Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Benelli Forums
Unobtanium

Design Concepts Ti M4S90 charging handle!

Recommended Posts

I understand they were not built then. But there is no law in california saying when I rebuild my 30 round pre-ban mags that I cant use a Pmag body, spring, follower or what ever. So what 99% of us californians that do know the law just rebuild our mag with Pmag parts.

 

I think that one of us is confused then, because it sounds to me like you are assembling a magazine and not re'building it.

 

A re-build involves the same (pre-ban) mag-body. An assembly involves all-new parts, which is what you are telling me you are doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand they were not built then. But there is no law in california saying when I rebuild my 30 round pre-ban mags that I cant use a Pmag body, spring, follower or what ever. So what 99% of us californians that do know the law just rebuild our mag with Pmag parts.

 

I beleive this is true for NY as well, and it's something I've been looking into ...

 

44Mag offers to send any mag disassembled as a parts rebuild kit ...

 

http://www.44mag.com/prodinfo.asp?number=RK

 

I'm pretty sure so long as you legally have old preban mags, you can replace them with new "rebuild kits".

 

It's retarded, but a nice loophole that potentially allows us to get new pmags :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I beleive this is true for NY as well, and it's something I've been looking into ...

 

44Mag offers to send any mag disassembled as a parts rebuild kit ...

 

http://www.44mag.com/prodinfo.asp?number=RK

 

I'm pretty sure so long as you legally have old preban mags, you can replace them with new "rebuild kits".

 

It's retarded, but a nice loophole that potentially allows us to get new pmags :)

Very nice. Good to be wrong!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand they were not built then. But there is no law in california saying when I rebuild my 30 round pre-ban mags that I cant use a Pmag body, spring, follower or what ever. So what 99% of us californians that do know the law just rebuild our mag with Pmag parts.

 

Ahhhh, another interpetation of the law that is self serving.

 

If you are not covered by one of the exemptions (see some of them below) ...

  • If you did not possess a large-capacity magazine in California before January 1, 2000, you may not have it now
  • If the gun (and its matching magazines) did not exist before January 1, 2000, you shouldn't have large-capacity magazines for it now

    (e.g. Springfield XD, first marketed in 2002 [as distinct from the 1999 HS2000]. You shouldn't be prosecuted for possession/use, but the timing can't be explained
    eek.gif
     

    A contrary example: a legally possessed in California pre-1994 Para-Ordnance magazine may fit a post-2000 Para pistol - the
    gun
    didn't exist before 2000, but a
    magazine
    that fits the gun did -- This is a gray area, you
    may
    have this one - no logical contradiction.)


  • No one in or out of California may transfer a large-capacity magazine to a non-LEO California resident

The relevant Penal Code is 12020(a)(2)

 

Prohibited actions:

 

  • manufacture or cause to be manufactured
  • import into the state
  • keep for sale
  • offer or expose for sale
  • give
  • lend

Note that it is not prohibited to

  • own a large-capacity magazine
  • possess a large-capacity magazine
  • use a large-capacity magazine, in whatever gun*
  • repair a legally possessed large-capacity magazine
    (and, necessarily, to acquire the parts to make the repair --
    remember it only makes sense to buy parts kits for existing
    legally-possessed large-capacity magazines)

(* Old magazine, new-ish magazine, old gun, new gun - all irrelevant; remember also the 10-round limit on fixed magazine OLL, a different law.)

 

 

Large-capacity magazines manufactured during the now-defunct Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device ban of 1994-2004 were marked 'Law Enforcement Only'. There are reasons one might legally have possessed them in California before 2000, but it is also legal to have the magazine bodies as repair parts for your other magazines.

 

There are exceptions in 12020(b), (b)(19)-(32) notably

(23) The importation of a large-capacity magazine by a person who

lawfully possessed the large-capacity magazine in the state prior to

January 1, 2000, lawfully took it out of the state, and is returning

to the state with the large-capacity magazine previously lawfully

possessed in the state.

