View Full Version : History behind high capacity magazine ban?

Greg with a GlockĀ®
May 24, 2009, 12:08 PM
I was wondering how certain states, like CA, have obtained the law of banning high capacity magazine?

What was the History behind this law? Can it be overturned?

Personally, I don't really see the crime preventive purpose of this law. Thanks.

P.S. If this topic has been horse beaten, please forward the link...the search button isn't my friend today.

Glenn E. Meyer
May 24, 2009, 12:59 PM
Probably Google would do the job. States have various firearms laws and that's what Heller was about.

I opine that states with the toughest gun laws, esp. regarding handguns will also buy into the AWB rhetoric.

It's been shown by peer reviewed research that the AWB had no effect on any known crime indices. However, to the anti folks that suggest the ban wasn't tough enough.

May 24, 2009, 03:38 PM
Back in the late 1980s, California came up with the concept of an "assault weapon ban" based on the appearance of a firearm. At the time, there were a couple of highly publicized shootings, one using an Uzi carbine and one using an AK-47. The Democrats actually sent out memos to CA LEO agencies seeking statistics on these types of guns being used in crimes. Unfortunately for them, the stats showed actual crime use to be less than 1/2 of 1 percent. They were not detered however.

Soon after, it caught on at the federal level, although it took until 1994 to pass. One of the "features" being viewed as making an assault weapon was having a detachable magazine.

At that time, one of the guns being looked at was the Ruger Mini-14 because of its ability to take 20-30-40 round magazines. Bill Ruger, in an attempt to keep the Mini-14 off the banned list, came up with the concept of limiting magazine capacity. He said no civilian needed more than 10 rounds and halted the sales of Ruger 20 and 30 round Mini-14 magazines to civilians.

Democrats, never being one to turn down a gun ban, jumped all over it and added it to their several state bans and the federal ban.

May 24, 2009, 04:12 PM
I've never seen as many legal slightly used magazines for sale as during the ban, almost thought there was a magazine racket.:rolleyes:

Greg with a GlockĀ®
May 24, 2009, 05:18 PM
Thanks for the response guys. I did some extra searching and found this:


I didn't want to copy and paste the whole article, because it's pretty long.

Check out the site.

May 24, 2009, 08:23 PM
I haven't read the cite, forgive me if I make points it covers.

I think the idea behind hi-cap mag bans relates more to selling the idea of firearms as autonomous beings that command otherwise docile humans to commit mass murder.

Were that the case, it makes sense that restricting such mags might have an impact on future mass murder scenarios. Stupid, emotional and uneducated people buy into such concepts. Legislators can promote themselves as "doing something". It is a win-win for everyone except the guy or girl set upon by threats requiring more than 10 rounds and no time to change mags.

The basic failure of such legislation is that criminals don't care about law or legislation. The majesty of my "representatives" in Sacramento is lost on bad guys. But the solons up there are in a bubble which this disrespect cannot penetrate. Or, it suits the solons just fine to disarm the law abiding to create more dependence on the solons. Either explanation would explain the behavior of these idiots. They are stupid or evil, take your pick.

May 24, 2009, 08:38 PM
High capacity mags exist to kill lots of people easily according to some people, usually the same folks who say that only the Police should have guns

Of course, the fact that the PD need high capacity mags doesn't mean that that the PD will kill lots of people to those folks; oh no, when it's the PD, its to make you and me safe

Ah, logic.