Colorado Magazine Ban

[banditgriot]

We in Colorado are one year into the "high capacity" magazine ban and I am more and more concerned that the lawmakers truly had no clue in what they were trying to accomplish. I understand that many Sheriffs have declared the laws unenforceable, but I have yet to hear from one police agency that agrees with the sheriffs' assessment. At the same time, over the years I have bought and sold a number of guns...I am middle aged now and have a gun locker full parts from guns I no longer possess. The parts include grips, moe barrels, slings and magazines. Under the new law, I am unsure if it legal to use the older pre-ban magazine in a newly purchased firearm. I am also unsure on how the police in Aurora will conduct themselves, given the new laws were put in place due to the Theater shootings. Moving is not an option for me right now, but I am considering it for retirement. The absolute uselessness of the laws is being reported and a legal fight has begun, but in the meantime I fear that an overzealous police action could land me in legal trouble because of the fact that I own spare parts.

[Sharkbite]

The mag ban here is STUPID...but its the law, so

Any mag you had before the ban took effect is good to go for any use you want to put it to. I had a bunch (20?) 9mm colt AR mags stored for years. These are now running in my newly built gun.

The issue happens when you want to get more mags or want to sell the ones you have. You can not legally obtain any mag over 15 rounds. You can not sell, trade or otherwise transfer 15+ round mag inside Colorado.

You CAN sell them out of the state. I sold a bunch of 30 & 42 round mags for a Steyr AUG. Sent em to another state w/o a mag restriction. GTG

The reason its "unenforceable" is that mags dont have S/N's or date sold stamps. So there is no way currently to show when you obtained the mag. Before the ban or a year after? No telling...

[kilimanjaro]

If you have any original receipts for the purchase of your mags, definitely keep them. I know one nephew back east who stenciled purchase dates on his, as best he could, and photographed all of them next to a newspaper pre-dating the new law.

I think that is a bit much, but who knows?

[JimDandy]

The reason its "unenforceable" is that mags dont have S/N's or date sold stamps.

But some have/will have an initial date of manufacture after the ban went into effect. Not a line I'd play fast and loose with. Not that any suggested such. Because we don't do that here.

[g.willikers]

There's a real danger that the police don't know this law any better than most others.
No disrespect intended, but how could they, with all the laws around.
Heck, there's plenty of district attorneys and prosecutors who don't know the laws.
If you're not using the mags for anything, why hang on to them and risk the hassle?

[TXAZ]

<Devil's_Advocate_Mode=ON>
Most manufacturers of any mechanical goods make subtle changes multiple times per year, often because of switching sub component vendors, new design or product tweak. For instance, the FBI wanted certain information on a mass produced product (no serial number) we manufactured and sold that they found in a search. We were able to provide a specific purchase time range based upon an examination of the product. That helped add a felony charge to the suspect.

The point is, jus because there is no date stamp or serial number, it is likely a manufacturing engineer can localize the production date to a narrow window, which may refute your claim of having had it for "10 years", and not benefit you.

<Devil's_Advocate_Mode=OFF>

[carguychris]

Originally Posted by banditgriot

Under the new law, I am unsure if it legal to use the older pre-ban magazine in a newly purchased firearm.

Correct. If you already possessed the magazines prior to July 1st, 2013, you're fine. Per CRS 18-12-302(2)(a)(I) & (II), it's not a crime to possess or lawfully use >15rd magazines that were obtained prior to that date and continuously possessed since then.

CRS 18-12-302(2)(b) explicitly requires the prosecution to prove that the magazine(s) was/were obtained after the cutoff date.

Originally Posted by JimDandy

...some [magazines] have/will have an initial date of manufacture after the ban went into effect.

Additionally, some manufacturers periodically make changes to their magazine designs. A newer magazine may have physical characteristics that identify it as having been made after the cutoff date, even if it lacks specific identifying marks.

That said, in past threads, I've characterized the law as a generational phase-out rather than a true ban. Assuming the law is still in force in 18-20 years, the people who will be most seriously affected are those who weren't yet born on July 1st, 2013, or at least were so young that their possession of firearm magazines would have been very unlikely.

Mandatory disclaimer: I am not an attorney, nor do I play one on TV. This is not legal advice. Caveat emptor and YMMV.

[johnwilliamson062]

photographed all of them next to a newspaper pre-dating the new law

Newspaper photos only work to prove a date in one direction. You can always get a hold of an old newspaper. I know a guy with thirty years worth stacked up(b/c he hoards them, not for this purpose).