(b)(19) exempts LE agencies

(b)(20) exempts LEOs

(b)(21) exempts CA-licensed FFLs

(b)(22) exempts loans so long as the lender stays nearby

(b)(27), (b)(28) and (b)(29) exempt "entities that operate armored vehicle businesses" who buy large-capacity magazines, lend them to their employees or receive them back

 

 

 

The crux of this is INTENT and common sense, replacing a magazine body with a PMag body will probably not fly as a repair...

 

Mg

Edited by Mike Grasso

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I beleive this is true for NY as well, and it's something I've been looking into ...

 

44Mag offers to send any mag disassembled as a parts rebuild kit ...

 

http://www.44mag.com/prodinfo.asp?number=RK

 

I'm pretty sure so long as you legally have old preban mags, you can replace them with new "rebuild kits".

 

It's retarded, but a nice loophole that potentially allows us to get new pmags :)

you hit the nail on the head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ahhhh, another interpetation of the law that is self serving.

 

 

If you are not covered by one of the exemptions (see some of them below) ...

  • If you did not possess a large-capacity magazine in California before January 1, 2000, you may not have it now
  • If the gun (and its matching magazines) did not exist before January 1, 2000, you shouldn't have large-capacity magazines for it now

    (e.g. Springfield XD, first marketed in 2002 [as distinct from the 1999 HS2000]. You shouldn't be prosecuted for possession/use, but the timing can't be explained
    eek.gif
     

    A contrary example: a legally possessed in California pre-1994 Para-Ordnance magazine may fit a post-2000 Para pistol - the
    gun
    didn't exist before 2000, but a
    magazine
    that fits the gun did -- This is a gray area, you
    may
    have this one - no logical contradiction.)


  • No one in or out of California may transfer a large-capacity magazine to a non-LEO California resident

The relevant Penal Code is 12020(a)(2)

 

Prohibited actions:

 

  • manufacture or cause to be manufactured
  • import into the state
  • keep for sale
  • offer or expose for sale
  • give
  • lend

Note that it is not prohibited to

  • own a large-capacity magazine
  • possess a large-capacity magazine
  • use a large-capacity magazine, in whatever gun*
  • repair a legally possessed large-capacity magazine
    (and, necessarily, to acquire the parts to make the repair --
    remember it only makes sense to buy parts kits for existing
    legally-possessed large-capacity magazines)

(* Old magazine, new-ish magazine, old gun, new gun - all irrelevant; remember also the 10-round limit on fixed magazine OLL, a different law.)

 

 

Large-capacity magazines manufactured during the now-defunct Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device ban of 1994-2004 were marked 'Law Enforcement Only'. There are reasons one might legally have possessed them in California before 2000, but it is also legal to have the magazine bodies as repair parts for your other magazines.

 

There are exceptions in 12020(b), (b)(19)-(32) notably

(23) The importation of a large-capacity magazine by a person who

lawfully possessed the large-capacity magazine in the state prior to

January 1, 2000, lawfully took it out of the state, and is returning

to the state with the large-capacity magazine previously lawfully

possessed in the state.

(b)(19) exempts LE agencies

(b)(20) exempts LEOs

(b)(21) exempts CA-licensed FFLs

(b)(22) exempts loans so long as the lender stays nearby

(b)(27), (b)(28) and (b)(29) exempt "entities that operate armored vehicle businesses" who buy large-capacity magazines, lend them to their employees or receive them back

 

 

 

The crux of this is INTENT and common sense, replacing a magazine body with a PMag body will probably not fly as a repair...

 

Mg

Way to much mis info bro. For one where do you come up with the idea that a mag has to match a gun? that is the sillyest thing ever. I didnt even bother to read any of the rest. other than your very last sentance. Show me where it says I can not use a Pmag body to fix my pre ban mag. I know of many many hundreds of people including LE that have done this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Way to much mis info bro. For one where do you come up with the idea that a mag has to match a gun? that is the sillyest thing ever. I didnt even bother to read any of the rest. other than your very last sentance. Show me where it says I can not use a Pmag body to fix my pre ban mag. I know of many many hundreds of people including LE that have done this!

