Proof of purchase date

[1775usmc]

There is no way to specifically identify mags. No serial numbers. No specific individual identifying marks.

So this conversation is pointless. Take all the photos you want. It doesn't prove anything.

 

[TTSX]

There is no way to specifically identify mags. No serial numbers. No specific individual identifying marks.

So this conversation is pointless. Take all the photos you want. It doesn't prove anything.

But but but... The newspaper, man

 

[CamoDeafie]

There is no way to specifically identify mags. No serial numbers. No specific individual identifying marks.

So this conversation is pointless. Take all the photos you want. It doesn't prove anything.

Indeed. The only thing closest are those USGI mags but they usually only have date codes and depending on age, CAGE codes (OK Industries, Magpul, etc)

 

[1775usmc]

But but but... The newspaper, man

I use a paint marker and write my name on my mags. With the date. It proves they are mine and that I bought them before the "cutoff."

lol.

 

[Caveman Jim]

A nice new sharpie is your best friend. Oh and blue painters tape if you got it, werkz fer me.

 

[Koda]

If you bought the gun before the law then thats evidence you owned the magazines that came with the gun, usually two. Just dont use magazines purchased since the law as most magazines have a mfg date code molded into them.

 

[1775usmc]

If you bought the gun before the law then thats evidence you owned the magazines that came with the gun, usually two. Just dont use magazines purchased since the law as most magazines have a mfg date code molded into them.

And someone could just say you received the gun without any mags. And you went out a sourced your own….. that's not "evidence."

 

[TTSX]

If you bought the gun before the law then thats evidence you owned the magazines that came with the gun, usually two. Just dont use magazines purchased since the law as most magazines have a mfg date code molded into them.

The only mags I own with dates on em are pmags. Specifically for ARs. None of my Glock, Beretta, CZ, HK, S&W, checkmate, mec-gar etc mags have a date anywhere on em. I would hardly call that "most"

 

[Koda]

And someone could just say you received the gun without any mags. And you went out a sourced your own….. that's not "evidence."

once you provide the evidence the burden of proof lands on the state to prove your lying.

 

[1775usmc]

once you provide the evidence the burden of proof lands on the state to prove your lying.

lol. Ok. If you say so.

 

[Koda]

The only mags I own with dates on em are pmags. Specifically for ARs. None of my Glock, Beretta, CZ, HK, S&W, checkmate, mec-gar etc mags have a date anywhere on em. I would hardly call that "most"

Most of the mags Ive purchased are Pmags and every one of them has a date code on them, both Glock and AR types. OEM Glock mags dont, though a few have a part number on them. I dunno about others. I swung by Sportsmans recently and out of curiosity looked for any mags that didnt have a date code, all the AR mags between 4 brands except one had that code molded into them so I guess I assumed incorrectly it was common now. I bought the one that didnt and it was the last one in their inventory (their magazine inventory is definetely dwindling fast, all the Glock mags were gone)

 

[30Govt06]

Possession is 9/10 law. I have it, I am a law abiding person, I must have acquired it legally.

When the candy or doughnut salesperson asks if I want a receipt, I say "no thanks, it's only evidence".

 

[CamoDeafie]

I have it, I am a law abiding person, I must have acquired it legally.

There's your "mistake"; the State absolutely do not view US gun owners as "law-abiding" if we disagree with their interpretations

Edit. Basically, unless we 100% "comply" with everything they come up, we are all criminals, convicted or not.

 

[washagonian]

Okay, so I know most of you have the same perception that I am going to opine below. But here it goes, anyway.

The anti-2A agenda around banning 10+ round mags is NOT about safety or reducing crime or mass shootings, etc. We all know that. The probability is infinitesimal that law enforcement is going to look into MY PERSONAL OWNERSHIP of semi-auto firearms magazines WITHOUT some sort of initiating event - like me being involved in some type of self-defense incident, purchasing discrepancy or other problem.

Instead, the 10+ mag ban is a palatable (for non 2-A folks) front-line strategy for the long-term anti-2A agenda of completely disarming the people. (Again, something most of us already know.)

The magazine capacity issue is "low hanging fruit" for the anti-2A folks. It is an EASY issue to focus on and create FEAR in the minds of people (both anti-2A folks and folks who are on the fence about firearms laws). It is MUCH EASIER to create that fear in the minds of those folks by talking about the quantity of nasty, deadly bullets and how all those bullets are going to kill innocent people - VERSUS - talking about a red-dot and how it makes target acquisition very effective and improves hits on target.

EVERYONE knows what a bullet is and what it does.

ONLY FIREARMS PEOPLE know what a red-dot is and what it does.

TRANSLATION: "Lots of bullets = BAD." "Red-dot sights = ???? WTF, we don't have a clue. Guess we better put our focus back on 'nasty' bullets."

It's easy for them to argue to non-firearms folks that - "BULLETS KILLS INNOCENT PEOPLE". It would be much less effective for them to argue that red-dots kill innocent people.

That being said, we still need to acknowledge and understand that the anti-2A folks STILL ARGUE that accessories like red-dots and braces and forward grips, and pistol grips, etc., are dangerous. It's just that the focus on banning 10+ round mags has been a consistent WINNER for the anti-2A agenda in more situations than most of their other anti-firearms arguments and legislative efforts.

The anti-2A strategy - I believe - has pivoted over the past few years from focusing on a few major issues, to bringing their attacks down to the state and local level. Yes, the 10+ mag ban issue is low hanging fruit. But the anti-2A strategy is basically, "death by a thousand cuts".

Anyway, that's my opinion.

TWYLALTR

Cheers

 

[Mono1]

This is Big Ghey

Versus Little Ghey??

 

[GrayGoose]

Take all the photos you want. It doesn't prove anything.

It does prove one's level of pussiness.

 

[TTSX]

Versus Little Ghey??

That can be your "street name" if you like. Mine is "li'l weiner"

 

[Mono1]

That can be your "street name" if you like. Mine is "li'l weiner"

OH! I thought that was your Lite Saber!

 

[Cavedweller]

The burden of proof is on the government, you've committed no crime by owning standard capacity magazines.

I'm not sure that's true as "affirmative defense" is written into the law. Affirmative defense means you violated the law but you had a legit reason for doing so, such as "I purchased them before the ban." But you have to prove that.

"An affirmative defense is a defense in which the defendant introduces evidence, which, if found to be credible, will negate criminal liability or civil liability, even if it is proven that the defendant committed the alleged acts. The party raising the affirmative defense has the burden of proof on establishing that it applies."

affirmative defense | Legal Information Institute

An affirmative defense is a defense in which the defendant introduces evidence, which, if found to be credible, will negate criminal liability or civil liability, even if it is proven tha

www.law.cornell.edu

HB 3075 reads:
(5) [As of December 8, 2022, it shall be] It is an affirmative defense, as provided in ORS[166.055] 161.055, to the unlawful possession, use and transfer of a large-capacity magazine in this state by any person[, provided] that a)(A) The large-capacity magazine was owned by the person before December 8, 2022, and maintained in the person's control or possession; or[(b)] (B) The possession of a large-capacity magazine was obtained by a person who, on or after December 8, 2022, acquired possession of the large-capacity magazine by operation of law upon the death of a former owner who was in legal possession of the large-capacity magazine; etc. etc.
See (page 17):

https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/2025R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/HB3075/Introduced

 

[ronin223]

Affirmative defense is illegal under us law. This law will be overturned easily