Confusion in New York

| February 27, 2013

Gun dealers and their prospective customers are expressing a little dismay at the whole SAFE Act thing in New York State. They say that no one makes 7-round magazines for their weapons and, apparently, none of the big gun manufacturers have any plans to conform their products to New York legislation according to the newspaper I used to deliver, the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle;

This means that in less than two months, gun dealers such as Paul Martin, owner of Pro-Gun Services in Victor, can only sell something that doesn’t exist yet.

“There was never a need for a (seven-round magazine),” Martin said. “Not many manufacturers are going to bother to make something just for the state of New York.”

The New York Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act, passed in January, says gun dealers cannot sell magazines with more than seven rounds beginning April 15. However, three gun dealers in the Rochester area say manufacturers don’t make a seven-round magazine for most guns, and several manufacturers don’t disagree. This leaves store owners wondering what they are going to sell.

So, I guess that leaves everyone the option to buy an M1911 in .45 caliber or nothing. I have about ten 7-round magazines for the 1911 that I’m willing to sell. But, of course, like everything else that’s poorly conceived, the number “7” was arrived at by committee;

Lawmakers arrived at the number seven through a compromise in the Democratic caucus, Democratic Majority Leader Joe Morelle said last month.

“Some wanted it higher, some wanted it lower, so seven became the place where we could get people to compromise and agree to … it was the subject of much discussion,” Morelle said. “In time, if other states follow New York’s lead, manufacturers will begin to produce magazines that have seven-round clips.”

The gun dealers can’t even get an answer as to whether they can “block” the magazines and still be in compliance with the law, such as it is. In a quick search on the internet, I found kits for blocking 20 & 30 round PMAGs to 10-rounds, so I guess an enterprising soul could start making NY-compliant blocks, if they’re legal. I know we used to “plug” shotgun tubular magazines in order to comply with New York’s 3-round limit for duck hunting, so, if that helps…

Thanks to PFM for the link.

Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists

Comments (37)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. 2/17 Air Cav says:

    Looked at your spedometer lately? Funny thing that. It will register at 110, 120 or higher but chances are you don’t travel that fast on the highway. The fact that it is illegal is enough. There’s no need to make cars that have a maximum speed of 75 mph.

  2. xbradtc says:

    that problem is a feature, not a bug, to the gun control fetishists in NY.

  3. Reaperman says:

    They make stuff just for california, so I’m sure somebody will (if needed) make mags just for new york. This might also fuel the ‘3d gun printing’ industry if the gap isn’t filled quickly. And again another article is quoted misusing the word ‘clip.’ Goddamn, that bugs me.

  4. MDB says:

    2/17 Air Cav, I would say cars shouldn’t go any faster than 57 mph. Since we’re just going to pull arbitrary numbers out of our ass for everything now. As long as you make a good enough argument from emotion you are immune to scrutiny no matter how unreasonable or stupid your idea is. Just find some people whose kids were killed because someone was going 60 mph and you could shove that legislation right through the US Senate.

  5. 2/17 Air Cav says:

    @4. Yes, what you say is true. I hope I wasn’t too obtuse. What I was trying to get at was that NY could have passed a law setting the maxinum number of rounds in a magazine at seven, just as there are speed limits instead of prohibitions on cars capable of exceeding a certain speed. But noooooooo, they had to ban the magazine.

  6. SJ says:

    Was looking for an AR PMAG or two on the web today. Nada that I could find.

  7. Jonn Lilyea says:

    SJ #6; There are PMAGs out there, but they want like $50 per. For something we were paying $18 for a few months ago.

  8. Spade says:

    Magpul right now is only selling to CO residents so they can get all the mags they need before the ban hits.

  9. SJ says:

    #8 Spade…I saw that and that was what prompted my search. Jonn: Dear Leader certainly has helped one industry.

  10. A Proud Infidel says:

    @2/17, just look at the number of people killed and maimed by drunk drivers, it exceeds the number killed by guns, let’s outlaw drunk driving, *OOP*,… wait, we already did,… Let’s outlaw felons possessing guns and ammo,… *OOP*,.. that’s already been done, too,….
    It looks like it’s safe to say that laws are only as good as their enforcement, and a lot of them don’t do a damn bit of good, like Chicago’s Gun Control laws!

  11. 2/17 Air Cav says:

    @10. Yep. I especially enjoy the murder by rifle number and, within that, the even tinier number of murders committed by AR 15s and the like. It’s all a sham and we know it.

