What is a hi-cap magazine?

What ever you do, don't let those states see these devices! :eek:

I'm of the opinion that without a specific section of any regulation against it, it gets treated like a designer drug.
Meaning: Until a state comes across the device, and law enforcenment or citizen group(s) complain about it, it gets a pass. Haven't we seen plenty of regulations/laws invalidated due to "being overly vague"?
 
How do states that limit capacity view things like this - or even two standard mags joined together with the easily available gizmos?
Click to expand...

Even California cares nothing about such a 'star coupler', any more than it would a large rubber band.

The individual magazines would still need to meet CA's law on capacity; for discussion here, let's say that's 10 rounds, but it's more complicated.

So long as the individual mags would be 10 rounds, each would still need to be inserted individually and removed when emptied, exactly as if the magazines were not connected.

Of course, now some CA legislator will experience the vapors and propose to outlaw such things ...

As to the question of 'what is a high-cap magazine', in my opinion it is a magazine with greater capacity than a magazine ordinarily provided by a manufacturer when the gun is sold. In that usage, for most 1911-style handguns, greater than 7 is 'high capacity'.
 
"High-Cap"....

I(not a formal definition or term) define a high-cap magazine as any firearm magazine that holds more rounds or an extended amount of rounds past what the gun maker/factory spec authorized.
For example, a Glock 17 9x19mm has a 17rd pistol magazine. A after-market 33rd magazine would be a "high-cap". It extends past the magazine well & has a large capacity.
A factory or regular size magazine that holds 10+ rounds isn't a "high-cap" if the pistol or semi-auto rifle is designed to hold it.
 
I like that ClydeFrog: Your definition makes my 100 round drum for an AK "not high capacity", and my 30 rounders' standard capacity!:D
 
In that usage, for most 1911-style handguns, greater than 7 is 'high capacity'.
Click to expand...
Is 7 the average? All of mine are 8, and came with a Sig Sauer factory package. Of course, I think they're just someone's mass produced 8 rounder with Sig's packaging.
 
I don't know how NY law would handle that device. The definition of a "hi-cap magazine", they call it a "Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device", is this:

"Large capacity ammunition feeding device" means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device, manufactured after September thirteenth, nineteen hundred ninety-four, that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than ten rounds of ammunition; provided, however, that such term does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.
 
There are, essentially two different way to look at the term "hi capacity". One is by the specific number of rounds. The other is by capacity vs what was standard production or military issue.

The Browning Hi Power pistol wasn't powerful in individual shots, it was powerful in capacity. (13 vs 7 or 8)

High capacity mags for pistols, in the old days meant something that stuck out beyond (often way beyond) the grip frame. 11 or 15rnd mag for the 1911, or a Luger snail drum.

And what is high capacity for a rifle? If the Army issues it with 20rnd mag, then the 30 is high capacity, right? Then a decade later, the 30 is the standard issue, and 100rnd drums are hi-cap....

Its so much easier for small minds to understand a fixed number. And that's what the anti's have done lately. I think the magic number today is 8. Used to be 10.

Wonder what it will be tomorrow?.....
 
Political "leaders"....

Who was the elected "leader" who didn't understand how firearm magazines function & thought new magazines(with new ammunition) had to be loaded?

That's who should decide the "high-cap" definition debate. :p

Clyde
 
I think you're talking about that Colorado State legislator who thought magazines had to be thrown away when you used up the rounds inside? i.e. the "high capacity" magazines in circulation won't be for long, because people will "shoot them up".
 
Sure, put them on a panel with the NY politico who thinks a barrel shroud is "the shoulder thing that goes up.."

That will be good for us....
:rolleyes:

The problem isn't that our lawmakers aren't experts in every possible field (which is impossible), the problem is that they THINK they are! And few of them are even fully expert in their own JOB, let alone anything else...

The other part of the problem is that when they do seek expert advice, they seldom follow it, or only listen to "experts" of their own political bent.

Yes, I know there are exceptions, but they are like safe honest gun owners, tarred with the same brush used to paint the dangerous idiots and criminally intended.
 
The concept of "high capacity" is only important to one group of people.
Lawmakers whose little brains can't deal with anything actually useful.
For our uses, I'd say it's any mag that extends down past the bottom of the grip on a handgun.
And it has no meaning in a rifle.
 
It will be interesting to see if/when these states try to attack these. I don't think any magazine (no matter what its capacity is) that is issued with a firearm should be considered "high capacity" if a Glock 17 is designed and manufactured with a 17 round magazine that is its standard capacity magazine.
 
In Colorado, there was recall elections for some who supported the mag ban. I think the law is still in place, but at least a couple of the politicians who sponsored it are not. And this was done prior to the regular elections.

personally, I have always thought that laws about magazine capacity are the most foolish of the stupid. Really, a law on the size of a spring loaded metal (or plastic) box? Really?
 
If? When?

Where ya been hiding? Massachusetts. California. New York. New Jersey. Connecticut.

Did I miss any?
Click to expand...

I was referring to the “OMC Ultamag” aka “The Star” did you even click on the OP’s link?


personally, I have always thought that laws about magazine capacity are the most foolish of the stupid. Really, a law on the size of a spring loaded metal (or plastic) box? Really?
Click to expand...

After watching this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJmFEv6BHM0&feature=youtube_gdata_player) of a senator who obviously has no clue what he is talking about. I am convinced that these bans are solely politically driven.

What is really interesting/fascinating is how irrational some of these people (and their ideals) really are (see above quote or video.) Does anyone pay attention to facts or logic anymore? Are these rifles really that scary looking? or is there something else that I am missing as well?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top