Shipping Gun Parts/mag Parts To Ca?

[ZoomZoom]

Can I ship a barrel/slide to CA [private party not FFL]?

How bout some hi-cap mags for a para if disassembled and going as "parts"? [same person]

The stuff need to go out on the 4th if it's legal.

Thanks in advance.

[D.Hayden]

Barrel/slide, sure no problem. We can buy those from all the normal sources..

Mags... that's a little dicey.. someone else can answer that..

Edited December 5, 2006 by BerKim

[ParaJoe]

PM Sent.

[warpspeed]

I would not ship a complete magazine that had the capcity to hold more than 10 rounds to CA under any circumstances. Period.

[Scooter]

No law against gun parts except for registered parts.

Can't ship an assembled hicap mag. You can ship mag parts for an entire mag in pieces in the same box. It is legal per CA DOJ. If it makes you feel better, send the mag parts in separate shipments. CA law is still like the old AW ban on mags. You can buy replacement parts to fix an existing mag. You just can't build new ones.

[bountyhunter]

No law against gun parts except for registered parts.

Can't ship an assembled hicap mag. You can ship mag parts for an entire mag in pieces in the same box. It is legal per CA DOJ. If it makes you feel better, send the mag parts in separate shipments. CA law is still like the old AW ban on mags. You can buy replacement parts to fix an existing mag. You just can't build new ones.

Which is why it is only legal to ship high-cap tubes into the state to replace ones which are already here and are "unserviceable".

If the person you are shipping them to ends up in possession of more operational high caps than he had prior to the shipment arriving, you are violating the Kali ban.

Edited December 5, 2006 by bountyhunter

[George]

If the person you are shipping them to ends up in possession of more operational high caps than he had prior to the shipment arriving, you are violating the Kali ban.

Correctamundo!

Ship only the tubes and ONLY if they are to replace de-activated, or damaged tubes aleady in legal possesion here PERIOD

[ZoomZoom]

So how do I know that the guy in CA telling me he replacing damaged mags with my tubes is telling the truth? If he's not who's breaking the law him or me?

I held the shippment till I get this figured out.

[George]

So how do I know that the guy in CA telling me he replacing damaged mags with my tubes is telling the truth? If he's not who's breaking the law him or me?

There's the rub, you don't. If he breaks the law and gets caught and he tells where he got them, then you are in the soup too. I doubt it, but the chance is there.

[ipscbob]

Woa! Lets not go overboard here. If you ONLY ship him parts you are NOT guilty of breaking a law regardless of what he does with them later. If you are concerned called the California DOJ and ask. You will get the same answer from them......

[George]

I thought you could be prosecuted for "knowingly" selling parts intended to create "new" hi-caps as opposed to replacing worn parts. I guess that is not so.

[ChuckS]

Woa! Lets not go overboard here. If you ONLY ship him parts you are NOT guilty of breaking a law regardless of what he does with them later. If you are concerned called the California DOJ and ask. You will get the same answer from them......

Thanks for tempering this. The laws are on line at :

http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/index.html

Later,

Chuck

[ZoomZoom]

Woa! Lets not go overboard here. If you ONLY ship him parts you are NOT guilty of breaking a law regardless of what he does with them later. If you are concerned called the California DOJ and ask. You will get the same answer from them......

Thanks for tempering this. The laws are on line at :

http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/index.html

Later,

Chuck

Thanks for the info. I couldn't track down the law regarding hi-cap mag or parts. Would you know in what section of the CA firearms laws summary booklet I can find that informaton?

Thanks

A

[ChuckS]

That link has the firearms laws off of the main page. That's the point: There are no laws about parts! People keep making that stuff up! The laws say you can not import or manufacture "high capacity ammunition feeding devices". Look around, it's there. And if it is not there, there is no law prohibiting it.

Later,

Chuck

PS: I am not a lawyer and you may wind up married to the barn boss at San Quentin if you follow my advice!

Edited December 6, 2006 by ChuckS

[George]

y ou can not import or manufacture "high capacity ammunition feeding devices"

Thats the part I interpreted as being worse than it really is. After re-reading it all, I see nothing specifically ;-/

Here is a PDF copy of SB 23.

sb_23.pdf

[ipscbob]

I dont have time to dig it up but there is a section that specifically allows you to purchase parts as replacements for pre-existing magazines.

