Ratio of AW registrations to Hi-Cap Mag declarations in CT

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Stargazer65

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2009
Messages
134
Location
Southeast CT
The numbers as stated on the news were:

50,016 AWs registered and 38,290 HCMs declared.

That was different than I expected, I expected a huge number for HCMs. It seems like you would get as a minimum the same number, since I assumed that most people that have EBRs also have HCMs. I would also have expected that added on top of that a lot more HCMs declared, since lots of people have standard size Glocks, XDs, FNs, etc... Most of those came with bigger than 10 round mags.

I wonder if a lot people with HCMs either intentionally didn't decalare them because they can't really be traced back to a purchase, unlike EBRs. Any thoughts?
 
Your explanation sounds good to me. I know if I registered mine the ratio would be about 25:1. Mags wear out, get dented or otherwise damaged. I saw a quote that said something like "A semiautomatic without a magazine is just a club."
 
Those numbers seem absurdly low to me. Do you have a citation?

Given that the forms were all on paper, and not digital, I'd be surprised if they have entered all the data in two weeks; and released it already.

As a total guess, I'd imagine that Hoffmans alone could have sold that amount of "Assault Weapons" in the month before Obama got elected and in the month after Newtown.
 
Here's one news source that gives those numbers FWIW:

http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/archives/entry/police_register_about_50000_assault_rifles/

On Friday, Scott DeVico, a legislative program manager and spokesman for the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection, said hand counts indicate that gun owners registered 50,016 assault weapons and declared 38,290 ammunition magazines. He noted that the numbers could fluctuate and won’t be finalized until they’re entered into the department’s computer system.
Click to expand...
 
At 38,290 standard capacity mags total registered, I personally account for about 1.5% of that. Probably should be 2 more zeros after 38,290
 
Numbers cannot be right, more guns than mags registered? Perhaps if an AW was registered the mags are not counted separately for this tally?
 
My two mag registration forms indicated caliber, capacity and quantity only. That column down the left side of the form was left blank, because whatever firearms those magazines fit - is none of the States' business.
If the state doesn't like it, they can take me to court.
 
Numbers cannot be right, more guns than mags registered? Perhaps if an AW was registered the mags are not counted separately for this tally?
Click to expand...

If you had both a gun to register and a magazine for it to declare you would be filling out two separate forms. So I can't imagine they would have neglected to count the magazines in the total.

It is possible that maybe they are only counting forms instead of total magazines and mistating it. You could own a couple of hundred magazines of various sizes and calibers and still only have to fill out one form to list all of them. Even then I still expected more magazine forms than gun forms would be submitted.
 
Perhaps it is simply that people got rid of there 30 mags and bought 10 round mags.
 
38,290 HCMs....I'd assume that is the number of forms received, not the number of magazines listed on those forms.

We can further extrapolate that there are only 38,290 law abiding assault weapon owners in CT now...and a lot of newly minted felons.
 
desidog said:
We can further extrapolate that there are only 38,290 law abiding assault weapon owners in CT now...and a lot of newly minted felons.
Click to expand...

Indeed, the question now is how vigorously will these laws be enforced.
 
Sounds like a lot of clubs out there.

My form had a bunch of mags and no assault weapons.

So, it seems like something isn't right in the state of CT.
Of course, we already knew that.....

With 3.5 million people that's about 1% of the population.
 
You'd think there would be more from the manufacturing birthplace of the AR, Colt, not to mention Marlin, Mossberg, and Ruger.

I have a feeling one or two people are not being truthful. :rolleyes:
 
Thanks guys. We need the help at this point. The birthplace of the firearms companies mentioned above (and additionally, Winchester, Stag Arms, CVA, Charter Arms, PTR Industries, and a few others) has really fallen hard with these new gun laws.
We have a Federal Court suit pending. The Judge just decided that the arguments in the briefs and motions submitted are strong enough that he doesn't need oral arguments, so expect to hear results in the next couple of weeks. Regardless of the result, I have no doubt that appeals will be filed post haste.

Going back to the OP, I do know of people who have decided not to register their "large capacity magazines" and also know of people who have already found ones that were stored away and that they innocently forgot to add to the registration list. I don't think there is any single "correct" choice to make with regard to this. Only that no matter what, the situation really stinks.
 
I'm stamping all my 30 round 5.56 AR mags with "Caliber .458 SOCOM, Capacity 10"

With a date stamped/ digital watermark photo, there should be no questions.
 
I'm stamping all my 30 round 5.56 AR mags with "Caliber .458 SOCOM, Capacity 10"
Click to expand...

I've thought of that too. It's an interesting way to get around it, but I wouldn't want to be the first guy to have to stand up in court and say "no no, don't you get it? It's a magazine for .458 SOCOM!"
 
I've thought of that too. It's an interesting way to get around it, but I wouldn't want to be the first guy to have to stand up in court and say "no no, don't you get it? It's a magazine for .458 SOCOM!"
Click to expand...
When the prosecutor gets up there with the 458 mag and loads it with 20 rounds of 223 you lose. Sure the last round or 3 might not feed properly due to the different follower (assuming you did swap that out) but even then 17 is enough to nail someone.

Remains to be seen what happens after the registration is fully computerized and instantly searchable by LE in the field. If it turns out to be strictly enforced this may get ugly.
 
The law doesn't have to be vigorously enforced. They have the next 20-30 years to do it by attrition, or the next restriction. Now that they have MOST of them accounted for......
 
19-3Ben said:
I've thought of that too. It's an interesting way to get around it, but I wouldn't want to be the first guy to have to stand up in court and say "no no, don't you get it? It's a magazine for .458 SOCOM!"
Click to expand...

I imagine a lot depends upon the circumstances.

If, for example, you're stocked with 5.56 rifles for which these magazines fit and nothing in .458, then the odds shift away from your favor on this.

If, however, you've got rifles in both calibers and the magazine quantities seem to be commensurate with what you have (say, for example, half the magazines are for the 5.56 rifles and half for the .458 rifles), then the argument weakens.

Needless to say, actually finding .458 SOCOM magazines loaded with 5.56 would not go well for you at all.


Obviously, one can argue this on sites such as THR until the cows come home though. What will ultimately count is what happens for a given instance in the courts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Latest Numbers For CT AW Registration
Replies
3
Views
640
larryh1108
larryh1108
forward observer
  • Locked
I have a question about the AR registration law passed in both CT and NY in 2013
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
CapnMac
CapnMac
D
  • Locked
Hi-Cap pistol mags as a civilian?
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
Wags
W
2
  • Locked
Gun culture alive and well in CT...
Replies
7
Views
506
280PLUS
2
Z
  • Locked
How gun registrations might "follow" you
Replies
19
Views
1K
waterhouse
W
Back
Top