 

"Bro"

 

Thank you for proving that if common sense was common, everyone would have it, do what you wish, it's your booking number.

 

But I can't leave without one last edification...

 

A) I doubt you know "many hundreds of people" who do this or anything else.

B) WE that are LEOs are exempt from the provision. As it states in the sections of LAW quoted above.

C) Show me in the provision where it states you may "repair" a magazine.... Again an interpretation

 

Take care Newbie,

 

Mg

 

Oh and "Bro" download a spell check program, you're selling yourself short.

Edited by Mike Grasso

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Bro"

 

Thank you for proving that if common sense was common, everyone would have it, do what you wish, it's your booking number.

 

But I can't leave without one last edification...

 

A) I doubt you know "many hundreds of people" who do this or anything else.

B) WE that are LEOs are exempt from the provision. As it states in the sections of LAW quoted above.

C) Show me in the provision where it states you may "repair" a magazine.... Again an interpretation

 

Take care Newbie,

 

Mg

 

Oh and "Bro" download a spell check program, you're selling yourself short.

(A) Ok true you got me with the actuall Knowing of them I only know them from the internet check calguns.net

 

(B)you are correct (edit)

© Its not my job to look up the laws you should know. Show me the provision where it states you cant!

 

BRO, this is not a spelling bee contest this is a benelli chat board.

Edited by ROCKETW19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the previously-referenced information regarding the repair of high capacity magazines you are looking for is located at hoffmang dot com/firearms/DOJ-large-cap-magazines-2005-11-10.pdf.

 

note: "dot com", as the forum will not allow a link by a user with less than 5 posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe the previously-referenced information regarding the repair of high capacity magazines you are looking for is located at hoffmang dot com/firearms/DOJ-large-cap-magazines-2005-11-10.pdf.

 

note: "dot com", as the forum will not allow a link by a user with less than 5 posts.

Thanks is this what you were looking for?

 

http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/DOJ-large-cap-magazines-2005-11-10.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look ... it's clearly a grey area ... a deterrent that will be effective against 95% of the general population.

 

I, however, fit into that 5% of people that is willing to push limits and ask questions, and face potential consequences.

 

I know firsthand, for one thing, that law enforcement in my state knows ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about preban vs postban magazines ... I've dealt with state police, local police, sheriffs etc and none of them had any CLUE about how to tell a mag was preban vs postban ... they all were just worried about the number on the gun, and making sure it was unloaded.

 

As a college grad student looking to go to law school, who has quite a few cop friends who would vouch for my character, I am really not worried about getting screwed over by some overzealous ATF agent who wants to interpret intentionally vague laws in ways that will hurt me ... ****, worst case scenario I make a lawsuit against the state defending my rightful action under the law via the parts rebuild clause, and we finally get some clarity from the guys behind the bench.

 

As always when it comes to law breaking ... if you generally shoot straight and don't make yourself a target, you will likely be fine if you step into a grey area, as you will be given the benefit of the doubt ... while if you shoot up a school, expect that every gun/round you own will be confiscated, and they will throw every charge they possibly can at you.

 

From taking many law classes, you learn that the law works in funny ways ... and that the law as it's seemingly written on paper means very little, while interpretation and situational enforcement mean everything.

 

That said, all my mags are currently old as **** preban mags, as I am still considering whether or not this pmag and glock upgrade is worth the potential red tape ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Look ... it's clearly a grey area ... a deterrent that will be effective against 95% of the general population.

 

I, however, fit into that 5% of people that is willing to push limits and ask questions, and face potential consequences.

 

I know firsthand, for one thing, that law enforcement in my state knows ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about preban vs postban magazines ... I've dealt with state police, local police, sheriffs etc and none of them had any CLUE about how to tell a mag was preban vs postban ... they all were just worried about the number on the gun, and making sure it was unloaded.

