9 Round Mag Limit?

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

expatqatar04

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2008
Messages
11
Location
Fort Worth, Texas
Are they just making this up as they go along or is this an attempt to discourage manufactures from making them because they will be cost prohibitive?

http://www.boston.com/news/local/connecticut/2013/01/23/conn-senators-propose-assault-weapons-ban/ijulHvPiMEygmfbHuUcUUI/story.html

"Sen. Richard Blumenthal told The Associated Press on Wednesday that the proposed legislation, to be unveiled Thursday in Washington, D.C., will more narrowly define what’s considered an assault weapon under a resurrected ban. The bill, he said, will also prohibit high-capacity magazines, limiting them to a capacity of up to nine rounds of ammunition."
 
Probably because lots of companies already make 10s. Going to nine would force a lot of them to either redesign their current products or just give up altogether.
 
A redesign of the follower could limit existing magazines to the desired lower capacity. Or, a manufacturer could put in a spacer. In the early days of the civilian AR-15, Colt supplied the guns with 5-round magazines, which were nothing more than 20-round magazines with a U-shaped sheet metal spacer inside. The question is whether these sorts of things would pass muster under a new hi-cap magazine ban, or whether the magazine body itself would have to be redesigned. If the law is sloppily drafted, it could give scope to all kinds of "creative" solutions. Maybe we shouldn't give the antis any more clever ideas.
 
It's not the capacity that is the biggest issue, it's the additional wording that is being floated "readily able to accept a magazine containing more than x number of rounds."

That would invalidate every modern semi-automatic firearm that ever had a higher than the "new legal" capacity manufactured.

ANY rifle that accepts the nearly standardized M16 magazine, banned

ANY pistol that accepts a double stack magazine, banned

ANY rifle that accepts a AK47 / AK74 standard magazine, banned

ANY SKS Rifle ever manufactured, banned (because they can accept the crappy jam-o-matic detachable Zeytl POS magazines that were made several years ago.

If you stretch it, ANY Lee Enfield bolt action rifle, BANNED because of that pesky 10-rd magazine

ANY NFA registered belt fed machine gun, BANNED due to the high capacity feeding device.


The list is quite possibly all encompassing if you stretch the definition to it's fullest extent.
 
Glock sold the 30, "I have one" during the last ban, with 2 9 round mags, after the ban, 10 rounders were available, so I can't say 100% what they were thinking, but the 9 and 10 rounders fit the gun the same way. I still own that one.
 
Probably a new anti-gun scheme.

If NY has a 7 rd mag limit, Massachusetts has a 9 rd limit, Conn. has an 8 rd limit (and so on) then they probably figure that most OEM companies that make mags like Mec-Gar won't be interested in making a bunch of different low capacity mags because they won't be making a whole lot of them. Because of this they won't be making any money and so they might just avoid the whole State like some companies do already with California. This would decrease gun ownership even further helping to 'boil the frog'.

I think eventually someone in mag companies will figure out some quick and cheap way of blocking them off permanently one rd at a time.

For instance some sort of cheap plastic block that's fitted into the spring to block it off to varying lengths for different capacities with a non-removable floor-plate.

As an example of a possible solution picture this as a piece of plastic with scored slots which someone at the factory could snap off to the appropriate length and shove inside the spring and then spot weld the floor-plate in place (making it a permanent mod).

152962FA-B219-4FA9-9E3C-B7B2FA275609-6200-0000025AF8AFA30F.jpg

BC4C6EFD-56C6-4611-A1B2-5C6BC54B280F-6200-0000025B006BF9AC.jpg

42428444-03A0-4B41-ADF4-EDB2F200D365-6200-0000025B06715777.jpg

Problem solved. Different States could still be sent mags by the same factory and still conform to that specific State law.

I'm sure that they'd cost more because of the increase in labor, but it would work.

[By the way, my idea so I want a cut :D]
 
Last edited:
Browning said:
Probably a new anti-gun scheme.

If NY has a 7 rd mag limit, Massachusetts has a 9 rd limit, Conn. has an 8 rd limit (and so on) then they probably figure that most OEM companies that make mags like Mec-Gar won't be interested in making a bunch of different low capacity mags because they won't be making a whole lot of them. Because of this they won't be making any money and so they might just avoid the whole State like some companies do already with California. This would decrease gun ownership even further helping to 'boil the frog'.

I think eventually someone in mag companies will figure out some quick and cheap way of blocking them off permanently one rd at a time.

For instance some sort of cheap plastic block that's fitted into the spring to block it off to varying lengths for different capacities with a non-removable floor-plate.

As an example of a possible solution picture this as a piece of plastic with scored slots which someone at the factory could snap off to the appropriate length and shove inside the spring and then spot weld the floor-plate in place (making it a permanent mod).