[bountyhunter]

I thought you could be prosecuted for "knowingly" selling parts intended to create "new" hi-caps as opposed to replacing worn parts. I guess that is not so.

It is so. It's also why the manufacturers generally refuse to ship high-cap tunbes to Kali.

That link has the firearms laws off of the main page. That's the point: There are no laws about parts! People keep making that stuff up!

The laws say you can not import or manufacture "high capacity ammunition feeding devices"

. Look around, it's there. And if it is not there, there is no law prohibiting it.

Later,

Chuck

PS: I am not a lawyer and you may wind up married to the barn boss at San Quentin if you follow my advice!

We all agree on that: the problem is, it is also a crime to help somebody in the commission of a crime. It is not a stretch to figure out what a person intends to do with a high cap mag tube, or to understand the chances are reasonably good he is building a magazine because he can't buy one here.

[Scooter]

This is the Q&A someone got from the DOJ.

Q1: Can you import newly manufactured parts to repair a legally obtained hi-cap magazine?

A1: Yes.

Q2: Are there any restrictions on which parts can and cannot be imported?

A2: No.

Q3: Can you import all the parts of a single hi-cap magazine at once, provided they are unassembled?

A3: Yes.

Q4: Can a California resident travel to another state, purchase a hi-cap magazine in that state, dissassemble it and ship the required replacement parts back to themselves in California?

A4: Penal Code section 12020(a)(2) makes it illegal to import a large capacity magazine into the state of California. If you traveled to another state in order to import a large capacity magazine, you would be guilty of a felony, even if you disassembled the large capacity magazine before returning to California. If you disassembled the large capacity magazine with the intent to use it only as repair parts, you could lawfully bring the parts in to California. In either case, you would test the limits of the law, and be at risk of criminal prosecution.

Q5: Can you replace the magazine body with one marked "For Law Enforcement Only"?

A5: While theoretically you could use such a part to repair a lawfully owned large capacity magazine, most dealers would be unlikely to sell you such a magazine body, unless you were a law enforcement officer.

Q6: Is there any limitation to the number of parts you can replace in a legally obtained hi-cap magazine? (Scenario: if on successive days I replace each individual part of a legally obtained hi-cap magazine, am I guilty of assembling a new hi-cap magazine once the final part is replaced?)

A6: Whether the scenario you describe constitutes repairing or manufacturing a large capacity magazine depends upon the legal opinion of the prosecutor in the jurisdiction where the acts occur. There are 58 district attorneys in California's 58 counties. They could elect to prosecute you for a felony (Penal Code 12280(a)(2)), if they believed that you were manufacturing a large capacity magazine.

Q7: If the magazine body is replaced with one clearly manufactured after 2000 is there any burden of proof upon a California resident that they did in fact replace a worn/obsolete part and did not illegally purchase/import a new hi-cap magazine.

A7: A California resident who repairs a large capacity magazine that was owned before January 1, 2000 does not have any "burden of proof" that the magazine was repaired, rather than replaced with a new magazine. However, it would be prudent in such a case to keep records documenting the purchase of the part necessary for the repair in order to demonstrate that the large capacity magazine was repaired, not replaced.

Q8: Can you use parts designed for a 10-round magazine to repair a legally obtained hi-cap magazine?

A8: If parts designed for a 10-round magazine are interchangeable with parts of a legally obtained large capacity magazine, there is no legal barrier to using them.

Q9: Can you have enough spare parts to assemble a new hi-cap magazine provided they are unassembled and intended for use as replacement parts?

A9: Whether the scenario you describe constitutes posession of magazine parts with the intent to manufacture or with the intent to repair a large capacity magazine depends upon the legal opinion of the prosecutor in the jurisdiction where the acts occur. You could be charged with a felony (Penal Code 12280(a)(2)), if a prosecutor believed that you were manufacturing a large capacity magazine.

I hope that this information was helpful. Please feel free to contact me again if you have any additional questions.

Sincerely,

Alison Merrilees

Deputy Attorney General

Firearms Division

For Bill Lockyer

Attorney General

[George]

Given all this, I guess I will continue to stand my ground about being careful of getting caught in the "intent to manufacture" net, which evidently CAN snare the supplier in certain situations that seem to be open to interpretation ;-/

[Scooter]

The intent to manufacture lies with the buyer. DA will go after the buyer not the seller since the seller did not do anything wrong in selling parts. This is the exact same situation with the OLL. All the DOJ can do is give out threats the DA might go after you. Yet look how many have made its way in.

