Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 8/19/2004 5:36:13 PM EST
Ive been thinking about this lately and as the AWB states, that particular law required hi-cap magazine manufacturers to date-stamp all magazines after 9/14/94. Well when the teh AWB expires, manufactures will not have to date stamp them. As seen in post by CMMG for the 10,000 magbodies he has on order when the ban dies, they are not datemarked.

So, getting to my point if these new mags are not date-stamped, then how can states like Kali, NJ, Maryland, ect regulate what a preban mag is and what is not. There is no way for them to tell other than lot numbers, but that requires a lot of background research and I doubt it would be worth the time. Especially since I dont think the manufacturer is marked on the CMMG mags.

You all think this is a loophole, or what? Im just glad I live in GA.
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 5:54:57 PM EST

Originally Posted By Trey-W:
Ive been thinking about this lately and as the AWB states, that particular law required hi-cap magazine manufacturers to date-stamp all magazines after 9/14/94. Well when the teh AWB expires, manufactures will not have to date stamp them. As seen in post by CMMG for the 10,000 magbodies he has on order when the ban dies, they are not datemarked.

So, getting to my point if these new mags are not date-stamped, then how can states like Kali, NJ, Maryland, ect regulate what a preban mag is and what is not. There is no way for them to tell other than lot numbers, but that requires a lot of background research and I doubt it would be worth the time. Especially since I dont think the manufacturer is marked on the CMMG mags.

You all think this is a loophole, or what? Im just glad I live in GA.



Yeah, those states are SOL, unless it is a Generation change or a mag that obviously did not exist. Of course, mag makers may keep stamping the mags, or just start adding date stamps to them all.
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 5:56:41 PM EST
1) 10,000 mags for civilian sales? Whoa, really?

2) Yup. I'll go to AZ gunshows for my "Kali banned" mags

3) No date stamp= no proof of date of manufacture!

4) You could have bought mag bodies and put in your "old springs/follower/floorplates"
as part of "replacement" parts. But, thanks to Sunset- NOT NEEDED!


Link Posted: 8/19/2004 8:16:36 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/19/2004 8:18:46 PM EST by gs430]
BZZZZZ - WRONG ANSWER...

Here's the deal...if the CA DOJ wanted to bust your balls (and they do), they can come to your house and raid it and take you to court for the magazines...their ONLY burden of proof is that you OWN the magazine. YOU HAVE PROVE THAT IT WAS PURCHASED BEFORE THE BAN DATE. The CA Legislators set the bar VERY low...does it surprise anyone?

Basically, the key to living in CA as a gun owner is to STAY OFF THE FUCKIN' RADAR....of course with registeration, that's not entirely possible. My point? MOVE THE FUCK OUT. I am.
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 9:39:10 PM EST

Originally Posted By lonewolf223:
1) 10,000 mags for civilian sales? Whoa, really?

2) Yup. I'll go to AZ gunshows for my "Kali banned" mags

3) No date stamp= no proof of date of manufacture!

4) You could have bought mag bodies and put in your "old springs/follower/floorplates"
as part of "replacement" parts. But, thanks to Sunset- NOT NEEDED!





10,000 mags, while a seemingly high number, is a drop in the bucket.
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 11:56:39 PM EST
MD does not apply here. Over twenty round mags can still be owned just not bought or sold in the state. I have never heard of a preban/postban issue re: ownership.

Link Posted: 8/20/2004 2:12:18 AM EST
The Massachusetts legislature recently (this summer) passed laws banning hi-cap mags. After a lot of heated discussions we came to general consensus on the following:

• Hi-cap, but undated mags for guns manufactured before and after the ban could be owned since nobody can prove when it was manufactured (Glock)

• Hi-cap, stamped mags dated prior to the ban are legal (HK)

• Hi-cap mags marked LEO are definitely illegal in MA

• Hi-cap mags for newly manufactured guns (after 9/04) are illegal

Pretty sad for the cradle of liberty. I’m moving to NH this Spring – Live Free or Die!
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 2:42:33 AM EST
Yeah Trey, it will be a bit sticky here for New Yorkers as well. NY State mirrored the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, so when it expires for most of the country, it will continues in NY.

I don't know if companies will be "urged" to start date stamping them again to avoid problems for these states, or whatever, but I can see what you are getting at. If they don't stamp them, the magazine distributors will just cover themselves in their flyers by stating that they will not ship to states restricting their ownership, but that would not prevent folks from going out of state to purchase them. These states adding thier own mag bans and/or restrictions, can complicate things for the manufactures. The anti's may use it as strong fodder against gun owners. They will call for helping these states out by asking for a ban on these "evil mags".

Though I would rather see the mags start being made without date stampings, I can see that continuing the date stamping may actually help to give the anti's one less thing to cry about.

They are stamped, so if they end up in states that have mag bans/restrictions, the person will be in trouble. Maybe that's bad for gun owning folks like myself living in one of these states, but probably best when looking at the Nation as a whole.

