CA mag law details

W

wogpotter

New member
Can someone please clarify the EXACT magazine capacity limits law for CA.
For example can a damaged or non-functioning pre-ban one be shipped out of state for repair & legally returned?

*edited*
I'm not in CA & I'm not the one sending or having it returned.
*end edit*
 
Last edited:
Not as precise an answer as it should be, but I do know that repair kits can be shipped in for pre-ban magazines such as 30 round AR types.
I don't know if you can ship one out of state for repair and legally have it "re-imported" to the state.
 
Please see the wiki article on large-capacity magazines - http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/Large-capacity_magazine_restrictions

Re: your specific question
For example can a damaged or non-functioning pre-ban one be shipped out of state for repair & legally returned?
Click to expand...
I do not believe anyone knows.

It is my opinion that the CA legislature has caught on to the average 'regular' gun-owners obsession with knowing 'the answer'. By refusing to be clear, they induce the classic Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt.
 
Pretty much everything above is correct according to my understanding, too.

You say you want to ship out a magazine for repair, but why does the entire thing need to be shipped? Can't you just ship out the part that's broken?

I say that because it would be an extra layer of protection. If you ship the entire magazine, you could be considered to be lending that magazine, which is prohibited. If you just ship a part, then it is not a magazine.
 
does the entire thing need to be shipped?
Click to expand...
Yes, see below.

Let me clarify. I'm not in CA.

I know someone who is & he has a known defective magazine. It's pre-ban & 20-round, documented. The defect is from the factory, but they just ignore the problem & tell him its normal. I've had the exact same issue with them over several magazines with the same factory-made defect. I fixed mine & I believe I can also fix his.

I need pretty much the whole thing because the factory problems relate to the body (feed lips), follower (presentation angle at the feed lips), & spring (incorrectly shaped ends). I could probably do without the floorplate, but that seems so petty.

Is sending for repair "exporting"?
If not how can it be re-importing?
 
Mags are easy to repair just order the parts in and do it yourself.
Click to expand...
Which bring up a different question.
Can I ship him "repair parts" as long as it isn't a complete magazine?
Leading to:
What is (legally in CA) a repair kit? Is it even actually defined?
 
What is (legally in CA) a repair kit? Is it even actually defined?
Click to expand...
No. That's a significant part of the problem.

Without that, it is effectively impossible to determine the legality of what you want to do.

Presuming by 'pre-ban' you mean 'possessed in California prior to Jan 1, 2000', it would be legal for the owner to take the mag out of state, have it worked on, and then bring it back.

Shipping? Parts? Unknown, and likely to remain so until we get a court case to clarify. Not only is such a case likely to take a couple years to run through to a conclusion, but getting one started is problematic - the court costs for a suit or legal defense vastly exceed the value of a couple of magazines. Unless we get an externally supported case along the lines of Heller, it's just easier and lots cheaper to surrender the mags and move on.

As I said earlier: legislatively-created FUD.
 
wogpotter said:
Is sending for repair "exporting"?
If not how can it be re-importing?
Click to expand...

AFAICT, there is no prohibition on exporting. I don't see that word anywhere in the PC.

There is a prohibition on importing complete magazines, but you certainly can send him repair parts in a general sense.
The problem is, as Librarian said, there is no clear definition of what constitutes a repair kit, so specifically where the line is drawn in unknown.

Personally, I think if you sent him a single repair part, there's no way you committed a crime. The first question in the letter referenced in the Cal Guns magazine faq makes it clear that it's legal to import parts (plural!) to repair a magazine. The question is where, beyond "parts" (again, plural) do we enter into the realm of "repair kit?

Wherever that line is, I don't think any reasonable person would conclude that a part (singular) is an illegal repair kit, when parts (plural) are specifically known to be legal. Abundance of caution is a great thing, but at some point it becomes ridiculous. Your tolerance for risk (and your friend's) will have to be considered here.
 
The question is where, beyond "parts" (again, plural) do we enter into the realm of "repair kit?
Click to expand...
And, where does 'repair kit' become 'large capacity magazine conversion kit'? If we could distinguish, we could identify RKs that are not LCMCKs. But with no data, we are adrift.
 
So where you are at is you could take photos of what you did to make the mags work correctly and email them to him with the steps. He should be able to reshape the mag lips and bend the spring to work and even reshape the follower so what part would he need?
 
So, if i used to live in Cali but moved out...can i take back into cali the "high-cap" mags that used to reside there??

Example, i had a G23 and a bunch of 13rnd mags when i lived there. Moved from the state. If i go back into cali is it legal to take those mags into the state?
 
Sharkbite, no, I think that could fall under "importing". Certainly there's no mention of any "grandfathering" clause, so it would be a serious risk.

For the OP, there is a weird option which probably would not work, but who knows....you could send a letter to the DOJ, explaining exactly (with pictures / links / videos / whatever) what you're trying to do, and ask them for clarification.

Won't cost much, at least.
 
Sharkbite, I actually addressed that in post 8, but slightly different context -
Presuming by 'pre-ban' you mean 'possessed in California prior to Jan 1, 2000', it would be legal for the owner to take the mag out of state, have it worked on, and then bring it back.
Click to expand...
That's not conditional on the repair - it's PC 32420:
32420. Section 32310 does not apply to the importation of a
large-capacity magazine by a person who lawfully possessed the
large-capacity magazine in the state prior to January 1, 2000,
lawfully took it out of the state, and is returning to the state with
the same large-capacity magazine.
Click to expand...
Nothing in there about 'California resident'. But Jan 1, 2000 is a hard date.
 
Thank you! Finally an actual answer not an opinion.
Let me ask the (unfortunately) obvious question.
What if its mailed not carried?
Is there any differentiation you can see?
 
What if its mailed not carried?
Is there any differentiation you can see?
Click to expand...

The precise language of the statute suggests the person owning (having timely possessed) the magazine has to be the actor "returning to the state with the same large-capacity magazine."

Given the fact pattern, in a reasonable situation this should not be a problem. The magazine is legally owned, all it needs is repair, the owner would not be getting a new (additional) magazine - in a reasonable legal environment even a technical, 'oh, maybe this might be seen as different' transgression ought to run under de minimus non curat lex.

California is toxic, not reasonable.

If detected, some prosecutor could charge it as a felony. Whether or not the prosecution would result in a conviction, defending against the charge would be expensive.
 
Let me see if I got this right...

You have a legal hi cap in CA
You ship it out for repair.
Legal.

The shop that fixes it, cannot send a hi cap to CA (crime), even though it is your property, they cannot send it back to you there.

If you personally bring it back into the state, its legal.

It that about right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top