• 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.

Mag blockers and modern magazines

Joined
Jul 3, 2019
Messages
9
Likes
7
Feedback: 1 / 0 / 0
Hey. Is it possible to get non compliant magazines (newer 30 round, for example) and make them compliant by permanently affixing magazine blocker with crazy glue / epoxy?
 
Crazy glue isn't permanent.

Neither is the plastic epoxy used by S&W to secure the pins in their blocked M&P 15-22 mags. I trust their lawyers have done their due diligence and epoxying a blocking mechanism is a pretty safe bet.

The real answer is “nobody knows”.
 
Neither is the plastic epoxy used by S&W to secure the pins in their blocked M&P 15-22 mags. I trust their lawyers have done their due diligence and epoxying a blocking mechanism is a pretty safe bet.

The real answer is “nobody knows”.

''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"

If I'm reading this right .22 is excluded from large capacity definition. Am I missing something?
 
''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"

If I'm reading this right .22 is excluded from large capacity definition. Am I missing something?
Only if it's. TuuuuBUlar! Lol


bill-and-ted-3-teaser-poster.jpg
 
''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"

If I'm reading this right .22 is excluded from large capacity definition. Am I missing something?

That’s for “tubular” magazines like these:
BEEF0B08-259D-4FCE-8530-9D1E5E0A45E5.jpeg
 
Neither is the plastic epoxy used by S&W to secure the pins in their blocked M&P 15-22 mags. I trust their lawyers have done their due diligence and epoxying a blocking mechanism is a pretty safe bet.

BIG difference here - S&W gets in trouble and nobody goes to jail over it, they just pay a fine and move on.

Someone here gets in trouble over it and they're going to jail for a while, having an arrest on their record and all that entails, paying for lawyers, etc. even if they eventually beat the charge they're still f'd
 
BIG difference here - S&W gets in trouble and nobody goes to jail over it, they just pay a fine and move on.

Someone here gets in trouble over it and they're going to jail for a while, having an arrest on their record and all that entails, paying for lawyers, etc. even if they eventually beat the charge they're still f'd

1. Being permanently 10 rounds is not the requirement anyway

2. S&W have a team of lawyers to help determine what complied with the law. That’s a whole heap of a lot better legal effort than me or you could do. But if you want to play it super duper, triple dog safe and then by all means.
 
Corporate lawyers determine what the cheapest option is they can probably get away with and how much it will cost them if they get caught. Its all about the level of risk and liability they're willing to accept vs the profit margin, not necessarily what complies 100% with the law. Its a bad idea to use that as a benchmark for your personal liability as John Q Public citizen since the rules are different for us.
 
Corporate lawyers determine what the cheapest option is they can probably get away with and how much it will cost them if they get caught. Its all about the level of risk and liability they're willing to accept vs the profit margin, not necessarily what complies 100% with the law. Its a bad idea to use that as a benchmark for your personal liability as John Q Public citizen since the rules are different for us.

Please refer to #1 above. Also, large corporations are usually much more risk averse than the average John Q. Public oft his type of thing. How many companies won’t even ship parts to MA?
 
''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"

If I'm reading this right .22 is excluded from large capacity definition. Am I missing something?

JFC.

So, my lever action .38/357 Rossi is illegal in MA.
And my Mossberg 930 is illegal in MA.

Let's not even talk about my Glocks or AR-15's.
 
JFC.

So, my lever action .38/357 Rossi is illegal in MA.
And my Mossberg 930 is illegal in MA.

Let's not even talk about my Glocks or AR-15's.
The law only exempts .22LR tubular (Only) mags, nothing else. That said, yes there are other guns out there freely sold in MA that violates this law. If you get caught for any reason, you are f'd.

No case law TTBOMK on jury-rigging post-ban mags to make them compliant. My bet from my knowledge of LE, you would likely be arrested, prosecuted and it is a toss-up whether you get convicted or not (largely depends on how much money you have to pay for the BEST legal counsel!).
 
JFC.

So, my lever action .38/357 Rossi is illegal in MA.
And my Mossberg 930 is illegal in MA.

Let's not even talk about my Glocks or AR-15's.

A large-capacity shotgun is a semi-auto shotgun capable of accepting more than five shotgun shells. It's not a feeding device.

Did somebody make up a new law?
 
No it isn't. Why would you think that? The mag tube won't accept more than 10 rounds whether .357 or .38 are used.

I just went downstairs and got the carbine out of the safe. I grabbed a box of .38spcl that I loaded, (OAL = 1.438 on the one I checked), and loaded TWELVE into the tube. Used the lever action to chamber and ejected all 12.

Took out a box of Remington UMC factory .38spcl. OAL = 1.463; ELEVEN rounds fit into the tube. All chambered and ejected fine.


Rossi Puma .357 imported by Interarms; purchased 04/25/87 for 274.95 (plus 20.62 tax) from Arms & Munitions in Fairfield, CT.
 
I just went downstairs and got the carbine out of the safe. I grabbed a box of .38spcl that I loaded, (OAL = 1.438 on the one I checked), and loaded TWELVE into the tube. Used the lever action to chamber and ejected all 12.

Took out a box of Remington UMC factory .38spcl. OAL = 1.463; ELEVEN rounds fit into the tube. All chambered and ejected fine.


Rossi Puma .357 imported by Interarms; purchased 04/25/87 for 274.95 (plus 20.62 tax) from Arms & Munitions in Fairfield, CT.

High capacity assault-levergun!!
Suppose I should go see if more than 10 wadcutters would fit into mine.
Oh wait IDGAF. ;)

DF403B47-F942-404D-962E-F158BEBA7931.png
 
Hey. Is it possible to get non compliant magazines (newer 30 round, for example) and make them compliant by permanently affixing magazine blocker with crazy glue / epoxy?

IANAL, but my guess would be "no", for the simple reason once you "get" the non compliant magazine, you are not in compliance!!
 
Yea. Just get some compliant mags.
7777418_0.jpg
 
I understand the question is rhetorical but why would you want a permanently (meaning no way to convert it back without destroying it) limited magazine without the intent of being able to actually convert it to it's original capacity at some point? I have a number of pre-ban 30's but I don't use them. They are nice to have but I much prefer 20's (which are the bulk of my mags) as they are less cumbersome especially in the prone or bench but even those stay home most times as I shoot in groups of ten so why put wear and tear on them and I just use the 10's (same size). Pre-bans are still around if you want but they are at a premium.
 
Back
Top Bottom