HICAP Magazines

[tfox2k1]

I've been considering a way to obtain some HiCap magazines for several of my handguns.   I suppose I should as a customs agent about this, but easier to ask the old barracks lawyers on here  

Has anyone had experience buying handgun magazines when travelling in Europe, or having friends mailing some from Europe?   Would packing about four European magazines per handgun into my luggage have ATF battering down my door or locking me up for years?   I have four semi's all from Europe, CZ, HK, Beretta, was in all of those countries two years ago.  Would be interesting to visit a gun store in each and buying some accessories and magazines.

Please advise.  

[Walt-Sherrill]

Don't go there.  

Once you got them in country, you're probably home free.  

But you run the risk of customs offenses and pissing off the BATF, too.  

Your friends, if mailing, and found out, would face legal charges, too.  (I guarantee that the US government officials prosecuting you [if caught] would also go after your accomplices.  The accomplices would have to worry about legal charges for exporting contraband materials, at the least.)

All of this is kind of dumb, I agree, but... Is having an extra round or two *really* worth a possible felony convinction?  

(That's about all the "EXTRA" you can get in most .40 hi-cap magazines.  I have 7 hi-cap .40 S&W mags for my 4006, and they hold 11 rounds.)

A conviction on gun offenses would mean the absolute loss of your right to keep and bear arms...  So there's more at risk here than just jail time (which is a short-term problem.)

There are still some EAA 12 round .40/41 AE mags floating around.  They wouldn't fit the grip of a CZ-100 properly, but they'd work.  They've available from CDNN.

   www.cdnninvestments.com

[ut83]

Its been allegedly rumored kinda maybe that if you find 40 caliber mags...supposedly, allegedly for a model of gun sorta kinda that has a maybe 9mm model also, supposedly they may hold sorta maybe 13-14 rnds...maybe and work flawlessly....I dont remember where I heard this and would never allegedly recommend it........
As far as I maybe know allegedlly they are possibly legal also.
Shoot allegedly well

[Walt-Sherrill]

What you heard "rumored" is true, but it depends on the gun.
Some work, some don't.

And the consensus of those familiar with the Federal firearms laws is that its NOT illegal to do this type of swapping -- as long as you don't modify the mag in a way that prevents it from working in the gun it was designed for....  (Tweaking the feed lips arguably would be a problem, but feed lips get screwed up in untampered-with magazines.)

So .40 mags in a 9mm are likely legal, if you can make them work.  (Don't do too much in the process of  "making them work," though.)

[jwstox]

BTW, there is a push for U.S. Attorneys to vigorously prosecute firearms violations, as I have recently been advised.  In addition to the Homeland Security issues, the administration is pushing enforcement to counter the anti-gun forces and going with the "There are enough gun laws, they just need to be enforced..." attitude.  Works for me.  Firearms violations are also generally easy to prove from an evidentiary standpoint so these convictions help the "stats".  So check the regs

IMHO, responsible gun owners are the best weapon against anti-gunners.

[Walt-Sherrill]

And please note, guys, that the folks pushing through HOMELAND SECURITY are not the flaming liberals...

[jwstox]

I read the relevant federal statutes.... hmmm, I wouldn't do the conversion...

See www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/921.html at subsection 31 (definition of "large capacity ammunition feeding device")

and

www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/922.html at subsection (w)(1)  (unlawful to possess large capacity ammunition feeding device).

Another interesting observation, quirky possible reading of the law -- under 18 U.S.C. 921(31) it is arguably unlawful to possess a regular off-the shelf 10 shot .40 magazine manufactured after 1994 if it was found to be "readily converted to accept more than 10 rounds of ammunition"!  LOL.  The statute doesn't say 10 rounds of ammunition the magazine was orginally designed for.  Don't know what the case law says about it.

[Walt-Sherrill]

I have copies of the regs in question, too, and have discussed this and seen it discussed at length.  

Your interpretation is a rational one.

But, when BATF agents have been asked directly about this point -- and, that is small comfort, however, as their "opinion" does not take the place of a written directive or legal opinion from the head of the department -- they say consistently and clearly, that if the magazine is not altered in any way, such  magazines usedin that manner are legal.  

I have several .40 mags that have no indication of caliber on them.  They are indistinquishable from my 9mm mags, until you load rounds.  They have not been altered in any way that makes them unusable in the weapon for which they were made.  

There is no indication on the mags as to date of manufacture.  (And if they were hi-caps made after '94, the manufacturer would have had to mark them if they were higher than the allowed capacity i.e., LEO only.)

As several of us have said with regard to related issues, this conceivably COULD get you in trouble.  I thnk it unlikely, but I'm not an attorney and I won't be representing anyone if he gets hauled into court.

Let's keep looking for answers on this one -- and see if we can find something more compelling than our own readings of the regs.

[jwstox]

Interesting... does not appear to be general consensus on this anywhere.  The seriously interested may want to request an BATF Letter Ruling on the precise issue.

I found a website that appears to have BATF letters on various firearms questions -- I don't vouch for the authenticity of the site.  There is one letter that appears to agree with Walt if a pre-ban mag is used and not materially modified to the point it won't function in the original weapon:

www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/u...tter88.txt

however, read this one:

www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/u...tter85.txt

and this from gun-tests:

www.gun-tests.com/newspic...apmags.pdf

I suspect this probably will be one of those cases that doesn't get resolved until some bad guy stuffs a .40 magazine with extra 9mms and starts shooting.

The "readily convert[ed]" language in the statute is broad enough to label quite a few things illegal if BATF wanted to push the issue.

[Walt-Sherrill]

I've read those citations before.    

All of the citations seem to address alteration or manufacture.  None of them really address leaving the mags unchanged, but using a different caliber bullet.

Alteration, I think, is the big issue.   If you alter too much, you MAKE a new mag.  The second citations addresses using parts from one mag to make another, in a different caliber.  There you clearly have parts from TWO different calibers put together.  I wonder if the modified mag would work in the "other" gun?  

The Gun Test article isn't much help.  (I've subscribed for years, but am thinking about letting my subscription run out.  I don't think they do their homework.)

I think Brownells now only has tubes for SVI, STI, and Para-Ordnance guns, so its a non-issue for me.  (And I've got enough hi-caps for carry... IDPA only uses  10-rounders, or less.)

Using a .40 mag, in unaltered form, in a 9mm gun, however, is something I'm concerned about.

[jwstox]

Truly a gray area, even more so every time I read the statute

The only clear safe harbor appears to be using a pre-ban mag in the original weapon.

[jbest2]

Have anyone tried CZ-select (25 rounds) magazine in their CZ-100? How it works?