high cap mags and Ban states.......need help/advise

[skipbo32]

i need some clarity. it is illegal to send an old high capacity AK magazine to New Jersey if it is sent as a "repair parts kit"? it is legal to ship to California in this manor, correct? which ban states accept high cap mags as "kits" and which don't. i have always been confused by this.

thanks.

 

[mbogo]

It doesn't matter. You are not subject to their laws unless you are physically in those states' borders.

mbogo

 

[skipbo32]

So the receiver is liable not the sender?

 

[Midwest]

Standard Capacity sounds good too.

 

[rromeo]

Large Capacity is mentioned in California law. It is indeed legal to send disassembled magazines to California, though SB396 (?) is currently in the works, but I hear that it is stalling.

 

[ChaoSS]

Just to clarify, California courts have ruled that their laws can apply to residents of other states in that they affect California and it's residents, for example, taping a phone conversation with a California resident without consent or sending stuff to California. They won't come out and arrest you, but you could have issues if you ever came to California. If you got caught, of course.

 

[mbogo]

Chaoss,

Please provide a citation of California law that states that a private party living outside the state is criminally liable for shipping a "large capacity" magazine to a resident of California.

Any liability resides with the recipient/possessor; the sender has no liability.

mbogo

 

[Frank Ettin]

...Please provide a citation of California law that states that a private party living outside the state is criminally liable for shipping a "large capacity" magazine to a resident of California.

Any liability resides with the recipient/possessor; the sender has no liability....

There probably is none because it probably hasn't come up in court.

But your claim that the sender has no responsibility is irresponsible and might well be wrong. The reality is that courts have held the one State's laws can apply to someone in another State who does something which has an effect in the first State.

The concept is referred to as "long-arm jurisdiction." Whether that would be applied by a court in this sort of case is perhaps uncertain, but it is impossible to say categorically (unless the proper court has so ruled) that someone sending a high (or standard) capacity magazine into a State in which it's prohibited has no possible liability.

 

[mbogo]

Frank,

First of all, a magazine is not an inherently dangerous item, like fireworks, volatile chemicals, or flammable objects.

The laws in California refer to manufacture, importation, and possession within the state (if you read them differently, please explain why). An out-of-state seller would not be subject to any of those restrictions unless they set foot in California.

Under the definition at your link, it says "This concept was expanded by the Supreme Court in Int'l Shoe Co. v. Wash., 326 U.S. 310, 316 (U.S. 1945) where it held that in order to subject a defendant to a judgment in personam, due process required the defendant to have "certain minimum contacts" with the forum, and that such jurisdiction may not offend "traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice."

A single transaction would likely not meet the "certain minimum contacts" standard, and most certainly would offend "traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice."

If the laws said that it was illegal to "ship into" California, MAYBE they'd have an avenue toward prosecution of the seller, especially if they were in the habit of doing so. As the laws are written now, I think the seller in a one-time transaction would have nothing to fear.

mbogo

 

[Frank Ettin]

...The laws in California refer to manufacture, importation, and possession within the state (if you read them differently, please explain why)....

1. Be that as it may, under some circumstance an out-of-state seller or sender might be chargeable with aiding and abetting or conspiracy.
   
   
2. California law is really irrelevant since the OP is asking about New Jersey.

...A single transaction would likely not meet the "certain minimum contacts" standard,...

Actually the case law is clear that a single transaction is sufficient contact when the liability arises because of that transaction.

 

[mbogo]

1. We must agree to disagree on this point.

2. Of course, I meant New Jersey. My statement holds true for NJ.

Case law may refer to civil liability, not criminal liability.

mbogo

 

[ChaoSS]

Mbogo, it isn't in the law, it's in Court rulings, or at least one that I know of, specifically in regards to recording phone conversations. And yes, it is civil liability, but it isn't a stretch to go from there to criminal liability.

And if one state rules that way, I'd imagine others might as well. In short, if the laws ban importing the magazine, I'd imagine that mailing one into the state would be a violation, whether you live there or not.

 

[danez71]

The laws in California refer to manufacture, importation, and possession within the state (if you read them differently, please explain why). An out-of-state seller would not be subject to any of those restrictions unless they set foot in California.

The law say a little more than that but whatever.

Yea... riiiight.

There are reasons the there are NO legit businesses that sell assembled 11+ mags into CA.
One of them is probably because their lawyers told them not to.
Another one is probably because they're not stupid enough to.
A 3rd reason is probably because they don't get their legal advice from internet gun forums.

Please explain why all of those sellers specifically say they wont ship assembled 11+ mags into CA; only dis-assembled.


And, if you're so confident, you should start selling assembled 11+ mags into CA. There are plenty of people willing to buy them.

But somehow I don't think you will.

 

[mbogo]

danez71,

Companies do not sell 'contraband' items to residents of states with bans because it exposes them to civil action by those states. Companies are in business to make money, not spend it on lawyers.

I am happily retired, and don't need to start another business. If I did sell 11+ round magazines to folks in 'ban' states, I'd do so for cash and without a return address on the package. I might even use a disposable e-mail address, wear gloves, and 'launder' the money by running it through a change-making machine in another state.

