Can someone explain this to me?

http://s43.photobucket.com/user/bohoki/media/MagazineGenerations-rear.jpg.html

The link above will take you to a picture of several Glock 9mm magazines however one is marked "Restricted LE/Govt only" however it stands next to another magazine that has no clear difference between it and the "restricted" model. Is there is any explanation for this madness?

 

Manufactured during the assault weapons ban that restricted magazine size to 10 rounds.

 

I've got AR mags with a similar stamping on them. Meaningless now, other than the novelty of it.

 

See this about that.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban

Mags made between 1994 and 2004 that held more then 10 rounds had to be marked as yours is.

Why??
It was a feel good government thing that doubled the price of standard capacity magazines for 10 years.

And dealers sold more high-cap mags then ever before at twice+ the profit.

Rc

 

During the ban gun companies such as Glock, S&W, Colt, and Beretta simply approached LE departments and offered to trade them 1 free "LE only" stamped mag for each older mag they would turn in. The older "pre-ban" magazines were then sold to the public at insane prices. Many were also brought in from foreign countries. As long as the magazines were made prior to the date the law was signed into effect they were legal to sell here.

Also, for some reason there were several months that passed between congress passing the law and the date Clinton actually signed the bill into law. Manufacturers knew it would be signed and the factories were running 27/7 making pre ban magazines as fast as possible. Supposedly several years supply were made between the law passing congress and the bill being signed into law. There were plenty of standard capacity magazines available for most guns during the ban, if you didn't mind paying a premum.

For some magazines such as most of the Smith and Glock 9mm magazines as well as AR magazines there were enough in circulation that used prices weren't too bad. Most were selling for $50 or a bit less. But the 40 S&W and 10mm had only been introduced shortly before the ban and not as many of those were available on the used market. I sold some 13 round G23 magazines for $100 each. I saw some 15 round G20 magazines actually sell for closer to $200.

Of course after the ban ended in 2004 magazines were no longer marked and it meant nothing. Prices quickly returned to normal.

 

^^^

Almost everywhere. Some states had their own versions, so after the federal law expired residents of those states were stuck paying quite the premium for them. And, as well all know, those laws have changed yet again making those investments worthless, as the date of manufacture is no longer a protection for their possession.

 

During the ban, I remember Glock 19/17 "hi-caps" being $40-$100 depending on who was selling them and their condition. I sold a couple of G21 13-rounders for, IIRC, $80 each just a month or so before the ban was to sunset. I told the buyer, he must really be a pessimist, because I was pretty confident I'd be able to replace them very cheaply in a month or so. There was at least one mail order place that must have cornered the market on police trade-in mags, was taking pre-orders before the ban expired (not to be fulfilled until after expiration) and sold used Glock mags for around $11 each. I got a whole bunch of used G19/G17/G21 "hi-caps" from them for dirt cheap.

 

In MA, a restricted magazine will still get you a felony charge. I have a few not full metal lined Glock 19 magazines. Going rate here is about $45-$55, and about $20 more for the drop free versions. Similar to the economy during the federal AWB.

 

There was stuff marked 'LEO Only' long before 1994. Remington and Mossberg, et al, as I recall. It was the marketing department's buzz words before they switched to everything being 'tactical'. Like RC says, the stuff sold like stink.

 

After the ban expired I was buying used LE mags stamped like that for like $5 a piece---put new springs in them and they were good as new other than the finish wear----still use them to this day.

 

No.

Clinton signed the bill into law the same day it was voted on, and passed, in the US House of Representatives, ... September 13, 1994. It went into effect the instant it was signed (which is unusual for a law banning something, the Volstead Act was passed and signed in Oct, but didn't go into effect until that January.)

There was a delay of ten months between the bill's initial passing through the Senate and its passing through the House, due to the fact that House at the time was less "anti-gun" as the Senate and required some amendments to the bill, namely the addition of the 'sunset clause', some negotiation between the Senate and House to reconcile the two versions of the bill was required, the Senate was bitterly opposed to the sunset clause, but the House knew that it had the votes to keep it from being passed unless the clause was kept...

Given the political climate of the time you could see that it was going to pass in some form.

 

Thanks for the summary. And given the political climate of the time shortly after Sandy Hook many of us thought an AR-15 ban/mag capacity ban was imminent. I think the main difference is that the internet and other instant communications connected us gun owners, informed us and let us coordinate campaigns towards our representatives to present a united front that would severely hurt their political careers if they tried to further restrict our Second Amendment Rights.

Back on topic, been awhile since I've seen any of those marked mags. Wouldn't they be worth something in States that upheld the ban since the sunset date? Or have all of those States required registration of said magazines by now?

 

I remember $150 standard capacity Glock mags. Actually, any double column mag skyrocketed in price. Go over to CDNN and scoop up a hundred @ $20 now so next time folks can call you a "gouger" when you sell them for $200. Joe

 

Buy the assault weapon ban version for the novelty, but understand the LEO only markings carry no actual legal weight at least in "free" states.

 

Speaking only for MA, the state-level AWB came into effect in 1998. However, the overlapping magazine restrictions started in 1994 with the federal version.

No registration is required for feeding devices; they're simply a felony if non-prebans are possessed.

It's much more of a gray area than it appears at first glance, since Glock magazines just before the ban and just after it are close to indistinguishable. And, for the Commonwealth to get a conviction they would have to prove that the magazine was made after the ban. Thing is, you could theoretically bring in the guy in charge of Glock magazine manufacturing and put him on the stand, place the magazine in his hands, and ask him when it was made, he couldn't tell you for sure–the Glock magazine generations have tended to have soft overlap from the early '90s through the mid 2ks. Obviously it's more clear with the dual-notching and exposed rectangle of metal on the anterior side.

More than you wanted to know I'm sure...

 

On the flip side, I never thought I'd have to pay $40 for a 10-round 92FS mag again, but I live in Connecticut in 2015.