User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/14/2014 6:24:36 PM EDT
[#1]
So long as you owned them before July 1, 2013 is all the law says.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2014 7:03:12 PM EDT
[#2]
Shouldn't affect you one bit.
It certainly hasn't affected me in the slightest. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2014 7:37:58 PM EDT
[#3]
Doesn't affect military or LE
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2014 9:29:11 PM EDT
[#4]
Quoted:
I've searched and can't find any laymen explanation, I don't live in CO, if I were to move there how does the law affect my wife and her 30 round mags? I'm in the military and would be moving due to the military, again how does it affect me as a service member? What is the definition of being grandfathered under this law? Thanks all google would show me is links to biased parties ranting over one side or the other about the law but didn't find anything explaining it simply. Outside of replies here, we have 4-5 other members from out of state ask the same thing. No One Cares. Now driving from CO to another state with weed, you might have some problems. Other than that, enjoy the scenery and your +15 round magazines. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2014 10:54:19 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Doesn't affect military or LE Quote HistoryQuoted:
Doesn't affect military or LE That is an over-generalization. The exception reads: (b) AN EMPLOYEE OF ANY OF THE FOLLOWING AGENCIES WHO BEARS
A FIREARM IN THE COURSE OF HIS OR HER OFFICIAL DUTIES: (I) A BRANCH OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES; OR (II) A DEPARTMENT, AGENCY, OR POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, OR OF ANY OTHER STATE, OR OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT; |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2014 10:56:40 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That is an over-generalization. The exception reads: Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Doesn't affect military or LE That is an over-generalization. The exception reads: (b) AN EMPLOYEE OF ANY OF THE FOLLOWING AGENCIES WHO BEARS
A FIREARM IN THE COURSE OF HIS OR HER OFFICIAL DUTIES: (I) A BRANCH OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES; OR (II) A DEPARTMENT, AGENCY, OR POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, OR OF ANY OTHER STATE, OR OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT; The law by its explicit language requires that you have possessed the >15 round magazines prior to July 1, 2013. It does not require that that possession have been within the state of Colorado. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to establish that the magazine was not possessed before that date. Personally, I'd go through the magazines and dispose of any that had any form of manuf date stamped on them that was post June 2013. Just to be cautious. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2014 5:39:00 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The law by its explicit language requires that you have possessed the >15 round magazines prior to July 1, 2013. It does not require that that possession have been within the state of Colorado. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to establish that the magazine was not possessed before that date. Personally, I'd go through the magazines and dispose of any that had any form of manuf date stamped on them that was post June 2013. Just to be cautious. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Doesn't affect military or LE That is an over-generalization. The exception reads: (b) AN EMPLOYEE OF ANY OF THE FOLLOWING AGENCIES WHO BEARS
A FIREARM IN THE COURSE OF HIS OR HER OFFICIAL DUTIES: (I) A BRANCH OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES; OR (II) A DEPARTMENT, AGENCY, OR POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, OR OF ANY OTHER STATE, OR OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT; The law by its explicit language requires that you have possessed the >15 round magazines prior to July 1, 2013. It does not require that that possession have been within the state of Colorado. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to establish that the magazine was not possessed before that date. Personally, I'd go through the magazines and dispose of any that had any form of manuf date stamped on them that was post June 2013. Just to be cautious. Good advice |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2014 11:19:07 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The law by its explicit language requires that you have possessed the >15 round magazines prior to July 1, 2013. It does not require that that possession have been within the state of Colorado. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to establish that the magazine was not possessed before that date. Personally, I'd go through the magazines and dont take to the range any that had any form of manuf date stamped on them that was post June 2013. Just to be cautious. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Doesn't affect military or LE That is an over-generalization. The exception reads: (b) AN EMPLOYEE OF ANY OF THE FOLLOWING AGENCIES WHO BEARS
A FIREARM IN THE COURSE OF HIS OR HER OFFICIAL DUTIES: (I) A BRANCH OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES; OR (II) A DEPARTMENT, AGENCY, OR POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, OR OF ANY OTHER STATE, OR OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT; The law by its explicit language requires that you have possessed the >15 round magazines prior to July 1, 2013. It does not require that that possession have been within the state of Colorado. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to establish that the magazine was not possessed before that date. Personally, I'd go through the magazines and dont take to the range any that had any form of manuf date stamped on them that was post June 2013. Just to be cautious. FIFY |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2014 1:47:47 PM EDT
[#9]
No, if I was an out of stater and still had access to magazines of > 15 round limits that did not have manuf dates post June 2013, I'd discard all post June '13 in my possession before moving to Colorado.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2014 3:25:47 PM EDT
[#10]
Has there been a single reported instance of anyone being charged under the law?
