[sleepyone]

I was not a shooter or hunter when the first ban took place, so I'm not sure how it worked. If you already owned hi-cap mags could you continue to use them? Was it illegal to use them for CCW weapons or home protection but you could have them for hunting, range use, or competition? The reason I ask is if there is a new ban on high-cap mags and it is illegal to use them why in the heck are people going crazy buying them up?

I have two M&P .40s with 15 round mags. I actually just ordered two extra mags for them yesterday to have as spares; not because of any potential ban. Will it be illegal to even possess/use them in the future?

It just seems crazy to buy 5, 10, 20 or 100 magazines that you can't use. I mean if people want them in case the ban is lifted like last time then you will be able to buy them again and would not have needed to stock up in the first place. Maybe I'm missing something.

[GiorgioG]

I think most people assume that these magazines will be grandfathered in just like in the previous AWB.

[sleepyone]

So will I have to prove I came into possession of the high-cap magazine prior to the ban, or since they aren't being sold anymore, it will be assumed I bought them preban?

[igpoobah]

Anything made after the ban will be marked as such.

[smalls]

Everything you had was grandfathered in during the last AWB.

We won't know what a new AWB will entail until/if one passes, but confiscation of mags seems very unlikely, it would cost the government a fortune to do, and I doubt it would pass if it involved confiscation of property.

[maudbid]

If it ever comes to the time when the purpose of the second amendment must be exercised, you will be glad you have the proper tools, laws won"t matter.

[wideym]

Ever since the 94' AWB ended, if I saw a good price on mags for guns I though I might buy in the future, I bought a dozen. It's actually worked out on several guns I've bought, although I still don't have a use for the Uzi, Sten, Swedish K, Thompson, and 6.8 SPC mags I bought on sale, yet.

The AWB kept me from buying a Glock for years, simply because I wanted full capacity mags and would'nt pay $60-100 a piece for them. Now though I have 6 Glocks and at least 10 full capacity mags for each.

[Skylerbone]

They never marked magazines during the ban, they simply restricted manufacturers to specific capacities. Those magazines produced before the ban went into effect were legal to sell until supplies were exhausted.

[smalls]

They never marked magazines during the ban, they simply restricted manufacturers to specific capacities. Those magazines produced before the ban went into effect were legal to sell until supplies were exhausted.

They were still allowed to cater to LEO, and were marked LEO ONLY.

Would be a real PITA to do do again, since do many of those are in circulation.

[crazy-mp]

They never marked magazines during the ban, they simply restricted manufacturers to specific capacities. Those magazines produced before the ban went into effect were legal to sell until supplies were exhausted.

That's funny I have a bunch of magazines that say "Restricted Gov/LE use only" and usually a month/year stamped on them. Guess I have some rare MP5, M14 and M16 mags.

[RCArms.com]

If there is new legislation enacted and they grandfather prior possession mags, the manufacturers will have to mark and date code new post-ban production for LEO/Mil only and private party possession will be verboten.

[gc70]

Why are people buying up mags that you probably won't be able to use?

The 1994 AWB prohibited the sale to members of the public of new magazines produced after the effective date of the ban. Possession, use, and transfers of pre-ban magazines were not limited.

One reason to buy mags would be the belief that a new ban would not prohibit possession, so buy now while you still can.

Another reason to buy mags would be the belief that a new ban would not prohibit transfers of existing mags; pre-ban mags sold at several multiples of their original prices during the ban years.

[evan price]

Why? Because sheep follow the herd. Then they get shorn. It's why they are sheep.

[Pilot]

I have no problem with people stocking up on standard capacity magazines prior to a possible ban.

[Tirod]

Really, the panic buying is just that. People who previously had no plan to do so are reacting to the news of something that they think will happen.

It's not a very good example of how they perceive their political power. They are caving in before there is even a vote, and spending their money (or increasing their debt load) rather than send a contribution to the organizations most capable of representing gun owners rights.

We've been down this road before, and we have a track record that it really does no good. It's entirely the point that the pre ban mags were readily available to many even after the AWB. There was really nothing gained at all.

There should be NO question of confiscation at all. That rule of law has already been thru the courts because of the effort in New Orleans during Katrina. The NRA stopped it dead in it's tracks then, and speculation it could be done again is pretty uninformed.

