Magazine modifications

A

Aguila Blanca

Staff
This could go in Handguns or perhaps in the Smithy but it's mostly a legal question, so I'm going to put it in L&CR.

I live in a state that has a 10-round magazine capacity limit. I am considering the purchase of a semi-automatic pistol that has a 13+1 capacity and for which the manufacturer does not offer any 10-round magazine option. So, if I get it, before I can take the magazines home from the gun shop they will have to be "permanently" (per state law) modified to hold not more than 10 rounds. "Permanently" under our law means that the magazine(s) cannot be "easily" converted back to normal capacity without the use of tools. I believe several of the nanny states have very similar language in their magazine capacity laws.

The question is: Does anyone know if ANY of the restricted-capacity states has issued any firm guidance as to what constitutes an acceptably permanent modification? I know about magazineblocks.com -- their inserts just pop in, and can be popped out again without any tools. Their web site sort of tip-toes around this problem with a disclaimer that users "may" need to do something to make the inserts permanent. But they offer no useful guidance as to what any state may have said is acceptable.

Has anyone found such guidance, from any agency of any of the magazine nanny states?
 
Not legal guidance, but...

If the follower is plastic, could you drill a hole in the bottom of the follower into which a small bolt of appropriate length could be screwed. Presumably, that process would at least involve a screwdriver to reverse.

I know that some 22lr magazines are limited by driving a pin through the magazine body. That might work better for a metal follower, but I would not drill holes in the magazine if I had a better choice. I believe the fix for reversing that involves a punch and hammer.
 
Being an automotive hobbyist, I have a bunch of tools and there are lots of things I could do. However, before jumping into the deep water and buying a gun that I might never be able to shoot, I'm looking for some firm criteria as to what might qualify as rendering a magazine "permanently" unable to accept more than 10 rounds.
 
cannot be "easily" converted back to normal capacity without the use of tools.
Click to expand...

I'd say (and no lawyer am I) that the key here is what the state considers "the use of tools". My read would be that if you use anything other than your bare hands, you are using tools.

There are many magazines (most??) that cannot be disassembled without the use of a tool. The tool may be a punch or even a nail but its still a tool.

UNLESS your state says otherwise.

Lets say, for example I have a 15rnd magazine for a 1911A1. (yes, they exist)
In order to block that mag to a 10rnd limit, you need to use a tool. 2 actually, one to compress the follower a bit, and the other to put through a witness hole to hold the spring compressed, so tension is removed from the follower. If you put a block (plug) in the magazine body, you would need to use the same tools the same way to remove it.

Quite a few magazines are set up that way. You CANNOT do it with bare hands alone. You must "use tools". The trick is finding out what level of tool use satisfies your nanny state requirements.

Best cya would be getting that definition in writing on the letterhead of the state agency who has legal authority to make that determination.

Stupid to have our govt waste time and resources over how big a spring loaded metal box can be, but that's the world we're in now...

Factors complicating this are a definition of the word "permanently" that is not permanent, and the fact that many, if not most of the anti-gun states have not, and will not give a firm definition until ordered to do so by a court.

WA state is still waiting on a definition of what is and is not a covered "transfer" under a law passed several years ago. Its almost a Catch-22.

LEOs in the state have refused enforcement until they receive further guidance. SO, no one gets arrested (for now) so there's no challenge in court with a criminal penalty attached. There is a challenge case working its way through the system, but, at this time, there is nothing to force the state to "draw a line in the sand" and say what is, and is not legal.

You might find the same kind of situation over what is, and is not "tool use", the state not bothering to give is clear guidance when they don't HAVE to.
 
AB said:
"Permanently" under our law means that the magazine(s) cannot be "easily" converted back to normal capacity without the use of tools.
Click to expand...

AB said:
...I'm looking for some firm criteria as to what might qualify as rendering a magazine "permanently" unable to accept more than 10 rounds.
Click to expand...

I know you are looking for something more specific than the definition in your state's code, but there may be no more specific legal authority on which you can rely.

Can you find any decisions referencing that code section? I don't recall which state you will be researching, but it is you will find one early case all the other cases cite that gives a more elaborate standard. I'd look for appellate cases describing the defects in a defendant's argument that his magazine was permanently modified.

If you can't find something in the case law, I'd consider asking a prosecutor or PO, and I'd be pretty direct. "How do I "permanently" limit a pistol magazine to 10 rounds in a way that you've concluded complies with the state 10 round capacity limit?"

If you don't know a prosecutor you would feel comfortable asking, the local attorney you would hire if you had to defend your choice would likely know one.

Disclaimer - criminal isn't my area of practice, but I've had proteges who went that way, and with whom I infrequently ask about facets of their world.
 
Last edited:
I was hoping that the state police or firearms board in one of the nanny states might have issued some guidance. They have not done so in my state.

Informally, several people have suggested rivets. For the life of me, I can't see any way to put a rivet into a mag tube without making it impossible to put the magazine into the pistol. I think their frame of reference is AR-15s, with the bulk of the magazine exposed outside of the firearm.
 
I would caution against taking the word of a prosecutor, or any LEO as anything more than their personal opinion.

They may be giving you a good faith answer, and be wrong.

IN the case of a prosecutor, HE might not find your mag a chargeable offense, and the guy in the next county (or city?) might have you arrested.
 
44 AMP said:
I would caution against taking the word of a prosecutor, or any LEO as anything more than their personal opinion.

