Quote:
|
speedrrracer: I would imagine so -- possession is not a crime in CA. If you had your standard capacity magazines before 2000, you are allowed to keep them (for now; there's a bill in the legislature to eliminate this).
|
Quote:
|
Metal god: I believe you would have to have had them before the federal AWB of 94 because the two over lapped . I do have some I bought pre 94 . I bought them before I even had a weapon to use them in knowing the ban would go in to effect .
|
No, CA doesn't care about the former Federal law; since the 'large capacity magazine' law went into effect in 2000, and that law did not ban possession, pre-2000 possession is the criterion.
As to court cases on magazines, if we exclude the occasional fool who imports a carload from a Nevada gun show and gets arrested after crossing back into CA, it's very hard to get a case when possession is not illegal and the burden of proof of illegal sale, importation or manufacture is on the prosecution.
Quote:
|
Webleymkv: Afterall, many guns that can use a "high capacity" magazine have been around for decades and magazines usually aren't marked with dates, serial numbers, or anything else that would identify when they were produced, so how could one prove that a magazine was not a legally grandfathered "pre ban" example?
|
Even that is not dispositive. It is legal to repair damaged magazines. If one has a Vietnam-era 30-round AR mag one has owned since the 70's, and the body rusts out, you can purchase a 2013-manufacture parts kit, marked with that date, and repair that mag.
The 'large-capacity magazine' law is another artifact of politicians wanting to 'do something' without understanding anything at all about guns. Please do not try to understand any California gun law (probably any gun law, but I'm not certain about other states) as anything but a means to improve the odds of re-election for those who may vote for them.