  12. Poetrooper says:

    Make no mistake that haste was the operative word in ramming through this legislation before emotions over the Connecticut shooting cooled. And most things done in haste get done badly, especially legislation. Guv Coo-mo (as Al Sharpton calls him) organized a legislative flash mob to overwhelm the opposition. It’s a tactic the Democrats are using more and more as are their constituents.

    A responsible, deliberative process would have involved contacting the firearms and magazine manufactures to determine what the effects of their legislation would be. But since when are liberals responsible or deliberative?

  13. Common Sense says:

    @8 – Magpul doesn’t have the offer available yet. As soon as they do, we’ll be getting our 10 PMAGs. Even after the ban goes into effect, we just have to drive up to Cheyenne when we want more. The bill only prevents the SALE of mags more than 15 rounds, not the OWNERSHIP. How stupid is that?

    As for price, BlueCore got a shipment in last week and they were $21.99 for the windowed variety. So if you’re patient, you can get them for a decent price.

    The universal background check is far more concerning. That’s a clear path to registration and future confiscation.

    Hickenlooper has been pushing universal background checks and said today that he would sign the 15 mag limit bill if it gets to him, which it will. Republicans need 6 Dems to vote against it in the Senate and they won’t get them.

  14. Ex-PH2 says:

    @13 – It does not prevent the RENTING of magazines with more than 15 rounds capacity, does it?

    No. It doesn’t.

    Can we say ‘loophole’?

  15. PintoNag says:

    @12 Poetrooper, they were indeed hasty, but there were no “unintended consquences” on their part. They knew precisely what they were doing. They’ll wait and see what shakes out and how much they’ll get. Then they’ll sit back and wait for the next tragedy. And they will repeat the process over and over until they get what they want.

    Unless the conservatives figure out a way to stop this runaway, we’re headed for a total gun ban in this country.

  16. DaveO says:

    #14 Has a point – great business renting out magazines, maybe even enough to cover the costs of rising health insurance premiums.

    Bottom line: this law is job insurance for lawyers, since it criminalizes law-abiding adherents of the US Constitution. How much will the lawyers pocket from the lawsuit that tears down this law?

  17. LIRight says:

    A fellow member of the FOP sent this to me today:

    Amended NYS Penal Law –

    Of particular interest is section § 265.37 pertaining to “certain ammunition feeding devices.”

    Unlawful possession of certain ammunition feeding devices.
    “It shall be unlawful for a person to knowingly possess an ammunition feeding device that such person lawfully possessed before the effective date of the chapter of the laws of two thousand thirteen which added this section, that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or
    converted to accept more than seven but less than ten rounds of ammunition, where such device contains more than seven rounds of ammunition.”

    As I’ve said before, NY sucks!

  18. Fen says:

    How does this not violate DC V Heller? They ruled that DCs law requiring safety locks on handguns stored in the home was unconsitutional because that:

    “amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense… Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense”

    Mandating magazine sizes that do not exist for sale makes it “impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense”

  19. ConcernedCitizen says:

    While we’ve had CA-compliant weapons and magazines made by companies before, I think making new mags to comply with NY laws in light of recent events would further a dangerous precedent where no one will remember that 30-round rifle magazines and handgun mags holding more than 10 rounds used to be the standard, and not ‘high capacity.’

  20. USMCE8Ret says:

    I have a feeling it’s only a matter of time before folks start leaving NY in droves and start moving elsewhere. It seems like the agenda is to create some kind of utopia.

    It’s more than little disheartening to think that I spent 25 years of my life supporting and defending the Constitution, only to see the sacrifices so many of us have made be trampled upon, and there’s not even ONE person who will try to make it stop.

    …it’s like watching a train wreck about to happen. It’s going to be devestating – but I’m not giving up yet.

  21. fm2176 says:


    True, and in some cases those limited capacity may be more popular than the suddenly evil “high capacity” ones. More than a few handguns come equipped with a magazine only holding eight to twelve rounds. When the AWB restricted mags to 10-rounds, some of us had the choice of paying $15 for a new post-ban mag or paying three times more for a mag designed to hold only one or two more rounds (and in many cases used). I managed to snag a few pre-ban mags for my Beretta 92F, but if I had the 96 conversion at the time I doubt I’d have paid $40+ for two extra rounds.

  22. Dirt Dart says:

    The Corections people are going to get a overwhelming work load. How many honest folk get hemmed for this illegal law befroe the Supreame court says back up NY cant you understand our prior judgments…

  23. Veeshir says:

    I grew up in upstate NY, everybody has a Ruger 10/22 or a Marlin or Remington with a tube mag (15 .22LR, 17 .22 rifle or 20 .22 shorts) and they’re all illegal.

    That gun you got your 12 year old son to shoot the rabbits eating your crops? That’s a felony now.

