1224 and selling to non-restricted states?

[halletts]

You guys get so caught up in the words that it makes me laugh a little.

"It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is."
- Bill Clinton

[mikedubs]

You guys get so caught up in the words that it makes me laugh a little.

That's exactly the point of this law. Nobody knows anything about actual de jure or even de facto enforcement, and it scares us all.

[def90]

You guys get so caught up in the words that it makes me laugh a little.

OK, right now based on the wording of this law which every nuance means everything to a prosecutor and a lawyer "possession" means literally "possession" and not selling to anyone means just that. A single word or phrase means everything when it comes to law. The way the law is written it even states that the burden of proof is on the state. If a cop arrests you and places charges on an illegal mag (even though they need to prove it) are you going to spend thousands on a lawyer or plea to a lesser deferred charge and give up the $15 surplus AK mag?

Right now the law is so ambiguous that anyone at anytime could charge you with something without any clear reason. Though ultimately it is up to the state to prove the charges, whatever they do you cannot recoup your own legal fees from them even when you will likely win the case. This legislation is confiscation through atrophy, even if they charge you and confiscate the mags in question who is going to waste their time and money trying to fight it?

Ultimately despite the sheriffs lawsuit, the best response to all of this would be for someone with legal backing to pony up as the poster boy for high cap mags and do a transaction for high cap mags on the capitol steps (which should theoretically get an arrest and prosecution) on July 1st to get the first court case rolling.

[jhood001]

That's exactly the point of this law. Nobody knows anything about actual de jure or even de facto enforcement, and it scares us all.

And I don't think it was by accident. Especially when this legislation was crafted elsewhere and handed to our inept legislators.

I believe their aim is to make firearm and firearm accessory possession laws similar to that of traffic laws - where there are enough laws on the book to pull you over at any time if law enforcement has a desire for a closer look.

Coming back from the range and walking into your house with some 30 rnd magazines? Probable cause to come on in and take a look... But don't worry! Burden of proof that you acquired them after July 1 is on law enforcement... After they've come into your home to look around.

I feel bad for all of us here to have to sweat about this bullshit. I feel just as bad for the members of law enforcement that are going to have to try to interpret this crap on the fly. But again, I believe that is the point. Get something down that is wishy-washy and solidify it in an even sterner fashion once the confusion is rampant.

This isn't legislation aimed at protecting people (we all know this). This is the first offensive in a war and the objective is to gain enough ground to launch a more focused attack.

I still retain hope that these things will be struck down or repealed at a later date. Hang in there. Keep fighting. The laws of our country are on our side.

[BlasterBob]

You guys get so caught up in the words that it makes me laugh a little.

Well, so far we are still able to laugh if we want but I wouldn't laugh too much about some wacky wordings in the law! The assembly of those rather ambiguous few words COULD make a huge difference in a guy possibly having to do some hard time, some community service, lose some of his savings or being able to still freely walk the streets. Let's just hope all this crap gets knocked down by some sensible leaders.