Idea for an un-banable adjustable capacity magazine.

[Nodaedul]

The goal: A 10 round magazine that is truly a 10 round magazine in size (not a 10/30) but whose parts, given ownership of multiple 10 round magazines, can be easily rebuilt into 20, 30, or 40 round magazines.

Requirements: There must be no special extra parts required to build high capacity magazines from 10 round magazine parts and therefore, nothing that could be banned.

Core Idea Parts: A 10 round magazine body whereby the top of the body is keyed to slide onto the bottom of the body such that any number of 10 round bodies can be combined. A base plate retainer that is also slotted to be used to attach 10 round magazine springs such that any number of magazine springs can be combined.

Other parts: Feeding head keyed to slide onto the top of magazine body. Base plate keyed to slide onto the bottom of magazine bodies. Standard follower.

Your thoughts?

I'm tempted to get a 3D printer and go to work but I'd rather just air the idea so if it has merit manufacturers can get it done in scale. I don't see how a legislature could ban these 10 round mags. High caps will still be illegal. I don't advocate breaking laws. I just want to make their regulations pointless and moot.

[MotoFahren]

The single magazines would not be illegal but as soon as you attach two of them together you commit a felony.

interesting idea though.

[keenkeen]

The single magazines would not be illegal but as soon as you attach two of them together you commit a felony.

interesting idea though.

Not outside of CA. (And a number of other states)

[RickD427]

I'd very strongly recommend that you go back and give a very close reading to Penal Code section 16740.

The type of magazine that you have described is already a felony to manufacture, or to acquire (even though it could be lawfully possessed).

Please note that even though PC sections 16740 and 32310 use the term "magazine" in the singular, the definition refers to generic feeding devices that "have the capacity" to accept more than ten rounds. That is quite different from only being designed to hold ten rounds.

Once you give the ten round magazine the capability of being joined to another ten round magazine, you have created a "feeding device" capable of holding more than ten rounds.

That's a felony.

[RickD427]

The single magazines would not be illegal but as soon as you attach two of them together you commit a felony.

interesting idea though.

Moto,

It would be a felony even before the single magazines were connected. The law does not proscribe magazines having a capacity of more than ten rounds. The law proscribes feeding devices having the capacity to accept more than ten rounds.

The felony is committed as soon as you modify the bottom of one magazine to accept another.

[Nodaedul]

I'd very strongly recommend that you go back and give a very close reading to Penal Code section 16740.

The type of magazine that you have described is already a felony to manufacture, or to acquire (even though it could be lawfully possessed).

Please note that even though PC sections 16740 and 32310 use the term "magazine" in the singular, the definition refers to generic feeding devices that "have the capacity" to accept more than ten rounds. That is quite different from only being designed to hold ten rounds.

Once you give the ten round magazine the capability of being joined to another ten round magazine, you have created a "feeding device" capable of holding more than ten rounds.

That's a felony.

I would argue that my magazine absolutely does not have the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds. I would put one down in front of you and challenge you to insert an 11'th round. If you tried to go get a bunch of extra parts, disassemble my magazine into pieces and reassemble it with your extra stuff I'd cry foul since my mag ceased to exist once you disassembled it into parts and added other stuff. I might even grab two 10 round metal AR mags and loosly tape their parts together or tac weld to prove the same can be done to currently available mags.

As a last resort, if I had no other choice, I'd add that dot of epoxy to the base plate that currently makes 10/30 mags "permanent", making my mags no different from the already available 10/30's (as we know there is a law in the works to ban 10/30's). Ok, pass a law banning epoxy seals. Ill build them with closed baseplates and a really thin line of plastic with instructions "dremel here to make mags combinable for moving out of state".

The point of this exercise is not to bring high cap mags into CA. The point is to make hi cap mags impossible to regulate, and I think this achieves that.

[SamsDX]

Why not just buy a standard capacity magazine when you're out of state? It would effectively achieve the same objective as what you're trying to accomplish here.

Also, what you contemplate here has effectively been tried with the Pearce +1 grips. If I recall, those extensions themselves were deemed illegal, though not the standard 10 round magazines.

[RickD427]

I would argue that my magazine absolutely does not have the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds. I would put one down in front of you and challenge you to insert an 11'th round. If you tried to go get a bunch of extra parts, disassemble my magazine into pieces and reassemble it with your extra stuff I'd cry foul since my mag ceased to exist once you disassembled it into parts and added other stuff. I might even grab two 10 round metal AR mags and loosly tape their parts together or tac weld to prove the same can be done to currently available mags.

As a last resort, if I had no other choice, I'd add that dot of epoxy to the base plate that currently makes 10/30 mags "permanent", making my mags no different from the already available 10/30's (as we know there is a law in the works to ban 10/30's). Ok, pass a law banning epoxy seals. Ill build them with closed baseplates and a really thin line of plastic with instructions "dremel here to make mags combinable for moving out of state".

The point of this exercise is not to bring high cap mags into CA. The point is to make hi cap mags impossible to regulate, and I think this achieves that.