I've seen a lot of comments on this lately, and I realized that a lot of new shooters have gotten into the sport since the AWB was repealed. Time to sharpen up, students, the rule of law, BATF regulations, and informed discourse is now a requirement. It's the only way to combat the falsehoods and outright lies the other side keeps spreading.

If you think "they" might be able to knock on your door and take your guns and magazines, then some study into exactly why we have the 2d Amendment is in order. That is EXACTLY what did happen during the Revolutionary War, and why we still oppose it.

However, if "everyone" thinks they can get away with it, of course, then they will just go ahead and try. They already won before the first truck is started up.

I realize some of us older crusty guys might sound a bit hard line, but consider that we have already been thru this before, and the experience has made us go thru a lot of thought distilling it down to it's essence. We're pretty much settled on the issue, and we are not going to change. Once again we will find out what our elected representatives are really capable of doing, not the campaign trail promises so freely handed out.

[MrTwigg]

Why are people buying up mags that you probably won't be able to use?


Some will not go quietly as the Republic fades.

[Boostedtwo]

I doubt the government is going to confiscate anything, so if you already have 30rd mags then you can keep them, just probably wont be able to buy them if they ban them.

[JVaughn]

If the time comes that you need to use them, you won't be afriad you government will imprision you for violating the law, you will be afraid they will kill you. When that time comes, you will be able to use anything you collected previously, free of the worry that it is illegal.

Even if it never comes to that, you may need them in a home invasion. If you have kids and other family to protect, you won't be worrying about legality then either.

[Skylerbone]

Say what you will about the past, the current Court and the potential for several more nominees in the near future may test a lot of what we think we know.

I thought it was understood that military and LEA were exempt from such bans but to clarify the snark (thanks High Roaders) yes, those high capacity magazines not intended for the consumer market during the ban were marked, none manufactured before or after were marked, confiscated or otherwise restricted in those States that did not previously or subsequently restrict magazine capacity. Even then some exceptions apply.

[sleepyone]

Time to sharpen up, students, the rule of law, BATF regulations, and informed discourse is now a requirement. It's the only way to combat the falsehoods and outright lies the other side keeps spreading.

Excellent advice, Tirod. I'll have to admit my lack of knowledge as it pertains to past and current gun laws and legislation. Time is much better spent reading than standing in line or sitting in your car at a gun show getting spun up on the "impending doom" and then spending $60 for a $15 magazine and then getting all spun up again on how you are getting screwed because you voluntarily shelled out the money for it.

What are some good books or online resources available with which to arm ourselves intellectually?

[HOWARD J]

I picked mine up just before Clinton banned them.
They don't get any use as the ranges I go to only allow 6 rds in weapon

[Skylerbone]

Arming yourself with facts is great but intellectual arguments will never trump a majority with an agenda. Like Mr. Romney, I've conceded a certain percentage of the population simply won't hear what there is to say whether it speaks to their best interests, makes sense and is proven fact. Concentrating on those receptive to change, those who are wondering if a ban serves no purpose and teaching them responsible firearm ownership is key.

We are a numbers game to most politicians. Increasing our numbers gives them freedom to vote for us or it gives us freedom to vote against them.

[gym]

For those who weren't in the shooting scene last time we had a ban. You were allowed to buy pre ban mags. They were 3 times as much as the 10 rounders, and sold at all the gun shows. I had bought 4 -13 round mags fo my p13, at the time. And Glock mags also. They were allowed to be sold and used as long as they were made prior to when the law was passed. This is really a stupid way of doing things, and I doubt they will do it that way if there is a ban again. just my 2 cents.
more than likelly ,you will be limited to 10 rounds, or 9 and 1 in the pipe. My glock 30came with 3- 9 round mags during that time. My clock 23 had come with 13 round mags as it was a pre ban model. I remember paying like $650 for it almost 18 years ago. So who knows what they may do, Persolally I don't think they will grandfather in the AR mags, if anything they will limit them to 10 rounds, same with AK.
But this makes no sense, as the mags are still out there, so any mad man or sane person can still use them. It is very confusing to think how this would do any good.
To me , unless they outright say you can no longer own these guns, "which won't work", it's a waste of time.
I don't see people turning in guns they just bought, or any guns they may have. And since most were purchased with no registration how would they know. I once owned an AK and traded it because I never shot it,I traded it for a 1911, and traded that for a 40 springfield, Now I sold that one for another pistol, so how does this make any sense?

[glove]

Everything you had was grandfathered in during the last AWB.

