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.
Are these Pre ban or Post ban Glock Mag?
Ignorance is bliss. Read the law.
(m) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) or (h), any person not exempted by statute who knowingly has in his possession
No person shall sell, offer for sale, transfer or possess an assault weapon or a large capacity feeding device that was not otherwise lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994...
They're square notch... you need a picture of the other side.
U-notch= widely excepted as Pre ban
Square notch, some regard all as post ban, others defer to the QTY of mag release cuts (1 cut=Pre ban, 2 cuts = Post ban).
I bought my Glock 17 in August of 1994, it came with 2 square notch mags. The mags are obviously pre ban. Also back in the days I had picked up a bunch of U notch mags, they work flawlessly in my 17, I dont understand the rap on this mags from some people.
Location of caliber marking is NOT an absolute indicator of status. READ the Sticky on Glock Mags.
NOBODY knows for sure and Glock USA is NOT told by Glock Austria which is what either. Pat Sweeney's book and Matt (mgr of AFS) both corroborate what I stated in the above paragraph (former in a book published during the Fed Ban and the latter due to his personal first-hand knowledge).
I agree with this and have read through the sticky several times. Gained a lot of knowledge from it. But I do occasionally run across a mag which makes me revisit it. Which is actually why i replied to this thread. While I have not read Pat's book, I have heard the later releases are lacking previous pics. Not sure if this is tue. I also recently came across this post in Glock talk which is news to me.Location of caliber marking is NOT an absolute indicator of status. READ the Sticky on Glock Mags.
NOBODY knows for sure and Glock USA is NOT told by Glock Austria which is what either. Pat Sweeney's book and Matt (mgr of AFS) both corroborate what I stated in the above paragraph (former in a book published during the Fed Ban and the latter due to his personal first-hand knowledge).
The u notchers sometimes don't drop free, can be quite anoying. Plus when fully loaded they have a tendencey to "bulge" due to a partial metal lining, therefore making it difficult to slide in and remove if need be. Some Unotchers like the 10mm for example are FML and drop nicely.
+1Read this thread from the beginning, as well as others. It says one thing to me very loudly REASONABLE DOUBT. Carry on.
I agree with this and have read through the sticky several times. Gained a lot of knowledge from it. But I do occasionally run across a mag which makes me revisit it. Which is actually why i replied to this thread. While I have not read Pat's book, I have heard the later releases are lacking previous pics. Not sure if this is tue. I also recently came across this post in Glock talk which is news to me.
- not sure who to credit
"The only real physical difference on a 'pre-ban" Factory FML Glock magazine and those manufactured AFTER October 1994 isn't the location of the caliber markings, it's the "dimples" or two holes in the plastic on the back of the magazine between the last four witness holes (on all 9mm examples) and the same dimples on the back of the .40S&W mags (depending on model) and all .45ACP models.
These holes or dimples were left over from the earlier NFML magazine molds that Glock re-used when they introduced the "new" FML magazines in late 1992. These same dimples are on every single NFML Glock magazine regardless of model or caliber. Glock scrapped these old molds and were forced to make new molds when they were required to add the BATF-mandated "Law Enforcement/Government Only" language to the post-Sept. 1994 restricted magazines.
Glock sold many thousands of Post-Ban FML, unmarked Factory magazines overseas for a few years after October 1994 WITHOUT the "LEO-only" language until the BATF forced them to change the design. ALL of these magazines DO NOT have a "high" caliber marking and DO NOT have the dimples. Many of these magazines are sold as "pre-ban". All of the above information is common knowledge among Glock collectors but with all of the confusion, you can see why Glock, Inc. doesn't want to take an "official" position with regards to an absurd State Law. Good luck."
*If I did miss this in th sticky don't crucify me. It's still new to me
Just pulled it off a thread on Glocktalk. Didn't grab the posters name. Emmetf or something like that. I can backtrack and find it again if you'd like. Just posting something I hadn't seen before. I don't have an opinion either way. Just a piece of the puzzle.The kicker here is "Not sure who to credit"
That and how did the BATF get Glock Austria to change a mag being made in other countries? Any actual documentation on this exchange?
Not bashing, just want to genuinely see it.
Anyone can say anything about the mags based upon their research but the problem is even the manufacturer cannot and will not state when a mag is from. Obvious things like the ambi cut will be easy to state as there is a date that relates to the introduction of that cut. Realistically, there will be some mags (high mark square, and now sans "dimples") that you could be prosecuted under and defend with that you cannot REASONABLY not know when they were made.
One question,
I know I can not buy a Glock out of state and have it shipped to Mass.
But can I walk into a store and just buy my Mags?