Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
American
Joined
·
3,289 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Just a little over two weeks ago the California Department of Justice suggested a new regulation which would require all gun owners to dispose of their standard capacity (10+ round) magazines prior to July 1, 2017. The Truth About Guns.Com is reporting that the California DOJ has just withdrawn their proposal as abruptly as it was introduced.

Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) has confirmed that the California Department of Justice (DOJ) has withdrawn their proposed "emergency" regulations on large-capacity magazines. A December 29, 2016 Office of Administrative Law (OAL) memo, sent to Attorney General Kamala Harris today, states that "This notice confirms that your proposed regulatory action regarding Large-Capacity Magazines was withdrawn from OAL review pursuant to Government Code section 11349.3(c)."

https://cdn.firearmspolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/2016-1223-02E_WD.pdf
 

·
Under Scrutiny
Joined
·
19,386 Posts
https://oal.blogs.ca.gov/files/2016/12/2016-1223-02E_WD.pdf

State of California
Office of Administrative Law
In re:
Department of Justice
Regulatory Action:
Title 11, California Code of Regulations
Adopt sections: 5490, 5491, 5492
Amend sections: 5480, 5483, 5484
Repeal sections:
NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL
Government Code Section 11349.3(c)
OAL Matter Number: 2016-1223-02
OAL Matter Type: Emergency (E)
This notice confirms that your proposed regulatory action regarding Large-Capacity
Magazines was withdrawn from OAL review pursuant to Government Code section
11349.3(c).
Please contact me at (916) 323-4217 or [email protected], or the OAL Reference
Attorney at {916) 323-6815, if you have any questions about the resubmittal process.
You. may request. the return of your rulemaking record by contacting the C?A~ Front
Desk at (916) 323-6225.
Date: December 29, 2016
Mark Storm
Senior Attorney
For: Debra M. Cornez
Director
Original: Kamala D. Harris
Copy: Melon Nobfe
 

·
American
Joined
·
3,289 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Confused-they just past it right? Did they pull it over fear of lawsuit?
No passage, this was a get rid of any grandfathered mags regulatory move on their part. Owners of 10+ mags that they have owned for decades would have to destroy or otherwise get rid of them (send them out of state perhaps) in order to comply with the CA DOJ's proposed violation of the 2nd Amendment.
 

·
Under Scrutiny
Joined
·
19,386 Posts
I kinda figure they thought a lawsuit would be filed that could go upward and hurt their gun control efforts somehow/someway so they walked it back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,960 Posts
I kinda figure they thought a lawsuit would be filed that could go upward and hurt their gun control efforts somehow/someway so they walked it back.
The new regulations were passed under CA's "emergency rulemaking process." Somebody appropriately noticed that the "large capacity" magazine laws have been official law since 2000, hence the use of the emergency rulemaking process was not valid and a potential lawsuit was definitely a possibility.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top