Non-Political RI Gun Law Question

Submitted by provendumb t3_z5fwh2 in RhodeIsland

I want this to be as non-political as possible please. I own a firearm that has a magazine with a capacity that is more than 10 rounds. That is how it came when I bought it. Will I now face potential fines and jail time come December 21st because of this law? Isn’t this law going affect nearly all of RI gun owners? I cannot order a 10 or less capacity magazine for this firearm as they are not made, and I understand that I cannot even modify the magazine I own because it could still be modified to again hold more than 10. Is there any solution or work around to this (legally)?

62

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Coincel_pro t1_ixvurkw wrote

You will be a felon when the grace period ends if you are ever caught with the magazine. You'll have to at minimum sell off the magazine or destroy it.

Yes, the law will affect nearly all RI gun owners. r/RIGuns has fairly regular posts updating some of the current legal challenges to the new law but those have not resulted in any stay or anything yet so as of today Dec 21 is still the last day to own it legally.

The law mentions that magazines can be "irreversibly modified" to hold 10rds or less, but there is no clear indication as what would be allowed as "irreversible" so basically you could try to modify it and then see what the court says if anyone feels like pressing charges against you to see what will stick. If you're not white I wouldn't suggest you try that one out with the police / courts.

21

Status_Silver_5114 t1_ixvv1j6 wrote

Why do you need a work around? Follow the law re guns and get rid of it.

−54

koidrieyez t1_ixvv3ra wrote

There is currently a lawsuit ongoing to stop this law form going into effect. Are you sure there are no 10 round mags available? Check out https://gunmagwarehouse.com/ they have a good selection. You face possible criminal charges if you are found in possession of it but they aren't going to raid your house looking for it.

46

RatFink_0123 t1_ixvx1op wrote

Just piling on here but how do you prove you disposed of the deadly and scary mags? I just don’t trust any of them. So hypothetically, what’s stopping you from just leaving them home and not carrying them? The law is against owning, right? So if they know something of mine came with deadly capacity mags, how can I show I no longer own them? Do I need to go to an FFL to ship to a place that honors the constitution?

−18

glennjersey t1_ixvza6l wrote

Sounds like you would have been or currently are a perfect candidate for a lawsuit.

Pretty regular updates over on r/RIguns regarding the active lawsuit. Perhaps you would be interested in becoming a part of it you certainly have standing. (IANAL, and have no affiliation with the active suits against the state. I am just a concerned RI gun owner who stayed at a Holiday Inn express last night.)

To answer your question more directly, you would have to block the mag or modify it in a way that prevents loading more than 10 rounds, regardless of how it shipped from the factory. Folks in NY/NJ/CT have been dealing with this for decades, and that's typically the simplest solution.

19

mrbisthebest t1_ixvzoo5 wrote

I believe you can buy magazine blocks to bring them into compliance with the new regulation. They'll limit the capacity accordingly.

3

glennjersey t1_ixw91hw wrote

Replying to Guyincognito4269 (#693,341)

That's the point. He can't get a 10 rounder.

Not every firearm has 10 round mags available.

Further - without the magazine the firearm is operable useless. Many of them won't even fire without a magazine inserted (as a safety feature). So your car analogy is more apt if you said someone was taking the gas tank out of your car. Sure they're not taking your car, but they're rendering it pretty useless, no?

8

glennjersey t1_ixw9o8c wrote

Replying to Guyincognito4269 (#693,526)

OP has not said, other than;

>I cannot order a 10 or less capacity magazine for this firearm as they are not made

One of the young senators made mention of a similar situation during the joke that was the hearings before they passed the law. This is not going to be an uncommon occurrence.

8

silverhammer96 t1_ixwa2oi wrote

Worst case scenario, anyone know of police departments doing firearm buy back programs?

2

winter-14 t1_ixwe36m wrote

Hillary will personally come to your door and take all your firearms, Bengazi laptops, and any Ben and Jerry's that's in your freezer. She and all her liberal, hippy, Democrat supporters, will then start eating babies on your firearm!

