FN Herstal Firearms banner

Understanding the New Colorado Gun Laws and Magazine Restrictions

10K views 37 replies 14 participants last post by  fd57 
#1 ·
I am looking for a little help on the topic of the new magazine restrictions Colorado will have going into effect on July 1, 2013. I bought a gun this past week and had to pay the $10 background fee and while at the local gun stores I talked to the guys behind the counters and to no surprise got two differing answers on the new laws.

My line of questioning basically revolved around 2 questions.

Question 1: If I buy a new Glock on July 2nd and it comes with a 13rd magazine am I allowed to take it home?

Answer 1: No, you can't take it home, since the magazine has a removable base plate it breaks the new law that will go into effect and we will have to send the magazine to CBI and they have to destroy it. In fact, any magazine with a removable base plate will be illegal under the new law. Hell, if you disassemble a magazine with a removable base plate and reassemble it, you have technically broken the law and have a "newly manufactured" high capacity magazine...

Answer 2: Yes, you can take it home, a judge here in Colorado ruled that if the magazine is under 15 rounds, just because it has a removable magazine base plate does not mean it falls into the ban, the magazine has to be manufactured to hold more than 15 rounds from the factory

Question 2: If I buy a new FsN can I take the gun home and leave the magazines?

Answer 1: Yes you can take the gun home, but we have to send the magazines to CBI to be destroyed. Also we have to notify the CBI and ATF that you purchased a gun that can accept a magazine over 15 rounds...

Answer 2: <Didn't ask the guy>

Last item of conversation was that guy 1 told me that starting on July 1, 2013 there will be an injunction in place that will nullify the new magazine restriction. He insinuated that the lawsuit that the Colorado Sheriffs, NRA, and other organizations filed will file the injunction.

Can anybody confirm what is actually going to be law with mags less than 15rds?
 
See less See more
#5 ·
While I like to chit-chat with those at the counter at a gun store, they are typically not lawyers, while many are associated to law enforcement, some are active LE earning some part time money, but still, they are not really able to speak.
If you really want an answer maybe you could contact the State Attorney General's office.
 
#15 ·
Or you have the bravery to stand and fight rather then run and hide like a little *****. But to each his own

I was born and raised in Colorado, I am what Colorado used to be, I will fight with all 54 sherrifs of the 64 counties, sometimes it is hard being a grownup
 
#10 ·
Just moving out of the "affected areas" instead of staying to fight will screw everyone over time. The fewer firearms friendly states there are out there, the closer we get to Congress being able to repeal the 2nd Amendment or pass more "reasonable restrictions".

An anti-gun state, especially if it has one or more large cities, will eventually start bleeding people and politics into the surrounded states. Just look at the North East and how NYC effectively spread its politics to CT, MA, NJ, MD, etc. for an example of this. The same is now happening in the western states and is why Colorado and Western Texas are suddenly falling as well because of their proximity to California (LA/SF.)

Every state that falls will create two more anti-gun Senators and a number of ditto Representatives in the Federal Government. Consider that California has the highest number of Representatives in Congress of any state, this should scare the living daylights out of you if you enjoy your current freedoms.
 
#11 ·
Just moving out of the "affected areas" instead of staying to fight will screw everyone over time...
There is some truth to this, monsterdog. But read the first post in this thread again. The OP is not asking about how to write his representatives or inquiring as to whether someone is organizing a protest. His question is about compliance. For him the fight is over, he has capitulated.

And how is that fight going for gun owners in California? Again, there I see mostly acceptance and people looking to get bullet buttons installed in order to be compliant with the rules of the nanny state.

Continuing to contribute tax dollars to your captors is insane, in my estimation. Imagine if the millions of gun owners in CA uprooted and left. Who would pick up the tax burden they left behind? Everyone else. And of those, the ones with the means to leave would get tired of the heavy tax burden and they would leave too. Eventually you are left with a failed state. Just look at Detroit if you want an example of what happens when the tax payers decide to take their contributions elsewhere.
 
#13 ·
Just moving out of the "affected areas" instead of staying to fight will screw everyone over time
Maybe so, but maybe not. If people move to a different state they also move their tax contributions, their purchase, and their contribution to society.

