California man arrested and charged for possessing JHPs and standard capacity magazines

[Deleted member 48331]

SF also has a separate city ban on mags that carry more than 10 rounds. There are a few exceptions but I wonder how that works with freedom week mags.

SEC. 619. PROHIBITION AGAINST POSSESSION OF LARGE CAPACITY MAGAZINES.
(c) Prohibition on Possession of Large Capacity Magazines.

(1) No person, corporation, or other entity in the City may possess a large capacity magazine, whether assembled or disassembled.

(2) Any person who, prior to the effective date of this chapter, was legally in possession of a large capacity magazine shall have 90 days from such effective date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution:

(A) Remove the large capacity magazine from the City;

(B) Surrender the large capacity magazine to the Police Department for destruction; or

(C) Sell or transfer the large capacity magazine lawfully in accordance with Penal Code § 12020.

Is... That a double law...? CA bans all those things. Did SF do it again?

 

[Deleted member 48331]

Agree with CadeH and I don’t think anyone caught what he was getting at. The armor piercing ammo charge is dead. CA’s AP law only covers handgun ammo and specifically excludes ammo made for rifles. Green tip was built for AR rifles. Treating the SBR as a handgun doesn’t save it because the ammo still isn’t handgun ammo.

The article says “arrested on suspicion of” AP ammo but the DA didn’t file it so the real charges are robbery, large cap mag (which will be eventually dropped if the mags are not date stamped like Magpul) concealed gun in the car and the SBR charge (he prob made an AR pistol).

So.. if you want to take photos of Trump and scout locations ahead of time go to town. Just don't be a retard rob a bank beforehand and flag yourself as a suspect.

What?! You can buy armor piercing rounds for a rifle, but, not a pistol? I thought it was banned for both.

 

[RustVendor]

Are you sure? I can't find info about that.

Google AI said this:

If you are thinking of a specific Second Amendment case. A well-known Ninth Circuit case on hollowpoints is United States v. Miller (1939) which is Supreme Court, or more recently, Wrenn v. District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit) or New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen (Supreme Court, 2022), which struck down NYC's "proper cause" requirement but did not specifically address a sale vs. possession distinction for hollowpoints in the manner described. The Ninth Circuit did uphold California's ban on the sale of large-capacity magazines in Duncan v. Becerra (2018), but that was about magazines, not hollowpoints.

AI sucks don't ever use it again

 

[RustVendor]

Are you sure? I can't find info about that.

Google AI said this:

If you are thinking of a specific Second Amendment case. A well-known Ninth Circuit case on hollowpoints is United States v. Miller (1939) which is Supreme Court, or more recently, Wrenn v. District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit) or New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen (Supreme Court, 2022), which struck down NYC's "proper cause" requirement but did not specifically address a sale vs. possession distinction for hollowpoints in the manner described. The Ninth Circuit did uphold California's ban on the sale of large-capacity magazines in Duncan v. Becerra (2018), but that was about magazines, not hollowpoints.

Jackson v SF https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2014/03/25/12-17803.pdf

I'm better than AI

 

[Deleted member 48331]

Jackson v SF https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2014/03/25/12-17803.pdf

I'm better than AI

Damn. Found the court records.

 

[Gawernator]

AI sucks don't ever use it again

I love using whisperX to transcribe my interviews with witnesses and defendants and then I use ChatGPT to generate a summary

 

[john_marsten_1873]

John, There's still a lot of speculating going on there.

The reporting and disclosure so far invites a lot of speculation, especially with the narrative that is being presented, explicitly or implicitly.

Me thinks that we're going to have to wait for some detail.

That goes without saying. However, [all that stuff about the information you choose to disclose and inviting speculation]

- Unregistered/illegally configured SBR - illegal
- Loaded concealed handgun - likely illegal (considering he was charged and there was no indication he had a permit)
- PC 32310(a) which requires evidence that he either imported or manufactured the large-capacity magazines - maybe illegal


Narrative A (fear-inducing):

• Heavily armed man ("gun nut")
• Body armor
• Armor piercing bulk ammunition
• Radios
• Disturbing notebooks
• Fake credentials
• Photographing Secret Service

Narrative B (charge-focused):

• Former Marine
• Contacted agents himself
• Falsely claimed to be on a State Department detail
• Found with an unlawful SBR, non-permitted concealed handgun, and large-capacity magazines
• Later charged with one federal firearms offense and several state weapons offenses plus robbery

 

[Gawernator]

Hope he likes his new cell mate Jerome for the next couple decades

 

[CadeH]

It doesn't matter if he bought the large-capacity magazines during "Freedom Week." Under PC 32310(b) they're still illegal to possess, even if acquired during "Freedom Week" or previously. Nothing has yet occurred to remove the criminal status of such possession from PC 32310(b). All that has occurred is that there is now an injunction prohibiting enforcement. But the suspect here was charged with PC 32310(a) which requires evidence that he either imported or manufactured the large-capacity magazines.

