Many guns made after the 1994 Crime Bills ban on hi-cap magazines now use lo-cap staggered or double-stack mags inside wide grip frames despite the fact that a thin frame might be more comfortable to many people. As well, there are cases like that of the H&K sporting rifles which could easily use hi-caps if the lower were changed in one area. Could it be that the gun makers are anticipating being able to sell hi-caps again in this country in the future? If they all thought that they could never sell hi-caps here again, wouldn't there be a lot more small but heavy large caliber autos like the Kahr, whose size fits more appropriately its firepower and capacity? Maybe silly, but just a thought.
A silly theory about hi-caps mags...
- Thread starter Molly
- Start date
Blue Duck357
New member
I wonder the same thing, but you also have to think about the "Global market". Sure Glock sells a lot of handguns to the United States but I'm still not sure it would be economically feasible for them (or others) to have a "USA only" single stack version of everything they make.
2004 the ban sunsets, may see some changes by manufacturers then if Bush signs it into law permanantly as expected. Personally I'm hoping we have enough power in congress that it never see's his desk, but I doubt that will happen.
2004 the ban sunsets, may see some changes by manufacturers then if Bush signs it into law permanantly as expected. Personally I'm hoping we have enough power in congress that it never see's his desk, but I doubt that will happen.
Hi Molly,
Nothing in your post is silly; it reflects sound analysis. I do not believe we will ever see legalized standard capacity magazines again due to the viciousness of politics. The minute such a debate were to be brought to the floor, Feinstein, Boxer, Schumer, et al, would launch a tirade about how their opponents lack caring for crime victims. They would argue that the current law is working as intended, and they would produce cooked stats in support of their lies. Further, they would argue that it's irresponsible to put our kids in danger as a result of legalizing standard capacity magazines. If perchance they were to once again become legal and God forbid a shooting occurred in which a standard capacity magazine was used, the liberals would hang freedom-loving legislators out to dry by asserting that were directly responsible for the tragedy.
This legislation was foisted upon us by deceit. We need to have legialators prove that standard capacity magazines were actually responsible for criminality. Obviously, an inanimate object is incapable of forming the intent to do anything. We must force our legislators to prove to us that individual responsibility is not the cause of crime, that standard capacity magazines are. Then we must make them prove efficacy of their legislation; that they are able to eliminate all confounding factors leaving standard capacity magazines as causal of said efficacy. I would love to see them attempt to prove that their legislation is even remotely responsible for a reduction in crime vis-a-vis three strikes legislation.
Forgive me, Molly, for my tangential response, but this is an issue that pisses me off to no end! I have been a practitioner in the criminal justice system for nigh on two decades, my undergrad major was CJ, I have been exposed to scholary research on gun control, and my no-so-expert opinion is that there is no there there. However, there is there there when one considers a hidden agenda for our eventual disarming. Check out John Lott's "More Guns Less Crime;" it's excellent scholary research on this topic. He explicates his research methodology and supports his thesis with facts. Unlike his attackers and supporters of gun control, Lott's work is devoid of emotion and hidden agenda.
What would make my day is the voting out of office of all those lying bastards (and bitches) responsible for the eroding of our precious freedoms. Then I would like to see almost all of these laws either repealed or have the US Supreme Court rule that they are illegal. I do fear a government that fears its citizens owning arms. As a cop, I have never feared a law-abiding citizen owning a gun; however, I have deeply rooted fear of criminals, with or without guns! Molly, your owning a standard capacity magazine is of little concern to me; criminals are: and you should have at your convenience the best means possible to protect your family and yourself from those on the outside of law.
So, in answer to your question, I believe that manufacturers have retained the configuation of certain models of their guns due to engineering and manufacturing costs. It's just cheaper to modify a magazine than it is to redesign a new model; and there might be an attendant marketing gimmick as well. People might feel better about buying a gun for which it is possible to use a standard capacity magazine.
Best of luck,
E
Nothing in your post is silly; it reflects sound analysis. I do not believe we will ever see legalized standard capacity magazines again due to the viciousness of politics. The minute such a debate were to be brought to the floor, Feinstein, Boxer, Schumer, et al, would launch a tirade about how their opponents lack caring for crime victims. They would argue that the current law is working as intended, and they would produce cooked stats in support of their lies. Further, they would argue that it's irresponsible to put our kids in danger as a result of legalizing standard capacity magazines. If perchance they were to once again become legal and God forbid a shooting occurred in which a standard capacity magazine was used, the liberals would hang freedom-loving legislators out to dry by asserting that were directly responsible for the tragedy.
This legislation was foisted upon us by deceit. We need to have legialators prove that standard capacity magazines were actually responsible for criminality. Obviously, an inanimate object is incapable of forming the intent to do anything. We must force our legislators to prove to us that individual responsibility is not the cause of crime, that standard capacity magazines are. Then we must make them prove efficacy of their legislation; that they are able to eliminate all confounding factors leaving standard capacity magazines as causal of said efficacy. I would love to see them attempt to prove that their legislation is even remotely responsible for a reduction in crime vis-a-vis three strikes legislation.
