Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967

Question on Modifying Magazines...

Recommended Posts

HUH? Today IS Columbus Day :lol: I'm sure you heard of him :P:D

As I read it, 10 and over are a NO-NO.

Allie, a BB gun is NOT a firearm(yet :unsure: ) :lol:

LG

Maybe the Cali politicals think a BB gun is a firearm. They wouldn't know...

 

GG

Share this post


Link to post

Just got off the phone with Justin at the CA. DOJ/Firearms unit.

He states AB 48, ONLY deals with the hi-cap rebuild kits. Nut'n else.

If you want to confirm this, then call 1 916 227 7527.

LG

Share this post


Link to post

FUD Alert

The provision in AB 48 that prohibits posession of >10 rd mags was only to be enacted if another bill was signed into law. Since that bill was never passed, the ONLY provision of AB 48 that is now law pertains to Parts kits/converion kits/ rebuild kits.

Share this post


Link to post

Ooooohhhhh..... this stuff is SO confusing.... :wacko: :wacko: :wacko:

 

At any rate, I did find an answer to my original query - evidently the M1 Carbine magazine is fairly easy to disassemble, which would make it easy to modify either with a block or other...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zhgukWs4Eo

Share this post


Link to post

HC, as per my talk with DOJ this a.m. Did you read my last posting?

Yours/mine, everydangbodies(in PRK)pre-ban hi-caps are GTG.

As per P.C. section 16740, our tube feed rifles are untouched. AB 48 ONLY deals with the 'kits' to 're-built' hi-cap DETACHABLE mags.

LG

Share this post


Link to post

Got it. Section 3 of the bill states that section 1.5 (the section that bans high capacity magazines) ONLY becomes operative if both this bill and SB 396 are enacted. Since SB 396 failed in the Assembly, Section 1.5 is non-operative.

 

See, told ya California legislators have funny ways of saying 'never mind'.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, Thanks, Lumpy and Frisco.

 

Purty danged confusing, though. Sheesh! :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post

16740.

As used in this part, “large-capacity magazine” means any ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds, but shall not be construed to include any of the following:

( a ) A feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it cannot accommodate more than 10 rounds.

( b ) A .22 caliber tube ammunition feeding device.

( c ) A tubular magazine that is contained in a lever-action firearm.

That is correct.... and the entrie existing section refers to 'Removable' magazine so any permanently affixed magazine is O.K.

 

Trouble is they added wording linking it to another bill that never made it out of committee so some of the provisiions of this bill will not apply. Trouble is I am sure they will insist it means you can't have any large capacity mags at all. We will just hafta wait to see what the courts decide on this..... meanwhile ya better 'bury' your mags or send them to a friend out of state for a vacation...

 

JJJ-D

:ph34r::ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post

Got it. Section 3 of the bill states that section 1.5 (the section that bans high capacity magazines) ONLY becomes operative if both this bill and SB 396 are enacted. Since SB 396 failed in the Assembly, Section 1.5 is non-operative.

 

See, told ya California legislators have funny ways of saying 'never mind'.

That's what I think.... i'm just waiting for one of those knuckleheads to try to say it's still law.... We will be fightin' this one for awhile. I think Brown signed it because it makes him look good in fellow Dem's eyes but it don't do nothing...

 

What this bill DOES do is outlaw the conversion/ repair kits for large capacity mags, so if ya want these kits ya better buy'em before January 1, 2014! Bet there will b a run on these at the gun shows!

 

JJJ-D

:ph34r::ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.