NY allows 7 bullets in a 10 round magazine? Have the Lunatics Taken Over the Asylum?

Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
6,862
Reaction score
17,183
Location
PRNJ
I could be wrong, but I think the new New York gun control law allows people with 10 round magazines to keep them, but they can only load them with up to 7 bullets.

Is this true?

If it is true, does anyone really think that a punk bent on committing murder and mayhem will be deterred from putting bullets 8-10 into his magazine before setting off to kill?

I did not think it possible, but this new law is even dumber than banning a semi-auto because it has a bayonet lug and a flash hider.
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
Far as I have heard, they grandfathered the old 10 round mags. So you can still carry them with 10 round. Mag capacity does not include the one on the chamber.
 
You wonder if the lunatics have taken over the asylum, in a state that bans 32 oz soft drinks to fight obesity? Perhaps that was a rhetorical question. ;)
 
That eliminates a huge choice of guns for New Yorkers. Suppliers are reluctant to ship to NY. Cuomo really wants to shut shooters down cold. It's pointless for real gun crime and SUCKS for taxpaying, responsible shooters
 
Q&A for NY Gun owners

Magazines
Q: How has the law changed for magazines?

A: Since the federal assault weapons ban in 1994, it has been illegal in New York State to buy, for any gun, a detachable magazine, manufactured after the law took effect, that can contain more than ten rounds. This law does not change that. Starting April 15, 2013, only magazines that contain 7 rounds or less will be sold in New York, including permanently modified magazines.

Q: What if I have a magazine that can contain more than ten rounds?

A: You can permanently modify the magazine so that it holds no more than ten rounds, responsibly discard it, or sell it to a dealer or an out of state purchaser by January 15, 2014.

http://www.governor.ny.gov/2013/gun-reforms-faq
 
Last edited:
You wonder if the lunatics have taken over the asylum, in a state that bans 32 oz soft drinks to fight obesity? Perhaps that was a rhetorical question. ;)

So.... maybe they can have 42oz cups if they promise to only fill it to 32oz?

Doublefacepalm.jpg
 
Far as I have heard, they grandfathered the old 10 round mags. So you can still carry them with 10 round. Mag capacity does not include the one on the chamber.

Believe it or not, you can only carry 10 rds until April 15, 2013 unless you're at a firearms range. From April 15, outside of a range visit, you may only carry 7 rds in a 10 rd magazine. You can't make this stuff up!!
 
I was able to find the text of the new law here:

NYS Gun control bill - Full text | WIVB.com

From the "Purpose" Section:

Magazines that can hold more than seven rounds but not more than ten rounds and are currently possessed will be grandfathered in, but may only contain seven rounds of ammunition.

As I read the new law, magazines are outlawed if:

A) They can contain more than 10 rounds (no granfathering of 11 or up) or
B) They contain more than seven rounds or
C) They are acquired after the effective date and can contain more than 7 rounds

My message to the persons who passed this bill: You Are Morons!

From the text of the Bill:

S 38. Subdivision 23 of section 265.00 of the penal law, as added by
chapter 189 of the laws of 2000, is amended to read as follows:

23. "Large capacity ammunition feeding device" means a magazine, belt,
drum, feed strip, or similar device, [manufactured after September thir-
teenth, nineteen hundred ninety-four,] that (A) has a capacity of, or
that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than ten
rounds
of ammunition, OR (B) CONTAINS MORE THAN SEVEN ROUNDS OF AMMUNI
TION, OR (C) IS OBTAINED AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE CHAPTER OF THE
LAWS OF TWO THOUSAND THIRTEEN WHICH AMENDED THIS SUBDIVISION AND HAS A CAPACITY OF, OR THAT CAN BE READILY RESTORED OR CONVERTED TO ACCEPT, MORE THAN SEVEN ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION; provided, however, that such term does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and
capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition OR A
FEEDING DEVICE THAT IS A CURIO OR RELIC. A FEEDING DEVICE THAT IS A
CURIO OR RELIC IS DEFINED AS A DEVICE THAT (I) WAS MANUFACTURED AT LEAST
FIFTY YEARS PRIOR TO THE CURRENT DATE, (II) IS ONLY CAPABLE OF BEING
USED EXCLUSIVELY IN A FIREARM, RIFLE, OR SHOTGUN THAT WAS MANUFACTURED
AT LEAST FIFTY YEARS PRIOR TO THE CURRENT DATE, BUT NOT INCLUDING REPLI
CAS THEREOF, (III) IS POSSESSED BY AN INDIVIDUAL WHO IS NOT PROHIBITED
BY STATE OR FEDERAL LAW FROM POSSESSING A FIREARM AND (IV) IS REGISTERED
WITH THE DIVISION OF STATE POLICE PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION SIXTEEN-A OF
SECTION 400.00 OF THIS CHAPTER, EXCEPT SUCH FEEDING DEVICES TRANSFERRED
INTO THE STATE MAY BE REGISTERED AT ANY TIME, PROVIDED THEY ARE REGIS
TERED WITHIN THIRTY DAYS OF THEIR TRANSFER INTO THE STATE. NOTWITH
STANDING PARAGRAPH (H) OF SUBDIVISION TWENTY-TWO OF THIS SECTION, SUCH
FEEDING DEVICES MAY BE TRANSFERRED PROVIDED THAT SUCH TRANSFER SHALL BE
SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 400.03 OF THIS CHAPTER INCLUDING
THE CHECK REQUIRED TO BE CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO SUCH SECTION.
 
Last edited:
Yes, the lunatics have taken over the asylum. In a very real sense, Adam Lanza is dictating public policy. The republic is doomed.
 
Obviously a 7 round law would make gun/magazine makers have to do some retooling. Some of it may be expensive retooling. There is no doubt that the NY State legislators responsible for this 7 round law know this, but they did it anyway.
I would think some or all of these companies would send NY a message, to the effect not to expect any new guns or parts or magazines in any form, no new pistols, no rifles, for any NY Police agency unless they amend their new law. No price deals, nothing. Maybe they should put a surcharge on sales to NY government, a very, very high surcharge, on any gun ordered/purchased for any NY State law agency. $10,000.00 for every gun, and then donate the extra money to the ILA of the NRA. Get the accessory makers to join the action. Then they should do the same thing to Massachusetts, California, Illinois, etc.
 
I don't think a big retooling is necessary, the law is stupid as we know but a machinist with a press could make a jig to dimple the magazine as they already do now to limit the loading of more than 7.
 
The 1934 Sullivan law has been a failure since 1934 and they still haven't learned anything.
I used to live in Woodstock and then Poughkeepsi, for a few years and I pity anyone who has to remain there for reasons beyond their control.
 
Far as I have heard, they grandfathered the old 10 round mags. So you can still carry them with 10 round. Mag capacity does not include the one on the chamber.

After this all goes into effect, you may legally put seven rounds into a grandfathered ten round mag. No more mags, over seven rounds, will be available for sale.

And, from what I've seen....even though this doesn't go into effect until April 15th....try to find a ten round mag anywhere....they've either all been bought up or the stores pulled them off the shelf.

Look how much ten round 10/22 Ruger mags are going for on ebay.

It's crazy.....
 
Last edited:
Where the previous ban exempted high cap magazines purchased prior to the ban, this one does not. We have one year to get rid of high cap mags.

The problem in N.Y. is that although N.Y. City is 10% of the land area, it holds probably 80% of the population. Since the state legislators are apportioned on a per capita basis, most of them are concentrated in N.Y. City. The rest of the state has to live with their moronic ideas.
 
Back
Top