hi-cap mag, has the rangemaster ever questioned you about the heritage? Since they no longer sell hi-cap mags in the PRC, I guess they would assume they were pre-ban. However, whats to stop people purchasing hi-cap mags out of state and then bringing them in and declaring them as a pre-ban purchase. Just playing devils advocate.

Ron

[professorhard]

Possession of hi cap mags is not regulated. They are perfectly legal to possess.

[Mssr. Eleganté]

Originally Posted by tecstar1

If you go out to the range to shoot with a hi-cap mag, has the rangemaster ever questioned you about the heritage?

No. That has never happened to me or anybody I know.

Originally Posted by tecstar1

However, whats to stop people purchasing hi-cap mags out of state and then bringing them in and declaring them as a pre-ban purchase.

Same thing that stops people from peeing in the swimming pool.

[mscales5]

You don't have to prove you owned them before the ban, they have to prove you aquired them after the ban. But, I don't even use mine. Htey are a pain in the butt and the original ruger mags work all day long so i carry 2 of them with me when i have my 10/22 out.

[uxo2]

I use mine all the time..Never any questions.


But MY P.O.S. ramline mags are dying and I have not found a rebuild-kit for Hi-cap 10/22 mags..

[lawboy]

It is my habit that when I want something really badly that I cannot afford, I will buy some small part of it, accessory, whatever, as a commitment to myself that I will one day have the item. I did that very thing when I was young and in college and could not afford a lot of guns that I wanted. I bought magazines for the guns I wanted. In some cases, the guns came 10 years later.

[just4fun63]

Originally Posted by lawboy

It is my habit that when I want something really badly that I cannot afford, I will buy some small part of it, accessory, whatever, as a commitment to myself that I will one day have the item. I did that very thing when I was young and in college and could not afford a lot of guns that I wanted. I bought magazines for the guns I wanted. In some cases, the guns came 10 years later.

That's what I did. I still have normal mags for guns I don't own (but will someday)

[tecstar1]

All great points and they help to clarify the issue. Thanks to everyone for your insight.

[Scratch705]

Originally Posted by uxo2

I use mine all the time..Never any questions.


But MY P.O.S. ramline mags are dying and I have not found a rebuild-kit for Hi-cap 10/22 mags..

purchase the [tacticalinnovation] ti25 magazines and see if a middleman will take it apart for you since those are designed to be taken apart then send it to you to help repair your ramlines.

[Hunt]

Originally Posted by Scratch705

burden of proof is on the state.

LOL

[supersteve9219]

Say I was given a high cap magazine when I was 9 (in 1999) could I use it now? Could a minor even own a high cap magazine?

[IrishPirate]

Originally Posted by Scratch705

burden of proof is on the state.

correct. you don't need to prove anything. use them and enjoy them.

[IrishPirate]

Originally Posted by supersteve9219

Say I was given a high cap magazine when I was 9 (in 1999) could I use it now? Could a minor even own a high cap magazine?

yeah, there was no age limit before the ban. (another reason why the ban is so stupid....they can't prove that the criminals didn't own them before the ban either...back before they were criminals)

[Scratch705]

Originally Posted by supersteve9219

Say I was given a high cap magazine when I was 9 (in 1999) could I use it now? Could a minor even own a high cap magazine?

you can be just born dec 31 1999, and legally own them. (birthday present from dad... )

[Dekker]

Some kid tried to pull it off when I went shooting but he got caught in a web of lies. Had to have been 18 or 19, some guy next to me noticed the magazine and asks the kid where he buys his 10/30's and the kid says it's a 30 round mag he bought before the ban. Yea...that would make him like 8 or 9 yrs old when he purchased it. Guy mentions the age thing....kid starts stumbling with his words....quite clear the thing was illegal. Guy just tells the kid to never do it again, or he could get in deep ****.

>___________>

[wilshire1412]

Originally Posted by Mssr. Eleganté

No. That has never happened to me or anybody I know.



Same thing that stops people from peeing in the swimming pool.

