Interesting Case Law - Large Capacity Magazines

[Gawernator]

See attorney's response to my question.

Did you mean my response? I'm a PI not an attorney haha, IRL. I sure like to argue like one

 

[sirdutch]

Okay, my understanding has been that those using their legally acquired "standard capacity mags" (or high capacity mags) could do so legally with a "California defined" featureless AR rifle but not with a fixed magazine AR with some or all the rest of the other features. Is my understanding incorrect?

Now I'm hearing that police officers at a shooting range possible could ignore your HCM's when using a featureless AR but could technically confiscate them as a "nuisance" or may even take you into custody before releasing you without your HCM mags. Am I correct or am I wrong?

 

[sirdutch]

because we allow them to, just read this whole site. no one wants to do anything about it except file lawsuits that go nowhere for ten years, and also just want to rant/ whine bout it. that is the problem and nothing more

Well...It's easy to understand the ranting and whining. The State of California has our money to use against us while we are fighting the 9th Circuit Court. The Supreme Court has essentially ignored California or made some very narrow decisions that don't help us much or get send back to the 9th Circuit. Any law that turns citizens into felons needs to be contested. California's electorate is either ignorant, stupid or propagandized to vote for candidates that ignore our constitutional rights. Voter fraud is rampant and even Republican in Congress won't vote in the Save America Act even when 80% of Americans believe voting should be only for American citizens that can document their citizenship.

 

[NorCALSpeed]

Did you mean my response? I'm a PI not an attorney haha, IRL. I sure like to argue like one

No I meant RickD's reply. I realize I'm not sure if he's an attorney but his reply confirmed that transporting mags back is illegal and technically CA could prosecute if a NV shop didn't report you (AND if CA DOJ found out).

 

[Gawernator]

Okay, my understanding has been that those using their legally acquired "standard capacity mags" (or high capacity mags) could do so legally with a "California defined" featureless AR rifle but not with a fixed magazine AR with some or all the rest of the other features. Is my understanding incorrect?

Now I'm hearing that police officers at a shooting range possible could ignore your HCM's when using a featureless AR but could technically confiscate them as a "nuisance" or may even take you into custody before releasing you without your HCM mags. Am I correct or am I wrong?

They probably can but around here cops don't care

 

[Gawernator]

No I meant RickD's reply. I realize I'm not sure if he's an attorney but his reply confirmed that transporting mags back is illegal and technically CA could prosecute if a NV shop didn't report you (AND if CA DOJ found out).

I thought he was a retired cop?

Yeah it's still illegal. it's just one of those things where you have to be really dumb to get caught

 

[NorCALSpeed]

I thought he was a retired cop?

Yeah it's still illegal. it's just one of those things where you have to be really dumb to get caught

Yeah I've been to pistol matches where everyone is running high caps and there's police officers in the competitions too (one was very good, one was very bad).

 

[MK6M9]

Well...It's easy to understand the ranting and whining. The State of California has our money to use against us while we are fighting the 9th Circuit Court. The Supreme Court has essentially ignored California or made some very narrow decisions that don't help us much or get send back to the 9th Circuit. Any law that turns citizens into felons needs to be contested. California's electorate is either ignorant, stupid or propagandized to vote for candidates that ignore our constitutional rights. Voter fraud is rampant and even Republican in Congress won't vote in the Save America Act even when 80% of Americans believe voting should be only for American citizens that can document their citizenship.

remove the california politicans that keep making these bills and laws, and there will be no need for the 9th or the SCOTUS. simple. california is part of the WEF agenda, hence why california is doing what they are doing. all voting in california is rigged

 

[MK6M9]

remove the california politicans that keep making these bills and laws, and there will be no need for the 9th or the SCOTUS. simple. california is part of the WEF agenda, hence why california is doing what they are doing. all voting in california is rigged

sirdutch,

see what I mean. just look how that person whom gave an eye roll on my post. my point exactly (shrugs)

 

[Gawernator]

Yeah I've been to pistol matches where everyone is running high caps and there's police officers in the competitions too (one was very good, one was very bad).

Funny how everyone at matches mysteriously has all standard cap mags ;P

 

[NorCALSpeed]

Funny how everyone at matches mysteriously has all standard cap mags ;P

My 10-round magazine reloads itself. It's incredible.

 

[dvoncock]

No I meant RickD's reply. I realize I'm not sure if he's an attorney but his reply confirmed that transporting mags back is illegal and technically CA could prosecute if a NV shop didn't report you (AND if CA DOJ found out).

I am an attorney and replied to RickD’s post saying his analysis is spot on.

 

[dvoncock]

Someone above posted prosecutions for just possessing noncompliant magazines alone are unheard of. I personally haven’t seen or heard of a case like that. But, what I have seen a few times in the past and with increasing frequency is people charged for possessing “assault weapons” in combination with “large capacity” magazines. The cases I’ve heard about recently do not seem to be limited prohibited persons either.

 

[Ro-bo]

Someone above posted prosecutions for just possessing noncompliant magazines alone are unheard of. I personally haven’t seen or heard of a case like that. But, what I have seen a few times in the past and with increasing frequency is people charged for possessing “assault weapons” in combination with “large capacity” magazines. The cases I’ve heard about recently do not seem to be limited prohibited persons either.

