Legality of LE/Mil magazines

G

GSMD Fan

New member
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Just out of curiosity, I have some questions on the LE/Mil magazines.
Being in the military I was told by several gun dealers that I was able to purchase LE/Mil magazines. Some dealers told me I was only allowed to purchase 92FS mags, as that is our duty weapon (of course, I know there are other duty weapons). Other dealers told me I could purchase magazines for any weapon I chose.

If I purchased LE/Mil magazines and used them in a handgun for home defense or legal CC are there any implictaions?

Can these magazines be owned by non-LE/Mil personnel, just not purchased?

Does anyone know of any instances were these magazines have been involed in any court proceedings?

What are the requirements to by these magazines? I have heard various things; I need offical letterhead, just an ID, do I fill out forms, or is the entire process dependent on the dealer/state?

Just curious, I would not want to break the law.
 
Well seeing how they were MADE After Sept 1994 they are ILLEGAL for the regular citizen to own/purchase/use.

As far as using one in a self-defense incident, no idea what the results, legally, would be (it could indeed save your life if you need more than 10 rounds to stop the perp(s)).
 
There is no clause in the law allowing ordinary soldiers to purchase restricted magazines. The military supply chain is the body that procures your equipment for you. For you to purchase restricted magazines would require a letterhead from your CO, much like an individual officer must provide a sighned letter from the Chief, Sheriff, etc. I doubt many CO's would do that.
As for home use, sorry, thats out. The law in question specifically states "For Official Use Only", in so many words. The mags aren't for your personal use. Some LE agencies are taking the official use thing so seriously, they are requiring their officers to leave the resticted mags at the office and take the weapon home with a 10 round mag in it. Thank God thats a minority of agencies, but officers I've met at schools have told me they are subject to that rule.
In NY, it is a Felony under State law for an unauthorized person to possess a restricted magazine.

[Edited by tcsd1236 on 01-31-2001 at 02:37 PM]
 
Speaking from over 20 years of active duty service in the Army I couldn't have said it any better than tcsd1236.

FWIW - Many dealers will sell you post ban hi caps by showing your ID. In my personal *opinion* it would illegal for you to purchase any however.

As far as I know no one has yet been charged in any court of illegally possesing post ban mags. If someone here has heard of any cases I sure would like to know.

Rob
 
your right rob.. there is nothing out there i do own one of the LE mags but i only use it at the range.. would advise against carrying these mags for personal ccw. will get you in alot of trouble.
 
Border Patrol currently issues Berreta 96 Brigadiers. There was a program in place to allow agents to privately purchase an HK USP (IIRC) and full capacity mags. for duty use. However, ATF has stepped in and declared the sales of the full capacity mags. illegal, and agents are required to exchange the full capacity mags for reduced capacity mags. The reason for this is as follows:

INS hasn't actually approved the USP for duty use. Since it is not approved for duty use, there is no legal justification for agents to possess the mags.

BATF is starting to take the position that for an LEO to possess LEO mags, the weapon must be approved for duty use by the department, the officer must be qualified to use the weapon, and the officer must in fact use the weapon on duty.
 
"BATF is starting to take the position that for an LEO to possess LEO mags, the weapon must be approved for duty use by the department, the officer must be qualified to use the weapon, and the officer must in fact use the weapon on duty"

good for the goose, good for gander. cops are regular people and should be treated as such.
 
Thank you for the responses. As I said I don't want to do anything illegal. There are enough 10 rd + magazines still out there for sale. I will just have to take out a second mortgage.
 
Cuerno mentioned that "the BATF is starting to take the position ..", leaving me wondering as to what have we here, yet another example of LAW BY BUREAUCRATIC DECREE? It seems to look that way, this being, one supposes, something that we must thank our "elected things" for.

How nice to have such wonderful people on THE PUBLIC PAYROLL.
 
I was quoting TaxPhd. IMO LEOs should be limited to hi-caps for duty weapons only with written permission from their agency. I am under the assumption that this is actually how the law is written. Hopefully LEOs won't become a "superior" citizen either by law or law interpertation (ie., not be subject to the same laws as "regular" citizens when it comes to personal arms/accessories).
 
I know this law has been broken by cops without prosecution. The contraband was 'confiscated' though. There are probably many LEOs who violate this law without reprecussion.
 