If the only view of the liberal is that of the locust, in that they take their non-sustainable economic approach into an area with surplus and bleed it dry and move on, then taking the surplus away from them faster could disrupt their migration and break the cycle.

If the view of the liberal is one that a liberal is just ignorant and can be educated then leaving them to themselves would be detrimental to the cause, because no one would be there to give them access to another view of how the 2nd Amendment should be interpreted.

Those that came to the new land seeking religious freedom by leaving Europe and Europe's systems of government and religion did not "screw everyone over time", but instead created a foundation that was strong enough to survive even until now.

One thing seems certain to me, conservatives can't move into California as the liberals flee the state because the mess hasn't collapsed. If you moved in to California now, you would be met with tax burdens that are not conducive to business growth, so my point is conservatives can't go in and fill the vacancy and expect to change the mess. Now, if say the entire conservative population of Colorado and Texas took up residency in California then they might swing the state, but that isn't happening.

So, does that mean it is a lost cause, the war is lost, and that the best approach is to regroup with like minded people and hold out as long as possible? That surely has crossed many people's minds.

Maybe we try the approach of fail hard and fail fast, and tell the conservatives in Washington to "give the Administration everything they want, pass it all!" With the idea that the liberals can no longer blame the any messes on the conservatives and that the people will then wake up as the bus hits the canyon floor. That might work, but an economic depression could be the results, with our military reduced to "french" capabilities (I thought that was funny sorry) and the dollar lost to another currency, etc.

Or we continue as we are, swinging to the left, and to the right, and dying of mediocrity.

So tell me, who has the solution? Is it too late? Shall we just dig in and see if we can out last the fools that are wasting everything away? I doubt you can. Even if we became a Greece or Spain we would sputter on for many decades, just like they have.

So, do what you feel is right, and spread the ideals of freedom how you can.
 
#14 ·
:th_greatpostsign:
 
#17 · (Edited)
marinedoc187 and rd_zzyzx you both make a really good point that I didn't consider, thanks :)

Staying or leaving, I don't know which alternative has a better chance at succeeding. Personally I would like to stay and fight until there is no other option than to leave. Nip it in the bud so to speak. That said, I am in the process of moving from a very (lost) anti-gun place to a slightly less anti-gun place within the same state, somewhat for the reasons you both laid out.

Taking your money and leaving will have the most impact if you have a lot of money. Sadly most of the lawmakers in these states are happy that firearms companies are leaving them behind. They would rather starve their population than compromise their ideology.

Ultimately people need to be educated about their rights, freedoms, and responsibilities and to embrace them fully, or those things will be gone. One of the reasons America has succeeded so far overall is because of its relatively small and fractured government model. However a lot of people are working very hard to centralize everything here, and on a global scale even governments which failed through centralization are calling for a world government to fix the problem by the same method which created it in the first place.

Perpetuating the problem in an attempt to fix it is insane. Consider European countries who pushed for higher and higher taxation to support ever expanding programs to keep people alive after having everything taken away because of taxation in the first place.

Maybe the solution lies in having voter rights within a "lost state" but to spend your money in a "free state"? That would be a pretty tough personal sacrifice though.

OK, enough braindump, sorry :) Yes, I can see that yanking the financial table cloth from under these states could work if we all do it at the same time.
 
#18 ·
I would venture to say that the fight is over (depending on your outlook, it's lost if your an American, it's been won if you're a progressive) in California, New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut at least. There are now battleground states like Colorado and others in which the opening skirmish of the war on freedom has been fought and won by the progressive forces, but the fight there is by no means over.

The difficulty is that, given sufficient time, the demographics of the progressive populations of this country will have their way in the end due to simple numerical superiority. Given fifty years, should I live so long, I expect to see Arizona, Texas, and Oklahoma firmly in the grasp of the progressives as well as many other states which are now holding tight to their traditional freedoms.

Sadly our government is currently in the process of creating eleven to twenty million new voters who, i can assure you, will be voting the progressive line in an overwhelming majority. It will be very interesting to watch the political evolution of this country for the next five decades as blue spreads across the country, and the red enclaves become smaller and more isolated....
 