We won't know what a new AWB will entail until/if one passes, but confiscation of mags seems very unlikely, it would cost the government a fortune to do, and I doubt it would pass if it involved confiscation of property.
With the way this government is throwing around trillions of dollars what would a few billion mean to them?

[jetboater]

I believe California allows folks to continue to own pre-ban 10+ round magazines but not sell, loan, or give them to anyone else (maybe someone from CA can chime in).
Wonder if this is a possibility for us all?

[Batty67]

How about the obvious? Sell them for a profit in the future...

[velojym]

Glad I didn't get rid of all my P95 mags when I sold the pistol (I let it go with the two 10rd mags Ruger included).
If I had the opportunity and the money, and was sure the hammer would drop soon, I'd buy 'em as an investment.

[Carne Frio]

How about use them. Going to let some possible future
regulation stop you ? Load them up and cache them, is
another good use.:D

[sleepyone]

How about the obvious? Sell them for a profit in the future...

I'm probably not going to take the risk of selling any banned mags if that becomes the law. Puts me and my family on the wrong side of the law and also provides more ammo (pun intended) to the anti-2A crowd that we are a bunch of law-breaking nut jobs.

And if there is a ban with a sunset clause, people buying up mags now will probably be selling at a loss since the market will be flooded immediately with millions of mags from businesses and individuals the minute the ban expires.

[wow6599]

I believe California allows folks to continue to own pre-ban 10+ round magazines but not sell, loan, or give them to anyone else (maybe someone from CA can chime in).
Wonder if this is a possibility for us all?

Go concede somewhere else........

[robhof]

I have them for personal protection and unless you advertize them or publicize that you have them, there's no reason for the Gestapo to come and take them away. My uncle, who died a few years ago had a Nazi machine gun that he fired regularly and only when he died did we find out it wasn't registered and had to turn it in. He brought it back from WW2 and only showed it to relatives and very close friends. If TSHTF, I want as many rounds in my clips as possible.:evil::D

[bushmaster1313]

I believe that in NJ there was no grandfathering of anything in excess of 15 rounds.

The NJ high capacity magazine ban and "assault weapon ban" still applies and forbids certain named guns and semi-auto rifles with two bad features

[Okiegunner]

I do not believe there will be any confiscation of firearms or magazines in a future AWB.

If there is, I do not plan to participate.

[justice06rr]

^ Same here. No way am I giving up anything!

As to the original question, there are many ways to use high-cap mags even after a hypothetical ban. Range use, Competition, plinking, SD/HD, and making profit when selling them.

I know a guy who bought 100 Pmags a while back anticipating a new AWB. I'm sure he is laughing all the way to the bank right now while he selling mags for $30+ a pop. If this frenzy does slow down, at least I know who to buy mags from.

[texasgun]

if an AWB should hit by (hypothetically) April 2013.... all the standard cap-magazines hoarders who bought the shelves empty would need to dump any magazine they are willing to sell before that date on the market.
Unlike the old AWB a new AWB will most likely prohibit the sale/transfer on any high cap magazine after the ban. So you either sell it pre-ban or keep it.

Wonder what that would do to prices... part of the high magazine prices during the old AWB was that folks could continuously sell their old mags legally... so a limited supply over a very long period.

[kwguy]

I'm sure logic won't play into the anti's decision making process, but if you ban the transfer of anything that has value on such a large scale, making it's value 0 in the marketplace, didn't you just create a huge black market for that item? Won't that actually help criminals? Not saying everybody would sell on the black market, but human nature being what it is, you some somebody surely will...

[texasgun]

to be honest: no reasonable gun owner would risk selling any high-cap magazines after the ban ... if you get caught you are in a world of pain. severe misdemeanor / felony will ruin your background check for employers for good. forget about your right to possess a firearm... but applying for a new job and you get flagged in the background check for a violation of federal firearm law? they won't hire you. period. I doubt that's worth the few bucks a magazine would sell for...

[goon]

I actually think that people who are "panic buying" now, if that is what they are doing, are doing us all a favor.
They are pumping money into gun makers and accessory makers as fast as they can and they are also getting more of these items into circulation, which means that they are more and more likely to meet the "common use" criteria cited in Heller.

[Jon Coppenbarger]

I plan on complying starting with taking about 300 of them to a gun show this weekend. It is so bad it seemed like about every box I looked in had from 3 to 10 or so in it.

[velojym]

I'd replace the word "reasonable" above with "obedient", but I do see the point.