Get the law removed ASAP. Keep at it. If you let it stand for long it might as well be in stone.

[62coltnavy]

In California, there is a 10 round limit, but mags possessed prior to the law are GTG, just like Colorado. But it really makes no difference. Police, who know full well they can never prove that full capacity mags are illegal, seize them as a "nuisance," never to be seen again. I suspect that the city DAs in Colorado will begin playing the same game.

[banditgriot]

Thanks for the replies guys. I am keeping the mags and I will use them in my new guns. I know when they were purchased and the truth has to account for something. I will support the fight to have the law repealed as best I can for now in hopes that I can stay in the state where I was born and raised.

[MagnumWill]

Better idea. Vote these guys out of office, it's literally that simple. This law will go away promptly, especially with what appears to be little conformance by the populace.

[Tom Servo]

This law will go away promptly, especially with what appears to be little conformance by the populace.

Unfortunately, it's not that easy.

You'd need to elect enough politicians sympathetic to the cause to constitute a majority, and you'd need to elect a governor who won't veto the repeal.

This is the problem: it is very, very difficult to repeal bad laws. This is why we have to prevent them from getting passed in the first place.

[Machineguntony]

I am not a Coloroadan, if that is the proper term. But I think you guys underestimate the cleverness of this ban.

The Sheriffs may think that the law is uneforceable, but enforceability is irrelevant. This law is a use of economics to accomplish a social and political goal.

If a magazine over X number of rounds can not be sold or transferred, it effectively makes the magazine either worthless or worth a lot less. If magazines are worth less or worth nothing, intrastate commerce in the magazines will decrease. This law uses economics to accomplish social engineering. Love it or hate it, it's actually quite ingenious.

Economics is an underappreciated tool/weapon.

[rwilson452]

I haven't checked my Pmags but a lot of plastic stuff had a mold date or date of mfg on them in one manner or another.

[doofus47]

yeah, pmags look like they have that production dial stamp.
It's a stupid law. I bought a stack of VZ58 rifle mags (30 round) last May and then bought the rifle w/out mags this year after the price had dropped into my price range.

Oh, if only Obamacare could provide free sanity checks to members of legislature....
We should have all high school civics classes dedicate one day to legislative sanity checking. It would be the world's shortest class:
Step 1. Read the legislation in its entirety. Is the legislation we're voting on going to fix the problem at hand?
Step 2: Review and decide yes/no
Step 3: if Yes, are there unintended consequences that we can easily detect? Can we ask competent persons in related field to discuss?
Result: If no to Step 2, then it's bad legislation.... Either fix the legislation or scrap it. If No to Step 3, then vote on it. If Yes to Step 3, then fix the legislation.

I think I'm most viscerally offended by the fact that the mag-ban law grandfather's existing mags but doesn't allow them to pass to family members. My kids, who are free members of the Republic as am I, won't be allowed to own the same size magazine as their father. Why are they less trustworthy than I am? I can give to them with no checks a bona fide gift FIREARM, but a 30 round magazine??? Whoa! Hit the brakes, that's too much.
If you passed a law that the next generation couldn't have more than half as many choices on a ballot as I had on July1, 2013 (I mean, who NEEDS all that choice? It wastes the time of the few people who vote anyhow), the ACLU and media would be all over that, but private property related to 2nd A??? FuggedAboutIt! Not a peep.

[/rant off]

[44 AMP]

it is likely a manufacturing engineer can localize the production date to a narrow window,

While it might be possible, with certain magazines, I don't think its likely.

I have a number of magazines that have no markings at all, and I doubt even the people who made them (if known) could prove they did, beyond reasonable doubt.

What is more likely is that any magazines that fit the description of the banned items will seized by those zealots who are either anti-gun or just strict letter of compliance types, and it will be (essentially) up to you to prove that they are legal to own.

And, those zealous types often "lose" or "accidentally destroy" item like magazines (sometimes they go into private pockets), so the best that you may get, after spending time and money to "prove" your right, will be a check for what they assess is the value of the property. And sometimes the cost of getting them to cut the check exceeds the value of the property.

[HiBC]

I remember hearing 59 million people voted for Bill Clinton's second term at a time when there were est 89 million gun owners.

We just cannot afford apathy.Please do not let anything keep you from the polls in November.

Blumberg is pouring money into Colorado politics.

But I think folks are ready to make a statement.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

"Bloomberg' and recall being a gun owner does not make someone a political activist for gun rights, nor are all one issue voters as some gun folks think should be the way of the world.

Enough politics.