#19 · (Edited)
That is a pretty dystopian vision, but you may very well be right.

It does look like there is a new awakening going on though. Lots of recent first time gun-owners out there and should all these new voters actually be let in, they may want to adopt traditional American freedoms as well if they came from places where the lack of those freedoms kill every day. And recently I read that a large percentage of college kids thought they might become firearms owners in the future.

The best thing we can do is educate and preach, and of course vote for and fund the right people. Becoming a gun owner will automatically make you politically motivated I think. At least for most people. And the best thing we can do is convince the progressive voters that they too need a gun to be safe. Even from evil Republican or Libertarian monsters ;)
 
#20 ·
The looters will eventually pounce on the free states. The real question is whether Atlas Shrugged is coming to life. Our Governor was shocked that Magpul did not accept the bribe of more government contracts.

There is no shame in fighting the stupid Colorado laws in the courts and in the legislature. The other question becomes intentional or unintentional civil disobedience and the risk of a misdemeanor conviction - which may lead to a DNA swab and disability like loss of gun rights.

Stay here or leave only delays the battle.
 
#21 ·
Monsterdog, as much as 2nd amendment freedoms are precious to those who believe in a constitutional America, they are not, I'm afraid, high on the list for the average progressive.

The fight against 2nd amendment freedoms by those on the left is merely a convenient proxy through which the progressive left can wage war on the constitutionalist right. The man in the street progressive is far more concerned with social issues such as gay marriage, abortion on demand, open boarders for free immigration, and entitlement issues such as healthcare, housing, food, phones, and income provided by the government without a work requirement. It is these last issues that appeal to those who honestly believe that the government exists to take care of their needs, and who honestly have no clue that all these governmental benefits are far from free, andthat they are bought at the cost of personal freedom and liberty.

Perhaps the freedom loving remnant can join together to resurrect, in some geographic area a government based upon the principles of the constitution as it was written and observed through the mid nineteenth century, the last time men were truly free to conduct their affairs as they saw fit.
 
#22 ·
wworker, that is indeed how it has happened all across the world.

However, guns can protect the right to gay marriage and abortion as well as it can protect your family and right to the sanctity of your religion, and maybe we can sell their own fear-mongering back to them. People joined the ACLU left and right when Bush was in office because they feared the overreach of a Republican government. We need to remind them that their socialist utopia may not last forever and when an "evil capitalist, profiteer" eventually takes over that they will need the guns. They most certainly read Animal Farm and 1984, which describe the ultimate fate of socialist regimes, penned as a warning by a socialist no less.

I know it is perverse to do this, but it works both ways. And if both extremes are invested in the same freedom, it doesn't really matter why they think it is necessary.
 
#25 ·
Not along the topic of the original post, so you can skip this if you want!



I think that the politicians that are against gun rights believe that both sides having guns is too dangerous because the religious right wing and the liberal left wing are on a collision course. I feel they fear having people armed because of the propensity of all out civil war. Then when you add the extremist groups into the mix.... kaboom! Big Kaboom.

The politicians can't be blind to the dissatisfaction, and all out contempt that is present all across this nation. As great as the ideals are in this nation, ideals embedded and founded in the Constitution, the nation's history shows that we are still normal people with human frailties and have demonstrated our weakness in such events as internment camps, extermination orders, marches and relocation, lynchings, etc. Aware of such past actions, I think these politicians are afraid of the citizenry in general.

Can the Christian love the sinner and hate the sin? Can the atheist accept that having faith does not make one a fool? Do we judge people to be above their actions, meaning, even though Ted Bundy killed all those young vibrant girls, he is still a human and we respect his humanity even though he showed little humanity? (I have friends that are the parents of one of Bundy's victims.) How about I put it this way, if you believe that homosexuality is a choice and a sin, are you willing to raise your children in an environment that allows homosexual behavior to be present, such as maybe going to a high school party where two men are seen "making out"? Are you willing to have your child tell you, "Dad, you need to lighten up, those guys are my friends and they are good people, what they are doing isn't wrong, it's just different"? Or the other side, you are an atheist and your child has friends that invite him to summer bible camp. You say, "No you can't go to that brainwashing indoctrinating camp, they will manipulate you with peer pressure and group think!", and your son replies, "These people are my friends, what they are doing isn't wrong, it's different, you can't prove there is no God anyway!"