OK, Challenge accepted. But you have to put down two of the magazines (remember, you described the multiple use of the magazines).

It looks like you kinda missed the subtle hint in my earlier posting. I'll make it more obvious - Don't talk about "magazines" they're not the point. The legal point is about "feeding devices." It's also not about how many round the "feeding device" actually holds. It's about how many the "feeding device" has the capability of holding.

Here's how I meet your challenge. I take the first our described magazines, and then stick in the bottom of the other, and then stuff more than ten rounds into the "feeding device", even though each magazine can hold no more than ten rounds.

[Nodaedul]

I don't see the difference in calling it magazine vs feeding device. I would only sell 10 round feeding devices. You breaking down my mags and creating something else is not my problem.

Is there some regulation that you can cite that describes the degree of effort that delineates building an illegal mag from my parts by hand, vs using a tool to depress a snap joint connected version of my mag, vs using a screw driver to screw together my mag housings instead of the keyed sliding connection vs using sheet metal presses and welding to combine two metal mags?

Also, you didn't address the "permanent" epoxied baseplate or cut lined baseplate options.

I can think of countless ways to make this magazine requiring any degree of tools to no tools at all to convert. I don't see how most of these options can be regulated and the end result is the same: Laws trying to make it impossible for people to get high capacity magazines become useless as anyone can illegally make a high cap with very little effort.

Again. I don't want to make high caps. Nor do I want anyone to break the law. I just want to make regulation so pointless that they give up trying to regulate.

[CAL.BAR]

Not outside of CA. (And a number of other states)

Who the hell would care outside of CA anyway? If you're IN the other states - just get a regular mag.

[Nodaedul]

Who the hell would care outside of CA anyway? If you're IN the other states - just get a regular mag.

Out of state my mags would be sold as "Modular". Maybe someone wants a 40 rounder for 3 gun competitions but would rather run 20 rounders while shooting prone. Why buy an expensive exotic high cap mag when you're already seconds away from one with what you've got?

[LeadFarmer74]

The unbanable magazine has already been banned in CA hahaha go figure.

[wireless]

I don't see the difference in calling it magazine vs feeding device. I would only sell 10 round feeding devices. You breaking down my mags and creating something else is not my problem.

Is there some regulation that you can cite that describes the degree of effort that delineates building an illegal mag from my parts by hand, vs using a tool to depress a snap joint connected version of my mag, vs using a screw driver to screw together my mag housings instead of the keyed sliding connection vs using sheet metal presses and welding to combine two metal mags?

Also, you didn't address the "permanent" epoxied baseplate or cut lined baseplate options.

I can think of countless ways to make this magazine requiring any degree of tools to no tools at all to convert. I don't see how most of these options can be regulated and the end result is the same: Laws trying to make it impossible for people to get high capacity magazines become useless as anyone can illegally make a high cap with very little effort.

Again. I don't want to make high caps. Nor do I want anyone to break the law. I just want to make regulation so pointless that they give up trying to regulate.

16740. As used in this part, "large-capacity magazine" means any
ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than 10
rounds, but shall not be construed to include any of the following:
(a) A feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it
cannot accommodate more than 10 rounds.
(b) A .22 caliber tube ammunition feeding device.
(c) A tubular magazine that is contained in a lever-action
firearm.

The courts get to interrupt the meaning of "capacity to accept". Based on which judges make up the CA courts and how this law is written, there's a good chance that the courts would interrupt it differently than what you're arguing.

Either way there are much easier ways to convert a 10/30 to standard capacity. Replace the legal 10/30 hexmag with a standard spring (you can buy 10 packs online for a few dollars per spring).

What you're proposing is cumbersome and annoying when there are easier ways to alter a 10/30 magazine. Drilling out the rivet with an electric screwdriver takes about 15-30 seconds.

Here's a picture of hexmags.

http://i.imgur.com/d08GM1n.jpg

[JDay]

The single magazines would not be illegal but as soon as you attach two of them together you commit a felony.

interesting idea though.

The magazines themselves would be illegal under the large capacity magazine conversion kit law.

[major burnout]

I would argue that my magazine absolutely does not have the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds. I would put one down in front of you and challenge you to insert an 11'th round. If you tried to go get a bunch of extra parts, disassemble my magazine into pieces and reassemble it with your extra stuff I'd cry foul since my mag ceased to exist once you disassembled it into parts and added other stuff. I might even grab two 10 round metal AR mags and loosly tape their parts together or tac weld to prove the same can be done to currently available mags.

As a last resort, if I had no other choice, I'd add that dot of epoxy to the base plate that currently makes 10/30 mags "permanent", making my mags no different from the already available 10/30's (as we know there is a law in the works to ban 10/30's). Ok, pass a law banning epoxy seals. Ill build them with closed baseplates and a really thin line of plastic with instructions "dremel here to make mags combinable for moving out of state".

The point of this exercise is not to bring high cap mags into CA. The point is to make hi cap mags impossible to regulate, and I think this achieves that.

https://youtu.be/Gk4vSh9bd7M