Judge just blocked CA 10 Round Mag Ban

Status
Not open for further replies.
New law scheduled to take effect July 1 2017 made possession of 10+ round magazines illegal statewide; this injunction says that law is on hold.

No change in the law banning purchase.

Some cities - San Francisco,Los Angeles, Sunnyvale - have their own bans on possession, and those are not affected by this order.
 
So, is this decision meant to allow CA gun owners to now purchase 20+ rnd. mags
No, purchase of 10+ magazines is still illegal in CA. As Librarian posted, "possession" of legally purchased 10+ magazines from past years when they were legal are affected by this injunction.

From preliminary injunction Duncan v. Becerra:

"... plaintiffs are a group of California residents who either already own magazines holding more than 10 rounds or who want to own magazines holding more than 10 rounds for their defense of self and state."
 
Last edited:
Forgive my ignorance here, but haven't 10-round mags been the limit in CA for years now? I have a semiauto rifle (not an AR) that came with a 10-round mag, and while 20 and 30 rnd. mags are available, they cannot be shipped to CA (and other states, I imagine). So, is this decision meant to allow CA gun owners to now purchase 20+ rnd. mags, or just keep those who already own them from being classified as criminals (or both)? I would very much like to have some larger capacity mags for my rifle and still be within the bounds of the law. TIA.
IIRC, there has been a 10-round mag limit for several years, but older 20- and 30-rd mags have been "grandfathered" in as legal. There was a recent brouhaha about CA residents buying magazine "repair kits" that were merely disassembled magazines that they could readily put together to create a new banned magazine. In any event the new law seeks to end all that, requiring anyone possessing "high capacity" magazines to sell them out of state, take them out of state, or turn them in to police.
 
Back in 2013, when Connecticut imposed a registration requirement on magazines of over 10 rounds, I begrudgingly registered two mags for my Beretta 92FS because I was working armed security at the time and didn't want to go searching for AWB-era 10 round mags. The rest of my evil mags were sent to live with a friend in New Hampshire until Connecticut clarified the exemption for military personnel. But if I get out of the military before the law is changed, I'd have to register the rest, or dispose of them. But here's the kicker: to register mags in CT, you have to PROVE you bought them prior to 2013. Those two Beretta mags were literally the only ones I actually had a receipt for.

Even more infuriating than that is I can't load the registered mags with over 10 rounds outside my home, and only the mag that's actually in the weapon can be higher capacity. Spare mags must be mechanically fixed to ten rounds. So when I was doing armed security, I was stuck ordering a couple of 10 round mags anyway. The same applies for concealed carry.

Whether by "activist" judges, a successful lawsuit, or a decision by SCOTUS, this horse manure needs to end.
 
Forgive my ignorance here, but haven't 10-round mags been the limit in CA for years now? I have a semiauto rifle (not an AR) that came with a 10-round mag, and while 20 and 30 rnd. mags are available, they cannot be shipped to CA (and other states, I imagine). So, is this decision meant to allow CA gun owners to now purchase 20+ rnd. mags, or just keep those who already own them from being classified as criminals (or both)? I would very much like to have some larger capacity mags for my rifle and still be within the bounds of the law. TIA.
It's been illegal to purchase magazines over 10 rounds in CA for some years, but it was legal to possess magazines over 10 rounds *if* you had purchased them prior to the old law taking effect. The new law makes possession illegal, in effect confiscating property without compensation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top