Thats what happens when one has a Governer that wears a Republican suite, but lawmakes like a hard core Democrat (in our case that would be Pataki). I voted for him with much hope to get communist like Coumo out of office, but after Pataki tried his hardest to pass even tougher gun restrictions than he eventually signed into law (he tried to even ban the post ban models), I gave my vote to pro gun Gollisano. Sure Gollisano lost, but Pataki will never again receive my vote.
The only reason we were lucky (if that is what one calls it) to just get a law mirroring the Fed AWB, was that the NY State Republicans fought hard to water down what Pataki really wanted. Again, if Pataki would have gotten what he wanted, even our post bans would have been gone. Our State Republicans could have fought much harder, but instead chose to go the easier route, which was to make deals. Their deals got us a permanent AWB.

I am currently not registered in any political party, and vote 95% of the time for Republican candidates, but they have to support my gun beliefs strongly, or at least much stronger than the Democrat contender, in order to get my vote.

It's sad, but states like NY, CA, NJ, etc, have Republicans that are that only in name, not in action.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 2:49:16 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/20/2004 2:50:11 AM EST by Janosk]
It really bugs me when people post disinformation concerning Massachusetts. Massachusetts has NO BAN on post 9/04 full capacity magazines. None. Zero. Markings are meaningless... The Senate initially passed a law regarding this issue, but it was then overturned on a second vote when they realised that they would have to invest a ton of $$$ to make it work, and there is no mention of it in the bill signed by Romney. The only restriction concerning magazines of any kind post 9/04 is your Class A or Class B LTC. For more information on this, please check out GOAL's website at:

http://www.goal.org/Alerts/reformlawpassed.html

Link Posted: 8/20/2004 3:17:39 AM EST
MY 2 cents

When the Federal AWB expires - there will be NO Federal Legal requirement to mark/date magazines.

NO MFG has publicly stated that they will continue or begin to mark magazines .

THERE ARE MILLIONS of UNMARKED AR15 , AK , Fal , and pistol magazines in existence.

Therefore - the prices on FULL Capacity mags will DROP (in states without their own bans).

------

As far as the "restrictive" states go , I will only offer my opinion on NY .

Under current NY law - an UNMARKED MAG is assumed to be "preban"

The simple FACT is I can buy UNMARKED MAGS at any NY gunshow or Gunshop I want ,
and this will continue as long as there are mags to buy.


( you can argue about this all day if you want - I will continue to purchase and use FULL Capacity
mags in NY )
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 3:26:18 AM EST
Sorry Janosk, but I wish hi-caps weren't banned but they are, have been and always will be in MA, unless the law is changed.

According to the article you referenced:
As explained in last month’s issue of The Outdoor Message, Massachusetts has had a semi-auto gun ban which was not due to disappear when the federal ban sunsets. However, some anti-gun legislators believed that it would. After trying, and failing, to extend the ban to cover even more guns, the other side “settled” for language that would take three existing references to federal law and add a date reference. GOAL believes this date reference actually gave gun owners a measure of protection.

Yes, the latest legislation did not specifically ban assault weapons or hi-cap magazines. "The ban was not due to disppear, when the federal ban sunsets." Since the hi-cap ban is incorporated in the federal ban, the hi-cap ban was never going to sunset in MA.

I was really disappointed that Goal tried to spin this as a complete 'win'. Yes, they made a few minor changes, but hi-caps and assault weapons are still banned in MA.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 3:26:34 AM EST

Originally Posted By gs430:
BZZZZZ - WRONG ANSWER...

Here's the deal...if the CA DOJ wanted to bust your balls (and they do), they can come to your house and raid it and take you to court for the magazines...their ONLY burden of proof is that you OWN the magazine. YOU HAVE PROVE THAT IT WAS PURCHASED BEFORE THE BAN DATE. The CA Legislators set the bar VERY low...does it surprise anyone?

Basically, the key to living in CA as a gun owner is to STAY OFF THE FUCKIN' RADAR....of course with registeration, that's not entirely possible. My point? MOVE THE FUCK OUT. I am.



Are you serious? You have to prove yourself innocent? What a worthless (except for the chicks) state
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 3:45:37 AM EST

Here's the deal...if the CA DOJ wanted to bust your balls (and they do), they can come to your house and raid it and take you to court for the magazines...their ONLY burden of proof is that you OWN the magazine. YOU HAVE PROVE THAT IT WAS PURCHASED BEFORE THE BAN DATE. The CA Legislators set the bar VERY low...does it surprise anyone

BZZZZZWrong answer
The burden of proof is on the Ca Doj.
First offf they have to have good reason, and warrant to bust in your door.
Thats not sayin that are wonderful Kalifornia state isnt turning into a facist state.
If you want to fight, you would probably win, and see your magazines back.
So basically you would have to have someone from the Ca Doj, or an informant follow you around, and actually be an eye witness to you buying them after the ban.
I'm not advocating breaking the law, its just that the its more difficult than you think to trace magazines bought after the ban. Unless they have magazine registration, they will have to wait a generation before they can start busting people for hi-caps.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 7:31:20 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/20/2004 7:31:54 AM EST by gs430]

Originally Posted By colossians323:
BZZZZZWrong answer
The burden of proof is on the Ca Doj.
First offf they have to have good reason, and warrant to bust in your door.
Thats not sayin that are wonderful Kalifornia state isnt turning into a facist state.
If you want to fight, you would probably win, and see your magazines back.
So basically you would have to have someone from the Ca Doj, or an informant follow you around, and actually be an eye witness to you buying them after the ban.
I'm not advocating breaking the law, its just that the its more difficult than you think to trace magazines bought after the ban. Unless they have magazine registration, they will have to wait a generation before they can start busting people for hi-caps.



