High capacity mags?

[CSACANNONEER]

Originally Posted by TheKlawMan

You misleadingly say that "Under PC12020(a)(2), purchase or other "reception" is not illegal" when the truth is that section does not say if it is legal or illegal.

As Cokebottle said, in general, laws do not tell you what is legal just what is illegal. There is no law making it legal to breath or wipre you bottom in Ca. So, are these acts legal or illegal?

[kemasa]

Originally Posted by Cokebottle

Everything I've heard from "The Right People"

Ok, let me be a bit more clear, where does it say that in the California Penal Code?

BTW, in case some people have not figured it out yet, the police can and do arrest people and take things and force the person to prove that nothing was done wrong, causing the person to spend time and money to get it corrected, most likely NOT getting all the money it cost you to get your items back. Spend some time in traffic court to see some examples of guilty until proven guilty.

[Oceanbob]

Originally Posted by Notorious

In your example, you would be correct. Nice frame. Where did you get the FDE frame?

Frames like that. It was called OD (olive drab).

They stopped production on OD frames last year.

I bought a bunch of them. (I got tired of BLACK frames)

OD colors looks like dark earth...depends on the lighting.

[TheKlawMan]

[QUOTE=Cokebottle;5950473]
Here is the actual letter from the DOJ regarding rebuild kits:

http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/DOJ...2005-11-10.pdf
QUOTE]

Look at question and answer 7. The letter you had all this time seems to agree with my postion, which is that replacement of a mag is illegal, whereas repair is legal.

Wouldn't it have been nice of you to warn the OP of the contents of that letter, even if you disagreed, before telling him that no laws were being broken if the OP got a replacement magazine from ProMag.

[kemasa]

Just for fun and since possession of money is not illegal, trying taking $50k and going to the airport and buying a ticket to the "wrong" location in cash and/or find a nice DEA agent and see what happens to your money. Did you know that they can "arrest" your money and it does not have any rights?

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/12/1296.asp

Federal Appeals Court: Driving With Money is a Crime
Eighth Circuit Appeals Court ruling says police may seize cash from motorists even in the absence of any evidence that a crime has been committed.
...
In the case entitled, "United States of America v. $124,700 in U.S. Currency,"

Notice the name of the case?

[darkjedi351]

Originally Posted by Oceanbob

Frames like that. It was called OD (olive drab).

They stopped production on OD frames last year.

I bought a bunch of them. (I got tired of BLACK frames)

OD colors looks like dark earth...depends on the lighting.

nice collection! who makes the 5 mag pouch?

[kemasa]

Originally Posted by TheKlawMan

Look at question and answer 7. The letter you had all this time seems to agree with my postion, which is that replacement of a mag is illegal, whereas repair is legal.

Also look at Q6, which indicates an issue if the whole magazine is replaced.

[TheKlawMan]

Originally Posted by kemasa

Also look at Q6, which indicates an issue if the whole magazine is replaced.

While the answer is anything but an answer. I wouold say that if the original mag was legally possessed, it is still legally possessed if each part is replaced one piece per day. Just try selling that to a jury.

[kemasa]

The answer to Q6 states that it could be considered manufacturing a high capacity magazine, which tends to indicate that a complete replacement of the magazine IS an issue. Then add Q7 which indicates that replacement is again an issue.

[Cokebottle]

Originally Posted by kemasa

Ok, let me be a bit more clear, where does it say that in the California Penal Code?

It's not there, but neither is the legality of rebuild kits.

I am presuming there there may be some case law that TRP are aware of, or they are simply using caution in the stance that a magazine that can still be used in the original gun can in no way be construed as manufacturing a new magazine.

[Cokebottle]

Originally Posted by kemasa

The answer to Q6 states that it could be considered manufacturing a high capacity magazine, which tends to indicate that a complete replacement of the magazine IS an issue. Then add Q7 which indicates that replacement is again an issue.

And neither of which are solid answers with statements that can be used as either a defense or offense.
Both are "CYA" answers on the part of Alison. It appears that the letter was written spanning a couple of days (or maybe before/after lunch). Page 1 is quite clear with solid "yes/no" answers. The bottom of page 1 and page 2 fall into "I'm not going to comment on this, it's up to the DA"... which were the same responses that we got to the Bullet Button/Featureless/OLL.

We all know how the BB/Featureless/OLL worked out.

The icing on the cake is when she begins talking about the prosecutor believing that you have the intent to manufacture. Possession of parts is not a crime, and constructive possession does not apply to magazine parts or assault weapons.

