- Messages
- 433
And the judge will pop the floor plate, pull out the limiter, reassemble, and put many more rounds in the magazine and off to prison you go.
Question What is consider acceptable when using mag blocks?
- Thread starter cheapie408
- Start date
NapalmCheese
Active member
- Messages
- 111
And the judge will have committed a crime.
Will they be charged? No. Will you get F-ed? Sure. But the logic is there, it sure would be nice if it was consistent.
- Messages
- 433
You are being silly. The law states permanent. If all they have to do is pop the floor plate to show it is not permanent, you are the criminal. Your magazine was not permanent. Try again. I mean I kind of already knew you had no clue what you were talking about when you thought a lawyer would walk up to the judge and ask them to put 11 rounds in a magazine. That is not what lawyers ask judges to do.
- Messages
- 1,166
- Classified ads
- 2
The state wants the magazine "permanently" altered to 10 rounds.
This is generally accepted to be epoxy or a rivet that keeps you from being able to take the magazine apart and remove the block.
It's not acceptable to simply add a block IF you can remove the block just as easily.
cheapie408
Member
- Messages
- 35
I've seen videos where the epoxy the entire base to the block. As some have pointed out this mix it impossible to service it.
If I just dropped epoxy into the hole on the bottom of the base is that technically permanent enough?
This would mean I would have to use a punch to punch down on the hole to break it free or drill it out if I need to service the magazine
- Messages
- 1,166
- Classified ads
- 2
"ability to service" is not a factor considered in the law nor a legal defense.
As long as a BOF goon whose job it is to defeat your "permanent" modification can not get the baseplate off in a fully equipped testing laboratory without destroying the magazine, you should be good.
So just use that as your standard to work to.
A blind rivet is probably the safest.
cheapie408
Member
- Messages
- 35
Ive seen those but have yet to attempt to design one yet. The base plate limiter is much easier for me to design and print. I'll do some investigation
- Messages
- 1,166
- Classified ads
- 2
If you can disassemble your magazine without destroying it and put in a different follower and then reassemble the magazine such that the magazine will hold more than 10 rounds, your magazine is not "permanently modified" per the law.
Michael the Beloved
Member
- Messages
- 38
The purpose of the law was to stop retail sale, and reduce private party sale of these types of magazines. Through the threat of prosecution, they wanted folks to stop using them, folks who had them to convert them… permanently. But after 26 years of experience, here in LA county, I’ve never seen someone prosecuted solely for possessing these magazines. It was always prohibited persons, in addition to the more serious felony charge, got hit with some minuscule misdemeanor charge of possessing some of these magazines… only to have them dismissed when the more serious felony charge was pled out. Of course no one here wants to be the test case, the reality is, no one gets prosecuted for these possession crimes, not even by city attorneys who survived by prosecuting solely misdemeanors. More importantly, you don’t see the police doing stings at gun ranges or stop folks just to fish (via consensual encounters) to see if they have these types of magazines. The state has put the fear into folks that they need to go around with receipts that their mags were purchased during a legit period of time. Which the burden is not on you to prove they were lawfully possessed, the burden is always beyond a reasonable doubt by the state to prove they’re not lawfully possessed.
cheapie408
Member
- Messages
- 35
Yah I definitely don't want to be a test case for sure. When I was living there, I had standard capacity magazines from FW. When I moved, I left all my magazine there and PPT all the CA roster stuff. But after living in a free state for so long and now having to relearn the CA laws again when I move back, I intend on blocking even those from FW as I'm considered a "new residence" now, as they may use my "new residence" against me on the arguement of FW mags. I feel like some of the laws are written so convoluted to give them loop holes to ding us.
- Messages
- 1,166
- Classified ads
- 2
Freedom week no longer matters.
The statute of limitation on manufacturing or importing of large capacity magazines is 3 years.
Any large capacity mag you have had in CA more than 3 years is not a chargeable offense.
It's up the the state to prove that you didn't have it or make it less than 3 years ago.
So be smart and don't have any mags with production dates marked on them that are newer than 4-5 years.