/s

−18

rhodynative t1_ixwexju wrote

Essentially, it would be a felony, if anyone ever asked, but unless you’re being stupid, pulled over, or have a particularly gone hating relative you should be fine

2

scrimalpream_ t1_ixwfnw7 wrote

You must have something pretty rare if there are no 10’s availabe. Otherwise Id just skip the headache and buy 10s. If you were to go the modification route, you could block it to 10 rounds and tack weld the base plate on, but it’s still questionable legally and can’t really open it up again easily.

3

Yz-Guy t1_ixwgnu9 wrote

Replying to glennjersey (#692,748)

Kind of a grey area. Bc permanent isn't really a definite state. As a mechanic and machinist. You can fix or modify almost anything. A weld may be permanent to some but not others if you have a grinder. However a rivot or tamper proof bolt is permanent without the right tools.

6

ProvBroker t1_ixwgu3a wrote

Replying to Status_Silver_5114 (#692,525)

Lol, no it’s not factually correct. Honestly commentary like what you are contributing betrays a complete ignorance of firearm construction and function.

I won’t berate you like the others, but this sort of know nothing commentary leaves pro gun-control legislators and proponents mouths all of the time, which only serves to make the folks who understand the subject matter uncomfortable about accepting the proposals, as it makes it clear the gun control people have absolutely no idea how the thing they are regulating even works.

It’s very important that we have thoughtful and nuanced regulation around the matter so that we can protect important constitutional rights while mitigating tragedies and violence involving deadly weaponry.

16

Jmac3366 t1_ixwh9z0 wrote

As of right now the only solution is to add a block to the magazine but there are lawsuits over it

4

topher352 t1_ixwj0c3 wrote

It's quite refreshing to see a post like this with the majority of responses keeping the politics out of it.

27

tilario t1_ixwjg03 wrote

can you ask your local police department what your options are? or have a friend ask on your behalf if you thinking asking directly puts you on their radar.

2

the_falconator t1_ixwno5n wrote

Yeah, it sucks as the law is written it will make you a felon. It's pretty likely that the law will get an injunction against it while the legal battle plays out. I don't know any gun owner that plans to get rid of theirs.

28

Physical-Half-5424 t1_ixwpoln wrote

Replying to TheRhodeIslandFamily (#694,608)

The law requires you to surrender them to a police dept, dispose or modify them Police are exempt from the law and surrendering them to a department will undoubtedly only enhance their personal collection. Bristol is not doing a buyback and I'm unaware of any departments carrying out such a thing. Sadly this poster is SOL, if they don't like the laws the only option is to vote out the people who forced this law through. My recommendation is sell the firearm and sell your magazines to people out of this state.

8

Steveesq t1_ixwpqus wrote

RI attorney here. As of the date... it isn't just fines... it's felonies. For EACH AND EVERY magazine over 10 rnds - 5yrs in prison, $5,000 fine. There is NO GRANDFATHER clause. Mere possession is a felony.

Yes there is a pending lawsuit... but it is essentially waiting on a similar case pending in the 9th federal circuit. The law in ri is unconstitutional on its face (7 clear violations), and is also in direct conflict with the US Supreme Court decision in "Bruen" which is the controlling standard.

From a legal standpoint, I would advise Not to turn anything in. The law is unconstitutional on its face, and any law in direct contradiction to the Constitution is null and void. This law will almost definitely be overturned as written, But the danger here is if you get caught with a magazine before it's overturned.