Remember... that letter was from 2005. 6 years ago, 5 years after the ban, and at a time when TRP were having very frequent communication with the BOF/DOJ regarding OLL. It was also somewhere around the time that Iggy shot his desk.

[Notorious]

Originally Posted by TheKlawMan

While the answer is anything but an answer. I wouold say that if the original mag was legally possessed, it is still legally possessed if each part is replaced one piece per day. Just try selling that to a jury.

From what it sounds like, you can replace each part in succession in one sitting and as long as you don't end up with more standard caps than you started with, you would be okay.

[G1500]

Originally Posted by Notorious

From what it sounds like, you can replace each part in succession in one sitting and as long as you don't end up with more standard caps than you started with, you would be okay.

Pretty much how I see it.

[TheKlawMan]

Originally Posted by Notorious

From what it sounds like, you can replace each part in succession in one sitting and as long as you don't end up with more standard caps than you started with, you would be okay.

Who is talking about "standard caps"? We are talking about large capacity mags. First, it is much more believable that all the parts were replaced in a single sitting than one a day until all parts were replaced. Unfortunately, in effecct you did not repair the original magazine but illegally manufactured a LCM assuming no exemptions apply.

Your question caused me to reconsider what I said about there being no problem if you replaced one part a day until all were replaced. Not only would that be difficult to sell to a jury, even under those facts you illegally manufactured a LCM.

[Cokebottle]

Originally Posted by TheKlawMan

Who is talking about "standard caps". We are talking about large capacity mags and whereas you will have your work cut out for you convincing a jury that you replaced eacy part one at a time evey day, you just convicted yourself of manufacturing an LCM if you do it in one sitting.

There you go again.

You are taking an answer from an opinion letter written by a FORMER employee of the BOF who was known to spread FUD and citing it as PC.

[TheKlawMan]

Originally Posted by Cokebottle

There you go again.

You are taking an answer from an opinion letter written by a FORMER employee of the BOF who was known to spread FUD and citing it as PC.

Uh, I didn't cite the letter and was aware that one could repair but not replace a mag. Nor could they assemble an different mag form a rebuild kit. go top court and see if anyone believes that you were not engaged in maufacturing an LCM even though you tried to disguise it as several attmpts to repair the original mag.

[Notorious]

Originally Posted by TheKlawMan

Who is talking about "standard caps"? We are talking about large capacity mags. First, it is much more believable that all the parts were replaced in a single sitting than one a day until all parts were replaced. Unfortunately, in effecct you did not repair the original magazine but illegally manufactured a LCM assuming no exemptions apply.

Your question caused me to reconsider what I said about there being no problem if you replaced one part a day until all were replaced. Not only would that be difficult to sell to a jury, even under those facts you illegally manufactured a LCM.

Standard cap is what the gun should have. Low cap is when you limit it to less than the factory design. Only in CA or NJ and other environs would something be called high capacity when it is just standard everywhere else. Semantics aside, I don't disagree with what you said and I have questioned others who think that it is okay to essentially make a new mag out of a kit to "repair" a pre-existing standard capacity mag.

My thinking is that no matter what, you need at least 1 part from the previous magazine for it to be considered a repair job and not a new manufacture. Even if the original part is just the floorplate or follower, it is still technically a repair of an original magazine. The question then becomes what happens when the last original part breaks, can you then replace that last part as a final repair or do you have to discard the whole thing now because no original parts are left?

[kemasa]

I suspect that the replacing of all the original parts really depends on how you do it. If you replaced a part each time something broke or got worn out, then everything is replaced, I doubt that it would be a problem. If you did it in one day, then it might be a problem (if they could prove it).

[Oceanbob]

Originally Posted by kemasa

I suspect that the replacing of all the original parts really depends on how you do it. If you replaced a part each time something broke or got worn out, then everything is replaced, I doubt that it would be a problem. If you did it in one day, then it might be a problem (if they could prove it).

Considering it is perfectly legal to rebuild your Hi Capacity magazine.
(per a letter from an official of the CDOJ)

What would be required to 'Rebuild' my GLOCK 20 magazine (15 rounds) if I
accidently backed over it with my Truck? Crushing the entire magazine.

Answer: All it would take to rebuilt it would change every part until it was in working order again. (about 10 minutes of time and my spare rebuild kit)

As a side note, nobody is being arrested or prosecuted for this magazine ban.

Probably because the law is so VAGUE and requires a big mouthed defendant before getting a conviction. Why would the State start enforcing this law when any credible challange might make the law MOOT.?

