glock hi-cap magazine legal question

[nordic alien]

have pre ban glock hi cap 10 mm mags vector arms makes an extension to increase them to 33 rounds; legal in ma?

 

[looser38]

Pre ban?
Hi cap?
Legal question?
IDK, Call an attorney?
Let's see what everyone else says.

 

[Al-Jim19]

Legal to increase capacity of preban magazines. Rock on.

 

[SgtHal75]

have pre ban glock hi cap 10 mm mags vector arms makes an extension to increase them to 33 rounds; legal in ma?

Yes. U already have more than 10 rounds in the preban.

 

[1903Collector]

Just looked at them on the the website, says they won't ship to a state that has mag restrictions.

 

[Horrible]

All glock mags are illegal in MA. Cuz Mora sez so.

 

[appraiser]

Have you ever used a 33 round magazine?

I have one ( Glock OEM 9mm for the Model 18) and it sucks to load, it is a waste of ammo, will have failure to load, etc etc etc.

It is range use only.

I'd rather have my 17 round magazines any day of the week.

As to your question, it is illegal to modify a "post ban" magazine to accept more than 10 rounds , but since you are using pre ban high caps ( IANAL this is not legal advice) and you wanted to throw your money away, go for it.

 

[nstassel]

I hate to rain on everyone's parade who thinks that a preban magazine of STANDARD CAPACITY can be modified to a larger capacity and still maintain its preban nature. There is absolutely no authority to support that theory. It might be true, and it might be the exact opposite.

During the federal awb a similar issue was addressed in an opinion letter by the ATF. The ATF stated that modifying a magazine to increase capacity in a different caliber was manufacturing a new large capacity magazine.

Sucks to be us but there's a real possibility that that definition would be applied in Mass in this scenario. Maybe not, but those are nothing but guesses.

http://www.titleii.com/bardwell/atf_letter85.txt

 

[Brewer]

I hate to rain on everyone's parade who thinks that a preban magazine of STANDARD CAPACITY can be modified to a larger capacity and still maintain its preban nature. There is absolutely no authority to support that theory. It might be true, and it might be the exact opposite.

During the federal awb a similar issue was addressed in an opinion letter by the ATF. The ATF stated that modifying a magazine to increase capacity in a different caliber was manufacturing a new large capacity magazine.

Sucks to be us but there's a real possibility that that definition would be applied in Mass in this scenario. Maybe not, but those are nothing but guesses.

http://www.titleii.com/bardwell/atf_letter85.txt

That ATF opinion letter does not address purely extending a pre-ban mag but also adding additional parts to change the caliber. Doing so is in effect manufacturing a new magazine regardless of how old the parts are. I’d be interested if an opinion letter exists on simply extending.

A 9mm 20 shot magazine manufactured prior to September 13, 1994,
would not be a large capacity ammunition feeding device as defined.
You asked about altering such a magazine to accept 14 rounds of
10mm ammunition by modifying the feed lips and possibly the
follower.

- 2 -

Mr. Bardwell

The altered magazine would be a large capacity ammunition feeding
device. The fact that the materials used to construct the 10mm
magazine were made prior to September 13, 994, would not mean that
the 10mm magazine was manufactured prior to that date. A new 10mm
magazine with the capacity of accepting more than 10 rounds of
ammunition would have been manufactured and it would be subject to
the prohibition in section 922(w).

 

[nstassel]

That ATF opinion letter does not address purely extending a pre-ban mag but also adding additional parts to change the caliber. Doing so is in effect manufacturing a new magazine regardless of how old the parts are. I’d be interested if an opinion letter exists on simply extending.

Absolutely agree that the letter doesn't control the issue not only because it's not legally binding but it's not directly on point. It simply shows another way of looking at the issue from the one some people adamantly espouse as authoritative when it's no more than a hopeful guess.

 

[92G]

OP- there is a simple solution to this need for so much 10mm. it's call a 44 magnum.

 

[M1911]

Wrong revolver for that quote — it should be a 629

 

[92G]

Wrong revolver for that quote — it should be a 629

the ruger super blackhawk and S&W model 29 were both produced in mid 1950's. very close to each other in time. if one was first it wasn't by much. iv'e heard all sorts of stories about how Ruger knew that S&W was working on a magnum'ed 44 special. who knows which story is accurate. i think the 629 stainless came way later like 1980's. unfortunately even after like 60+ years of building revolvers, Ruger still can't find a way to build a 44 magnum without tearing up my hand. a 40 oz 629 or even 30-ish oz model 69 shoots more pleasant than my 51 oz Ruger Redhawk. to me the 629 is the finest revolver i've ever shot. nothing comes even close. well maybe the K frame 357 magnums but it's apples / oranges.

 

[M1911]

the ruger super blackhawk and S&W model 29 were both produced in mid 1950's. very close to each other in time. if one was first it wasn't by much. iv'e heard all sorts of stories about how Ruger knew that S&W was working on a magnum'ed 44 special. who knows which story is accurate. i think the 629 stainless came way later like 1980's. unfortunately even after like 60+ years of building revolvers, Ruger still can't find a way to build a 44 magnum without tearing up my hand. a 40 oz 629 or even 30-ish oz model 69 shoots more pleasant than my 51 oz Ruger Redhawk.

You are correct, I meant the 29. I believe that is what was used in the movie.

 

[pupchow]

The OP has 15 rd preban mags, and wants to alter its capacity utilizing a mag extension. That would not alter the definition of the magazine, and it would still function in a G20/G40. Lawful.

 

[Reptile]

This following is about G21 mags and the Vector extension:

Do not use with U notch mags.


I believe that all G20 10mm mags are U notch...

It is possible that the Vector extension for 10mm will not work in U notch mags.

Edit: I meant to say that all G20 10mm pre ban mags are U notch.

 

[drgrant]

I believe that all G20 10mm mags are U notch...

WAT?

-Mike

 

[45collector]

I have one of those Scherer +2 baseplate extensions on a Gen2 G19 15rnd mag.

I can haz jailtime?

 

[Reptile]

WAT?

-Mike

Preban.

 

[nstassel]

The OP has 15 rd preban mags, and wants to alter its capacity utilizing a mag extension. That would not alter the definition of the magazine, and it would still function in a G20/G40. Lawful.

Another possible guess, but definitely not certain.

 

[Reptile]

Here she is...

Mag-Ex2 Extension Kit for Glock Magazine

The G21 .45 extension can't be used with U notch.

Can the G20 10mm extension?

Who knows?

The probably think that nobody has those old mags 10mm U notch mags so they may have never tested them.

If they do work with 10mm U notch - I'd buy em up ASAP because they will double in price if used with this extension.

The 9mm extension is awesome, too.

Don't forget a +20 extension from Taylor Freelance:

Goliath Glock plus 20 Basepad - Black