[Fjold]

I have some Ramline 20 or 25 rounders and some steel lips and the Ramlines have never been reliable.

I also have some Sten magazines, M14 magazines and Glock magazines and I've never owned any guns that they fit.

[speeedracerr]

In my opinion, if the law applies in the most logical manner... firearms that were purchased before the high capacity ban would be legal for the utilization for the high capacity magazines.

Although it may be difficult to prove on some firearms due to insignificant change in designs, it certainly wouldn't be difficult to prove on lets say a first generation Glock to a third generation Glock with design changes such as a rail system vs. no rail system.

The Handgun design would be distinctive by design (rail system vs. non rail system) and some may know that a certain year Glock was made on/after a certain year.

But... If one had a Glock that was manufactured when Hi-Caps were legal then "the informed" would know that it is legal.

I guess another example would be... If I were to take my new Umarex M4 Colt .22 and put a high capacity magazine in it... I would definitely be a fool to say I purchased Hi-Cap magazines for my M4 Colt Umarex a long time ago as the rifle wasn't even produced yet.

Just trying to throw an example from a common sense point of view, as if Any of our California Laws had any common sense... errrr!

[H3llpl3ss]

I was at the range a couple of months ago and the guy and his 2 kids next to me were taking the plastic off of 10/22 25 rounders and hi cap mini 14 mags for their brand new guns. I made some comment and his reply was "I had to have my brother mail these to me from Arizona, I couldn't find these anywhere here". I just shut up and kept shooting.

[Scratch705]

Originally Posted by speeedracerr

In my opinion, if the law applies in the most logical manner... firearms that were purchased before the high capacity ban would be legal for the utilization for the high capacity magazines.

Although it may be difficult to prove on some firearms due to insignificant change in designs, it certainly wouldn't be difficult to prove on lets say a first generation Glock to a third generation Glock with design changes such as a rail system vs. no rail system.

The Handgun design would be distinctive by design (rail system vs. non rail system) and some may know that a certain year Glock was made on/after a certain year.

But... If one had a Glock that was manufactured when Hi-Caps were legal then "the informed" would know that it is legal.

I guess another example would be... If I were to take my new Umarex M4 Colt .22 and put a high capacity magazine in it... I would definitely be a fool to say I purchased Hi-Cap magazines for my M4 Colt Umarex a long time ago as the rifle wasn't even produced yet.

Just trying to throw an example from a common sense point of view, as if Any of our California Laws had any common sense... errrr!

bad example with the glocks.... since even the 3rd gen glocks can use 1st gen magazines. so if you acquired some 1st gen mags before the ban, you can still use them in 3rd gen guns today since you did not modify the magazines to be unusable for the original gun that the magazines go with.

[DaveFJ80]

Originally Posted by Dekker

Some kid tried to pull it off when I went shooting but he got caught in a web of lies. Had to have been 18 or 19, some guy next to me noticed the magazine and asks the kid where he buys his 10/30's and the kid says it's a 30 round mag he bought before the ban. Yea...that would make him like 8 or 9 yrs old when he purchased it. Guy mentions the age thing....kid starts stumbling with his words....quite clear the thing was illegal. Guy just tells the kid to never do it again, or he could get in deep ****.

I saw something similar at my local range, except the guy (probably in his late 20's) was shooting a GSG-5 and told the other guy that his 22rd mag was pre-ban. I really don't think there was anything available back in the 90's that would have fit the GSG-5 now

[speeedracerr]

Originally Posted by Scratch705

bad example with the glocks.... since even the 3rd gen glocks can use 1st gen magazines. so if you acquired some 1st gen mags before the ban, you can still use them in 3rd gen guns today since you did not modify the magazines to be unusable for the original gun that the magazines go with.

Actually I was referring to the fact that if anyone had the "the most up to date generation glock", its pretty common sense that when these handguns were purchased they do not come with a high cap magazine.

