-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
MA: Identifying Pre-Ban Glock Mags
- Thread starter MarkM
- Start date
Dating the gun is good, but I'm really thorough. If I were in your shoes I'd call the back and talk to the legal department or an LE representative to see if they still have records including the serial number on the mag. See below for my reasoning.
There's two issues. Under the Federal standard, that was the case, but Mass. doesn't necessarily go by that. No dating or identifying info has come to light based on the AWB prosecutions that we're aware of.
The 2nd is that you have a gun likely issued during the ban, and a mag with some kind of LE markings and a serial number. There's cops out there who would freak out if they thought you were carrying a "police issued" gun with "police" mags in it or some BS. Keep in mind you live in the state where PD's refuse to re-sell their old guns to the public because they don't want them "going to the street."
![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
I think that would get much more attention than just a standard FML mag. I'm not saying that you should live in terror that your mag might be illegal. I am saying that if a cop sees that, they're going to wonder if the gun was stolen from a police department (yes that happens) or if you're breaking an imaginary law. You really will want to be able to explain that.LenS has gone back and forth with Glock legal quite a bit. I believe their position is that an ambi notch or LE markings is the only way to ID pre or post ban. They say that they've made so many design changes to mags they never catalogued, then mixed and matched parts on rebuilds, so now they can't date the various generations of FML mags outside of those two indicators.
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2008
- Messages
- 13
- Likes
- 0
I have been doing a little online search and found something interesting, at least I thought it was. Here is the link http://http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=14905483
Second mag on the OP's pic has identical numbers to mine. I looked very closely at the mag to eliminate a possibility that it could actually be the same magazine. It is definitely not. However the numbers are the same.
Second mag on the OP's pic has identical numbers to mine. I looked very closely at the mag to eliminate a possibility that it could actually be the same magazine. It is definitely not. However the numbers are the same.
Last edited:
Dating the gun is good, but I'm really thorough. If I were in your shoes I'd call the back and talk to the legal department or an LE representative to see if they still have records including the serial number on the mag. See below for my reasoning.
There's two issues. Under the Federal standard, that was the case, but Mass. doesn't necessarily go by that. No dating or identifying info has come to light based on the AWB prosecutions that we're aware of.
The 2nd is that you have a gun likely issued during the ban, and a mag with some kind of LE markings and a serial number. There's cops out there who would freak out if they thought you were carrying a "police issued" gun with "police" mags in it or some BS. Keep in mind you live in the state where PD's refuse to re-sell their old guns to the public because they don't want them "going to the street."
LenS has gone back and forth with Glock legal quite a bit. I believe their position is that an ambi notch or LE markings is the only way to ID pre or post ban. They say that they've made so many design changes to mags they never catalogued, then mixed and matched parts on rebuilds, so now they can't date the various generations of FML mags outside of those two indicators.
I would not be so paranoid. Glock isn't going to document the mags and every indication is that they can't.
There are cops out there that believe that civilian ownership of ANY AR-15 is illegal, there are cops out there that have arrested people for possession of a BB gun without a LTC or FID, but I wouldn't hide under 10# of tinfoil because any of these things are possible. Accept the fact that there is no catalog of mags tied to DOBs, that Glock-Austria has REFUSED to provide mag development info to Glock-USA and Glock-USA's legal department have told MA DAs that they can NOT date the mags!
It is true that Glock readily rebuilds old mags with new followers, springs and baseplates, so nobody can judge age of mags based on those items.
Now a slight correction on an attribution to me . . .
When I last spoke with Glock's Legal Dept, there were NO ambi-cut-out mags in the marketplace yet, so I never addressed that with them. HOWEVER, it is obvious to all that ALL ambi-cut-out mags are post-ban mfr (unless someone manually cut that notch out themselves).
I'm stuck behind a firewall right now and can't view the link. If more than two mags have the same serial number then I'm guessing it was a way to ID an entire lot of them. I've seen several DPD Glocks for sale around the Internet, but I've never thought to look at the mags before.