At this time (11 years after the ban) not a single piece of Case Law or Precedent (road map) exists on the hi cap magazine ban.

Sure we have 'letters' from the CDOJ but nothing concrete. They are letting this law be PASSIVE and not pushing the issue in fear of failure.

JMO by the way.

[kemasa]

Replacing ALL the parts COULD be considered replacement, not repair.

Yes, it is unlikely that you would ever get charged and convicted, but that does not mean it is legal either.

[TheKlawMan]

Originally Posted by Oceanbob

Considering it is perfectly legal to rebuild your Hi Capacity magazine.
(per a letter from an official of the CDOJ)

What would be required to 'Rebuild' my GLOCK 20 magazine (15 rounds) if I
accidently backed over it with my Truck? Crushing the entire magazine.

Answer: All it would take to rebuilt it would change every part until it was in working order again. (about 10 minutes of time and my spare rebuild kit)

As a side note, nobody is being arrested or prosecuted for this magazine ban.

Probably because the law is so VAGUE and requires a big mouthed defendant before getting a conviction. Why would the State start enforcing this law when any credible challange might make the law MOOT.?

At this time (11 years after the ban) not a single piece of Case Law or Precedent (road map) exists on the hi cap magazine ban.

Sure we have 'letters' from the CDOJ but nothing concrete. They are letting this law be PASSIVE and not pushing the issue in fear of failure.

JMO by the way.

Re your side note, the fact that it is difficult to enforce does not make the LCM law any less the law. As for there being no prosecutorial action taken, are you sure about that or do you mean that there are no published appellate or USDC decisions on 12020(a)(2). Ask yourself this, why has no one challenged the validity of the law? Just set up a table in front of the steps of the Firearms Bureau and start assembling LCMs from rebuilt kits. Be sure to send a letter ahead of time announcing when this event will take place.

[Notorious]

One more time, the fact that nobody has been prosecuted under a law doesn't mean it is legal. The law is the law. Illegal is still illegal. There are literally tens of thousands of laws on the books in the vehicle code alone and I doubt even 10% of it is being enforced regularly. That doesn't make it legal either.

[Toolfreak66]

I guess for me in my situation it would all just boil down to wether or not Promag would even give me a new one or not. They are not an FFL nor a gunsmith so me giving them the old one for repair I would think be out of the question too.

[Cokebottle]

Originally Posted by Toolfreak66

I guess for me in my situation it would all just boil down to wether or not Promag would even give me a new one or not. They are not an FFL nor a gunsmith so me giving them the old one for repair I would think be out of the question too.

True, but you could go through a gunsmith (or any person licensed pursuant to 12071) rather than deal directly with Promag.

[TheKlawMan]

Originally Posted by Notorious

One more time, the fact that nobody has been prosecuted under a law doesn't mean it is legal. The law is the law. Illegal is still illegal. There are literally tens of thousands of laws on the books in the vehicle code alone and I doubt even 10% of it is being enforced regularly. That doesn't make it legal either.

+1. I feel sorry for the Poor Joe that gets prosecuted if someone chooses to enforce one of those laws.

[tonelar]

Originally Posted by Oceanbob

LOL..I would PAY MONEY to see Nancy wet her knickers.

(looking around...now who has a Beta-C Drum...?...)

I have 2 Beta C Drums that are unassembled. Sadly, I got these after I rebuilt my AR and AUG magazines a few years ago.
So, if one of them starts acting up, I'll likely rebuild it using the C Drum kit.

Originally Posted by Toolfreak66

I guess for me in my situation it would all just boil down to wether or not Promag would even give me a new one or not. They are not an FFL nor a gunsmith so me giving them the old one for repair I would think be out of the question too.

Don't be so quick to give up. I had 6x 226 range mags that I sent to Promag to refurbish (they were old and worn out 15rnd capacity). Initially, I contacted them about sending me a couple of bodies, 3 followers and a half dozen springs, but they said they'd rather I sent them my magazines. So, I shipped them and I got a message where they warned they might have to return me 10 rnd replacements. I phoned them and talked to a couple people who assured me they would check with their attorneys first. A week or so later I get a box with 6 newly rebuilt 15 rnd Promags. There wasn't any documentation aside from a receipt with address info and "6 warranty magazines" and "0.00" in the price and shipping sections.

[Sniper3142]

Originally Posted by TheKlawMan

Your question caused me to reconsider what I said about there being no problem if you replaced one part a day until all were replaced. Not only would that be difficult to sell to a jury, even under those facts you illegally manufactured a LCM.