Have you checked this with lawyers? I have. While your scenario SOUNDS correct (at that's the way it SHOULD be), according a few lawyers that I personally spoke too (who are not anti-gun BTW), the CA DOJ only needs to prove that you OWN the magazine. That is their only burden of proof. I don't think it's been tested in court yet but I'm sure if it was, the gun owner COULD prevail IF they were willing to go through the legal battle (which itself could break most people)...

CA is not known for doing things on the up and up...if you recall....

http://pages.prodigy.net/geoffc/news5.htm

Link Posted: 8/20/2004 7:36:27 AM EST
I'm glad I don't have this problem but at the same time I feel for all of ya'll that do. Maybe after this election is over and if Bush wins, hopefully the NRA, GOA, and other pro gun groups can start focussing on these troubled states. I just paid my dues againg recently, hopefully it will do some good.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 7:45:30 AM EST

Originally Posted By gs430:
MOVE THE FUCK OUT. I am.



+1

- Gazzy!
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 7:46:02 AM EST
I'm sure that hypothetically speaking there might be some individuals that live in free states like Texas that would have no problem trading their pre-ban magazines for new post-awb magazines for those people living in the state-awb states on a one-to-one basis. I know that hypothetically speaking I would be open to this sort of arrangement when/if the awb dies, and maybe some others here would/may be as well.

Link Posted: 8/20/2004 7:55:15 AM EST
I live in MA and I hate reading gun laws, so I am going to find a manufacturer that does not date the mags and have a bunch sent to my NH cottage
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 8:01:45 AM EST
Some people just talk too much.................


TR
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 8:02:12 AM EST
Bush et al don't care what happens in California. In fact, Bush doesn't care for Constitutional rights in general.

Lotta people seem to have missed the shell-game shift from rights to privileges over the past 20-30 years, both the Dems and Repubs see what once were considered rights as merely granted by the government. Which means that they can take them away.

GWB stated he's all for extending the AWB. His daddy let BATF ban imported guns based on "sporting purposes". I looked all over the Constitution and couldn't find anything that said "except for those firearms not considered suitable for sporting purposes". He OKed CCW in Texas, but CCW laws should be like Vermont or Alaska, as a license is a permission slip that can be bureaucratically revoked.

The Republicans have fallen all over themselves to best the Democrats in the "government will give you everything you want" game, reinforcing the voters' beliefs that the government is the reason you have a job, healthcare, a home and your MTV. Is this the same party that tried to get rid of the Education Department? The one that regained Congress 10 years ago by promising to reduce big government?

madkiwi

PS To keep this on topic, the CA large capacity magazine ban has functioned as an honor system anyway. I bought "enough" before the deadline, and still have a 1/2 dozen GI issue m16 mags new in wrapper, so it doesn't affect me.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 8:07:58 AM EST

CFFuts is correct. MA law bans sale or possesion of mags > 10 rounds that were not manufactured before 1994 (which is how it is worded).

So, unstamped would be pretty safe here.

But, the way I figure, all those folks who have been hording mags waiting for 2004 will be selling them cheap in October since their market is about to drop considerably.

I thought the same thing would happen to pre-ban rifles by now, though, and it hasn't. Suddenly they have become "collector's items". Hope that doesn't last long.

And.......I am still holding my breath on the sunset. Don't be surprised if there is some dramatic crap flying around the House when they come back on 9/7. They still have 7 days to renew it.

Subliminal
(Matt D)
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 9:37:10 AM EST
Since the AWB won't end in MA, I was waiting for pre-bans to go down in price before I bought another. Then I ran across a NIB Colt Carbine, so I bought it for $2k figuring that I could always dump it to another MA resident before I make my move to NH.

The ban should be ending so I can get a brand new Colt when I move to NH. If something terrible happens and the ban is extended, I still win.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 10:21:48 AM EST

Originally Posted By gs430:
BZZZZZ - WRONG ANSWER...

Here's the deal...if the CA DOJ wanted to bust your balls (and they do), they can come to your house and raid it and take you to court for the magazines...their ONLY burden of proof is that you OWN the magazine. YOU HAVE PROVE THAT IT WAS PURCHASED BEFORE THE BAN DATE. The CA Legislators set the bar VERY low...does it surprise anyone?

Basically, the key to living in CA as a gun owner is to STAY OFF THE FUCKIN' RADAR....of course with registeration, that's not entirely possible. My point? MOVE THE FUCK OUT. I am.



I would definately move! You CA guys got it worse than us CT guys and thought it was'nt possible.
Top Top