Converting High Capacity AR Mags into 10 Round

[johnny1290]

Meh not that you asked but I just don't see the reason in going to the hassle to cut up and d**k around with my legally owned standard capacity magazines when I can buy the 10 rds so cheap.

For me it's just so much easier than worrying about a po-lice cramming an 11th round into my home modified magazine or something.

Plus a 10 rd mag doesn't draw extra scrutiny at the range or wherever like a standard capacity does.

Not that I've got anything to hide, but why ask for trouble.

just my 2 cents

[Zachs300zx]

While that is covered in the PDF linked, none of the below is. Where are you getting the below information?

Its all in the PDF, I even listed references the the specific questions: http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/fsor.pdf

Right. That also doesn't give you a blanket "ok" to make your modification meet ZERO standard for permanence. They are simply acknowledging that nothing in this world meets the dictionary definition of "permanent".

So, let me get this straight. "Nothing in this world meets the dictionary definition of permanent", but you have to do something to make it look like you tried to reach this impossible goal? Like placing a block in the magazine and epoxying it in place, a roll pin, a rivet? Ok.. To each his own since the above PDF is the extent of what the DOJ will say on this matter. I'm not a lawyer, so use epoxy with blocks. That's what I would recommend. Better safe than sorry.

Sure. But that also doesn't exclude a DA from prosecuting anyways. And if the modification is not found to be permanent, well then you have yourself an awesome little felony there.

The DA can try to screw just about anyone on this forum if they really want to. I don't care what method of magazine conversion you have. So everyone should play their stupid little game and strive for the goal of "permanence", even though that is not synonymous with irreversible. Luckily, we're all reasonable people so we know what they mean

[P.Charm]

I just take 10 round mags, cut the 30 mag to length, epoxy that to the bottom of the 10 round mag, then gun kote it so it looks like one piece. done deal, no need for mag blocks, wood, hangers or rivets. cost more but I won't have to face a judge or make my rifle look like it's missing "something"

jk, haven't done this, but it seems like it's the only way to be safe.

[freonr22]

tag

[CHS]

Its all in the PDF, I even listed references the the specific questions: http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/fsor.pdf

Ok, here is the entirety of the section devoted to "permanently altered".

So, let me get this straight. "Nothing in this world meets the dictionary definition of permanent", but you have to do something to make it look like you tried to reach this impossible goal? Like placing a block in the magazine and epoxying it in place, a roll pin, a rivet? Ok.. To each his own since the above PDF is the extent of what the DOJ will say on this matter. I'm not a lawyer, so use epoxy with blocks. That's what I would recommend. Better safe than sorry.

[stix213]

The DA can try to screw just about anyone on this forum if they really want to. I don't care what method of magazine conversion you have. So everyone should play their stupid little game and strive for the goal of "permanence", even though that is not synonymous with irreversible. Luckily, we're all reasonable people so we know what they mean

So why would you want to make the prosecuting DA's job easier? It isn't the DA's idea of "permanent" you need to worry about, its the jury's anyway. A jury will understand that your 10 round modification doesn't need to withstand a nuclear bomb to be permanent, even if that doesn't match a dictionary definition.

[Zachs300zx]

So why would you want to make the prosecuting DA's job easier? It isn't the DA's idea of "permanent" you need to worry about, its the jury's anyway. A jury will understand that your 10 round modification doesn't need to withstand a nuclear bomb to be permanent, even if that doesn't match a dictionary definition.

I wouldn't want to make the DA's job easier. So I use epoxy on my magazines, and recommend that others do too when using our blocks. The point is to make it easy to convert to 10 rounds without using rivets or plastic coat hangers.

I'm not even trying to argue here. I don't want to argue details of the block replacing the locking plate, never removing it, etc... Epoxy the block to the spring, epoxy the floor plate closed, etc. I agree that a cheap magazine is not worth the cost of defending yourself in court. End of story.