58

KindlyBrain6109 t1_ixwwyg1 wrote

when in doubt have a "boating accident" and "lose" it in the water

5

Swamp_yankee_ninja t1_ixx0yxc wrote

This is a great question, the short answer is many will likely become potential felons for Christmas. The law doesn’t pass constitutional muster, however until it moves through the courts firearm owners in Rhode Island are under their thumb. It can be pretty scary being a law abiding citizen one day and being jammed up on felony charges the next because you forgot a 15rd magazine in your range bag. It’s best to air of the side of caution and sanity to remove all the 11 plus round magazines you have in your collection and take them charter fishing before December 21. After the ban is repealed you can send a scuba diver down to retrieve them.

18

glennjersey t1_ixx2dbt wrote

Replying to anon45564556 (#697,888)

NYSRPA v. Bruen. Recent SCOTUS decision that not only got rid of the two step interest balancing judicial precedent, but also noted that the 2A is protected hlby historical analogs to the revolutionary period.

Show me a mag ban from pre civil war era?

The tl;dr is unless there were analogous gun laws on the books when the constitution was drafted/ratified, the gun law is unconstitutional.

That means no more AWBs or Mag bans in the near future, but the courts move at a snails pace.

9

Steveesq t1_ixx2kw4 wrote

Replying to anon45564556 (#697,888)

Simple... there is a new Supreme Court case from this summer that changes the standard. The California AWB (Assault Weapons Ban) is set to be decided within the next month or so... and it looks like it will be overturned.

The MA AWB is a carbon copy of CA. If the court rules the CA AWB is unconditional under this new standard... then ALL AWBs are by definition unconstitutional. I belive the MA ban is being challenged as well under this new standard but I'm not sure.

15

BMorris2526 t1_ixx52ze wrote

This law will do nothing to stop violent crime. However, making lawful citizens felons seemed to go over well with the voters.

3

glennjersey t1_ixx7lb1 wrote

Replying to Steveesq (#697,966)

Small caveat.

The CA mag ban is under jurisdiction of the 9CA. A ruling there is not binding to anyone outside of that jurisdiction.

It would be great case law, but we'd need a victory in the 1CA to affect MA and RI.

3

CrankBot t1_ixx7ll9 wrote

Sorry to hear you aren't easily able to get compliant mags, that stinks.

If you haven't yet looked up Mag Blocks you can check them, and if it's epoxied in then it would be considered permanent. Some gunsmiths can also press in a pin to make it compliant although that is probably pricey.

If you don't want to conveniently "lose" your magazines prior to the deadline you might be lucky enough to have family in another state without a capacity ban who can hold them for you?

I'm any case, good luck.

1

captain_carrot t1_ixxkhxd wrote

Replying to KindlyBrain6109 (#697,177)

This all seems well and good but when my carry guns all carry 10+... I'm not going to stop carrying or subject myself to a restriction that lessens MY odds should I need it, but I'm also not looking forward to any legal issues that might arise should that be the case. But I'd rather deal with legal issues than the alternative.

5

pbNANDjelly t1_ixxqdax wrote

Replying to Steveesq (#701,429)

Alright, dope. I just kind of assumed a lawyer wouldn't advise strangers on the internet to take legal risks 🤔 What if this goes sideways for OP? Or someone reading?

Thanks for providing info on the subject

2

psycho_candy0 t1_ixy5bmg wrote

Replying to the_falconator (#695,747)

This issue seems ripe enough to make it's way up top even to the supreme court imho, it'd be interesting to see if they'd strike down infringements on capacity laws, given their recent decisions, but I'm not entirely that optimistic.

9

mightynifty_2 t1_ixy9zlr wrote

There really should be a law that mandates the govt pay anyone market value (x1.25-1.5 for convenience) for any goods made illegal without a grandfather clause. Absolutely ridiculous otherwise.

11

smokejaguar t1_ixykd6c wrote

Replying to Swamp_yankee_ninja (#697,718)

It also has some serious ambiguity in the wording of the legislation. While it gives members of the National Guard an exemption, it states "when authorized" in the legislation. Does that mean a member serving during drill and activations only? What if one of my guys forgets a standard capacity magazine in their backpack? Will they be a felon while driving home from drill?