Point is, when opposite sides are armed, the politicians fear what may come of it. Therefore, no one can have weapons. You will have to beat each other to death with sticks.

What we need is a uniting voice. A voice that doesn't divide, that doesn't create classes for one group to hate and blame. Classes are ways to dehumanize the equation. I don't hate people, I hate the rich. I don't hate people, I hate the gays. I don't hate people, I hate the right wing nut jobs. Since I do not underestimate the minds of liberals I believe they know what class warfare will bring. I also believe they have thought out the results of such tactics and find the results satisfactory.

Just typing this has now made me want to move into a hidden bunker in the Rocky Mountains.

We have a nation of elitists that are determined to be the ruling class, elitists that are on the left and on the right. These elitists are afraid of the dogs the people appear to be, dogs that are mean and will bite any hand, for the left that would be the hand that feeds them, and for the right that would be the hand that protects them.

Where am I? Right wing conservative that believes that we are past the tipping point and the following decades will see continual decline. What do I believe will change the path to one of increase and prosperity? A miracle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: monsterdog
#24 ·
I have family in northern Colorado; the way we read it is any high caps in your possession prior to July 1 are good to go. We also read it as you can't sell them in state but you can sell them out of state. You must maintain possession/ownership. You can't loan them or give them to a friend, not sure about passing down to family members after death but at that point proper arrangements will be made to move them out of state. Many Sheriffs say there is no way to enforce a mag ban because who’s to say when you got the mag or when it was made, as far as I know hk is the only ones with date codes other then LE marked ones with the 94 ban bs on them. IMHO