Originally Posted by kemasa

Replacing ALL the parts COULD be considered replacement, not repair.

Yes, it is unlikely that you would ever get charged and convicted, but that does not mean it is legal either.

You are both wrong if you are saying a person can't repair or replace ANY or ALL parts of their LEGALLY OWNED Large Capacity Magazine.

If parts of that magazine are damaged or worn to the point that the owner feels they need to be replaced, then he can LEGALLY DO THAT. Or are you saying a person can't maintain their legally owned property?!? Should they be forced to discard that magazine once it becomes so damaged or worn that replacing multiple or all parts is the only way to get it to function again?!?

Legally owned Property can Legally be maintianed!!!

[TheKlawMan]

Originally Posted by Sniper3142

You are both wrong if you are saying a person can't repair or replace ANY or ALL parts of their LEGALLY OWNED Large Capacity Magazine.

If parts of that magazine are damaged or worn to the point that the owner feels they need to be replaced, then he can LEGALLY DO THAT. Or are you saying a person can't maintain their legally owned property?!? Should they be forced to discard that magazine once it becomes so damaged or worn that replacing multiple or all parts is the only way to get it to function again?!?

Legally owned Property can Legally be maintianed!!!

Maintaining is one thing, but replacing is another.

[jamesonamac]

Klawman and kemasa: these aren't the magazines your looking for. Move along...

[G1500]

Originally Posted by TheKlawMan

Maintaining is one thing, but replacing is another.

What happens when the tires wear out on your vehicle?

[Librarian]

Originally Posted by G1500

What happens when the tires wear out on your vehicle?

Well, luckily the California Legislature has not passed a law that restricts what size tires you are allowed to buy, so many people replace their tires with similar new tires.

[Notorious]

Originally Posted by tonelar

I have 2 Beta C Drums that are unassembled. Sadly, I got these after I rebuilt my AR and AUG magazines a few years ago.
So, if one of them starts acting up, I'll likely rebuild it using the C Drum kit.

I have 2 fully assembled and functional C-mags which I bought last year and I have used 1 during a shooting exercise in Orange County which was caught on video and broadcasted on YouTube. I have no problems sharing that footage with all our lovely California politicians, including hypocrite supreme DiFi.

Originally Posted by Librarian

Well, luckily the California Legislature has not passed a law that restricts what size tires you are allowed to buy....

Not yet they haven't... don't give them ideas.

[kemasa]

Originally Posted by Sniper3142

You are both wrong if you are saying a person can't repair or replace ANY or ALL parts of their LEGALLY OWNED Large Capacity Magazine.

If parts of that magazine are damaged or worn to the point that the owner feels they need to be replaced, then he can LEGALLY DO THAT. Or are you saying a person can't maintain their legally owned property?!? Should they be forced to discard that magazine once it becomes so damaged or worn that replacing multiple or all parts is the only way to get it to function again?!?

Legally owned Property can Legally be maintianed!!!

You are making assumptions and trying to make things the way you want. Please provide a source that says you can replace ALL the parts of a legally owned large capacity magazine within a very short period of time.

You can replace any parts and over time you could replace all the parts of a large capacity magazine, but if you do it in a short period of time, it could be an issue. How you do it also could be an issue. If you took a magazine apart and put all the parts on the right and you had all the replacement parts on the left and then put it together, that is a completely different magazine. If you put it together with one new piece at a time, then took it apart and replaced another, that is basically questionable and looks like you did it just for replacing, not maintaining.

If you have a used vehicle and it gets damaged and you find an identical vehicle, is that a replacement or repair?

I don't like the law at all and I think it is unConstitutional, but until it is overturned, it is still the law. The law does not say that you can replace a magazine. At what point does repair change to replacement? You don't want to admit that can happen at any point. If you replace a part just because you want to, not that it is damaged, and you do that for ALL the parts ALL at once, that is not repair.

One example is a magazine that is run over by a vehicle. There is really no repair for that, just replacement of everything and that seems to be a new magazine. The law does not state that you can always have the same number of magazines. The problem for the state is proving what happened and trying to get a conviction. If you admit what you did, then you might get convicted, especially with a completely damaged magazine. If you say nothing, I doubt that anything would happen, but that does not make it legal and due to that you should not encourage others to do things which are illegal.

[Sniper3142]

Originally Posted by kemasa

Please provide a source that says you can replace ALL the parts of a legally owned large capacity magazine within a very short period of time.

