Mag capacity limits and "grandfathered" mags, can I still carry "hi-caps"?

This is a discussion on Mag capacity limits and "grandfathered" mags, can I still carry "hi-caps"? within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by Maltz Wouldn't it be easier to have such a document notarized? That's dated as well, if I'm not mistaken, and seems like ...

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 58 of 58
Like Tree14Likes

Thread: Mag capacity limits and "grandfathered" mags, can I still carry "hi-caps"?

  1. #46
    VIP Member Array SIGguy229's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Kommie-fornia-stan
    Posts
    7,072
    Quote Originally Posted by Maltz View Post
    Wouldn't it be easier to have such a document notarized? That's dated as well, if I'm not mistaken, and seems like it would be less susceptible to suspicion of tampering. I suppose postage is probably cheaper though. :)
    Again...it is the burden of the state to prove how old the mags are (i.e. they need too prove you committed a crime)
    Magazine <> clip - know the difference

    martyr is a fancy name for crappy fighter
    You have never lived until you have almost died. For those that have fought for it, life has a special flavor the protected will never know

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #47
    Ex Member Array drinknshoot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Bggest Little City in the World
    Posts
    303
    Well I heard that youd be able to keep the high cap mags you already have
    but legally only allowed to carry max 10 rounds or whatever the number is their trying to do in em...

  4. #48
    VIP Member Array Aceoky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,587
    Ex Post Facto Laws (no grandfathering as in the latest NY law) are expressly forbidden by Article I, Section 10, Clause 1, of the U.S. Constitution.

    An ex post facto law is considered a hallmark of tyranny because it deprives people of a sense of what behavior will or will not be punished and allows for random punishment at the whim of those in power.

    The prohibition of ex post facto laws was an imperative in colonial America. The Framers of the Constitution understood the importance of such a prohibition, considering the historical tendency of government leaders to abuse power. As Alexander Hamilton observed, "It is easy for men … to be zealous advocates for the rights of the citizens when they are invaded by others, and as soon as they have it in their power, to become the invaders themselves."

    Section 10

    Clause 1:


    No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law,
    Last edited by Aceoky; January 22nd, 2013 at 09:16 AM.
    Bark'n likes this.

  5. #49
    Distinguished Member Array Nmuskier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Upper Michigan
    Posts
    1,516
    Quote Originally Posted by Aceoky View Post
    Ex Post Facto Laws (no grandfathering as in the latest NY law) are expressly forbidden by Article I, Section 10, Clause 1, of the U.S. Constitution.
    I thought the same thing until the Lautenberg amendment passed in '97, repunishing people who thought they paid their debt to society decades earlier.

  6. #50
    VIP Member
    Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    S. Florida, north of the Miami mess, south of the Mouse trap
    Posts
    16,186
    Quote Originally Posted by drinknshoot View Post
    Well I heard that youd be able to keep the high cap mags you already have
    but legally only allowed to carry max 10 rounds or whatever the number is their trying to do in em...
    Never "heard" anything. Read the statute and see what allows/disallows. It's NY after all.
    Retired USAF E-8. Lighten up and enjoy life because:
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield

  7. #51
    VIP Member Array Aceoky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,587
    Quote Originally Posted by Nmuskier View Post
    I thought the same thing until the Lautenberg amendment passed in '97, repunishing people who thought they paid their debt to society decades earlier.
    Can you point me to where this was ever challenged before SCOTUS? (not lower courts ??) in addition, we now have a couple SCOTUS rulings which the NY bans cannot pass muster- a clear violation of the 2nd Amendment per SCOTUS. (in common use) etc. Don't get me wrong, I do agree with what you're saying I just am not sure IF SCOTUS has ruled on Lautenberg amendment I don't think they have

  8. #52
    Member Array Maltz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by SIGguy229 View Post
    Again...it is the burden of the state to prove how old the mags are (i.e. they need too prove you committed a crime)
    That depends on how the law is written. If the crime is selling/manufacturing/importing/etc, but not specifically possession, then yeah, the burden is on the state to prove you broke the law by acquiring them after the ban date. (I believe this is how the CA ban works?)

