Unintended consequences of CO new gun laws

OK, so this morning marks the second time I've been blocked from buying something online due to CO new mag limits. It causes me to realize something that was not inherently obvious. Some online dealers will not modify a package no matter how trivial that modification is. In this case me asking them to remove a magazine to be compliant with CO gun law.

Cheaper Than Dirt -- won't remove a 30rd mag
Bud's Gun Shop -- won't remove a 30rd mag, even though the web listing says :Capacity: 30 + 1 (Ships with one 10 Round Magazine)

Now on the flip side, just to show that not all retailers are idiots about this...
Hinterland Outfitters was more than happy to simply remove the magazine, or offer a legally suitable replacement.

So while I suppose you could view this as a market oriented protest against our blatantly stupid laws, I suspect it's really just a matter of the vendor in question being inflexible and apparently willing to sacrifice any market which would require the slightest modification. In the case of Bud's it's effectively false advertisement.

On the plus side this allows me to determine which vendor's I'm actually willing to do business with, and maybe even funnels people more towards local vendors. However it's pretty unfortunate from a savings perspective as both of the vendors doing this are at least several hundred dollars less expensive than most other stores.

So I guess this is my personal motivation to get my states anti-gun prejudice laws reversed. None the less it surprises me that these companies are willing to forgo us completely as a market save for items that are already CA compliant.

More hassles for legal gun owners and less guns for sale at good prices is not an "unintended consequence" of the new laws, its a FEATURE.

I think this is exactly what "they" were aiming for when they passed the laws. We even brought these issues up. It is frustrating that merchants on one hand are trying to protect themselves (which is understandable) and yet on the other hand fall into the trap set for them last year with a "error on the side of caution" approach. I can say that at least for Buds last year, when I called them and explained the laws and dates they did change their ways. I don't know if they will again though.

You can understand the complexities of the legal environment surrounding this cant you. I don't like it either but understand their position. They sell and ship a rifle to Colorado that the original packaging and SKU clearly indicates that a 30 round magazine is included. The recipient in Colorado buys a magazine out of state with a current manufacturing date and then gets himself into trouble with the weapon. The seller could see a day in court accused of selling that rifle with a Colorado illegal magazine even though they "technically" didn't. It is just flat out not worth even the most far fetched way out in left field possibility of legal entanglement. It sucks I whine about it but I understand it.

I do get why they are paranoid, as USMC88-93 said, what it ultimately boils down to is my own states fault, actually felt better to vent this, and yelp's doesn't seem like the place [Bang]

Not defending them but I think you are going to see a lot of the High volume dealers not willing to remove or substitute mags. Too much hassle and posibilty of someone making a mistake which could land them in legal trouble. Small time guys aren't pushing hundreds of guns out the door every day so it's no big deal for them to remove a mag.

Think you messed up your thread title. If you think for a minute that the people who pushed the laws through weren't hoping for this situation then you are delusional. Perhaps "Intended Consequences" would be more fitting.

Brownells wouldn't ship me a mag tube for an 870 but Midway did. Tube is legal so go figure. I can understand wanting to protect themselves but not shipping legal items seemed dumb. J&G sales did remove the 30 rounder when shipping a pap here and were very understanding of our situation when I bought another pap while I was working in AZ. I think there's a thread somewhere about vendors and this issue.

As was said before, this was entirely intended.

I support the vendors doing this. Yes, it's a hassle as a consumer but if you don't have to experience the hassle, you adapt to the circumstance as the anti-gunners hope you will then they raise the bar again. The only way to fight this is get people pissed off enough to change out the legislature and governor instead of dying the death of a thousand cuts by accepting incremental changes.

