Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 1/21/2006 8:53:50 AM EDT
The law seems rather fuzzy. I am 29. I have a glock 17 9mm. If I have high cap mags that are not dated or stamped with a date are they legal to own since I bought them before the 2000 law? Can anyone out there clairify this for me please. I turned 18 in 1995. The fed law went into effect in 1994. My glock was purchased in 2000. When in CA. I use the 10 rounders. When in AZ I user the 17&33 rounders. Also my Ar mags (in AZ) all dont have a date on them. Plese help me understand this more.
Link Posted: 1/21/2006 10:00:48 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/21/2006 10:19:19 AM EDT by caliar15]
Forget it
Link Posted: 1/21/2006 10:24:36 AM EDT
Mabey an actual response would help a little more than forget it! Has this subject just been beat to death or does no body really know?
Link Posted: 1/21/2006 10:25:11 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/21/2006 11:31:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By leelaw:
www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=26890

This should be tacked..


+1, this should provide all the info you need. There was just a very long thread on the legalities of high cap mags. In short though, the Fed ban has no impact on anything. If you owned the high caps in CA prior to the CA ban, they're completely legal to use in any gun regardless of when you purchased the gun. Possession of high caps in CA is not controlled, only the sale, importation, giving, lending, or buying of them is.
Link Posted: 1/21/2006 12:21:19 PM EDT

Originally Posted By caliar15:
Forget it

Sorry I was typing a long response when I realized I gave the wrong answer.h.gif
Link Posted: 1/21/2006 12:31:17 PM EDT
im so confused, all I can say is as long as you had them in CA before the law they are legal.
Link Posted: 1/21/2006 1:37:37 PM EDT
Thanks for the link. Good info here. I guess you just need to make sure you have a recipt for you're purchase prior to 2000. It seems rather un enforcable.???
Link Posted: 1/21/2006 1:56:36 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Cdog:
Thanks for the link. Good info here. I guess you just need to make sure you have a recipt for you're purchase prior to 2000. It seems rather un enforcable.???


I'm willing to bet, very, very few have receipts for magazines purchased before 2000. The burden is on them to prove that you broke the law, not the other way around. As long as you're not doing something obvious like owning magazines that weren't even in existence before the ban, you should be fine.
Link Posted: 1/21/2006 3:23:01 PM EDT
There are no laws that says you couldn't purchase regular capacity (hi-cap) magazines before 2000 regardless of your age. As long as those magazines were available for sale before 2000 and they're not stamped with dates, I'd like to know how they're going to prove that you got them after 2000. Some here might say that they'll prosecute you anyways. If so, I'd like to see a documented case of this happening.
Link Posted: 1/21/2006 4:27:35 PM EDT
This is why I brought this up. It's a very intresting topic that could go many ways. I've taken apart my ar 30 rd. mags to make sure their were no markings and there were non. I've looked on my 33 & 17 rd. glock mags and none either. There is a 5 on the inside of the plastic plunger that the first round sits on but no other #'s. My 10 round mags have serial #'s on them.
Link Posted: 1/21/2006 7:56:51 PM EDT
This law is going to be effective in about 2020 when some 18yo, in possession of a 30rd mag, gets tagged with a Felony.
Link Posted: 1/21/2006 9:31:04 PM EDT
I imagine it is going to be one of those things where everyone has it, but noone talks about it. Its just too easy, too tempting, and too difficult for law enforcement to prove it isn't legal.
Link Posted: 1/21/2006 11:38:09 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/22/2006 7:54:57 AM EDT by phish]

I imagine it is going to be one of those things where everyone has it, but no one talks about it. Its just too easy, too tempting, and too difficult for law enforcement to prove it isn't legal.


Why is it these threads always wind up with someone going on a fishing expedition?

I give up, you guys do what you're going to do. I'll even make it easier for you: Big Reno Show, 3/10-3/12.

have at it dudes
Link Posted: 1/22/2006 2:08:53 AM EDT

Originally Posted By phish:
Why is it these threads always wind up with someone going on a fishing expedition? hat
have at it dudes hr


Haha, my thoughts exactly.
Link Posted: 1/22/2006 7:31:06 AM EDT
How else is a person suppost to find aout about these things? Ask the dufis at turners who just quit his job at easy lube? Why are people in the know such smart ass's when someone asks a fairly important question? I realize that in CA some idiots have ruined it for most but our gun hobby will die out if we don't introduce new people to it and spread the know how!!!! I grew up in socal and am there every other week or so for biz. I've been going hunting with my dad up in Jawbone canyon since I was 12. I carry a side arm while camping. Do I have to give my life story to be deemed a responsible gun owner before the know how will trickle thru?
Link Posted: 1/22/2006 8:55:26 AM EDT
cdog,

Possesion of hicap mags is legal. In CA, as long as they are not marked LE only, you will never have any issues. If you legally buy a LE marked hicap in AZ, keep it out of CA. Not worth the hassle. If they are dated pre 1994 or not dated, you will not have to prove anything.
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 4:51:03 AM EDT
Cdog, don't worry about it. The ability to hide behind a keyboard brings out the inner jerk in people. It is great you are learning.

Link Posted: 1/23/2006 7:15:36 AM EDT

Originally Posted By dave3006:
Cdog, don't worry about it. The ability to hide behind a keyboard brings out the inner jerk in people. It is great you are learning.



+1 Good to have you here.
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 8:12:27 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/23/2006 8:14:18 AM EDT by phish]
My sarcasm wasn't aimed at Cdog in any way. I know he's in AZ and only gives a fuck about our laws when he comes to visit, which is cool, when in Rome right?

My issue is with certain ass-clowns who consistently show signs of intent to break the law, even after being warned in previous threads both on here, and calguns for shit's sake. Instead of absorbing the meaning of the laws and coming to their own logical conclusions, they always have to mouth off for validation.

So, I say again: go for it dudes, burden of proof right?
Top Top