    However, if the law is against mere possession, that can be a different story. (I think this is how the NY ban works?) The grandfather clause may be what's called an affirmative defense to prosecution. E.g., Possession is illegal - and there is no dispute of your possession - BUT you have an affirmative defense to prosecution if you owned the items before the ban. The burden of proof is on the state to prove possession, but the burden of proof is on you to supply the affirmative defense that you meet the grandfather clause provision.

    Affirmative defense - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  9. #53
    Ex Member Array gregnsc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    455
    When they were banned,back when Clinton was president,it was only illegal to buy them,not to have them.This time around,it may say something different.

  10. #54
    VIP Member Array Aceoky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,587
    Either way the NY debacle is contrary to recent SCOTUS rulings and will be challenged and at the very least have to be re-written to comply per those rulings

  11. #55
    Member Array Maltz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    58
    For the record, I'm not all that concerned just yet. There's no way any such legislation would pass the current house, and probably not even the current senate. The surviving senators remember quite well what happened to many of their red-state peers in the 2010 election following the unpopular Obamacare vote. Even Harry Reid has made it pretty clear he doesn't want to touch gun control with a 10ft poll. (sorry, couldn't resist...)

    If the republicans lose the house in 2014 and the democrats keep the senate, MAYBE then I'll be a little more concerned. But there are plenty of democrats in congress that aren't all that eager to repeat their historic losses in 1996/2010 over this.

  12. #56
    VIP Member Array wmhawth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Western Colorado
    Posts
    4,406
    Quote Originally Posted by Alex_C View Post
    Lets say the magazine capacity limit comes into law and mags are limited to 10 rounds. Can I still carry my 15-rounders for my Glock 19? After all, I already have them and they are "grandfathered" in.

    I live in Michigan, if that matters.
    The last time we had this type of ban, (1994 - 2004), pre-ban magazines were considered "grandfathered" if you owned any. It's too early for us to know how the rocket scientists who will write a new law willl craft the thing or even if a new ban will happen at all.

  13. #57
    Member Array BrianK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Aceoky View Post
    Ex Post Facto Laws (no grandfathering as in the latest NY law) are expressly forbidden by Article I, Section 10, Clause 1, of the U.S. Constitution.

    An ex post facto law is considered a hallmark of tyranny because it deprives people of a sense of what behavior will or will not be punished and allows for random punishment at the whim of those in power.

    The prohibition of ex post facto laws was an imperative in colonial America. The Framers of the Constitution understood the importance of such a prohibition, considering the historical tendency of government leaders to abuse power. As Alexander Hamilton observed, "It is easy for men to be zealous advocates for the rights of the citizens when they are invaded by others, and as soon as they have it in their power, to become the invaders themselves."

    Section 10

    Clause 1:


    No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law,

    So the laws outlawing cocaine, which once was legal, are invalid?

  14. #58
    VIP Member Array Aceoky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,587
    Quote Originally Posted by BrianK View Post
    So the laws outlawing cocaine, which once was legal, are invalid?
    They are IF they charge you for possession when bought legally .

    US laws are fully dependent on complying with the US Constitution- I didn't write either. Still that is how it's worked for > 250 years, seems pretty clear???

    On another point cocaine possession is not a guaranteed RIGHT expressly covered by the 2nd (or any other ) amendment... Recent SCOTUS rulings no longer leave it up to anyone to "guess" it's been ruled on and covered and the NY laws ignored that, meaning they cannot and will not hold up to the first Fed level Court challenge (which IS coming soon) NY trying to ban some 70% of commonly used firearms was not prudent and will likely be costly in the end.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

are 30 round magazines grandfathered in colorado
,
are existing 30 rd mags grandfathered in.colorado
,
are high capacity magazines grandfathered in colorado
,
can i still keep my 10 round magazine in ny
,
colorado magazine limit grandfathered
,
grandfathered magazines
,
high capacity magazines grandfathered
,
will 30 round magazines be grandfathered in colorado
,
will existing high capacity magazines be grandfathered
,

will high capacity magazines be grandfathered

,
will high capacity magazines be grandfathered in colorado
,
will magazines be grandfathered in colorado
Click on a term to search for related topics.