It has been a couple of months since I last read this law, but here is the way it breaks down. At least to the best of my scatterbrained memory.

1. To purchase an LE/Mil post ban mag you have to have an authorization on letterhead signed by the person's commander. As the military issues all weapons and associated gear I doubt that any company commander would sign such a letter. The purchase option is geared more towards LEO's than soldiers.

2. It is a FELONY for a non-LEO/military type to even posses a restricted magazine. DO NOT TAKE ONE TO THE RANGE TO SHOOT!!!!

3. There is nothing in the law that says off duty cops cannot carry restricted magazines. In most states cops are technically "on-duty" 24/7.

4. Magazines purchased for "duty use" are not necessarily restricted to the gun a cop carries in a uniform holster. There are other occasions where a cop may have a back-up gun or a smaller gun for concealed carry assignments. That would cover most personal defense arms. I think any cop would have a hard time trying to jusitfy the purchase of several 30 round magazines for a Ruger Mark II.

5. Most of this will not be applicable to the military guy in the original post because Uncle Sam is his procurment agent, and he could only posess such things in conjunction with official duty. Since very few military types are authorized to carry weapons 24/7 it would seem logical that they could not possess restricted magazines 24/7 either.

6. I will not get into how cuerno de chivo "knows" that cops are "getting away" with violating this law. It would appear that he would rather grind an axe than learn the specifics of the law. Ignorance is bliss. My apologies, sir, if I am mistaken.

Anyone interested in the specifics of this law can find it on the web at findlaw.
 
insults instead reason

Very mistaken. They have, and they do. Specifically AR15 purchases in CA for personal use (search TFL, it was discussed here). The buying of LEO only mags to folks with just LEO i.d. as mentioned in the first post. TaxPhd's post as well. If you can point out a conviction of cops, please do.

Just apply the law fairly. For duty weapons only with written permission.
 
Are we talking about apples/oranges? I am referring to the federal statute regarding high capacity ammunition feeding devices, but I think you may be talking about California laws which I understand are more restrictive and something I have know nothing about.

As far as the federal restrictions are concerned it is a violation of federal law for a person to sell such a magazine to a cop without the signed letter of authorization. That is why I find it hard to believe that someone would do this with an ID only. The dealers know the law, and most follow them to a fault. I know that a cop cannot purchase such magazines without authorization in my neck of the woods.

I also know that it is NOT a violation for a cop to posess such magazines while off duty. Just read the law and that should clear all of this up. http://www.findlaw.com

And finally, I don't need to point out a conviction of a cop. If a person wants to make accusations, he should have the facts to support it. "I know" and "they do too" don't cut it.

But we need not squabble. The law is available for everyone to read, and as persons interested in arms, we should all read what the law actually says. Otherwise we don't know when the gov't is acting out of line and legitimately needs to be chastised. We can't defend our rights if wee don't know what the rules are, eh?
 
Concerning this discussion of magazines and the limitations thereon, a couple of toughts come to mind. First, the terminology is not only sloppy, it is INCORRECT. What are described as "Hi-Cap", and so on, should properly be described or refered to as STANDARD CAPACITY MAGAZINES. For instance, the Browning Model 1935, otherwise known as the Hi-Power, had been furnished, AS FACTORY STANDARD, from 1935 on, with 13 round magazines. Anything else was an anomoly, to use a polite term term for the "politicaly correct" trash we have had foisted off on us by our "elected things", media and other hysterics.

Secondly, I submit that the police, sometimes known as LE, and the military are the servants of the people. Any argument on that score? The following question applies, obviously, to personal weapons only, pistols, rifles, such light automatic weapons, possibly shotguns also, such as the infantryman in any army might carry.

Assuming that "large capacity feeding devices" enhance the function/performance of the particular arm, why is it that the servants are allowed "better" arms than are their masters? It has long struck me that there is one hell of a "disconnect" inherent in such a situation. Comments anyone?
 
The point that I was trying to make had nothing to do with how the law is written. IamNOTaNUT has done a fine job of presenting the law, and I don't take issue with that. I was simply pointing out that there appears to be some "judicial review" being carried out by a tax collecting agency (BATF).

BATF is indeed beginning to apply/enforce the law as I previously described, e.g., the Border Patrol. Do you have the money/legal muscle to take them on?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top