Forgive me, Molly, for my tangential response, but this is an issue that pisses me off to no end! I have been a practitioner in the criminal justice system for nigh on two decades, my undergrad major was CJ, I have been exposed to scholary research on gun control, and my no-so-expert opinion is that there is no there there. However, there is there there when one considers a hidden agenda for our eventual disarming. Check out John Lott's "More Guns Less Crime;" it's excellent scholary research on this topic. He explicates his research methodology and supports his thesis with facts. Unlike his attackers and supporters of gun control, Lott's work is devoid of emotion and hidden agenda.
What would make my day is the voting out of office of all those lying bastards (and bitches) responsible for the eroding of our precious freedoms. Then I would like to see almost all of these laws either repealed or have the US Supreme Court rule that they are illegal. I do fear a government that fears its citizens owning arms. As a cop, I have never feared a law-abiding citizen owning a gun; however, I have deeply rooted fear of criminals, with or without guns! Molly, your owning a standard capacity magazine is of little concern to me; criminals are: and you should have at your convenience the best means possible to protect your family and yourself from those on the outside of law.
So, in answer to your question, I believe that manufacturers have retained the configuation of certain models of their guns due to engineering and manufacturing costs. It's just cheaper to modify a magazine than it is to redesign a new model; and there might be an attendant marketing gimmick as well. People might feel better about buying a gun for which it is possible to use a standard capacity magazine.
Best of luck,
E
Blue Duck357
New member
O.T. Kind of funny the first two responses to this post (both against the magazine ban) were from a Parole Officer and a cop. I thought they said they were doing it for "us"
Eric Larsen
New member
Actually, no disrespect to anyone else, as I agree with most of the points made...Just like stated above, I believe the real reason why they didnt change the frame/gun size but the mag only...is cost.
Gun makers are still doing it, first and foremost to make a living!
If they retooled just because of the change to a limited capacity...they would all go bankrupt and no more gun makers! The cheapest and the smartest way to do it...is alter the mag.
As much as I would love to say, they make guns..just for the sake of making guns...sorry, not reality. No profit, no more guns. !!!!
You either retool and start a whole new gun line, spendy and risky, will it take off, will people like it? Or keep the same proven
guns in the works and neuter the mags.......it works, is cost effective and makes the "man" happy......welcome to compromise.
Shoot well
Gun makers are still doing it, first and foremost to make a living!
If they retooled just because of the change to a limited capacity...they would all go bankrupt and no more gun makers! The cheapest and the smartest way to do it...is alter the mag.
As much as I would love to say, they make guns..just for the sake of making guns...sorry, not reality. No profit, no more guns. !!!!
You either retool and start a whole new gun line, spendy and risky, will it take off, will people like it? Or keep the same proven
guns in the works and neuter the mags.......it works, is cost effective and makes the "man" happy......welcome to compromise.
Shoot well
Maybe
Yes these are proven designs, but are we really "happy" with them in lo-cap format? Or do we think we are because they're all we have? I for one am not. I am not really happy with the fact that my HS2000 is full-sized (I do love the gun overall), but could be much smaller and still hold 10 rounds. Same goes for the other "service pistol" type guns I have. The HS2000 in current form would be a great size if it had 17 shots stuffed inside of it. But since all of my standard-sized guns are bigger than their firepower, I am going to by a Kahr 9, and leave the others in the safe. If the gun makers would make more guns along those smaller lines, matching their smaller capacities, I would be a much "happier" consumer. In fact, if they would make 9mm guns sized like a most .380s or a Makarov, I would buy one from every maker. In a heartbeat.
Yes these are proven designs, but are we really "happy" with them in lo-cap format? Or do we think we are because they're all we have? I for one am not. I am not really happy with the fact that my HS2000 is full-sized (I do love the gun overall), but could be much smaller and still hold 10 rounds. Same goes for the other "service pistol" type guns I have. The HS2000 in current form would be a great size if it had 17 shots stuffed inside of it. But since all of my standard-sized guns are bigger than their firepower, I am going to by a Kahr 9, and leave the others in the safe. If the gun makers would make more guns along those smaller lines, matching their smaller capacities, I would be a much "happier" consumer. In fact, if they would make 9mm guns sized like a most .380s or a Makarov, I would buy one from every maker. In a heartbeat.
Well I am for sure happy the manufacturers have kept their models adapted to HC mags. Living in sweden and knowing of no european country where they have been stupid enough to legislate against HC mags (though they make a lot of other stupid legislation around here in the EU). Would firearms become less lethal with a low cap mag? If he aint down after 3 rounds son, you better, RUN ...When I bought my latest handgun, a CZ75 ST IPSC it came equipped with 4 16-shot magazines in cal.40S&W. None of these magazines had any "pre-ban-markings" as for instance my newer Glock mags do.
