hi-cap legality question

C

CBlackjr

New member
I been looking into buying a new rifle and I want to be able to put a 20-30 mag on it. The problem is I live in CA. Now what if I go to a Arizona gun show to get a 20-30 mag for my weapon. Is this illegal to do. BTW I not even sure if Hi-cap mags are even sold in Arizona.
 
You can't even buy a high capacity compatible firearm in Kilifornia. Why waste your time finding magazines for a firearm that in your case, does not exist anymore?

Robert
 
It is my understanding that it be illegal for you to bring a high-cap magazine into the state of CA.

M1911
 
It ....IS....illegal to bring +10 mags into CA. But it is not illegal to buy them out of state. You can always throw them away. A good amusing game is trying to throw them into your car trunk and have them bounce out and land on a 10" circle. Few are good at this game. It seems that some always stick in the trunk. This is illegal. They ARE legal to possess in CA as long as you don't buy them here.
 
"you can still buy the firearm and make it compatible. Example the ruger mini 14. Give it a few more legislative secessions and those will be gone too. :(

Robert
 
To hell with California's crap.

I say, for the record, that I have brought more than one standard-capacity magazine in from out of state, and I intend to do the same again when I can get the ones I want. Bill Lockyer will have to prove that any particular magazine I own was smuggled.

Yeah, I know. It may not be wise to announce one's felonies on the internet. See this post's header.
 
If you get my drift.....

You didn't buy all those PMI blued 20rd Mini 14 magazines in Phoenix. You've had them in CA well before any laws were passed.
 
Yeah, I know. It may not be wise to announce one's felonies on the internet. See this post's header.

Its a felony? I would disobeying the law if it was an infraction but I am getting into a career where felonies are not good things.
 
If that means law enforcement, you're in luck. Gun and magazine bans won't apply to you, and you won't have to settle for cheesy guns like Mini-14s.

I'm not sure whether it's a felony or not, but it sounded more dramatic.
 
posted by Jeff,
"If that means law enforcement, you're in luck. Gun and magazine bans won't apply to you, and you won't have to settle for cheesy guns like Mini-14s."

Jeff,
Your statement is untrue. These laws do apply to LEOs. I cannot, as a LEO, walk into a shop and buy restricted guns and magazines for my personal collection. I can buy guns and magazines that are for DUTY use. For a LEO to buy restricted equipment a letter must be signed by the head of the LEO's agency stating the purchase is for duty use. I recently wanted to purchase a gun that is not on California's "safe" gun list, my chief will not sign the letter since it is not a duty gun.
 
Yeah, and I can't buy them at all, even with a note from home. See any difference?
 
Here I go again...

CBlackjr, el al,


By Hi-Caps, do you really mean "standard capacity" magazines? ...as opposed to the restricted capacity magazines that have been forced upon on us by misguided lawmakers. Please, let's not legitimize the anti-gunners inflamatory verbiage by using it ourselves. :)


Joe
 
Jeff,
Yes,I do see a difference. I have the "privilege" of purchasing equipment for use in my work as a public servant. When I leave my position as a public servant I get to surrender this equipment that I paid for to my agency since I can no longer possess it. That sounds like a GREAT deal to me, I feel so above the law.
 
And when you're on duty? Tell me, if the people can't get them, why do the police need them?
 
Jeff,
I am not the enemy. I do not agree with these stupid laws nor can I change them anymore than you can. I am not trying to argue with you about this. I just get tired of people stating gun laws do not apply to LEOs and infering LEOs can go buy whatever they want and in unlimited quantities. You made a statement saying gun control laws do not apply to LEOs. I simply tried to point out to you that is not the truth. I cannot walk into a gun store and order restricted items because I feel like it, nor can I get them for my personal use. Getting pissed off at LEOs because of our elected politicians does not help RKBA. I think it is BS that I have to buy my own equipment in the first place, especially since I have to turn it in when I leave the department.
 
I agree - you should not have to pay for your own gear, then turn it in when you leave. There are 2 issues there, 1) the fact that you're out the money you spent, 2) the gun control/rights issue. The rights issue is far more important.

However, what I said was true, in that there is a DOUBLE STANDARD: law enforcement (i. e., gov't) still has access to standard-capacity magazines, "assault weapons", full auto, etc. And as I said before, if the people don't have it, government doesn't need it.

You're not the enemy. The enemy is the statist, elitist attitude manifest in "gun control" and the double standard I mentioned. You may not feel that way (statist, elitist) personally, but you can't deny the attitude exists in law enforcement.
 
I don't live in California, and am not sure what
the law is there.

However, I do know this.

If someone were to ship you some high-capacity
magazines with no return address on the package,
it wouldn't be your fault.

After you received them, you would have to
turn them in. I guess. I dunno.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top