This is what happens when knee jerk legislation gets rammed through the general assembly.

11

sailri t1_ixz1j34 wrote

Replying to Guyincognito4269 (#693,341)

Yes you are. Because in your scenario your engine is capable of pushing your (over $10,000?) car over the speed limit. And having it in your car in your possession would make you a felon.

3

sailri t1_ixz1td6 wrote

Replying to sailri (#707,388)

You could just get rid of the engine of course. Isn’t that free? Sure it is. But the cost to replace the engine? And if you can’t the cost to replace the car? That’s taking.

3

thentangler t1_ixz86gw wrote

I mean if states are now free to make abortions illegal and even pay people to rat on someone who even thinks of abortion resulting in jail time, what’s to stop other states from doing the same ridiculousness with things such as gun control. To each their own I guess! Just move to a different state that aligns with your views… Country fragmentation here we come!!

−5

Coincel_pro t1_ixzallo wrote

Replying to CrankBot (#698,731)

I agree with your post but I am very wary of what will actually be defined as "permanent" since the law does not spell that out well at all. Guess who gets to be the test case? The 1st person arrested with a mag block. Then you get to see if a jury of your peers decides if your epoxy job is good enough to mean you broke no laws, or congrats now you're a felon, pay $5000 and lose all your guns to boot.

4

CrankBot t1_ixzckq0 wrote

Replying to Coincel_pro (#708,820)

That's 100% understandable if you or OP or anyone else do not want to take that chance. In that case OP should just sell the mags, put the gun in storage and buy something with easily obtainable compliant magazines.

2

coffeemaker3 t1_ixzjhi7 wrote

SCOTUS should have added a coda to the end of the NY case in Bruen stating that Constitutional Carry is no the law of the land. It was a golden opportunity that they missed.

3

KindlyBrain6109 t1_ixznv72 wrote

Replying to RobotUnicorn046 (#705,023)

If you think criminals are going to limit themselves to 10 round mags when they are committing other felonies already I suggest more training in logic and reasoning. Why intentionally put yourself at a disadvantage to them?

8

scrimalpream_ t1_ixzo04p wrote

Replying to scrimalpream_ (#694,541)

I’d add that, if neither of those options work and you really want to hold onto it, you can probably find a safe deposit box or something in southern NH/VT. When I was living in Mass. I kept my banned mags at a storage facility in Manchester. Nothing illegal about it.

1

RobotUnicorn046 t1_ixzts26 wrote

Replying to mightynifty_2 (#703,797)

Buy back programs a such a great offer! Especially with a “don’t ask don’t tell” sort of policy where any accessory/firearm, serial number or not, could be exchanged. Could be a lucrative trade for those that may need the cash and have access to blackmarket dealings

−1

1Certified1 t1_ixzzmu6 wrote

Replying to RobotUnicorn046 (#711,720)

The point of the 2nd amendment is not only for hunting and self defense against “normal criminals” it’s main reason is for the defense against a tyrannical government and for the power to remain in the peoples hands.

1

1Certified1 t1_ixzzvx0 wrote

Replying to RobotUnicorn046 (#711,836)

Until you realize they are easily exploited by selling $2 makeshift guns in bulk for profit and the fact that for real firearms the price is never even close to what the gun is worth unless it’s a cheap hipoint.

5

KindlyBrain6109 t1_iy051u9 wrote

Replying to RobotUnicorn046 (#711,720)

Tell that to any military ever <3 The 2nd amendment is for more than just hunting and stopping burglars.

When the US government stops using magazines larger than 10 rounds, then maybe the citizens won't need them either.

4

1Certified1 t1_iy0z98z wrote

Replying to RobotUnicorn046 (#717,576)

Look at Afghanistan, Vietnam, and even currently Myanmar. Soldiers in the US will not start drone striking people from their country because the government wants to take away their guns lol. Believe it or not but people in the US military are not actually robots and have independent thoughts.

8