Hi-caps in danger?

Everything is in danger.
Congress is in session.

vintovka said:

I see a well known seller offering case lots of hi-cap rifle and pistol mags. Just curious.

Click to expand...

Would you want to be caught holding a massive amount of non-sellable product, except military/LEO sales, or dump them for little or no profit?

Bill

Those are not "high capacity" magazines, please don't perpetuate those terms and that belief. If the pistol was designed to hold a 15rd magazine, then that is the standard capacity for that pistol. Yes, some states have limited that but it is still the standard. Same for a rifle, if made for and normally sold with 30rd mags that is the standard capacity.

That said, anything can happen. Will they make them illegal to have or grandfather them in? If illegal then you may be out some $$ and have to go buy the castrated ones. Or, if grandfathered then they may be very valuable to you for the rest of your life. Only you can make that call though.

There are millions of new gun owners, many I think voted for the current administration who may not be happy becoming felons for the magazine they bought 6mns ago. So, maybe they will grandfather things. Guessing what politicians will do is anyone's wildest guess.

It’s time to circumvent the idiocy of politicians counting the number of rounds you are allowed to have in your magazine:

Phase plasma rifles and Phasers!

That’ll throw them off for years! Not to mention, we’ll need another technical forum ;-)

vintovka said:

I see a well known seller offering case lots of hi-cap rifle and pistol mags. Just curious.

Click to expand...

They have always done that, people are just noticing now.

Some might be worried there won’t be any grandfather clause if they do to mags what Trump did to bumpstocks.

Only the ones not sold are in danger.

Define "high caps." I have a bunch of standard capacity magazines. Maybe OP is from CA or NY where any magazine which holds over 10 rounds is considered "high capacity?"

Discussion aside, IMO nothing is safe. You should be allocating funds to buy what you can while you can. You never know what will end up on the chopping block and when.

vintovka said:

Sorry, but hi-caps are whatever the current regime says they are and will (on paper) attempt to dictate your ability to own them.

Click to expand...

We'll have to agree to disagree here. If the politicians decide the sky is green it doesn't make it true. Nor, if they pick the # a magazine holds to now be 3 does that mean that the firearm was designed to only hold 3 and anything over that is "high capacity". Using their terms doesn't help us is my point. We now have deer rifles which they call "assault weapons" (another totally made up term if you look at it legally or militarily) and stand magazines which are now "high cap". Add in their attacks on us with "common sense" and "reasonable" laws to further illustrate their attempt to lie about all facets of the debate.

I would suggest that if there is not currently a legal definition of "high capacity magazine", and a Bill defining it (as a magazine holding more than 10 rounds) is passed and signed into law; that will be the definition. Although, didn't the 1994 weapons ban already define it?

nipprdog said:

View attachment 984443

Click to expand...

A citation for that would be helpful.

TheBruce said:

Define "high caps." I have a bunch of standard capacity magazines. Maybe OP is from CA or NY where any magazine which holds over 10 rounds is considered "high capacity?"

Discussion aside, IMO nothing is safe. You should be allocating finds to buy what you can while you can. You never know what will end up on the chopping block and when.

Click to expand...

Indeed by using their terminology (hi caps, "assault weapons") we are already ceding ground to the grabbers and their distortion of the English language.

WrongHanded said:

I would suggest that if there is not currently a legal definition of "high capacity magazine", and a Bill defining it (as a magazine holding more than 10 rounds) is passed and signed into law; that will be the definition. Although, didn't the 1994 weapons ban already define it?

Click to expand...

I’d suggest that they really like to change the definition of things. Like the Constitution they view as a “fluid” document or turning plastic stocks into machineguns etc.

jmorris said:

I’d suggest that they really like to change the definition of things. Like the Constitution they view as a “fluid” document or turning plastic stocks into machineguns etc.

Click to expand...

Sure. But that's not got so much to do with the definition of what "high capacity" means when it comes to magazines.

WrongHanded said:

Sure. But that's not got so much to do with the definition of what "high capacity" means when it comes to magazines.

Click to expand...

If all I have is beltfed stuff, any number lower than infinity is “low capacity”

If all I have is 30 round mags, that’s normal capacity.

If I am an over/under guy, having 3 is “cheating”.

Kind of like the definition of “a minute” depends on what side of the bathroom door your on.

jmorris said:

If all I have is beltfed stuff, any number lower than infinity is “low capacity”

If all I have is 30 round mags, that’s normal capacity.

If I am an over/under guy, having 3 is “cheating”.

Kind of like the definition of “a minute” depends on what side of the bathroom door your on.

Click to expand...

I understand your argument, it the same one that's been going on since the phrase "high capacity magazine" was first coined. Do you think by convincing me, you will convince the world?

People use the word "theory" incorrectly all the time. The consequence is that the definition of the word in common daily usage has changed. It's frustrating, but there's no point trying to tell the world they're wrong.

But what does any of that have to do with my original point? Make a law that includes a definition, and that's the new definition.

In New York we have been limited to 10 rounds for quite a while. Originaly 7 rounds, but then the law was modified as enough competition shooters lobbied that they needed 10 rounds for competition. Solution, carry more magazines, One in the gun and two in a mag pouch and I have 30 rounds.

Bob

Ohen Cepel said:

A citation for that would be helpful.

Click to expand...

https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/pu...&File_id=A77CA0D0-07B0-4CC1-8CE5-271997FE1947

jmorris said:

Kind of like the definition of “a minute” depends on what side of the bathroom door your on.

Click to expand...

Ha! I'd not heard this before. That's funny. Thanks for the laugh.

WrongHanded said:

Do you think by convincing me, you will convince the world?

Click to expand...

Absolutely not, that would be as likely as someone convincing me they will be happy and stop if they could limit me to 10 rounds....