.22 rifle magazine capacity question...

[dimsum414]

“Large capacity feeding device”, (i) a fixed or detachable magazine, box, drum, feed strip or similar device capable of accepting, or that can be readily converted to accept, more than ten rounds of ammunition or more than five shotgun shells; or (ii) a large capacity ammunition feeding device as defined in the federal Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(31) as appearing in such section on September 13, 1994. The term “large capacity feeding device” shall not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with,.22 caliber ammunition.

does this mean that if i have a .22lr rifle, then i can have a magazine larger than 10 rounds???

 

[hminsky]

“Large capacity feeding device”, (i) a fixed or detachable magazine, box, drum, feed strip or similar device capable of accepting, or that can be readily converted to accept, more than ten rounds of ammunition or more than five shotgun shells; or (ii) a large capacity ammunition feeding device as defined in the federal Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(31) as appearing in such section on September 13, 1994. The term “large capacity feeding device” shall not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with,.22 caliber ammunition.

does this mean that if i have a .22lr rifle, then i can have a magazine larger than 10 rounds???

Yes, if the magazine is attached permanently, like a Marlin 60 or Browning lever action .22. Mine holds about 15 22LR, and about 20 22 short, for example.

In theory I suppose you could have a three foot long tube fed magazine.

 

[JPO]

So... If I were to form a tube into a spiral magazine with a looooong spring, as long as it is perminently attached to the rifle. The law doesn't say the rounds have to line up axially, or that the tube needs to be round in cross section.

 

[vellnueve]

That's not a tube. A tube is, by definition, straight, or at least not a spiral.

#2, I'd love to see the follower you make for that.

#3, Why the hell would you want to do that when you already have plenty of tubular mag .22s available?

#4 That would be an extremely fragile, unreliable device.

#5 Are you that desperate to get around the laws just to have a large capacity .22? It'd cost you maybe 5% of the cost of making that to find a preban 10/22 magazine that holds 50 or so rounds.

 

[dimsum414]

Yes, if the magazine is attached permanently, like a Marlin 60 or Browning lever action .22. Mine holds about 15 22LR, and about 20 22 short, for example.

In theory I suppose you could have a three foot long tube fed magazine.

so i can't buy a removable magazine larger than 10 rounds then...correct?

 

[jdubois]

so i can't buy a removable magazine larger than 10 rounds then...correct?

Not without an LTC, and not unless it was manufactured prior to Sept 94.

That's not a tube. A tube is, by definition, straight, or at least not a spiral.

Hmm, I'm not convinced of that definition.

 

[dimsum414]

Not without an LTC, and not unless it was manufactured prior to Sept 94.

i have an ltc a, so if i can find a mag made prior to september of 1994 i should be good, right?



so....does anyone have a mag greater than 10 rounds for a remington 597?

 

[jdubois]

i have an ltc a, so if i can find a mag made prior to september of 1994 i should be good, right?

Yup.

so....does anyone have a mag greater than 10 rounds for a remington 597?

Nope.

I know Eagle makes them, but I don't know if there are any pre-ban ones.

 

[dwarven1]

i have an ltc a, so if i can find a mag made prior to september of 1994 i should be good, right?

Right.

so....does anyone have a mag greater than 10 rounds for a remington 597?

Nope. Got two pre-ban thirty round Eagles for a 10/22 that I'm still debating selling, but nothing for the 597.

 

[vellnueve]

Hmm, I'm not convinced of that definition.

Honestly, I'm not convinced of it either. But I think my other points stand.

 

[vellnueve]

The 597 wasn't made before 1994, therefore, no preban hicaps. I think they started making it in around 97-98.

 

[jdubois]

Honestly, I'm not convinced of it either. But I think my other points stand.

Agreed. My initial response was, "Good luck with that."

 

[dimsum414]

The 597 wasn't made before 1994, therefore, no preban hicaps. I think they started making it in around 97-98.

they could've made them before making the rifle....in anticipation....

 

[jdubois]

they could've made them before making the rifle....in anticipation....

I believe you are correct; but they only made the 2500 round spiral tube magazines.

 

[JPO]

The tube I am thinking of is flexible and uses pneumatics and a floating follower.

 

[strangenh]

I believe you are correct; but they only made the 2500 round spiral tube magazines.

Ah, the fabled Remington Tubular Spiral of Ultimate Plinkitude!

 

[JPO]

Did you think I was serious? I am just pointing out how rediculous our laws are when a feeding device calls into question the legality of a gun I had several of when I was a teenager.

 

[vellnueve]

they could've made them before making the rifle....in anticipation....

Good luck with that one.