They may be giving you a good faith answer, and be wrong.
Click to expand...
Too true. Many years ago, before I had a carry permit, a police captain (who was the nephew of the woman I was dating at the time) told me it was perfectly okay for me to transport a handgun from home to a shooting range. In fact, in my state that's a felony.

IN the case of a prosecutor, HE might not find your mag a chargeable offense, and the guy in the next county (or city?) might have you arrested.
Click to expand...
That's why I'm asking if any of the nanny states have put out any official guidance.
 
Many years ago, before I had a carry permit, a police captain (who was the nephew of the woman I was dating at the time) told me it was perfectly okay for me to transport a handgun from home to a shooting range.
Click to expand...
What are you expected to do then? Buy a gun & have it delivered to the shooting range where it will be stored there for you?
 
AB said:
I was hoping that the state police or firearms board in one of the nanny states might have issued some guidance. They have not done so in my state.
Click to expand...

Clarity may not serve the purpose of a restriction -- to make people uneasy at the wall of prohibitions and regs involved in ownership. Before concealed carry was licensed, open carry was legal in Ohio, but the way police and judges enforced this was that a carrier violated the law by carrying concealed if a PO testified that he couldn't see the arm as he approached the defendant, even if the witness approached from the side opposite the holstered arm. That's a clear law, and an application not reasonably foreseeable to someone unfamiliar with the caselaw.

On the other end of the spectrum, I had a towtruck driver who had contact with a Cleveland PO. When the PO learned that the driver wasn't carrying (again, long before licensed concealed carry), the PO went to the trunk of his car to get a cheap revolver, handing it to the driver and explaining that he shouldn't be towing without one.

The purpose of asking a PO or prosecutor where the law isn't a comforting guide is to get an insight into the culture that would handle a claimed violation. It's unfortunate that the police captain gave incorrect legal advice (and police frequently do), but a PO is the individual who is going to make a threshold decision about whether you are a problem. Knowing what and how they think may have value for you. If a rivet is widely recognized as the "permanent" change that prosecutors and judges (often former prosecutors) accept, that may be as much guidance as you will get.

AB said:
Informally, several people have suggested rivets. For the life of me, I can't see any way to put a rivet into a mag tube without making it impossible to put the magazine into the pistol. I think their frame of reference is AR-15s, with the bulk of the magazine exposed outside of the firearm.
Click to expand...

I looked for 10 round highpower magazines when I read your original post. I came across one image that had a rivet sitting at the bottom of a dimple on the side of the magazine. The dimple was deep enough that the head of the rivet didn't protrude beyond the rest of the surface of the magazine. I don't know how the dimple was made.
 
Last edited:
The question is: Does anyone know if ANY of the restricted-capacity states has issued any firm guidance as to what constitutes an acceptably permanent modification?
Click to expand...

I live in NYS with the 10 round limit. The local forums, gun shops and all my shooting friends all have a different opinion on what " permanent " means, because there is no official guidance from the state.
IMO, the state left it vague on purpose, so that the authorities and prosecutors have lots of wiggle room on their end....
 
Colorado has a 15 rd limit. My M+P 9 C holds 12,but it has a short grip.

Full size M+P 9 mm mags hold more than 15.

When I saw S+W brand 15 round factory M+P mags,I bought a couple from Brownells.

Brownells policy is to stay legal about shipping magazines.

I think I can be reasonably confident that magazines sold by S+W as factory 15 rounders should e OK. Right?

When I received them,I wondered how they did it.

Its a trick magazine spring.The lower part of the magazine spring is wound coil against coil for several coils.There is zero compression space between the coils. The spring itself will only allow 15 rounds to be inserted.

I remember some FBI Chief exonerating another official of any crime beause she lacked "intent" to do wrong.

Of course,my opinion of what "should" be is worthless,but my worthless opinion is that if you can only load 10,or if I can only lad 15,in our magazines as we carry them,without carrying parts to extend their capacity,our "intent" is to comply with the law. If an LEO checks,they will only be able to load the lawfu limit in the magazine.

The argement "Well,if you can disassemble the magazine and change the internal parts to make an unlawful capacity magazine,you are busted ,hairball"

Is IMO,harrassment persecution and abuse.

If it is in the condition of lawful capacity,the LEO has to commit a crime by altering or manufacturing the magazine to be unlawful capacity.

But that would make sense.

I'll say again,I am not a lawyer,I'm giving no legal advice,and my opinion of what "should be" is worthless.

But its good to know how S+W does it.
 
I was hoping that the state police or firearms board in one of the nanny states might have issued some guidance.
Click to expand...

Well you see the obvious problem here is that someone would have to make a DECISION and then take RESPONSIBILITY for the decision and where's the up side to that for the person doing it?

I thought there was a very eloquent explanation of our law makers NOT making decisions by Ben Sasse (Senator from Nebraska) who says absolutely the best way to stay in power and get re-elected is to pass on the decision making to the "alphabet agencies and allow them to make law-like regulations that can't come back and bite you. If you go to the 9 minute 30 second mark in this video you can here Senator Sasse speak to this point.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlAHS6pT5A4
 
Jim Watson said:
Here is an outfit that makes magazine plugs. They cite several state laws on them, but only a couple have any mention of HOW to limit capacity. The vendor recommends their plugs be glued in place. Which will keep you from disassembling your magazine for cleaning or spring replacement but that is a feature, not a bug to the banners.

https://www.magazineblocks.com/magento/faq
Click to expand...
Yes, I mentioned them and their unhelpful information in my opening post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top