What's the risk level on bringing a cali-banned gun

File: 1470280152790.png (93KB, 203x345px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 203x345px

>>31981776

>>31981776
If you've got a lot of land, not much.

>>31981776
Bump because I've always wondered that too

This is relevant to my interests as a Washington CPL holder who has family in the Bay Area.

>>31981776
None, as long as you don't get caught.

>>31981776
Well traveling through the state as a non resident is totally legal.

Military personel can apply for a waiver that allows them to bring non-state legal weapons so long as they agree not to become state residents.

>>31981909
As phil stated, legality only extends as far as enforcement can detect. Cant be punished if you dont get caught.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_Owners_Protection_Act#.22Safe_Passage.22_provision

You should be fine, legally, as long as you never take it out of your trunk.

>>31981776
Running out of ammo

>>31982797

>"any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm"

FOPA safe passage only covers firearms, not things like 30rd mags which a CA cop will arrest you for

The best course of action is to post about it online first

>>31982129
yup, if they don't know, they can't do shit
i've done all sorts of stuff
ironic part is that i'm a civilian contractor for the police

>>31983357
>FOPA safe passage only covers firearms, not things like 30rd mags which a CA cop will arrest you for

It's never been tested in court but given that magazines an an integral part of said firearm I would say they are covered by FOPA's provisions but then again this is California. Logically if you follow that trail the only thing you'd be able to legally transport is the receiver itself since everything else technically isn't a legal firearm.

>>31983357
California does have caliber limits for safe passage. My mother and stepfather can't go through California if they have their 50 cal rifles.

>>31983481
While Cali might likes to make shit up legally .50 cals are still protected by FOPA if you keep em locked up.

>>31983357
>30rd mags which a CA cop will arrest you for

Bullshit. He MIGHT cite you, or confiscate it if you drop it on his foot.

>>31983602
Most likley squirrel it away in his personal stash.

Got a few buddies from my Marine Infantry days who are CHP now, they do it for the money but loathe state gun laws.

Fun fact about california gun laws, they dont apply to police OR legistators.

Thats right, the same people who say YOU shouldnt have shit wrote an exclusion saying that THEY should.

The vote on the exemption for legislators was 28-8 in favor. Really makes ya think....

Do you have a dog?
Does he wear a kevlar collar?

>>31983741
while LEO exemption may be "reasonable"
the legislator exemption is not, surely the law could be challenged on that basis as contradictory to equal protection

>>31982885
And now having to get a background check to buy more

I can't imagine the pain in the ass that gunshops have to go through now. What was a several-times-a-day thing is now a pretty-much-every-purchase thing

>>31984009
When was the last time that california was ever reasonable? And as for challenging the law, yes you probably could, but I garuntee that they would drag you through every fuckin court and appeal system they could to make it as expensive and time consuming as possible for you.

3 years and $600,000 in legal fees later some liberal pole-smoking faggot judge and a jury loaded with only the limpest of wristed hand picked nu-males and the smirkiest of feminazis would support the state.

>>31981776
What rail covers are those?

>>31986192

They're literally called SCAR rail panels, made by Tango Down.

>>31986209
Sweet thanks.

>>31983357

What if the mags have 10 round limiters in?

>>31986398
The magazines may have been originally designed to carry more than 10 rounds provided that they are PERMANANTLY modified to hold only 10.

So it depends on what kind of limiters you are using. Any of the drop in varietey are a no-go according to state law.

>>31986840
Uh o

>>31981776
>checked

idk about guns but i flew in with a few high cap baby killer mags to give to a friend last june. no one said anything.

File: 1478828971921.jpg (16KB, 365x367px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 365x367px

>>31981776

FELONY conviction.

And with the new law that just passed in Cali, a felony conviction means the Cali LE comes to your house and confiscates all your guns, not to mention the time in state pen you will do.

And thinking no gov types will ever come inside your house/apt in Cali is a huge mistake. Cali doesn't give a shit about the 4th amendment and gov officials enter domains without warrants all the time. Look into the LAHD SCEP inspections if you don't believe me. They've been in my apartment in L.A. three times now without a warrant.

I've transferred all my AWs to my sister's house in NV now to keep them safe.

I just pray that Trump and the Feds will overturn all this illegal Cali gun laws. Trump's already hinting about it.

>>31981776
If you mod your mags to only hold 10 rds, you'll be OK, place a cleaned stick/plastic piece in you mag spring. This is advice coming from CHP.