 

As a college grad student looking to go to law school, who has quite a few cop friends who would vouch for my character, I am really not worried about getting screwed over by some overzealous ATF agent who wants to interpret intentionally vague laws in ways that will hurt me ... ****, worst case scenario I make a lawsuit against the state defending my rightful action under the law via the parts rebuild clause, and we finally get some clarity from the guys behind the bench.

 

As always when it comes to law breaking ... if you generally shoot straight and don't make yourself a target, you will likely be fine if you step into a grey area, as you will be given the benefit of the doubt ... while if you shoot up a school, expect that every gun/round you own will be confiscated, and they will throw every charge they possibly can at you.

 

From taking many law classes, you learn that the law works in funny ways ... and that the law as it's seemingly written on paper means very little, while interpretation and situational enforcement mean everything.

 

That said, all my mags are currently old as **** preban mags, as I am still considering whether or not this pmag and glock upgrade is worth the potential red tape ...

I agree with everything you said execpt the first line this is not a grey area at least not for California read # 7 in the link I posted. Remember this letter is from the attorney general for the CDOJ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are those who shift power away from the people, and towards the government, and there are those who shift power from the government, and towards the people. In our countrys current situation, the latter are clearly more needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow call the cut man somebody is bleeding.

 

Some pretty good info and clears up the rebuilding of mags for CA.

 

You could still get arrested and spend some $$$ to get out of it but it looks like a winner.

 

After all losses by law enforcement on the OLL front I would think the DA would hesitate to take this one to court.

 

It would be even more of a loser if you had a pre ban registered AW/pistol.

 

It's your money spend it how you wish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow call the cut man somebody is bleeding.

 

Some pretty good info and clears up the rebuilding of mags for CA.

 

You could still get arrested and spend some $$$ to get out of it but it looks like a winner.

 

After all losses by law enforcement on the OLL front I would think the DA would hesitate to take this one to court.

 

It would be even more of a loser if you had a pre ban registered AW/pistol.

 

It's your money spend it how you wish.

I think Duggan made a great point if you are doing something you shouldnt be you will get the book thrown at you. If you are at the range or what ever I doubt anyone messes with you. Now there is alway some Rambo Grasso cop that might TRY to do something but will loose in the end.

You are from California you should check out calguns.net

They have some very smart people over there. They even have a team of laywers defending our gun rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
UNO, I am sorry I hijacked your thread bro please forgive me.

I hope you find your Ti handle soon.

 

Your hi-jack has nothing to do with me finding or not finding my handle. All is good. The people who have these handles obviously aren't giving them up even at the $85-100 price-range. It is tempting to kinda be a dick if I get a dozen or so of these handles. Being as they are the last dozen of their kind, I could pretty much ask what I wanted for them and in a few months they would all be gone.

 

Tempting. meh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Require a cited essay in MLA format on why they need the handle also. 1500 words.

 

Correct! Yes! And people would do that. ****, I would, lol.

 

That and exclusive nude pix of hot female.

 

*I like APA format though. MLA is for liberal arts majors, APA is more for science majors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is tempting to kinda be a dick...

 

Tempting. meh

 

Hmm, I always thought you a douche bag poser, but I'd imagine it a fairly minor temptation for you to be a total dick. Hope I haven't missed much of your BS in my absence spent in the real world.

Edited by BigHat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmm, I always thought you a douche bag poser, but I'd imagine it a fairly minor temptation for you to be a total dick. Hope I haven't missed much of your BS in my absence spent in the real world.

oh look, BIGA$$ is back!!!:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oh look, BIGA$$ is back!!!:rolleyes:

 

Hey Girls!!!! LOL

 

Skeeter,

You're my favorite moron on the site. Uno, is a total jerk, but admittedly fairly clued-in. You're primary contribution to plant Earth is to convert O2 to CO2 for the plants.

Edited by BigHat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey Girls!!!! LOL

 

Skeeter,

You're my favorite moron on the site. Uno, is a total jerk, but admittedly fairly clued-in. You're primary contribution to plant Earth is to convert O2 to CO2 for the plants.

exactly what i mean, BIGA$$!!;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...