458SOCOM rifles use the standard .223 magazines which hold 10 rounds of the larger ammunition. Does this mean that 10-round .458 magazines would become very popular should the proposed ban go into effect? Their ability to hold 30 .223Rem cartridges would be just an incidental side effect. I suppose that could be made illegal — so a person with a .458 10-rounder could be prosecuted for “constructive possession” if .223 ammo was nearby. All gun laws that try to regulate technical aspects are failures from the get-go. Or maybe they aren’t failures if the intent is admitted to be mass entrapment and victimization of innocent people.
Really makes me want a .458 upper…
I remember guys using 10 round .40 cal Glock magazines to hold 13 rounds of 9mm during the AWB years.
I think you’ve clearly hit upon the intent in your last sentence.
For example, the only ban introduced so far is a mag ban. It only bans sale or transfer. Not possession.
Magazines are non-serialized parts. How are they going to prove the number of mags I own goes up or down?
Scott,
I haven’t seen the legislation they want to pass right now, but if it follows a trend since the original AWB, it will require that You prove that you had the magazines before the new ban.
This has been a trend in >10 round magazine ban attempts in the past few years, and it parallels a trend in all criminal law to make prosecutors’ jobs easier.
Odds are this session’s HR 138 is a direct copy of last session’s HR308 http://beta.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/house-bill/308
Last time theAWB required standard magazines holding more than ten rounds to be marked “law enforcement and military only,” and possession by us peons was illegal.
After the ban died I bought several for my Browning, which my father-in-law liberated from the Germans in WWII. There is some irony in using them together.
Pingback: SayUncle » Gun Porn
By responding to the silly assertions and demands of The Enemy, we may simply be demonstrating who is in charge of the conversation.
Should we be responding to them, or should they be forced to either respond to us or shut up?
Being in charge of the framework of the conversation is purely a matter of choice.
I’d say it would remain legal as long as you only load 10 .458 rounds. The moment you load 30 .223 rounds in it, it becomes illegal.
But, really, don’t try to find *any* logic in any existing or proposed gun laws. They are all irrational and based on emotions, feel-good and picture books.
Constructive possession will get you.
“A person can be charged with constructive possession of an illegal device if they possess the otherwise legal material to assemble it. If a person has in his possession or control the ingredients to make an explosive device, he can be charged with constructive possession of that device.”
Having magazines and ammunition will violate the plain text of the law. Have a .458 SOCOM 10 round magazine and 11 rounds of .223 ammo…. iron handcuffs.
I don’t like it. I think the 2nd Amendment actually means what it says. But that argument is at a higher level.
“If a person has in his possession or control the ingredients to make an explosive device, he can be charged with constructive possession of that device.”
Yeah, bat feces, charcoal, and plumbing. Such is the sanity of “common sense” legislation.
And what about farmers, if they buy fertilizer to fertilize their crops… and use a Diesel tractor, they would have the components to create ANFO.
It has been a while since my MP officer JAG orientation week. But the basics that stuck in my grey matter are that non-NFA items require an overt act in the direction of criminal trepass. Meaning that NFA applies to certain items. If passed, a ban on 30rd magazines for .223 would make the possession of .223 ammo and . 10rd .458 magazine constructive possession in violation of the law.
In the instance you cite of diesel fuel and fertilizer, the accused would have to take a step towards assembly. Get caught mixing the two and you will be arrested. Get caught with the assembly of components of a pipe bomb and you will be arrested.
Again, for non-NFA items, the accused must take a step towards the illegal act. I forget the actual legal term, but it means more than reading up on the idea. It is not “he attended an anarchist meeting”. It has to be “he loaded all of the components of an explosive device into his truck”.
Again, I do not like the implications of the proposed gun control. I do not like constructive possession laws. But it is what it is.
During the ban years, 10-rd Beretta 96 mags made perfectly serviceable 15-rounders for a Beretta 92.
I had this same thought 2 days ago. Hoping magazine manufacturers will suddenly start making “10rd 458 mags”
Folks,
Have any of you actually READ Feinstein’s proposed bill? If it accepts a detachable magazine (or more than 10 rounds in a fixed magazine) it would be classified as a NFA firearm. That includes pistols and shotguns. NFA firearm means Background check by local LEO, registration, fingerprints, photo. That probably means no travel across state lines without prior permission since it’s a firearm and not a suppressor. Oh – and when you die? Turn it in. No transfers for “grandfathered” items.
She’s learned from the last failed attempt. This one is MUCH different – and greater in scope.
Take it seriously – and start calling your congress-critters NOW.
http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/assault-weapons