Hi Cap Mags
I had a "spirited discussion" (argument) with a buddy last night about pre ban high capacity mags. He claims that it is illegal to put a hi-cap in a post ban gun - I disagree. Who is right? This may seem like a dumb question, but it is really bugging me. Thanks for your input. Shoot straight!
0
-
I have a couple of hi-capacity magazines(13 rounds) and was wondering if I can leagally sell them to individuals,or only to FFL dealers.If I can sell to individuals,are there any states I can't sell to? Thanks. 0 -
Dealer is correct.cpermd 0 -
Thanks for the info guys. I never realized how little I knew until I started to follow this board.
cbxjeffIt's too late for me, save yourself.0 -
As the others have said, it is entirely legal to use a pre-ban "large capacity ammunition feeding device" in any firearm in which it will fit, or can be modified to fit. (I have adapted some pre-ban magazines to fit new post-ban pistols designs, such as the Steyr M9/40.) I suspect that this is a "loophole" the antis missed in writing the legislation. Perhaps they realized that unless they banned the magazines themselves, which apparently they did not think they had the votes to do, it would be nearly impossible to enforce a ban on the use in post-ban firearms that are identical to pre-ban firearms of the same model. This issue raises a pet peeve of mine. Any new pistol design should accept pre-ban magazines, instead of creating a new magazine design for which there is no pool of pre-ban large capacity magazines. The best choices in a 9x19 would be Beretta M92 or S&W M59 series. There is also a 65-year pool of High Power magazines, but most of those are 13-round instead of 15-round. While there are a lot of pre-ban Glock M17 magazines, they are fatter and not as adaptable to some new designs, but the 17-round capacity is attractive. 0 -
Dano, I think your rumor originated with the Klinton/Smith & Wesson agreement. If memory serves, that agreement had a provision that required new Smith guns that would not accept pre-ban high capacity magazines. I am told that the Bush administration has quitely abandoned the agreement. I hope it never comes to pass. I do note that new Smith & Wesson revolvers now have internal key locks. Ugh. However, I can see that such devices are now necessary in the liability climate we are now in. Putting them on voluntarily makes the manufacturers seem more "responsible." The Saf-T (sp?) hammer would have been better as it is less obtrusive, but I would guess these revolvers were well under way before the change in ownership. (I have read that the buyer cannot raise all the money. Now what?) 0 -
Magazines are what is regulated, not the gun in this case. It is legal to put the high cap mag. in the gun you mentioned. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
6 comments