I called Buds to get some clarification. I know Shiro and have done business with Buds, both are honorable. Here is what they said (don't shoot the messenger). They asked their lawyers and the ATF has also been involved. They were told that when a gun is created and sold, if it is normally sold with/as a 30rd capacity that can't be changed.... even if they remove the mag. They also run into who-did-what-with-the-manufacturer if they open a box between them and the customer. They do have a "California" section on their site for those states wanting 'common sense' [this is paraphrasing with annoyed humor]. These guns are normally sold with 10 Round mags and fine for sale to us. The gun Shiro was going after did state 10Rd mags but was a typo that has been changed. Buds was courteous and honestly they have no reason to lose business but also no reason to lose their licenses/go to jail.

I talked with 'Nick'. He said if anybody wanted to talk further, his extension was 7152.

Short answer: Wanna fix this..... Change the laws.

November is coming shortly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hound

Short answer: Wanna fix this..... Change the laws.

November is coming shortly.

---

Amen. Stop whining and get your family, friends, and neighbors out to vote in November and get those SOBs out of office.

Agreed that this was entirely intentional. Lanza had 10 round mags. They know that it stops nothing, and it is just another way to restrict your options. Infringement in other words.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Artema

Agreed that this was entirely intentional. Lanza had 10 round mags. They know that it stops nothing, and it is just another way to restrict your options. Infringement in other words.

---

Lanza had 30rd mags. He only shot about half the ammo in them before changing mags.

Here is an unintended consequence... I had originally planned on purchasing an AR chambered in .22 and was saving up for it around the time these laws arrived. Well, just like the original poster, I couldn't find one online that would sell me one and couldn't find anything in the local stores so one day I was at Wal-Mart diong a milk run and saw a Sig AR in 5.56 that came with a 10 round mag. After thinking about it, and how I had tons of 30 round mags already, I just went for another real AR. Take that Rap Sheet Rhonda!

Glad I did, it's a great rifle and had all the magpul goodies on it. Looking back, getting a .22 would have been pointless anyway.

I'll be fair and say Bud's was courteous about the whole thing, and they do have some AR's you can still buy that are not specifically CA legal but do ship with 10 rd mags. I'm already doing everything I can to convince more people to vote the right way this fall.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KAPA

Here is an unintended consequence... I had originally planned on purchasing an AR chambered in .22 and was saving up for it around the time these laws arrived. Well, just like the original poster, I couldn't find one online that would sell me one and couldn't find anything in the local stores so one day I was at Wal-Mart diong a milk run and saw a Sig AR in 5.56 that came with a 10 round mag. After thinking about it, and how I had tons of 30 round mags already, I just went for another real AR. Take that Rap Sheet Rhonda!

Glad I did, it's a great rifle and had all the magpul goodies on it. Looking back, getting a .22 would have been pointless anyway.

---

Same adventure for me. Now I'm glad I didn't buy a .22 AR as the ammo continues to be ridiculous and a PITA.

I know it's a trip for most people, but DragonMan's in CO Springs says he can order anything for cost + small fee and give legal mags instead of illegal mags.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doolsmack_Bud

I know it's a trip for most people, but DragonMan's in CO Springs says he can order anything for cost + small fee and give legal mags instead of illegal mags.

---

Yup, he sells them online out of state. It's good business from what he said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Artema

Yup, he sells them online out of state. It's good business from what he said.

---

I was under the impression he didnt ship?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doolsmack_Bud

I was under the impression he didnt ship?

---

For magazines that would be illegal here is probably his only exception.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Artema

For magazines that would be illegal here is probably his only exception.

---

Well for example, every Sig 556XI sold comes with a 30 rd mag. Being a new-ish gun there arent many used, esp. not locally. So when i ask him if he is able to order and replace the mag, he says doable. Everyone else says "no." Why?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doolsmack_Bud

Well for example, every Sig 556XI sold comes with a 30 rd mag. Being a new-ish gun there arent many used, esp. not locally. So when i ask him if he is able to order and replace the mag, he says doable. Everyone else says "no." Why?

---

No idea, but I'd guess they know some of the people working there may make a mistake and hand over a standard capacity magazine by accident, and then they're now a part of the misdemeanor technically.