HOUSE BILL 13-1224

BY REPRESENTATIVE(S) Fields, Court, Fischer, Hullinghorst, Labuda,
Levy, Melton, Pabon, Rosenthal, Schafer, Williams, Young, Buckner,
Ferrandino;
also SENATOR(S) Hodge, Aguilar, Guzman, Heath, Nicholson, Ulibarri,
Morse.
CONCERNING PROHIBITING LARGE-CAPACITY AMMUNITION MAGAZINES.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Colorado:
SECTION 1. In Colorado Revised Statutes, add part 3 to article 12
of title 18 as follows:
PART 3
LARGE-CAPACITY AMMUNITION MAGAZINES
18-12-301. Definitions. AS USED IN THIS PART 3, UNLESS THE
CONTEXT OTHERWISE REQUIRES:
(1) "BUREAU" MEANS THE COLORADO BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
CREATED AND EXISTING PURSUANT TO SECTION 24-33.5-401, C.R.S.
(2) (a) "LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE MEANS:
NOTE: The governor signed this measure on 3/20/2013.
________
Capital letters indicate new material added to existing statutes; dashes through words indicate
deletions from existing statutes and such material not part of act.
(I) A FIXED OR DETACHABLE MAGAZINE, BOX, DRUM, FEED STRIP, OR
SIMILAR DEVICE CAPABLE OF ACCEPTING, OR THAT IS DESIGNED TO BE
READILY CONVERTED TO ACCEPT, MORE THAN FIFTEEN ROUNDS OF
AMMUNITION;
(II) A FIXED, TUBULAR SHOTGUN MAGAZINE THAT HOLDS MORE
THAN TWENTY-EIGHT INCHES OF SHOTGUN SHELLS, INCLUDING ANY
EXTENSION DEVICE THAT IS ATTACHED TO THE MAGAZINE AND HOLDS
ADDITIONAL SHOTGUN SHELLS; OR
(III) A NONTUBULAR, DETACHABLE MAGAZINE, BOX, DRUM, FEED
STRIP, OR SIMILAR DEVICE THAT IS CAPABLE OF ACCEPTING MORE THAN
EIGHT SHOTGUN SHELLS WHEN COMBINED WITH A FIXED MAGAZINE.
(I) A FEEDING DEVICE THAT HAS BEEN PERMANENTLY ALTERED SO
THAT(b) "LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE" DOES NOT MEAN:
IT CANNOT ACCOMMODATE MORE THAN FIFTEEN ROUNDS OF
AMMUNITION;
(II) AN ATTACHED TUBULAR DEVICE DESIGNED TO ACCEPT, AND
CAPABLE OF OPERATING ONLY WITH, .22 CALIBER RIMFIRE AMMUNITION; OR
(III) A TUBULAR MAGAZINE THAT IS CONTAINED IN A LEVER-ACTION
FIREARM.
18-12-302. Large-capacity magazines prohibited - penalties -
exceptions. (1) (a) EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THIS SECTION, ON
AND AFTER JULY 1, 2013, A PERSON WHO SELLS, TRANSFERS, OR POSSESSES
A LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE COMMITS A CLASS 2 MISDEMEANOR.
(b) ANY PERSON WHO VIOLATES SUBSECTION (1) OF THIS SECTION
AFTER HAVING BEEN CONVICTED OF A PRIOR VIOLATION OF SAID SUBSECTION
(1) COMMITS A CLASS 1 MISDEMEANOR.
(c) ANY PERSON WHO VIOLATES SUBSECTION (1) OF THIS SECTION
COMMITS A CLASS 6 FELONY IF THE PERSON POSSESSED A LARGE-CAPACITY
MAGAZINE DURING THE COMMISSION OF A FELONY OR ANY CRIME OF
VIOLENCE, AS DEFINED IN SECTION 18-1.3-406.
PAGE 2-HOUSE BILL 13-1224
(2) (a) A PERSON MAY POSSESS A LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE IF HE
OR SHE:
(I) OWNS THE LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE
OF THIS SECTION; AND
(II) MAINTAINS CONTINUOUS POSSESSION OF THE LARGE-CAPACITY
MAGAZINE.
(b) IF A PERSON WHO IS ALLEGED TO HAVE VIOLATED SUBSECTION (1)
OF THIS SECTION ASSERTS THAT HE OR SHE IS PERMITTED TO LEGALLY
POSSESS A LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (a) OF
THIS SUBSECTION (2), THE PROSECUTION HAS THE BURDEN OF PROOF TO
REFUTE THE ASSERTION.
(3) THE OFFENSE DESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION (1) OF THIS SECTION
SHALL NOT APPLY TO:
(a) AN ENTITY, OR ANY EMPLOYEE THEREOF ENGAGED IN HIS OR HER
EMPLOYMENT DUTIES, THAT MANUFACTURES LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINES
WITHIN COLORADO EXCLUSIVELY FOR TRANSFER TO, OR ANY LICENSED GUN
DEALER, AS DEFINED IN SECTION 12-26.1-106 (6), C.R.S., OR ANY EMPLOYEE
THEREOF ENGAGED IN HIS OR HER OFFICIAL EMPLOYMENT DUTIES, THAT
SELLS LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINES EXCLUSIVELY TO:
(I) A BRANCH OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES;
(II) A DEPARTMENT, AGENCY, OR POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE
STATE OF COLORADO, OR OF ANY OTHER STATE, OR OF THE UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT;
(III) A FIREARMS RETAILER FOR THE PURPOSE OF FIREARMS SALES
CONDUCTED OUTSIDE THE STATE;
(IV) A FOREIGN NATIONAL GOVERNMENT THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED
FOR SUCH TRANSFERS BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT; OR
(V) AN OUT-OF-STATE TRANSFEREE WHO MAY LEGALLY POSSESS A
LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE; OR
PAGE 3-HOUSE BILL 13-1224
(b) AN EMPLOYEE OF ANY OF THE FOLLOWING AGENCIES WHO BEARS
A FIREARM IN THE COURSE OF HIS OR HER OFFICIAL DUTIES:
(I) A BRANCH OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES; OR
(II) A DEPARTMENT, AGENCY, OR POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE
STATE OF COLORADO, OR OF ANY OTHER STATE, OR OF THE UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT; OR
(c) A PERSON WHO POSSESSES THE MAGAZINE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE
OF TRANSPORTING THE MAGAZINE TO AN OUT-OF-STATE ENTITY ON BEHALF
OF A MANUFACTURER OF LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINES WITHIN COLORADO.
18-12-303. Identification markings for large-capacity magazines
- rules. (1) A LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE THAT IS MANUFACTURED IN
COLORADO ON OR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION MUST
INCLUDE A PERMANENT STAMP OR MARKING INDICATING THAT THE
LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE WAS MANUFACTURED OR ASSEMBLED AFTER
THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION. THE STAMP OR MARKING MUST BE
LEGIBLY AND CONSPICUOUSLY ENGRAVED OR CAST UPON THE OUTER
SURFACE OF THE LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE.
(2) THE BUREAU MAY PROMULGATE SUCH RULES AS MAY BE
NECESSARY FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS SECTION, INCLUDING BUT
NOT LIMITED TO RULES REQUIRING A LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE THAT IS
MANUFACTURED ON OR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION TO
BEAR IDENTIFYING INFORMATION IN ADDITION TO THE IDENTIFYING
INFORMATION DESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION (1) OF THIS SECTION.
(3) A PERSON WHO MANUFACTURES A LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE
IN COLORADO IN VIOLATION OF SUBSECTION (1) OF THIS SECTION COMMITS
A CLASS 2 MISDEMEANOR AND SHALL BE PUNISHED IN ACCORDANCE WITH
SECTION 18-1.3-501.
SECTION 2. Effective date. This act takes effect July 1, 2013.
SECTION 3. Safety clause. The general assembly hereby finds,
PAGE 4-HOUSE BILL 13-1224
determines, and declares that this act is necessary for the immediate
preservation of the public peace, health, and safety.
____________________________ ____________________________
Mark Ferrandino John P. Morse
SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE PRESIDENT OF
OF REPRESENTATIVES THE SENATE
____________________________ ____________________________
Marilyn Eddins Cindi L. Markwell
CHIEF CLERK OF THE HOUSE SECRETARY OF
OF REPRESENTATIVES THE SENATE
APPROVED________________________________________
_________________________________________
John W. Hickenlooper
GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF COLORADO
PAGE 5-
 
