Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 8/12/2003 2:04:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/12/2003 2:06:11 PM EDT by ArmaLiter]
I don't know how anyone would really know, because you really have to pick up a magazine made after the '94 ban to check for markings/date to identify it as post-ban/LEO magazine. You would really have to do something wrong to get the authorities start checking your magazines.
But let's say that it was found that you did have post-ban hi-cap mags, in true reality, what penalties would a judge give because you owned an "illegal" 30 round magazine made in 2001 along with dozens of "legal" 30 round magazines that were made before 1994.
Since both the pre-ban and post-ban magazines are 30 rounders and function in the same way and fit the same type of rifle, in what way could anyone say that one magazine is more "dangerous to society" just because of what year it was made in.
NO, I don't have any post-ban mags. I have plenty of pre-ban mags and there are plenty of NIW pre-ban mags out in the market for me and anyone else not to need to buy a hi-cap post ban magazine.
I would just like to know some of your opinions/theories of what our judicial system would do to justify this "game" politicians are playing with law-abiding gun owners over something that is illegal because of what year it was made in no matter what it says in the "books".

ArmaLiter
Link Posted: 8/12/2003 4:43:16 PM EDT
My guess is that you would already be in some other trouble before magazines became an issue to LE anywhere. Less than one percent of them would be able to tell would be my bet.
Link Posted: 8/13/2003 12:09:01 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/13/2003 2:40:14 AM EDT
A felony conviction for post ban mags, even without jail time, means no more guns for you. It's highly unlikely that you would be prosecuted for possession, but people win the lottery every day. The stakes are pretty high, so consider your bet carefully.
Link Posted: 8/13/2003 8:54:20 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Troy: In REAL life, the range of possibilities is pretty wide, but here's my take. The maximum penalty is 5 years in prison and $10,000 fine. But the chances of actually receiving that sentence is nearly zero, unless you somehow personally piss of the judge in your trial. In MOST cases where you were found to be in possession of restricted mags, they'd likely just be confiscated (read: stolen) "for the protection of society". Don't be surprised if your (otherwise LEGAL) rifle is also confiscated, though with work, you could probably get that back. Don't expect it to be in good condition, though... A realistic "worst-case" is that BATF is contacted, and for whatever reason, felt that they had time to bother with such a trivial violation (most of the time, they literally will inform the cops that they don't have time to deal with petty crap like post-ban mags). Then, you could be pretty screwed. Most likely, you're the target of some person who is looking to make a public example of you, and the best you're gonna do is plea bargain the charges down to something more managable (misdemeanor with fine and/or community service). I agree that in most cases, no one is going to care in the first place. Only a hard-core anti-gun LEO is going to make it an issue in the first place. -Troy
View Quote
ArmaLiter: IMHO, Troy is correct in his assessment. Unless ATF is willing to make an "example" out of someone, or the person is already in trouble for something else, the likelihood of being prosecuted is probably pretty low. But the penalty is also pretty high for conviction of a felony, so like Dirty Harry says, youu "have to ask yourself, do I feel lucky?" Now if the officer were to run across a carload of gangbangers with LEO magazines or weapons, or a drunk with an attitude, or they were used in another crime, all bets are off....
Link Posted: 8/13/2003 6:17:28 PM EDT
I would think the LAST thing they would want to do is go after an otherwise law-abiding citizen on such a trivial matter, and have it as a test case for the law vs civil rights (yes, RKBA is a civil right). But as usual, with a case where the person charged is truly vile, armed bank robber, drug dealer, etc, it will be used as a bargaining chip for getting the bad guy to plea guilty to the offense for which he is really guilty.
Link Posted: 8/13/2003 6:38:55 PM EDT
It is almost un-enforceable. The biggest threat of getting into trouble is from imbeciles like [i]Computerguy[/i] (from this site). These dopes like to bring ATF into the equation. I agree with all the previous posts. As long as you are not running a meth lab out of your trailer, you probably won't ever face any problems.
Link Posted: 8/14/2003 9:14:27 AM EDT
ARMALITER, I spoke to a Federal Prosecutor about "what if" Joe Blow was caught in possession of a LEO/MIL post marked mag. His reply was that unless its some guy cooking meth in his basement, who has the mag stuck into his stolen and illegaly converted 15...He wouldn't press the issue as there is nothing to be gained. i,e. no glory and a waste of his time to come down on JB. But if the above is relavent, than the post mag possession could be heaped on. Which is a great tool especially when the SOBs always plead out anyway... Then the prosecuter bought his son a Glock from the shop I worked for. But remember opinions, circumstances, and attitudes change. Would a guy want to press his luck? Mama told me: "This is your ass (.) This is your ass in jail (O)"... I'll take her word. Mrs. Brady, would you care to buy a vowel? G_ F_CK Y_ _ RS_LF!
Link Posted: 8/14/2003 9:17:52 AM EDT
Correct me if I'm wrong..... I believe that there has not been one single conviction for any offence related to the AWB. IIRC I don't even think any charges have been brought against anybody at all. The AWB was just so they could add even more charges to the people like Randy Weaver and David Koresh's of the world. If they don't kill them first. [:D]
Link Posted: 8/15/2003 9:00:55 PM EDT
Originally Posted By bvmjethead: Correct me if I'm wrong..... I believe that there has not been one single conviction for any offence related to the AWB. IIRC I don't even think any charges have been brought against anybody at all. The AWB was just so they could add even more charges to the people like Randy Weaver and David Koresh's of the world. If they don't kill them first. [:D]
View Quote
I know of one conviction, in the midwest within the last year .... of a police officer who had been buying post-'94 mags for his non-LE buddies. IIRC, they convicted him on conspiracy and four counts of illegal sales of banned items, and he did get jail time. I believe his non-LE buddies were not charged (after they agreed to testify against him). If I have some time I'll try to dig up the story....
Link Posted: 8/16/2003 10:40:17 AM EDT
I would just like to know some of your opinions/theories of what our judicial system would do to justify this "game" politicians are playing with law-abiding gun owners over something that is illegal because of what year it was made in no matter what it says in the "books". Kind of like post 86 machine guns...it's all a crock but I don't want to be the test case.
Link Posted: 8/18/2003 9:05:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/18/2003 9:09:17 PM EDT by nr24769]
I have asked this very question to a friend of mine who happens to be the deputy prosecutor in Arizona. He said that in most cases the state or federal government will not prosecute if illegal mags are found in your posession. unless you commit a crime while using them, as the penalty is a minor charge. If used while commiting a crime the charges are compounded upon the crimnal charges accrued. Thus if you get 10yrs for holding up a bank. You may also get another 5yrs for having an illegal mag or any other preban parts on your postban ar. Most LEOs look the other way anyway. Unless you commit a crime.
Link Posted: 8/20/2003 2:18:53 PM EDT
Felony charges handed down from a federal court dose not have a good ring to it. I don't know about any one else but I always think it's not good to play the odds when it come's to a federal crime that the ATF may be involved in. Don't want to be guy who wanted to save a few dollars and be made an exaple of.
Top Top