Therefore, anyone who puts a high cap, even if its preban into the most up to date glock available, its kinda a given that they are not doing what they are supposed to be doing

[Swatguy10_15]

Well some of this stuff happens because certain folks on here interpret the law as they see fit. First, to be legally "pre-ban" you would of had to of purchased the mags before 1994..Not 2000 when cali did theyre own ban..Brady bill went from 94-04...Alot of folks on here seem to think 200 was the golden year..Its not.
Pmags, colt 22, gsg 5 a whole bunch of these weapons..Didnt even exist ..and to the guy who had his brother ship him those mags..Wow..Thanks for just confessing you committed a felony brain surgeon.

[TZL]

First off: 10 round = restricted capacity, 10+ round = standard capacity, NOT high capacity

nothing says you have to use the legal standard cap in the same gun it was purchased for

case in point, I have a bunch of glocks, first gen g17, g17L, 3rd gen G19, g22 2nd gen, recent 3rd gen G35

nothing says that I can only use my standard caps from the old g17 into the new g19....and then later sell my old g17 and keep my legally acquired mags

In fact it would be prefect legit if i rebuilt an old standard cap glock mag using newer "drop-free bodies" thus creating mags that appear to be modern-standard caps

Originally Posted by speeedracerr

Actually I was referring to the fact that if anyone had the "the most up to date generation glock", its pretty common sense that when these handguns were purchased they do not come with a high cap magazine.

Therefore, anyone who puts a high cap, even if its preban into the most up to date glock available, its kinda a given that they are not doing what they are supposed to be doing

[cmichini]

"Therefore, anyone who puts a high cap, even if its preban into the most up to date glock available, its kinda a given that they are not doing what they are supposed to be doing".

I completely disagree with that. I have a Gen 1 Glock 17, which came with 2 hi cap mags and bought extras as well. I purchased this when they first became available (one of my first handguns) maybe as long as 20 years ago. I recently purchased (waiting for DROS to start after 30 days from my new sig purchase) another Glock 17 that came with 2 10 rounders (I'll buy more of the 10 rounders too for spares). I fully plan to use my hi caps in the new pistola and there's nothing wrong with that in any way.

I also purchased a bunch of USGI 20 rounders for the M14,15 and 30 rounders for the M1 Carbine, 20 and 30 rounders for the AR, and 15 rounders for the Beretta 92, all years before I even owned one of them.

BTW - I have some browning hi power mags, but don't own one of them (yet).

Unless there is a mfg. date on the mag, or a variant wasn't made pre-ban the burden of proof the state holds is going to be tough for them to meet. Additionally, even if a new hi cap variant how do they know you didn't swap out new parts (parts kits) to keep the same number of hi caps, which I believe is OK based on some guidance I've seen here on CG.

All this is JMO which is free and worth exactly what you paid for it.

Cheers!!

[professorhard]

Originally Posted by Swatguy10_15

Well some of this stuff happens because certain folks on here interpret the law as they see fit. First, to be legally "pre-ban" you would of had to of purchased the mags before 1994..Not 2000 when cali did theyre own ban..Brady bill went from 94-04...Alot of folks on here seem to think 200 was the golden year..Its not.
Pmags, colt 22, gsg 5 a whole bunch of these weapons..Didnt even exist ..and to the guy who had his brother ship him those mags..Wow..Thanks for just confessing you committed a felony brain surgeon.

Epic fail. That Brady ban only outlawed the manufacture of new 10+ magazines. It did not outlaw the sale or possession of 10+ mags which were made before the ban. Many people bought Hi-caps in CA in 1999 just before the ban went into effect. Don't spread FUD

[TZL]

Its perfectly legal to run pmags if you rebuilt pre-bans,

[QUOTE=Swatguy10_15;3595266]...
Pmags, colt 22, gsg 5 a whole bunch of these weapons.....QUOTE]

[speeedracerr]

Originally Posted by cmichini

"Therefore, anyone who puts a high cap, even if its preban into the most up to date glock available, its kinda a given that they are not doing what they are supposed to be doing".