Actually I think there have been some affects from this legislation on gun design. The combination of the ban on standard capacity mags with the increase in the number of states that have shall-issue CCW has resulted in the introduction of a lot of small, large caliber semi-autos. If you can only have 10 rounds, why carry 10 rounds of 9mm when you can carry 10 rounds of .40 in the same package? Guns like the HK USPc, Kahr K40, mini Glocks, Kimber Compact, Sig 239, etc.
For me, a full size 9mm with 10 round mags just doesn't make much sense.
M1911
For me, a full size 9mm with 10 round mags just doesn't make much sense.
M1911
CarbineKid
New member
Here's my two cents
I recently posted the post "Am I Alone" on this forum(I also posted a simular thresad on other sites). I thought I was the only one who felt that a hi cap pistol is crippled by the silly 10 round mag, currently being sold with it. I was rather surprised at the number of responses I recieved. It appears that alot of people would not buy their current wonder nine if it only came with a mag holding only 10 rounds. My feeling is that most people are starting to look elsewhere. I THINK(just a guess) some manufractures also notice this, and there are designs on the board for single stack compact weapons. Of course there are still hi caps out there, so for now the wonder nines will still sell. 10 years from now....who knows . I think the death of some pistols is drawing near. Im starting to look elsewhere because I really can afford both a $500 gun, and then an extra $50-$100 for the mags DESIGNED for that gun. No Glocks, No Sigs, and No other super hi cap gun for me. I would rather go with a pistol that is sold with the mags designed for it. I hate that silly plastic block that is designed on post ban mags. I know Im not alone, and I think others are realizing this too.....then again who need more that 10 rounds.....heck who needs more than one
I recently posted the post "Am I Alone" on this forum(I also posted a simular thresad on other sites). I thought I was the only one who felt that a hi cap pistol is crippled by the silly 10 round mag, currently being sold with it. I was rather surprised at the number of responses I recieved. It appears that alot of people would not buy their current wonder nine if it only came with a mag holding only 10 rounds. My feeling is that most people are starting to look elsewhere. I THINK(just a guess) some manufractures also notice this, and there are designs on the board for single stack compact weapons. Of course there are still hi caps out there, so for now the wonder nines will still sell. 10 years from now....who knows
. I think the death of some pistols is drawing near. Im starting to look elsewhere because I really can afford both a $500 gun, and then an extra $50-$100 for the mags DESIGNED for that gun. No Glocks, No Sigs, and No other super hi cap gun for me. I would rather go with a pistol that is sold with the mags designed for it. I hate that silly plastic block that is designed on post ban mags. I know Im not alone, and I think others are realizing this too.....then again who need more that 10 rounds.....heck who needs more than one I think a lot of manufactures have already hit upon a winning idea. Design guns that use OLD magazines. Rifles like the M96 and the Tavor use AR mags, while the HS2000 and the Kel-Tec carbine can use multitudes of older pistol mags. AS long as the pre-ban mags keep coming in from overseas, we will have fal, HK, and AK mags galore. I'm sure there are large shipments of unmarked BHP and Glock mags getting to us, both new manufacture and pre-ban. If I was a pistol designer I would make sure that the plentiful BHP or Beretta mags are easily usable. The US civilian market is HUGE, way too large to dismiss easily. Thats why I could never understand S&W and Colts desire to specialize purely in the military or LEO market. Civilians must buy 3-4 times as many guns as those agencies, so why ignore the market? If, God forbid, the AW ban goes into effect permanently, we will see more and more "go-arounds", there is just too much money at stake. Look at the M-16 bird-cage muzzle brakes, who would have ever bought something like that pre-94? Or those fixed open stocks? There is always a way to get close to what you want. Later.
riddleofsteel
New member
If any good has come from the ban it is the bloom of concealable pistols DESIGNED to hold 10 rounds or less. The compact Glocks and Kahrs are excellent examples. Rather than buying a pistol with a mag well that is designed to hold a 15 round or larger magazine, now equipped with a neutered 10 round mag, many of us have elected to go with a handgun designed for 10 rounds or less to begin with.
I have several handguns with preban mags that hold 15 or more rounds already so I doubt that if the ban sunsets I will be affected much. However, when you have walked the streets and lived with a K or MK Kahr or a mini-Glock for a couple of years some of the higher capacity handguns seem huge and bloated by comparison.
I have several handguns with preban mags that hold 15 or more rounds already so I doubt that if the ban sunsets I will be affected much. However, when you have walked the streets and lived with a K or MK Kahr or a mini-Glock for a couple of years some of the higher capacity handguns seem huge and bloated by comparison.