[Zachs300zx]

In the DOJ response to questions on pages 23-29 here http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/fsor.pdf Its on the DOJ's own website. What is this not a real document put out by them?


This is where the true problem is! The DOJ wishes to continue this Ambiguity.

[mdimeo]

I had an idea for a product, which anyone is free to steal if it's practical.

Could you make a magazine follower that was several inches tall, so as to fill enough of the capacity of the magazine to get it under 11 rounds?

wouldn't work for severely banana-shaped magazines, but straight ones like a typical AR mag should be fine.

Such a magazine seems likely permanent - you'd have to completely replace a major part to get it to hold more.

Dunno if it's practical.

[Ordnance1]

I have been told by several LEO's AND a DA (friend of the family) that if it is blocked and riveted then it is permanent ie. requires tools to drill the rivet out thus "destroying" the originality of the magazine. Personally I don't trust epoxy, if you bang the mag against a table hard enough then the epoxy cracks and you can remove the floor plate. Rivets are the way to go.

[ivsamhell]

Did you completely miss this point:

It doesn't matter what the resulting pile of parts is considered.

The charge will be for manufacturing a large-capacity magazine. They will show that you manufactured it by purchasing a parts kit and installing a block. They will then show that the modification wasn't permanent. If all they have to do is use their fingers to take the floor plate off and remove the dowel, then your initial modification was not permanent and therefore you were guilty of felony manufacturing.

What they are left with, complete magazine or parts, has no bearing on what they need to prove or show in court.

???

No, I read that opinion. But if a tool is required to remove the floor plate(plenty of magazines) and a tool is required to remove epoxy or a rivet, I can't see how one side is reasonable and the other is not. If you have to tear it down then manufacture a hicap, its reasonable to me that that is a separate crime ie, a separate case of manufacturing.
Like I said I don't recommend anyone ride the line, I know I certainly can't afford fighting the legal battle. I'm a fabricator I can't see epoxy or a rivet as "reasonably" permanent, I'm supposed to try and figure out what a pen-pusher would think is reasonably permanent? The correct tool for the job voids permanence, whether thats a punch, a bullet, a grinder, a hammer, a drill or so on makes no difference to me; a tool is a tool. Without a definition its only opinion, what makes yours valid?

like mentioned in another post and a common way to modify p-mags: is a lengthened, pinned, epoxied follower enough to comply?
in this case you need a tool to remove the stock functioning floorplate, and then you can try a lucky break or use another tool to remove the rod.
Or is it again just someones opinion that the floorplate also have some additional form of attachment?

[Zachs300zx]

I had an idea for a product, which anyone is free to steal if it's practical.

Could you make a magazine follower that was several inches tall, so as to fill enough of the capacity of the magazine to get it under 11 rounds?

wouldn't work for severely banana-shaped magazines, but straight ones like a typical AR mag should be fine.

Such a magazine seems likely permanent - you'd have to completely replace a major part to get it to hold more.

Dunno if it's practical.

H&K already has a patent on this type of device. Found it during my patent research.

[CHS]

like mentioned in another post and a common way to modify p-mags: is a lengthened, pinned, epoxied follower enough to comply?
in this case you need a tool to remove the stock functioning floorplate, and then you can try a lucky break or use another tool to remove the rod.

PMAG's require no tools whatsoever in order to disassemble.

[ivsamhell]

PMAG's require no tools whatsoever in order to disassemble.

oops. I'd still prefer to use a tool. how about the rest of the question?

[CHS]

oops. I'd still prefer to use a tool. how about the rest of the question?

I would just reiterate what I've already said:

Basically, when you modify your magazine to hold 10 rounds or less, imagine that you are in court explaining why you think it meets the definition of permanent. If you sit there and think "yeah, I think 12 people would go for that", it's probably permanent.

I've always said, if the DA has to disprove your permanence by bringing a hammer, drill press and maybe an angle grinder into the court room, you're probably permanent.