[Cybercop]

Well I don't know about anyone else but any "ban" is unconstitutional and need not be obeyed. For myself I intend to manufacture what I want and sell the rest at cost. If .gov doesn't want to play by the rules I'm not either. But then again I've always had a problem with authority.

Jim

[BWB]

Two points:
The question of what magazines or how many I do or do not want to buy is irrelevant to anyone but me, or ought to be, and should remain so.

Those who place any confidence at all in the concept of "grandfathering" should examine Feinstein's 2013 draft ban law and notice that it proposes the licensing, background checking, registering, fingerprinting, and photographing of the persons possessing "grandfathered" prohibited items.

I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you (make you safe); grab your ankles. This is as good a time as any to wake up.

[straightShot]

Buying up mags?

I just hit the lottery today. I was looking for something, and I found another 7 30 round mags that were already loaded. Life is good!

[exavid]

I just discovered I have quite a few 20, 30 and 40 round magazines that seem to fit AR type rifles in my safe. If a new ban were to make it illegal so sell or transfer those mags I have to wonder how the could possibly enforce that. There are no serial numbers on magazines. Even I don't remember who I bought them from. If I were to sell them it would be for cash. So how do they enforce that ban? I do like the larger capacity magazines because I can load up a hundred rounds or so and take them to the range where I can spend time shooting not loading magazines from a box.
The only thing you can take to the bank on this mess is that whatever the politicians so in response to the CT shooting is that it won't accomplish anything useful or make anyone safer.
This whole hoorah makes me want to buy a Slidefire stock for my AR.

[Warp]

They will not be illegal to use.

[Skylerbone]

Timing is key. Let's hope that another Supreme Court Justice isn't coincidentally "mugged" twice in the coming 4 years. Trading any current Justices for activists in their 40s is an invitation to losing all Constitutional Rights, bad news for America.

[exavid]

They will not be illegal to use.

No but they will be illegal to sell or give away if Dian Frankenstein has her way.

[Warp]

They will not be illegal to use.

No but they will be illegal to sell or give away if Dian Frankenstein has her way.

That is a BIG 'if'.

And IF that if comes to fruition then, well, that perfectly answers the OP's question about why people are buying them right now

[smalls]

They would have to pump obnoxious amounts of funding into ATF to register mags as NFA items. Even most anti's see that as unfeasible.

[Renigeid]

If you have any doubt, ask yourself the gov has bought millions rounds of hollow point ammo. Nuff said.

[tuj]

If you have any doubt, ask yourself the gov has bought millions rounds of hollow point ammo. Nuff said.

What do you mean? The Gov't has bought up HP rounds? Why would they do that? My understanding is that unless they were used by police or maybe national guard, it would be against the Geneva convention to use them in battle.

[Hacker15E]

it would be against the Geneva convention to use them in battle.

The Geneva Convention has nothing to do with HP bullets.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hague_Conventions_%281899_and_1907%29

[Hacker15E]

If you have any doubt, ask yourself the gov has bought millions rounds of hollow point ammo. Nuff said.

This is THR -- can we lay off the tinfoil govnerment-is-out-to-get-us-conspiracy garbage?

[ID-shooting]

This is THR -- can we lay off the tinfoil govnerment-is-out-to-get-us-conspiracy garbage?
Erm, the Gov't is out to get us.

Back to topic, still waiting for someone from CA to chime about that they do with their "pre-ban" mags.

Since this new proposal come out of CA it makes sense that is where the precedence will come from.

Are you still able to use them in public? What happens to them legally when you pass on?

[Hacker15E]

Erm, the Gov't is out to get us.

No, they're not as a matter of fact.

The posting of a statement that government agencies have purchased a trainload of ammunition, and then making some ominous statement implying that it is meant to be used on the civilian population, with no evidence of that whatsoever is the tinfoil junk that doesn't belong in a logical, rational discussion.

Have any evidence of your statement that "the Gov't is out to get us" outside of that? All I see is the normal lawmaking process happening.

Welcome to THR -- we have a little higher standard of discussion here.

[Warp]

If you have any doubt, ask yourself the gov has bought millions rounds of hollow point ammo. Nuff said.

It takes a lot of ammo to train and qualify all of the sworn personnel.

And yes, when you are the gov't you can afford to do that with the same ammo issued for duty use.

Well, maybe they can't afford it, but they sure try.