Sure. I see that too. But again, there's still another layer to it if the main course is a legitimate AW charge where the presence of the magazine(s) only come to light because of that. Or even perhaps that the AW charge is explicitly brought because of the >10rd magazine being a part of the configuration that creates the AW in the first place.

But that isn't some random guy getting popped for a magazine he has sitting around in a gun safe somewhere.

When the hypotheticals involve elements such as CADOJ attempting to craft an insanely convoluted conspiracy charge (!) between some unwitting gun store clerk in Nevada, and Joe-Bob-Californian-LCM-magazine-buyer, a pause in the discussion is in order. Such scenarios are unlikely to ever happen, short of a bigger criminal catalyst driving it. And that's the whole point here. Yeah, possessing so-called LCMs is still a crime. But it's effectively not unless you're making threats against UC Irvine or doing something equally dumb.

 

[dvoncock]

Sure. I see that too. But again, there's still another layer to it if the main course is a legitimate AW charge where the presence of the magazine(s) only come to light because of that. Or even perhaps that the AW charge is explicitly brought because of the >10rd magazine being a part of the configuration that creates the AW in the first place.

But that isn't some random guy getting popped for a magazine he has sitting around in a gun safe somewhere.

When the hypotheticals involve elements such as CADOJ attempting to craft an insanely convoluted conspiracy charge (!) between some unwitting gun store clerk in Nevada, and Joe-Bob-Californian-LCM-magazine-buyer, a pause in the discussion is in order. Such scenarios are unlikely to ever happen, short of a bigger criminal catalyst driving it. And that's the whole point here. Yeah, possessing so-called LCMs is still a crime. But it's effectively not unless you're making threats against UC Irvine or doing something equally dumb.

None of the cases I’ve seen involved a noncompliant magazine making the firearm fall under the AW definition. They’ve all been just an AR with features or handgun with a threaded barrel in combination with the magazine itself.

Your point is well taken, though. Unless there’s a bonafide, organized conspiracy to smuggle LCMs, the probability of detention is probably low. But that doesn’t mean as a practicing attorney I think it’s a good idea or would ever tell someone to break the law, even if I believe a particular law is constitutionally invalid.

 

[nakatomi]

See attorney's response to my question.

Sorry I missed your comment. Not sure who the attorney is but the person who replied said it's never been tested in court and described it as DOJ arm twisting merchants into voluntary compliance as business decisions.

Here is the thing where did that come from?

Is that firsthand information or secondhand? Did someone witness DOJ pressure a specific merchant or is this I heard from a guy who heard from a guy? Because that's how this stuff spreads.

I heard.

They said.

I heard they said.

All of it hearsay and FUD IMHO.

My firsthand experience is that I do business in NV often and out of all the shops I've been to none have asked for my ID. Not one. If anyone wants to claim otherwise name the store. That's an easy thing to verify. Walk in and see if they ask. If DOJ had actually prosecuted a single NV merchant under this conspiracy theory in the last 25 years he would have cited the case so I can look it up.

 

[lactoast]

My firsthand experience is that I do business in NV often and out of all the shops I've been to none have asked for my ID. Not one. If anyone wants to claim otherwise name the store. That's an easy thing to verify. Walk in and see if they ask. If DOJ had actually prosecuted a single NV merchant under this conspiracy theory in the last 25 years he would have cited the case so I can look it up.

I was asked for my ID when I went to Green Valley Range in Henderson. I don't know if they do this for everyone since they have an attached indoor range, but it was at the cashier's desk, not the adjacent range service area.

Nice place, by the way. I was hoping to try out some polymer CZs, and ended up shooting my own stuff I brought along.

 

[nakatomi]

I was asked for my ID when I went to Green Valley Range in Henderson. I don't know if they do this for everyone since they have an attached indoor range, but it was at the cashier's desk, not the adjacent range service area.

Nice place, by the way. I was hoping to try out some polymer CZs, and ended up shooting my own stuff I brought along.

Thanks for sharing I'll check them out next time.

You said they asked for your ID at the cashier's desk. So after they looked at it what did they do w/ it? Did they just glance at it and hand it back or did they write something down? Did they scan it or enter anything into a system? Did they take a photo or make a copy?

These details matter because anyone can look at an ID and that doesn't really tell us anything. The DOJ pressuring out of state dealers is FUD and this isn't about looking at your ID it's about whether your info as a CA resident is being recorded and going somewhere.

I don't know any FFL in NV who is willing to narc to the CA DOJ. If they did they would go out of business even locals wouldn't support that.

 

[lactoast]

You said they asked for your ID at the cashier's desk. So after they looked at it what did they do w/ it? Did they just glance at it and hand it back or did they write something down? Did they scan it or enter anything into a system? Did they take a photo or make a copy?

I'm afraid I don't recall, I think it might have actually been more for creating a membership profile of some sort. Now that you mention these things, I probably should have been more alert on why they wanted such information

I would certainly be surprised if they were taking the information down as a means to narc on people to another state's DOJ. Either way, I'll pay closer attention the next time I visit, I liked their range and it was definitely a fairer price compared to the tourist traps on the Strip. A good chunk of their customers were fellow CA visitors enjoying a taste of freedom

 

[treelogger]

I don't know any FFL in NV who is willing to narc on CA DOJ. If they did they would go out of business even locals wouldn't support that.

How would anyone find out?

And I've been asked for my DL in southern and central Oregon gun stores ... never been to a gun store in AZ or NV.