The fact is, if someone in a 'ban' state wants magazines larger than 10-round capacity, they just have to drive to the nearest 'free' state and do so.

mbogo

 

[Oceanbob]

As a California resident who owns pre-ban normal capacity magazines I have legally bought repair kits over the years. Some I have bought at local gun shows, but most have been bought via the internet, out of State.

Recently the City of San Francisco (City Attorney) has filed a CIVIL Lawsuit against several of these out of State suppliers. The result of this action is the expense and time required to fight this lawsuit in Federal Court. These companies are having to spend money defending themselves.

A brief rundown on this legal action is here:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=812395

Be well
Bob

 

[danez71]

mbogo,

The OP didn't distinguish criminal vs civil as his concern.

Your 1st post in this thread was:

It doesn't matter. You are not subject to their laws unless you are physically in those states' borders.

mbogo

And now you say :

Companies do not sell 'contraband' items to residents of states with bans because it exposes them to civil action by those states. Companies are in business to make money, not spend it on lawyers.

So now you acknowledge that the out of state person is able to be charged with CA laws even though the person isn't/wasn't in CA.


As Oceanbob pointed out. San Fran file suits against some of those companies. The lawsuit points out the CA laws that San Fran thinks those companies broke. They filed suit in San Fran.


Again, the OP didn't specify that he was only concerned with criminal prosecution and not civil prosecution.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...I am happily retired, and don't need to start another business. If I did sell 11+ round magazines to folks in 'ban' states, I'd do so for cash and without a return address on the package. I might even use a disposable e-mail address, wear gloves, and 'launder' the money by running it through a change-making machine in another state...

In other words you'd take care to cover your tracks just as criminals do when they engage in illegal activities. But if you're so sure that (post 7):

...the sender has no liability...

and (post 9):

...An out-of-state seller would not be subject to any of those restrictions unless they set foot in California...

why would you bother?

...The fact is, if someone in a 'ban' state wants magazines larger than 10-round capacity, they just have to drive to the nearest 'free' state and do so.

But if he brings it back assembled to California he has committed the felony of importing a high capacity magazine. If he disassembles it for transporting but reassembles it in California, he has committed the felony of manufacturing a high capacity magazine.

I suggest you forebear from further suggesting that folks violate laws.

 

[Midwest]

The reality is that courts have held the one State's laws can apply to someone in another State who does something which has an effect in the first State.

The concept is referred to as "long-arm jurisdiction."

One of those examples is when New Jersey sends over NJ State Troopers to Pennsylvania to write down license plates of New Jersey cars parked at the fireworks stands in Pennsylvania. Then the NJ State Trooper (while still in Pennsylvania) contacts NJ State troopers on the NJ side with license plates and descriptions of the cars and then when the person crosses over the bridge back into New Jersey..the car gets pulled over and the person gets busted for bringing fireworks into NJ.


Cincinnati cops used to come over to Covington KY to take down license plates of people buying cigarettes on the KY side of the river (because they are cheaper because of less taxes) and then the person drives back across the river into Cincinnati...they would get busted.

 

[JRWhit]

Sounds like the answer is: It's not worth the time or hassle for what little margin you stand to make on a parts kit. Perhaps if you are planning on doing a good number of these transactions it would be best to contact the Attorney General for the state of NJ and copy any response given. If ever an issue came to be of these constantly re-interpenetrated laws you could produce a letter from the SAG stating the response to your inquiry.

 

[goon]

I wondered about ban states and high caps in the context of a move. Ultimately, I've decided that if I have to move to friendly territory across a "slave state," I'll just ship any offensive items to myself at my new address.

 

[Oceanbob]

it would be best to contact the Attorney General for the state of NJ and copy any response given. If ever an issue came to be of these constantly re-interpenetrated laws you could produce a letter from the SAG stating the response to your inquiry.

JRWhit you hit the nail on the head my friend.

That's exactly what happened back in 2005. The question was asked and the answer is here:

http://cdn.44mag.com/downloads/pdf/doj.pdf

No problem.

Be well
Bob

 

[mbogo]

Frank,

You are being either disingenuous or deceptive by not including the smiley at the end of the statement you quoted.

I did not promote the violation of any laws and unless you edit my posts, cannot cite where I did.

I was showing the pointlessness of ordering magazine repair kits online when you can buy assembled magazines so easily in another state and disassemble them for use as repair kits.

Seriously, I don't know how some of you can type while wringing your hands so much.

mbogo

 

[Frank Ettin]

Frank,

You are being either disingenuous or deceptive by not including the smiley at the end of the statement you quoted....

It is you who are being disingenuous and deceptive. You wrote (post 16):

...The fact is, if someone in a 'ban' state wants magazines larger than 10-round capacity, they just have to drive to the nearest 'free' state and do so...

That does not mean the same thing as (as you wrote in post 22):

...showing the pointlessness of ordering magazine repair kits online when you can buy assembled magazines so easily in another state and disassemble them for use as repair kits....

In post 16 you tried to show how if one wants a high capacity magazine (not a repair kit), he can get one.

Your words are there for all to read.

 

[mbogo]

No, you're just reading and parsing it in a way that suits your narrative.

mbogo

 

[Frank Ettin]

No, you're just reading it in a way that suits your narrative.

How each person reads your statement will be up to him.