I don't have to provide a source that says what is LEGAL.

How about YOU provide a source that specifically says it is ILLEGAL.

Both you and TheKlawMan are masters at spreading FUD.

[kemasa]

Please see CA PC 12020(a)(2).

12020. (a) Any person in this state who does any of the following
is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year
or in the state prison:
...
(2) Commencing January 1, 2000, manufactures or causes to be
manufactured, imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or
exposes for sale, or who gives, or lends, any large-capacity
magazine.

Creating a new large capacity magazine from all new parts would be considered manufacturing, regardless if you took apart some other high capacity magazine. If you did it over a long period of time, it could be considered repair, but that is not what you are talking about. In part, it could depend on your intent, which clearly is to have a new high capacity magazine to replace an old magazine.

You personal attacks reflect poorly on you. I am not spreading FUD. You are trying to claim something is not illegal with no basis. I am sorry you don't like the reality, but it does not change the way it is. I have said that I don't think it would be possible to get convicted unless you talk too much, but that still does not make it legal, just that you most likely could get away with it.

Tell you what, you go and replace ALL the parts in a magazine, video tape it and send it to the CA DOJ with a letter telling them what you did and see what happens. Perhaps nothing, but are you willing to take that chance? If not, you should not be promoting it.

So, yes, you need to be able to show what you are claiming is legal when the law says otherwise. Remember, you are replacing ALL the parts.

[imarangemaster]

I am retired California LEO. I was also an FFL for 25 years. I had a 1990 AWB registered AR and AK. I eventually sold the weapons but kept the mags. I had Carbines, VZ58 builds, and all sorts of high cap and their mags that were not covered by the initial ban. I NEVER sold magazines off, as you never know... It proved right because in 2000 they closed the door. Fortunately I still had boxes and boxes of assorted pre-ban (M14, M1 carbine, Uzi, Mini 14, mini-30, Browning HP, AR, AK, VZ, Para Ord, and more) mags accumulated as a dealer and in the gunshow days. I moved from the state in 2007, eventually to Mississippi. I did check the statute, and with DOJ, and both say sincer I possessed those mags before the ban and lived in California before the ban with the mags, I may bring them back in. IT IS NOT IMPORTATION, BECAUSE THEY WERE HERE IN THE FIRST PLACE. I wanted to make sure, because in a year or two I am moving from Mississippi to our retirement home on the southern Oregon coast. With kids and grandkids living in So.Cal, I will be spending lots of time there. My Glock 19 and CZ82 I carry have preban high caps. My 19 I carried as a duty gun and the CZ (actually an 83 -same gun but .380, I later sold it and kept the mags and upgraded to the 9x18 82) I carried as an off duty. My OLL AR I opted to put a bullet button on and use 10 rounders. Its a retro SP1 clone, and it looked funny with a MMG. Muy Saiga AK and VZ58 I put Kydex paddle on from Solar tactical to make them featureles (they have fixed stocks with brakes on them). I have my preban high caps for those (old mil-surp metal ones). One time where planning head paid off!

[imarangemaster]

I realize that I forgot to address an issue I had with a parts replacement on a magazine: I carried a Glock 19 as a duty weapon. At the range, one of my LE only mags was run over, deforming the body. I asked DOJ, and they said I could replace the defective part (body) as long as the floor pate, spring, and follower were original. I go a mag body from Brownels (a Scheerer, but it works), and was good to go. They had no problem shipping to california a mag body as a replacement part. I kept the squashed mag body, just in case...

[jamesonamac]

Originally Posted by imarangemaster

I realize that I forgot to address an issue I had with a parts replacement on a magazine: I carried a Glock 19 as a duty weapon. At the range, one of my LE only mags was run over, deforming the body. I asked DOJ, and they said I could replace the defective part (body) as long as the floor pate, spring, and follower were original. I go a mag body from Brownels (a Scheerer, but it works), and was good to go. They had no problem shipping to california a mag body as a replacement part. I kept the squashed mag body, just in case...

I wonder what orifice DOJ pulled those rules from. I know of nowhere that it says you can only replace the body. These people make stuff up as they go.

[imarangemaster]

I'm sure you are right! All that matters is I FIXED my damaged mag!

[Notorious]

Originally Posted by jamesonamac

I wonder what orifice DOJ pulled those rules from. I know of nowhere that it says you can only replace the body. These people make stuff up as they go.

Yes they do. We called them on a question and five of us got five answers.