152962FA-B219-4FA9-9E3C-B7B2FA275609-6200-0000025AF8AFA30F.jpg

BC4C6EFD-56C6-4611-A1B2-5C6BC54B280F-6200-0000025B006BF9AC.jpg

42428444-03A0-4B41-ADF4-EDB2F200D365-6200-0000025B06715777.jpg

Problem solved. Different States could still be sent mags by the same factory and still conform to that specific State law.

I'm sure that they'd cost more because of the increase in labor, but it would work.

[By the way, my idea so I want a cut :D]
Click to expand...
did that with some AR 20rd mags to make 10rd hunting mags years ago.

Slick and easy.
 
^The only problem with that is it has to be a permanent modification.as it is now, you can remove that wood.
 
The only problem with that is it has to be a permanent modification.as it is now, you can remove that wood.
Click to expand...
[sarcasm] no you can't remove the wood that would be illegal [/sarcasm]
 
goldie said:
^The only problem with that is it has to be a permanent modification.as it is now, you can remove that wood.
Click to expand...
That's why I threw in the part about the mag company spot welding the floor plate.

That would be a permanent mod.

Read the above post all the way through. It's in there.

As an example of a possible solution picture this as a piece of plastic with scored slots which someone at the factory could snap off to the appropriate length and shove inside the spring and then spot weld the floor-plate in place (making it a permanent mod).
Click to expand...
 
As an example of a possible solution picture this as a piece of plastic with scored slots which someone at the factory could snap off to the appropriate length and shove inside the spring and then spot weld the floor-plate in place (making it a permanent mod).
Click to expand...

That's why I threw in the part about the mag company spot welding the floor plate.

That would be a permanent mod.
Click to expand...

Totally awesome dood!!

Maybe in just a few more years we'll be posting pictures on how to modify our existing magazines to comply with new laws to hold the maximum allowable TWO rounds of ammunition!

(golf clap)
 
It's designed to negate any semi-automatic. I really don't like the idea of permanently altering full capacity magazines to accept <8 or 10 rounds. I'm just going to purchase 10-rounders if available an "dispose" of the others.

I'm not sure what I'm going to do when they get thoroughly ridiculous. A lot of my contacts in EP are in denial believing that these laws are somehow not going to effect them. It may very well put US protection agencies in the same class as they are over a good portion of the "civilized" world - unarmed.
 
New York's limit is now 7. Hopefully it gets repealed but you can never tell with three courts.
 
Here in NJ the folks in the Assembly are trying to pass a ban on all mags that hold more than 5 rounds. While many rifles take 5 round magazines, this would effectively disarm semi automatic pistol owners throughout the state.
 
If NY has a 7 rd mag limit, Massachusetts has a 9 rd limit, Conn. has an 8 rd limit (and so on) then they probably figure that most OEM companies that make mags like Mec-Gar won't be interested in making a bunch of different low capacity mags because they won't be making a whole lot of them. Because of this they won't be making any money and so they might just avoid the whole State like some companies do already with California. This would decrease gun ownership even further helping to 'boil the frog'.
Click to expand...

My guess is that a lot of these companies will settle for the lowest common denominator. In the cast above, they'd just make 7 round mags which would be legal in all 3 states.

Some might even drop to 7 for the states currently limited to 10 (at least for future designs - for anything already out with 10 rounders I'm sure they'll keep making them). Having multiple production lines complicates things, and I'd wager that many companies will want to work in terms of "full" and "limited" capacity production lines, with the "limited" lines covering as many markets as possible.
 
This is just getting ridiculous.
Click to expand...

It's okay.

Someone will just post some pictures detailing how to make the wooden block modification longer and longer to accommodate for stricter laws. =D

Soon we'll see pictures how to render our semi automatic handguns and rifles in to single shot firearms to stay within the letter of the law! Woot!
 
I'll bet someone told them you could have 10 in the magazine and one in the chamber, giving you 11 SHOTS!!!! Of course that is unacceptable, so dropping the magazine limit to 9 is completely logical. :barf:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

V
  • Locked
Resource for "non-gun people" - Magazine limits and Index to Much More
Replies
0
Views
595
vincewarde
V
S
  • Locked
We are WINNING the battle against AWB (victory party will be inside!)
2 3
Replies
66
Views
3K
Silent Bob
S
L
  • Locked
Senate Judiciary Chair Rejects Feinstein's Assault Weapons Ban
Replies
23
Views
3K
LemmyCaution
L
H
  • Locked
House GOP Proposes to Repeal D.C. Gun Bans
Replies
8
Views
595
gunsmith
G
S
  • Locked
Bye, Representative Godfrey to Introduce Package of Firearms, Ammunition Laws
Replies
21
Views
2K
gbw
G
Back
Top