OP, I wouldn't sweat it, I can't speak for any other areas, but the majority of agencies are not enforcing these laws |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2014 3:41:01 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Has there been a single reported instance of anyone being charged under the law? OP, I wouldn't sweat it, I can't speak for any other areas, but the majority of agencies are not enforcing these laws Not yet, but that is not a defense |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2014 5:19:48 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not yet, but that is not a defense Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Has there been a single reported instance of anyone being charged under the law? OP, I wouldn't sweat it, I can't speak for any other areas, but the majority of agencies are not enforcing these laws Not yet, but that is not a defense Just giving my opinion from an LE standpoint 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2014 5:42:09 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, if I was an out of stater and still had access to magazines of > 15 round limits that did not have manuf dates post June 2013, I'd discard all post June '13 in my possession before moving to Colorado. Unfortunately there's a (small) mentality that says. "I'LL JUST GRIND ANY NUMBERS OFF MY MAGS" They will disagree (argue) with you till the thread gets locked or warnings go out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2014 12:14:02 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Has there been a single reported instance of anyone being charged under the law? OP, I wouldn't sweat it, I can't speak for any other areas, but the majority of agencies are not enforcing these laws Nope, not a single reported instance. But that's not a good reason not to take certain actions before moving here to reduce the risk, should that change and some DA decide to make a name for himself. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2014 12:15:48 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Unfortunately there's a (small) mentality that says. "I'LL JUST GRIND ANY NUMBERS OFF MY MAGS" They will disagree (argue) with you till the thread gets locked or warnings go out. Those that wish to do that are certainly welcome to do that, at their own risk. I don't care what they choose to do, I'm not trying to convince them to do anything at all. But when someone asks for advice on the law, and how it might affect them, its not good advice to tell them to ignore it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2014 4:30:55 AM EDT
[#16]
Thanks, surprised it was that simple, I've never heard of mil not maintaining their magazines from work, so that mil/leclause really doesn't change anything.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2014 6:41:28 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thanks, surprised it was that simple, I've never heard of mil not maintaining their magazines from work, so that mil/leclause really doesn't change anything. And one of the many problems with the law...... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2014 1:06:12 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Shouldn't affect you one bit. It certainly hasn't affected me in the slightest. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2014 1:07:40 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Has there been a single reported instance of anyone being charged under the law? OP, I wouldn't sweat it, I can't speak for any other areas, but the majority of agencies are not enforcing these laws I will ask someone that has access to the data but I don't think a single ARREST much less charge has been filed under either mag or ubc |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2014 2:03:54 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The law by its explicit language requires that you have possessed the >15 round magazines prior to July 1, 2013. It does not require that that possession have been within the state of Colorado. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to establish that the magazine was not possessed before that date. Personally, I'd go through the magazines and dispose of any that had any form of manuf date stamped on them that was post June 2013. Just to be cautious. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Doesn't affect military or LE That is an over-generalization. The exception reads: (b) AN EMPLOYEE OF ANY OF THE FOLLOWING AGENCIES WHO BEARS
A FIREARM IN THE COURSE OF HIS OR HER OFFICIAL DUTIES: (I) A BRANCH OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES; OR (II) A DEPARTMENT, AGENCY, OR POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, OR OF ANY OTHER STATE, OR OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT; The law by its explicit language requires that you have possessed the >15 round magazines prior to July 1, 2013. It does not require that that possession have been within the state of Colorado. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to establish that the magazine was not possessed before that date. Personally, I'd go through the magazines and dispose of any that had any form of manuf date stamped on them that was post June 2013. Just to be cautious. I would never dispose of a perfectly good magazine to cater to this law. Ever. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2014 5:49:32 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would never dispose of a perfectly good magazine to cater to this law. Ever. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Doesn't affect military or LE That is an over-generalization. The exception reads: (b) AN EMPLOYEE OF ANY OF THE FOLLOWING AGENCIES WHO BEARS