[bountyhunter]

The intent to manufacture lies with the buyer. DA will go after the buyer not the seller since the seller did not do anything wrong in selling parts.

The law simply does not work this way. If a person of common reason could forsee something as being the case, that person may not claim refuge by saying:

"Well.... I had no way of knowing when I shipped him a box of parts which could be used to make a high-cap mag that he would actually use them to BUILD a high-cap mag..."

OR:

"Well..... of course I assumed that when I shipped him all the parts to build a high-cap mag he must have been replacing one which somehow died, since nobody ever would think he might actually want to break the law and build one from scratch."

It is likely true the CaDOJ is not pursuing many of these.... and I used to call them and chat regularly a while back. They told me that the problem is they only have a tiny fraction of the manpower it would take to do enforcement. They had a list of dealers they knew were violating the law by importing non-list guns and selling them, as well as dealers doing PPT's from persons out of state for non-list guns.

The bottom line is, they have to prioritize. They might never bother to look at somebody who shipped a few hi-caps or parts to build them into kali.

Or, they might.

Given all this, I guess I will continue to stand my ground about being careful of getting caught in the "intent to manufacture" net, which evidently CAN snare the supplier in certain situations that seem to be open to interpretation ;-/

It certainly can, which is why no major gun parts manufacturer that I know of ships high-cap tubes to kali unless it is to LE. If they do, I would think they would want you to send the old tube in to verify it is replacement not manufacture (which would cover their backside). I can not imagine any manufacturer in their right mind who would assume this legal risk without it.

Edited December 8, 2006 by bountyhunter

[Religious Shooter]

I don't know about all this stuff. During the Crime Bill years... what is the difference between then and now?

Are you telling us that the way you remember it all there were no mag-tubes being sold during the Crime Bill years?

The whole crux of your argument stems from believeing that the person you sell the part to will commit a crime by creating a new magazine instead of using the said part to refurbish a magazine.

That's crazy.

How did all those tubes sell during the Crime Bill years if you reasoning and interpretation is correct?

In fact how can we even buy guns? A person can 1) either buy a gun and commit crimes with it or 2) they can buy the gun and use it for lawful purposes. Your whole argument assumes that the worse will happen.

???????

[Nik Habicht]

The whole crux of your argument stems from believeing that the person you sell the part to will commit a crime by creating a new magazine instead of using the said part to refurbish a magazine.

In fact how can we even buy guns? A person can 1) either buy a gun and commit crimes with it or 2) they can buy the gun and use it for lawful purposes. Your whole argument assumes that the worse will happen.

???????

To the first paragraph: There's a huge difference between selling one part to repair a damaged magazine, and to selling all of the components needed to assemble a magazine. The concept of a reasonable person being able to foresee their actions appears all over the law.....

To the second: Apples and oranges. Guns are legal to buy, certain magazines are not legal to buy in certain states.....

[Religious Shooter]

The thread may have started with a fully disassembled magazine.

What I am replying about is this:

It certainly can, which is why no major gun parts manufacturer that I know of ships high-cap tubes to kali unless it is to LE. If they do, I would think they would want you to send the old tube in to verify it is replacement not manufacture (which would cover their backside). I can not imagine any manufacturer in their right mind who would assume this legal risk without it.

It is so. It's also why the manufacturers generally refuse to ship high-cap tunbes to Kali.

We all agree on that: the problem is, it is also a crime to help somebody in the commission of a crime. It is not a stretch to figure out what a person intends to do with a high cap mag tube, or to understand the chances are reasonably good he is building a magazine because he can't buy one here.

Bountyhunter is writing that mag tubes can't be sent to California.

To the second: Apples and oranges. Guns are legal to buy, certain magazines are not legal to buy in certain states.....

We aren't talking about complete magazines. The argument is about parts.

Bountyhunter appears to be saying that you shouldn't be able to buy a mag tube because it can be assembled into a high cap magazine. His justification is that because there is a probability of it the crime happening.

If his reasoning is correct then I guess there wasn't a lot of tubes bought when the Crime Bill was in effect?