I completely disagree with that. I have a Gen 1 Glock 17, which came with 2 hi cap mags and bought extras as well. I purchased this when they first became available (one of my first handguns) maybe as long as 20 years ago. I recently purchased (waiting for DROS to start after 30 days from my new sig purchase) another Glock 17 that came with 2 10 rounders (I'll buy more of the 10 rounders too for spares). I fully plan to use my hi caps in the new pistola and there's nothing wrong with that in any way.

I also purchased a bunch of USGI 20 rounders for the M14,15 and 30 rounders for the M1 Carbine, 20 and 30 rounders for the AR, and 15 rounders for the Beretta 92, all years before I even owned one of them.

BTW - I have some browning hi power mags, but don't own one of them (yet).

Unless there is a mfg. date on the mag, or a variant wasn't made pre-ban the burden of proof the state holds is going to be tough for them to meet. Additionally, even if a new hi cap variant how do they know you didn't swap out new parts (parts kits) to keep the same number of hi caps, which I believe is OK based on some guidance I've seen here on CG.

All this is JMO which is free and worth exactly what you paid for it.

Cheers!!

Hmmm.... Thanks for the clarification. I was always under the impression that preban magazines are only good for firearms that were manufactured during the time frame before the law took affect.

Does anyone know if that applies to utilizing my AR high capacity magazines on my new Charles Daly M4 with Bullet Button?

Being that the magazines are in fact preban and had been purchased for my Colt Sporter back in the early 90's, the law should be reciprocal for both rimfire and centerfire since we were using glocks as an example?

[professorhard]

Originally Posted by speeedracerr

Does anyone know if that applies to utilizing my AR high capacity magazines on my new Charles Daly M4 with Bullet button?

That would create an assault weapon and be illegal.

[till44]

Originally Posted by Scratch705

burden of proof is on the state.

This. Not your problem, the state must prove you recently purchased, imported, manufactured, sold, etc. I've never heard of it being prosecuted. The few cases I have seen it was charged but then dropped as it was viewed as a lesser included offense for the illegal weapon possession.

[Cokebottle]

Originally Posted by compulsivegunbuyer

Unless they caught you in a illegal transaction, or you opened your mouth and confessed, it would be pretty damn hard to prove.

Or you happen to have a mag that can be verified to have been manufactured after 2000 AND was not available prior...
Remanufacture with parts kits is legal, but example... Springfield XDm... didn't exist before last year.
Kinda hard to claim that you owned the mags in 1999

[TZL]

Well if you own pre-ban AR mags, you can use them on a featureless AR

using 10+ rounders on a BB'd AR would be creating an assult weapon

If you had a Colt Sporter, i'm assuming that its now a RAW or no longer in your posession?

Originally Posted by speeedracerr

Does anyone know if that applies to utilizing my AR high capacity magazines on my new Charles Daly M4 with Bullet Button?

Being that the magazines are in fact preban and had been purchased for my Colt Sporter back in the early 90's, the law should be reciprocal for both rimfire and centerfire since we were using glocks as an example?

[leelaw]

Originally Posted by Cokebottle

Or you happen to have a mag that can be verified to have been manufactured after 2000 AND was not available prior...
Remanufacture with parts kits is legal, but example... Springfield XDm... didn't exist before last year.
Kinda hard to claim that you owned the mags in 1999

Those 20rd FN Five-seveN magazines were from a super secret prototype my grandfather bought and subsequently gave me in the 1990s... when I was 8... Pffsh...

[SixPointEight]

Originally Posted by Swatguy10_15

..and to the guy who had his brother ship him those mags..Wow..Thanks for just confessing you committed a felony brain surgeon.

Double epic fail:

Originally Posted by H3llpl3ss

I was at the range a couple of months ago and the guy and his 2 kids next to me were taking the plastic off of 10/22 25 rounders and hi cap mini 14 mags for their brand new guns. I made some comment and his reply was "I had to have my brother mail these to me from Arizona, I couldn't find these anywhere here". I just shut up and kept shooting.

He didn't admit anything, except that he knew that someone else had done it.