I get a lot of those "gangbanger arrested" Instagram posts local police put out where they brag about the guns they've recovered from search warrants or traffic stops. I have noticed that a lot of the time they list the charge in the description of the post as just PC 32310, but they say "possession of a large capacity magazine", even though there is an injunction prohibiting enforcement of the possession aspect of 32310. I've always wondered if they're charging them under (b) even though they're not supposed to, or if they're just saying possession to simplify it for their posts when they're really charging them for importing/buying under (a). I haven't bothered looking up someone they posted's court records to see what they're actually doing.

What?! You can buy armor piercing rounds for a rifle, but, not a pistol? I thought it was banned for both.

Yes, as long as it's primarily designed for a rifle or are shotgun shells they're legal in California. The feds are more strict, if it's used in handguns it can be banned as AP. In 2015 the the ATF tried to ban M855 due to AR pistols, but after public outcry and congressional opposition they were determined to be "suitable for sporting purposes" and allowed to continue as normal.

 

[Deleted member 48331]

I love using whisperX to transcribe my interviews with witnesses and defendants and then I use ChatGPT to generate a summary

what do you mean interviews with witnesses and defendants?

 

[Gawernator]

what do you mean interviews with witnesses and defendants?

I’m an investigator. I use AI a lot to help me these days, saves a lot of time

 

[Deleted member 48331]

I’m an investigator. I use AI a lot to help me these days, saves a lot of time

Damn. I wonder what stories you have to tell.

I know... I know... You can't confirm or deny...

 

[Gawernator]

Damn. I wonder what stories you have to tell.

I know... I know... You can't confirm or deny...

lol I have a few on here

 

[miles888]

Here’s a photo of the SBR the guy had.

Looks like an LWRC lower with a 10.5” barrel.

No maglock…

Good example of what not to do

 

[compshell]

Here’s a photo of the SBR the guy had.

Looks like an LWRC lower with a 10.5” barrel.

No maglock…

Good example of what not to do

Yeah if that’s a pistol lower, he really screwed up putting a stock and forward grip on it. Also there could be a mag lock that we can’t see- like the freedom fighter pin setup, but judging by the setup I would jump the conclusion as well and say he probably doesn’t have any CA compliant setup on it.

On a side note- anyone know why has the stock wrapped like that in 2 places?

 

[Deleted member 48331]

lol I have a few on here

Tag me, i want to read

 

[miles888]

Yeah if that’s a pistol lower, he really screwed up putting a stock and forward grip on it. Also there could be a mag lock that we can’t see- like the freedom fighter pin setup, but judging by the setup I would jump the conclusion as well and say he probably doesn’t have any CA compliant setup on it.

On a side note- anyone know why has the stock wrapped like that in 2 places?

Maybe a freedom fighter… but people normally run a rear pin like ar maglock kingpin. Never seen anyone run a mil spec pin.

It’s probably just an SBR. Rifle lower, non compliant… foolish

 

[Seeed]

Man with illegal weapons in home, car arrested at Trump golf club in California

The 38-year-old man, who had been under investigation for robbery, was at the Trump National Golf Course in the Los Angeles area days before Trump’s visit, officials said.

www.nbcnews.com

He was doing some other criminal stuff but wild that Rancho Palos Verdes prohibits JHPs.

They found armor piercing bullets, doesn't mean they're referring to the JHPs.

 

[CAshooter]

https://ktla.com/news/california/chp-road-rage-suspect-illegal-guns/

Just saw this article today. Posted yesterday around noon…..

 

[lactoast]

A follow-up, for those who are interested. Seems the dude was off his rocker, as you may have already gathered from the first few articles:

Los Angeles County Judge John Lonergan Jr. sent Jeanine John Taele, 38, to a mental health court in Hollywood based on statements he made in a pretrial evaluation indicating he wasn’t mentally fit to stand trial. In the evaluation, Taele falsely insisted he had been a State Department official for 14 years.

As for what was relevant to our thread:

Taele was charged with several felonies, including possession of a short-barreled rifle or shotgun and receiving a large-capacity magazine. He was also charged with carrying a concealed firearm in a vehicle, a misdemeanor.