It seems like when Rabbit_Lived called Glock, they transferred him to the guy who dates the serial numbers on frames. I've called them before and I know that they can be brusque. If the serial number is on multiple mags, then I'm guessing that Glock would have some kind of records related to this, but chances are they wouldn't be with frame serial number lookup guy.
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
Calling back to talk to the legal department (or maybe to have the call shifted around while they try to find someone who would know) still seems like a good idea to conservative legal definitions GSG.Thanks for the clarification with the rest. Glock's lack of cooperation with ban states trying to ID mags may have something to do with submitting countless guns for abusive testing only to be repeatedly shot down by Mass.
Guys,
I couldn't find an answer, so forgive me if this has been asked before.
Can a post-ban 15 rounder be "made" ma compliant by inserting a block so that it wont feed more than 10 rounds? Does doing that satisfy the letter of the law?
Thanks!
I couldn't find an answer, so forgive me if this has been asked before.
Can a post-ban 15 rounder be "made" ma compliant by inserting a block so that it wont feed more than 10 rounds? Does doing that satisfy the letter of the law?
Thanks!
Thanks for your answer Mike. It is not pointless since it allows an individual who inadvertently possess them to comply with the (stupid) law ASAP. Saves him/her from having to buy new MA-friendly mags, and having to get rid of the 15 rounders?
slugworth
NES Member
Do pistol laws differ from rifle laws? Cause there a thread here about pre ban 30rd. mags in post ban gun (Ar-15) And it was said that was legal to do with a LTC Class A But here it seems that Pre ban 15rd. mags are illegal for use in post ban pistols that came with 10rd. mags... Is this true?
there are several are laws at work.
there are pistols that can and can not be sold by dealers. no pistol possession laws other than the AWB.
there are rifles and shotguns with features that you can not possess because of the AWB
and then there are post ban mags of any type that you can not possess if they have a capacity greater than 10
they are all separate issues
Everything is explained in the stickies. Read them first: http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/forums/81-Massachusetts-Laws
this glock ban is very confusing to me.
if i want a glock 23 in massachusetts, is the following correct:
1. must be 2nd gen glock 23 (made before 1998), so i have to buy it used somewhere.
is there any other way? can a police officer buy a glock and then sell it to you if i wanted a post-ban glock?
if i want a glock 23 in massachusetts, is the following correct:
1. must be 2nd gen glock 23 (made before 1998), so i have to buy it used somewhere.
is there any other way? can a police officer buy a glock and then sell it to you if i wanted a post-ban glock?
Last edited:
The handgun compliance stuff isn't relevant to this thread, there are no "banned glocks" in MA.... there are however, glocks that can't be sold by dealers new, etc.
Please read this thread:
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/threads/37553-MA-Handgun-Compliance-Q-A-Thread-(new)
Further handgun compliance posts in this thread will be deleted. (it has noting to do with AWB compliance. )
-Mike
It's probably not worth mentioning, but I will anyway, that there is another identifier that I noticed at least on new 13 round .40 SW for the Glock 23. Besides the dual cutaways for the gen 4 ambi-catch, I noticed that the four in ".40" is different. I remember there being another stamp that didn't appear on my pre-ban 13 round magazine but I can't remember what it was.
Agree. Reading this entire thread you will learn that even Glock US couldn't tell you definitely when the cut-over to banned mags happened (absent LE/Mil markings or ambi-cut-out).
I take it you are a burden of proof guy vs. hi/lo caliber markings guy?What about follower markings?
What about follower markings?
Nothing says that you can't replace followers and springs on any mag! Of course (for the cup 1/2 full crowd) nothing in MGLs says you can either.
Glock sent me a bunch of new followers, springs and baseplates for my Wife's pre-ban U-channel G17 mags.