A FIREARM IN THE COURSE OF HIS OR HER OFFICIAL DUTIES: (I) A BRANCH OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES; OR (II) A DEPARTMENT, AGENCY, OR POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, OR OF ANY OTHER STATE, OR OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT; The law by its explicit language requires that you have possessed the >15 round magazines prior to July 1, 2013. It does not require that that possession have been within the state of Colorado. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to establish that the magazine was not possessed before that date. Personally, I'd go through the magazines and dispose of any that had any form of manuf date stamped on them that was post June 2013. Just to be cautious. I would never dispose of a perfectly good magazine to cater to this law. Ever. I'm right there with you |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2014 5:50:16 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I will ask someone that has access to the data but I don't think a single ARREST much less charge has been filed under either mag or ubc Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Has there been a single reported instance of anyone being charged under the law? OP, I wouldn't sweat it, I can't speak for any other areas, but the majority of agencies are not enforcing these laws I will ask someone that has access to the data but I don't think a single ARREST much less charge has been filed under either mag or ubc We would know, Hickendildo would be parading about it |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2014 9:43:48 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We would know, Hickendildo would be parading about it Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Has there been a single reported instance of anyone being charged under the law? OP, I wouldn't sweat it, I can't speak for any other areas, but the majority of agencies are not enforcing these laws I will ask someone that has access to the data but I don't think a single ARREST much less charge has been filed under either mag or ubc We would know, Hickendildo would be parading about it If not hick That grass smoking roots .org would plaster it across the universe. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2014 5:36:18 PM EDT
[#24]
if it bothers you then don't travel here with them. As for us folks in state no one cares, hell there are still shops in the Denver area selling 30 rd AR mags.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2014 12:46:57 AM EDT
[#25]
What is the/your main concern? If you're doing something dumb, you can always be held accountable for your ignorance/actions. Doubtful that anyone will check or care as long as you are demonstrating respect and responsibility. Actions equal consequences for the most part of how they affect you.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2014 3:44:24 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I will ask someone that has access to the data but I don't think a single ARREST much less charge has been filed under either mag or ubc Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Has there been a single reported instance of anyone being charged under the law? OP, I wouldn't sweat it, I can't speak for any other areas, but the majority of agencies are not enforcing these laws I will ask someone that has access to the data but I don't think a single ARREST much less charge has been filed under either mag or ubc there was the cop stealing guns from the evidence lockup and selling them who was charged for it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2014 7:30:17 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
there was the cop stealing guns from the evidence lockup and selling them who was charged for it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Has there been a single reported instance of anyone being charged under the law? OP, I wouldn't sweat it, I can't speak for any other areas, but the majority of agencies are not enforcing these laws I will ask someone that has access to the data but I don't think a single ARREST much less charge has been filed under either mag or ubc there was the cop stealing guns from the evidence lockup and selling them who was charged for it. I would have charged him with everything possible. ETA: wait, is this the New York case? Do you have a link to anything? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2014 9:48:29 AM EDT
[#28]
I suspect on e Beauprez gets elected here we'll see at the very least the magazine law go away. Then we can all pretend this never happened.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2014 11:40:09 AM EDT
[#29]
I know of one case like that, but it was in Montrose in 1998.
If there's been anything in Colorado since 7-1-13 this will be the first I've heard of it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would have charged him with everything possible. ETA: wait, is this the New York case? Do you have a link to anything? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Has there been a single reported instance of anyone being charged under the law? OP, I wouldn't sweat it, I can't speak for any other areas, but the majority of agencies are not enforcing these laws I will ask someone that has access to the data but I don't think a single ARREST much less charge has been filed under either mag or ubc there was the cop stealing guns from the evidence lockup and selling them who was charged for it. I would have charged him with everything possible. ETA: wait, is this the New York case? Do you have a link to anything? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2014 2:54:23 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I know of one case like that, but it was in Montrose in 1998. If there's been anything in Colorado since 7-1-13 this will be the first I've heard of it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
I know of one case like that, but it was in Montrose in 1998. If there's been anything in Colorado since 7-1-13 this will be the first I've heard of it. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Has there been a single reported instance of anyone being charged under the law? OP, I wouldn't sweat it, I can't speak for any other areas, but the majority of agencies are not enforcing these laws I will ask someone that has access to the data but I don't think a single ARREST much less charge has been filed under either mag or ubc there was the cop stealing guns from the evidence lockup and selling them who was charged for it. I would have charged him with everything possible. ETA: wait, is this the New York case? Do you have a link to anything? You know Hick would've been prancing everywhere with that story |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
