The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights > Legal and Political

 
 
Thread Tools
Old February 28, 2006, 01:09 AM   #1
mattmcg
Junior Member
 
Join Date: February 23, 2006
Posts: 2
CA high capacity magazine legalities?

I'm now a California resident that moved from Oregon in the mid 90's. While in Oregon, I purchased a Glock 23 handgun what came with 2 thirteen round clips (.40 Caliber) and brought it with me during the move. When I came into the state, I did everything that was requested by the CA DOJ but haven't really been following any legal changes since entering the state.

I'm particularly interested in this pre-ban/post-ban high capacity magazine limitation that I have recently read about. This firearm is meant primarily for home defense so I'm wanting to be fully compliant in every detail so that if it is ever used for defense purposes, I will be completely lawyer-proof (if that is even possible).

I have a few questions where I'd like to get your input:
1. Is it legal to own and have in my personal possession my 13 round magazines that I had before the ban?
2. Can I transport and use my pre-ban 13 round magazines at my local indoor range?
3. Is it legal to purchase replacement parts for my pre-ban 13 round magazines? (for example a replacement spring)
4. Is it legal to purchase and own new 13 round magazines as a CA resident?
5. Is it legal to purchase a magazine extension to a high capacity magazine (for example, a +2 Scherer extension on a 13 round mag)?
6. Should I limit myself to using 10 round magazines to make myself more lawyer-proof in the event of an altercation?

One side comment that I'd like to share. I'm not particularly supportive of the thought that I might limit myself to lesser legal capacities when a criminal that breaks into my home might disregard the law and have a higher bullet capacity, thus putting me at a defensive disadvantage. I have also heard the quote, "Better to be judged by 12, than carried by 6." That said, I am aiming for complete legal compliance to continue being a responsible gun owner.

I thank you all in advance for your facts and opinions!
mattmcg is offline  
Old February 28, 2006, 08:31 AM   #2
Handy
Junior member
 
Join Date: August 31, 2001
Posts: 8,785
My understanding is that if you had your hicaps in the state before the ban was put in place, then they are legally grandfathered and you can use them as you wish - shoot, transport, repair. I don't think you can sell them to someone in CA, though. If you moved after that ban was in place, the mags are illegal and need to go away.


You'll want to look up the relevant facts on the CA DOJ website.
Handy is offline  
Old February 28, 2006, 06:26 PM   #3
numbnuts
Member
 
Join Date: March 25, 2005
Posts: 24
IANAL:

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes
4. No
5. No
6. No
numbnuts is offline  
Old February 28, 2006, 07:42 PM   #4
railroader
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 8, 2000
Location: so cal
Posts: 1,459
#5 is a yes. You can use plus 2 basepads on hicaps you already own. The law says you can't import or make hicaps but yours are already 13 rounders. Mark
railroader is offline  
Old February 28, 2006, 09:50 PM   #5
dgrolem
Junior Member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2006
Posts: 7
Don't know what the law was when you moved in the 1990s. I would only be worried if you were required to register the handgun when you entered the state in the 1990s, and DID NOT . Today you are required to register the guns upon establishing residency.

Any investigation (self-defense use etc.) might show that you are in possesion of pre-ban magazines with no evidence that you owned them legally in state before 2000. I think the grandfather clause says they are legal if owned and registered in-state prior to 2000.

Current DOJ says... ammunition feeding devices with the capacity to accept greater that 10 rounds may not be transported into California.

With no evidence that they were legal prior to the ban in 2000, they might make the leap that you illegaly "imported" them "recently"

If you did register them in the 1990s, you should be completely in the clear
dgrolem is offline  
Old February 28, 2006, 09:50 PM   #6
dgrolem
Junior Member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2006
Posts: 7
double post
dgrolem is offline  
 

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.06784 seconds with 7 queries