It may be good to go, but I bought three exactly like that recently. There were dozens in a big plastic bag. One of them only takes 9 rounds, another 13, and one 15 but is really hard to get the last few rounds loaded even though they lookalike, and were sold as 15 round mags. While this is a limited example, it has made me very suspicious of anything except the standard (based on my experience) Glock mags.
Caveat emptor.
Oh right, I should have mentioned that these do have a glock floor plate and appear to be as solid as any verified glock original mag. I don't think they are anything but glock mags. The reason I ask about this is because I was under the impression that;
1)T he absence of the 'window' on the front of the mag indicated a pre-ban mag--- If it has a rectangle cut on the front of the mag, through which you can see the metal lining, its banned mag.
2) U-notch mags are pre-ban
But then I started reading about the height/positioning of the caliber markings on the top rear of mags with the square notch, not the u-notch... and so I am unsure about square notch mags now.. Ughh. This is ridiculous.
1)T he absence of the 'window' on the front of the mag indicated a pre-ban mag--- If it has a rectangle cut on the front of the mag, through which you can see the metal lining, its banned mag.
2) U-notch mags are pre-ban
But then I started reading about the height/positioning of the caliber markings on the top rear of mags with the square notch, not the u-notch... and so I am unsure about square notch mags now.. Ughh. This is ridiculous.
Don't be. What Len stated is right- if you don't believe us, call Glock. I know a bunch of weekend sallies that don't, but that's fine by me... more mags for the rest of us.
-Mike
Oh man... THis is kinda what I was feeling!! How exciting... How much should I expect to pay for a mag like the one I showed above? We'll assume its not FML. BUt maybe there is one in there.... Wish I was looking for 45 and 40 mags like this too cuz there was plenty of those...
I never pay more than about 30 bucks for a Glock mag, and I only buy square notch FML. Course the ones without the ambi notch on the front are getting harder and harder to find.
-Mike
I paid $30 for the ones I bought. Just to clarify, I wasn't insinuating that they weren't real Glock mags. I had never seen them before, and the dealer didn't have the ones with the window. Based on what you say, i guess I had bad luck. I tried to open them up this morning to see if I could fix them, and I could not. One of them definitely has a problem, as the detent on the bottom is not in the hole.
ETA: I got one open, and the internal bottom plate was in vertically. I fixed it, and it takes 15 now. The other one won't open, and only takes 13.
ETA: I got one open, and the internal bottom plate was in vertically. I fixed it, and it takes 15 now. The other one won't open, and only takes 13.
Last edited:
Well, somehow or another y ou have to pry the plate off and find out what's going on inside. It just sounds like someone who didn't know what they were doing had owned them previously.
What I usually do is get a punch that is smaller than the diameter of the hole, put it in the hole and apply pressure so the punch is pushing on the inside of the mag... squeeze the sides of the mag near the floorplate, and the plate will come right off.
-Mike
What I usually do is get a punch that is smaller than the diameter of the hole, put it in the hole and apply pressure so the punch is pushing on the inside of the mag... squeeze the sides of the mag near the floorplate, and the plate will come right off.
-Mike
I'll tell you what my trainer told me at my last Glock Cert'd Armorers class. When the Fed AWB went into affect Glock moved the caliber designation up towards the feed lips to make room for the "Restricted, LE Only" marking. If you look at your mags you'll see the BOTTOM of the "9mm" caliber designation letters is in line with the magazine stop protrusion on the left side of the mag. The pre-ban mags cailber designation had the TOP of the "9mm" almost in line with the mag stop protrusion. According to my instructor when the AWB expired, Glock removed the "Restricted, LE Only" wording but left the caliber designation in the upper position to save having to build new mag molds. So according to my instructor, if your caliber designation numbers/letters sits above the mag stop protrusion then they are post ban, if it sits below the mag stop protrusion then its pre-ban.
I confirm what LenS said about Glock not dating their mags etc but just giving you what was taught to me and is being taught to civs/LEOs at all Glock Armorer classes.
