LEO mag with a civilian SIG!!

[Chris Pinkleton]

A friend of mine recently purchased a P226 from a Raleigh gunshop, and aside from the thumb-busting 10 round mags, its a lovely pistol. A few weeks ago he mentioned to me that the 15-rounder that came with the gun was marked " for law enforcement use only." I told him to go back to the shop ASAP and get a replacement pre-ban mag. He did, and the store checked every other 226 they had. All of them came with the correct pre-ban hi-caps, one of which they swapped for my friend's LEO one. Just a fluke, but it could have been a bad one for my friend if I hadn't warned him about it....has this happened to anyone else?

Hopefully, this won't be an issue by mid-summer.

Chris

 

[10-Ring]

Just the sheer number of mags & guns sales would suggest that this has happened before, just not very often.

 

[MMcCall]

Nine months until the idiocy is over.

 

[Sactown]

Nine months until the idiocy is over.

just for everyone in the free states. damn Kaliban.

 

[Tecolote]

What's a civilian SIG? SIG Arms ships LE SIGs with three LE mags and non-LE SIGs with two postban mags. SIG had a special offer going recently on P226s that were sold with two postban mags and one preban mag. Mistakes happen. I'm glad to hear the shop exchanged the mag.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

Nine months until the idiocy is over

Unless GWB gets his way.

 

[armoredman]

Fingers, toes, and other body parts crossed....

 

[Ala Dan]

Greeting's All-

Being a former LEO, I think all the hype about
magazines marked LE/GOV'T USE ONLY is a crap of
BS. Heck, I've never seen any magazine
that by its-self, killed any body! And, I most
definitely would have NEVER placed any one under
arrest for merely owning one of these; cuz I feel that
all law abiding soul's have the right to self-protection!

Plus I can't remember the exact context, but the law
also mandates that these magazines are non transferable.
In other words, if the post ban magazine was issued by
your department, and you failed to retire leaving the said
department under other condition's; then you aren't to be
allowed to carry those magazine(s) with you, even thought
you may have reimbursed your department with the cost
of each magazine. In my way of thinking, this is pure
BS!

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

 

[Lone_Gunman]

BS it may be, but a federal law it still is.

 

[rebbryan]

does it really matter? do you actually think any police officer who stopped you or had reason to come in contact with your gun is really gonna give a flyin whoop if it's an LE mag? if you go to the range is the rangemaster gonna come over and give you a naughty look for havin an LE mag? it's not gonna kill ya to have it. i highly doubt any judge would give a flyin whoop either. but anyways

 

[c_yeager]

Watch COPS sometime reb. I cant even remember how many times ive seen some guy talk about the evil "cop killer" hollowpoints that will cut through a vest like butter. There are plenty of cops out there that honestly believe that noone but them should be allowed to carry a firearm. Fortunatly they are in the minority. but, recruiters are doing their level best to change that.

 

[clubsoda22]

talked to a cop who insisted that the ranger talon ammo they're issued will go right through a bulletproof vest and that's why it's LE only. You should have seen his face when i told him that i have a few boxes of it. He said something like "you better not get caught with it"

That's pisses me off. Knowing that one day some dumbass cop could arrest me for having completely legal ammo.

Reminds me of a shooting range owner telling me that I couldn't shoot my handguns at his range because i was under 21 (i'm 18 and legally own the handguns and have a letter from the attorney general confirming this ) and that i had to have someone over 21 shooting with me AND that it had to be the "real" owner of the handguns. He said, like he was doing me a favor by not calling the cops, that if i pressed the issue he'd have me arrested for juvenille possesion of a handgun (uh, doesn't juvenille mean under 18?). I left not wanting to have to deal with some dumbass cop who thinks he knows the law and thinks that law is that i have to be 21, i left and never came back.

The under 21 myth is widely believed by FFL's and cops. This is because FFL's mistakenly assume that since they can't sell a handgun to someone under 21 that someone under 21 can't posess one (where in fact an 18 year old can buy from a non-ffl as long as the transfer is done in a gun shop or sheriffs office where a background check is performed under PA law or the transfer is between father and son, which requires no background check or paperwork of any kind). Cops mistakenly assume that since you can't carry a concealed handgun under 21 you can't own one altogeather unless you are 21 (this doesn't take into consideration that in many states the carrying age is 18)

Everytime i show a cop or ffl the letter from the attorney general they either get upset and yell at me condecendingly or tell me that i misinterpreted it somehow.

The letter, addressed to me, clearly states:

Dear Mr. XXXXX,

This letter is in response to your e-mail to this office, as to the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act. You are correct in your understanding that a person 18 years of age may possess a handgun in his residence and may transport it to and from a firing range, as stated in the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act. As to your proposed transfer of the firearm to your son, ordinarily transfers of firearms are required to occur at a place of business of a licensed firearms dealer; however, there is an exception to this requirement for a transfer between a parent and child.

Looks crystal clear to me. I asked if an 18 year old could keep a handgun, transferred to him by his father in his own residence, where he alone lives and if anything prevented him from transporting it to a firing range for the purpose of target practice. They said it was just fine.

 

[BerettaNut92]

Sweet...what store is this? Not that I'd try to....uhh.....

 

[Wayward]

I had it happen with a Glock that I bought NIB at a local dealer though I never left the store with the evil mag. While the salesman was finishing up the paper work on the purchase I decided to check the box to make sure everything was there and found an LEO only mag inside. I told the salesman and he swapped it for a legal mag.

 

[Newton]

Just add it to the list of bad laws that are allowed to remain on the statute books because people are more interested in passing new laws than removing old ones.

I am reminded of the fact that it is a felony to fit a bayonet to a Chicom SKS, whilst it is a felony to REMOVE one from a Yugo SKS - total nonsense.

As for the magazine ban, I still get a kick out of the fact that lots of people buy 10 round .40 mags for their 9mm because they provide greater capacity for the smaller caliber and usually do so with no functioning issues, it's also legal since the magazine has not been modified.

Gun laws are not supposed to make sense, they are supposed to make it more difficult to legally own firearms, thus making the whole proposition less attractive to the average potential owner.