[Nik Habicht]

The thread may have started with a fully disassembled magazine.

What I am replying about is this:

It certainly can, which is why no major gun parts manufacturer that I know of ships high-cap tubes to kali unless it is to LE. If they do, I would think they would want you to send the old tube in to verify it is replacement not manufacture (which would cover their backside). I can not imagine any manufacturer in their right mind who would assume this legal risk without it.

It is so. It's also why the manufacturers generally refuse to ship high-cap tunbes to Kali.

We all agree on that: the problem is, it is also a crime to help somebody in the commission of a crime. It is not a stretch to figure out what a person intends to do with a high cap mag tube, or to understand the chances are reasonably good he is building a magazine because he can't buy one here.

Bountyhunter is writing that mag tubes can't be sent to California.

To the second: Apples and oranges. Guns are legal to buy, certain magazines are not legal to buy in certain states.....

We aren't talking about complete magazines. The argument is about parts.

Bountyhunter appears to be saying that you shouldn't be able to buy a mag tube because it can be assembled into a high cap magazine. His justification is that because there is a probability of it the crime happening.

If his reasoning is correct then I guess there wasn't a lot of tubes bought when the Crime Bill was in effect?

Yep, that's exactly how the thread started --- with disassembled, complete mags going into CA, as replacement/repair parts. As to the legality of purchasing guns vs. purchasing magazine parts --- guns, at least the ones on the DOJ list are legal to buy in CA. Magazines, exceeding ten rounds are not. (At least that's my understanding of the law.) Anyone selling all components of a magazine capable of holding more than ten rounds might face prosecution by the state --- at least that's what the AG's lawyer alludes to in the questionaire above. This should provide some insight into how lawyers might interpret the laws of CA:

Q4: Can a California resident travel to another state, purchase a hi-cap magazine in that state, dissassemble it and ship the required replacement parts back to themselves in California?

A4: Penal Code section 12020(a)(2) makes it illegal to import a large capacity magazine into the state of California. If you traveled to another state in order to import a large capacity magazine, you would be guilty of a felony, even if you disassembled the large capacity magazine before returning to California. If you disassembled the large capacity magazine with the intent to use it only as repair parts, you could lawfully bring the parts in to California. In either case, you would test the limits of the law, and be at risk of criminal prosecution.

Q5: Can you replace the magazine body with one marked "For Law Enforcement Only"?

A5: While theoretically you could use such a part to repair a lawfully owned large capacity magazine, most dealers would be unlikely to sell you such a magazine body, unless you were a law enforcement officer.

Q6: Is there any limitation to the number of parts you can replace in a legally obtained hi-cap magazine? (Scenario: if on successive days I replace each individual part of a legally obtained hi-cap magazine, am I guilty of assembling a new hi-cap magazine once the final part is replaced?)

A6: Whether the scenario you describe constitutes repairing or manufacturing a large capacity magazine depends upon the legal opinion of the prosecutor in the jurisdiction where the acts occur. There are 58 district attorneys in California's 58 counties. They could elect to prosecute you for a felony (Penal Code 12280(a)(2)), if they believed that you were manufacturing a large capacity magazine.

Q7: If the magazine body is replaced with one clearly manufactured after 2000 is there any burden of proof upon a California resident that they did in fact replace a worn/obsolete part and did not illegally purchase/import a new hi-cap magazine.

A7: A California resident who repairs a large capacity magazine that was owned before January 1, 2000 does not have any "burden of proof" that the magazine was repaired, rather than replaced with a new magazine. However, it would be prudent in such a case to keep records documenting the purchase of the part necessary for the repair in order to demonstrate that the large capacity magazine was repaired, not replaced.

Q9: Can you have enough spare parts to assemble a new hi-cap magazine provided they are unassembled and intended for use as replacement parts?

A9: Whether the scenario you describe constitutes posession of magazine parts with the intent to manufacture or with the intent to repair a large capacity magazine depends upon the legal opinion of the prosecutor in the jurisdiction where the acts occur. You could be charged with a felony (Penal Code 12280(a)(2)), if a prosecutor believed that you were manufacturing a large capacity magazine.

This is one of those areas, where it would be prudent to consult a criminal lawyer before proceeding ---- it's amazing how much trouble one can fend off by doing that....