#27 ·
Lets try and get this back on topic, Although I appreciate the comments, if you want to further discuss the philosophy of states and how people should act within them, please move to a new thread.

Roadking I agree with you and have read that as well, but the removable base plate is the piece that I think is far too generalized


Back to the original question of my thread, if on July 2nd, 2013 I go to buy a Glock with a 13rd magazine, would I be able to take that magazine home with me? As one person suggested, it may be worth contacting the Attorney General or even my local Sheriff and see if they can answer the question, based on the interpretation of the "law"
 
#37 ·
I truly think the people you should be asking about this is your LGS, there the ones who have the most to loose if they sale mags over 15rds. Anyway your talking about 13rd glock mags which are 2 less then 15 if my count is right(let me take my shoes of to count again. lol) Even with a plus2 added your still at 15 thus readily available modification. Now if someone starts making plus3 or more then who knows. I still believe your questions should be directed to LGS for the answer to question at hand. Check your pm
 
#28 · (Edited)
Have you contacted your local Sheriff/PD and asked them if they understand the law and if, when and how they intend on enforcing the law? Ultimately, they will be the ones charged with enforcement.

I'd wager that you would get several different answers which goes to show that the law is poorly written and ambiguous at best.
 
#29 ·
Have you contacted your local Sheriff/PD and asked them if they understand the law and if, when and how they intend on enforcing the law? Ultimately, they will be the ones charged with enforcement.
True, and I know that my sheriff is a very strong supporter of the Morse recall and the current lawsuit, but I have not reached out to him yet. He said he would not enforce it, but my biggest question is the removable base plate on mags that are under 15 rounds. I think I am gonna have to start calling around.
 
#33 ·
How would "they" know if your evil removable baseplate magazine was from before or after the ban?
I was trying to focus on purchases after July 1st since I know I will be grandfathered in. I have been buying alotta mags in the past couple months lol.

Based on one of the guys I talked to, i would be unable to bring the magazines home with my new gun purchase if the mags have removable base plates
 
#34 ·
Most mags have removable base plates. It's how you clean them and also replace the spring if it should break.
This is a poorly thought out law at best.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top