[exavid]

You have to remember that those .40 rounds are going to be split up to the Border Patrol, USCG, and a lot of other government agencies that have traditionally carried small arms. When you consider the number of personnel in those agencies and the amount of initial training and qualifications they do need a lot of ammo. It only makes sense that all of the ammo would be of the same type they use in the field because besides making their firearms act the same way in training as in actual use it really simplifies the logistics of providing ammo. I think we can take off our tinfoil hats on this one. I did.

[ID-shooting]

If you don't call Feinstein's proposed ban "out to get us" you dont know what "out to get us" means.

Also, don't take this wrong, no need to welcome or preach to me about the rules. I was a member here during the last ban and got to celebrate when it expired.

Back to the post, is does seem buying is slowing down. Just came back from picking up a new Sig and was able to buy two additional 15-rounders $35 each. They even had plenty of normal capacity AR, mini, and AK mags on the shelf.

[Dreamliner787]

Maybe they'll have a mag exchange program next. One mag and get a $200 gift card or for food?

[Skylerbone]

Or you can register your firearms in exchange for a free yellow badge and tattoo...wait, someone did that already.

[DaisyCutter]

I can't wait for $150 Glock magazines again. I'll sell all my old "between-ban" mags for a mint and just replace 'em with LEO Only mags. The job has it's occasional perks.

[Hacker15E]

If you don't call Feinstein's proposed ban "out to get us" you dont know what "out to get us" means.

Sorry, but a proposed law that has repeatedly been submitted year after year, and year after year failed to even make it to the Congressional floor for a vote, is not an indicator of the federal government's overall aims, by any measure whatsoever.

In fact, the failure of the '94 AWB to be re-upped, and the failure of subsequent AWB proposals to even make it to a vote for the last 8 years, is a clear indicator of the opposite.

Also, don't take this wrong, no need to welcome or preach to me about the rules. I was a member here during the last ban and got to celebrate when it expired.

Welcome back, then.

[Skylerbone]

It was a singular event that doomed firearms in England and the same in Australia. Anyone else catch that Chicago's homicide record reached 500 for the year this week? Now it's ammo to use, last week it was 12th page Metro coverage. Politicians choose carefully the time and place that serves their purpose. Record heat wave? Global Warming! Clean Energy Investment! Killer winter storm? ...crickets.

The point is, Rights grabbers are gaining traction, especially with public sentiment. Asking the wrong questions, "What legitimate sporting purpose do 100 round clips serve?" gets you a lot of head nods. It speaks to the ignorance of the general populace in regards to their own Constitutional Rights. It may not pass but the pressure placed on conservative legislators has been ratcheted up considerably. We're seeing the consequences of that same sentiment as it applies to tax policy. A classic double-end short.

[tulsamal]

Sorry, but a proposed law that has repeatedly been submitted year after year, and year after year failed to even make it to the Congressional floor for a vote,

I agree that Feinstein's AWB bill won't pass. But was it even meant to do so in its current form? People on the Left aren't generally stupid. You would start your bill out with some "wish list" stuff you realize can't pass. Then you can cut that stuff out later as part of a gracious compromise. I think that's what the NFA stuff is all about.

On the other hand, the bill that will be introduced on the first day of the new Congress does have me concerned. Small and "limited" and to the point. Ban all new mags over 10 rounds. Make them illegal to sell, buy, or transfer. Such a bill could easily end up as a rider or amendment to some other bill. Like a budget bill that has been hammered out over weeks. That's a lot more likely than some big bill getting voted on by itself.

Gregg

[P.O.2010]

Many of the people buying these magazines today have no intention of turning them in regardless of any law(s) passed in the future. This recent run on guns, ammo and magazines has little or nothing to do with sporting use.

[Skylerbone]

Or by presidential fiat or that of the BATFE, or perhaps the new commission or a yet to be appointed "Gun Violence Czar". Any law that cannot survive the legislative process is no longer doomed, in fact it becomes an unconstrained juggernaut. Wiretaps, Homeland Security, Proposition 21, Bloomberg.

[exavid]

The run on magazines is partially due to the unknown future actions of the government. If they will be granfathered again it's a good way to get any you want now while you can. There's also the thought of many folks that if the price is going up they might be a good investment in the future. Worst case scenario would be large cap mags would be made completely illegal with no grandfathering. Obviously most people seem to be expecting something like the previous AW ban. It's the uncertainity that's the cause of the current price run up.