Last edited:
NapalmCheese
Active member
- Messages
- 111
Show me where permanent is defined in the context of low/high capacity magazines?
If you put in a roll pin, it can be punched/drilled out. If you epoxy the floor plate you can saw/cut/use heat to undo it. What if someone were to epoxy and fiberglass the entire bottom of the magazine so you can't remove the floor place? Someone could just cut off the bottom, remove the limiter, and glue the bottom back on...
Show me where anyone states, unequivocally, what "permanent" means in this context? Until then you're guessing, just like me.
We have some examples from several years ago of what is likely to be considered permanent; but there is no definition for it in this context.
So go ahead and proselytize whatever it is you sell your customers, but you are no more or less right than me.
I would advise people to own and use factory 10 rounders with 10 round mag bodies and just avoid the whole problem altogether. YMMV with pistol mags and however they are blocked from the factory.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 433
You said a blocked magazine. If all it has is a block, that is not permanent. Especially when someone simply removes the floor plate, removes the block without tools, reassembles the magazine, and puts more than ten rounds in it.
If by blocked you meant to include epoxied, pinned, blind pinned, or riveted, then yeah, you are right. We are not exactly sure what permanent is. There are some hints to it. However, that in my mind is not a blocked magazine, but a permanently altered magazine.
I agree own ten rounders and would add or own your own Freedom Week magazines. Much, much cleaner.
NapalmCheese
Active member
- Messages
- 111
Why isn't a magazine with just a block in it permanent? What legal precedent do you have to say it's not a permanently altered magazine?
All we have is some informal advice from a few years ago that suggested epoxied or riveted mags are probably permanent, but maybe not the only permanent solution.
If your argument is that a magazine with only a block isn't permanently altered because you can take off the base plate, remove the block, and have a LCM; I would argue that a magazine that's limited to 10 rounds just because there's a pop rivet limiting travel of the follower is even less permanent than a mag block. With a block you have to disassemble the mag and create a new LCM; maybe that's converting it, maybe it's not. With the pop rivet you just drill the rivet and convert your 10 rounder into an LCM with some FOD in the bottom of it, no disassembly required. Is a pop rivet somehow more permanent just because you had to use a power tool, even if it was actually easier and faster to convert than disassembling the magazine?
I have a factory 10 round beretta 92 mag that is limited to 10 rounds because the sides of the mag body have an extra fold that essentially makes them single stack. That's a permanent 10 round magazine right? But 5 minutes with a dremel with a cut off wheel would take care of that without even disassembling the magazine.
The simple fact is we don't know what exactly permanent means in this context and the only safe path is 10 round mag bodies. Anything else is a guess based on Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt, and our risk tolerance.
It's no different than trying to argue what 'locked' means. Is something only locked if it requires a certain amount of effort to bypass? Or is it locked when you put a lock on it, no matter the quality or size of the lock? Would a reasonable person consider your storage shed locked if you use a dollar store Hello Kitty lock on it? Would a reasonable person consider your magazine a 10 rounder if you can't put more than 10 rounds in it? I guess it depends on 'reasonable'.
Michael the Beloved
Member
- Messages
- 38
To my knowledge, no one throughout the state of California, has ever been prosecuted for possessing a blocked mag, that was not permanently blocked. The intended purpose of the law is to make people not wanna own them anymore. The only persons, throughout my career, that I saw being charged with illegally possessing a magazine containing over 10 rounds, were individuals involved in criminal street gangs, who also had more serious charges of felon in possession of a firearm, being involved in the drug trade, or more serious violent offenses. So the magazine charge was just thrown in there for fun, and gets dismissed when the perp pleads to a prison disposition.
- Messages
- 433
You can argue against the pop rivet. Go for it. Nothing about a magazine block that is not permanently altered is permanent. It can go back and forth which is not the definition of permanent.
- Messages
- 1,166
- Classified ads
- 2
NapalmCheese
Active member
- Messages
- 111
Is a pop rivet permanent?
- Messages
- 433
As you already stated, it is debatable. The problem with permanent is many, many things are not as permanent as the government claims they are.