    I foresee a revolution in upstate. Something like 25 counties have told NYS to eff off. Saratoga, Ulster and Green were the first, but 22 others (at least, I haven’t checked lately) are all into a revolution.

    For those not in the know, upstate NY is maybe 10 cities that resemble a small Queens, NY, and the rest of the state is mountains, farms and lakes.
    The difference between the non-city parts of upstate NY and Georgia are: Thicker flannels and more rust on the pick-ups with Confederate flags.

    I left NY long ago because of snow and how they just kept voting for nannarchs, so I don’t have a high opinion of NYS voters, but I have high hopes.

    Hopefully I’m not just high.

  24. teddy996 says:

    @23- we’re not going quietly. Oswego county legislators and a couple bus loads of supporters are going to Albany today, joined by others from across the state. This new law will crush rural counties.

    Also, there is an exception written into the law specifically for. 22s with tube magazines, and guns over 50 years old. That’s why there are no surplus Garands hanging on any shop’s walls anymore. Those 8 shot spring clips are legal in NY for now, if you can find them.

  25. NHSparky says:

    I have about ten 7-round magazines for the 1911 that I’m willing to sell.

    Nah, I’ll keep my 8-round magazines, thanks all the same. Just to send the Massholes and other assorted ri-tard flatlanders into coniption fits.

  26. Adirondack Patriot says:

    The answer is simple: Since I can’t carry my Sig 229 anymore because of the magazine restrictions, but I can carry my Mossberg Tactical Elite 12 gauge, I’m going to sling that Mossberg up and go the movies and shopping and making client calls in bad neighborhoods.

    Thanks, Gov. Cuomo. You’re the greatest!

  27. MCPO NYC USN (Ret.) says:

    SSSSHHHHH … I am keeping everything! Law to change very soon!

  28. Whitey_wingnut says:

    Looks like my Steyr M95, Enfield, 7mm Mauser, Mosin 91/30, Mossberg 12 gauge and Winchester 30-30 are the only ones I can carry into New York.

  29. MCPO NYC USN (Ret.) says:

    @ 23

    You say: “Thicker flannels and more rust on the pick-ups with Confederate flags”.

    I say: “Thicker polartech, more rust on pick up trucks … maybe, but that Confederate flag notion is way off base”.

  30. Adirondack Patriot says:

    No confederate flags. “Don’t Tread On Me Flags,” which will be in full view today at the Capitol in Albany.

    Crazy Andrew, who doesn’t know what an inside voice is and needs to dust off his father’s ancient staffers to run government, will proclaim us all as “gun nuts” as he watches from the safety of his taxpayer-funded phalanx of State Troopers with automatic weapons.

  31. John11b says:

    I seem to remember something about that New York bill that stated you could gphanve 10 rd mags, but you better not put more than 7 in them. So it was like an honor system thing. Stupid. I could be wrong though if someone else has other info to clarify. And I knew manufacturers would not make 7 rd mags. And I think the politicians knew it too, and used it as a sneaky way to get people to sell their guns out of state to have fewer in their own state. Creeps.

  32. John11b says:

    *could have 10 rd mags. Stupid iPad.

  33. Adirondack Patriot says:

    From today’s news, New York State ordered to show that the NY SAFE Act is constitutional.

    It’s not much of a read, but it will get better as case proceeds.

  34. Ex-PH2 says:

    I think this news item today proves that it is not guns that are the issue, but rather gun-wielding dogs:

    I do issue a warning about hot liquid intake before you read it.

  35. obsidian says:

    The majority of gun owners in my area are saying any laws reach us like that and we will just ignore it.
    Carry what’s legal keep at home what’s not.
    Down here a switchblade knife is illegal to carry yet it’s legal to have in your own business or home. How the Gov. expects a person to buy and carry a switchblade home legally I do not know.
    What’s stopping the search of homes is the fourth amendment, to enable any kind of magazine grab the fourth will have to be suspended as will the fifth question is, Does NYC have the nerve to cancel the bill of rights just to collect a bunch of empty magazines or not.
    Who the gov. plans on sending in is something to think about also ANG, Police, State Troopers or DHS. who gets to confront possibly several gun owners in order to search and seize magazines. Will those who steal citizens property come under civil rights violations?
    Recall that the Green River Serial killer kill an estimated 95 people during his hunt and he did not use a gun, 30 rd magazine or even a big knife nor box cutter nope, The killer used ligature, shoestrings, ropes and rags he choked with his own hands three Hi Cap magazines worth of human lives.
    I don’t see Nanny bloomberg demanding a ban on shoestrings though.

  36. The Dead Man says:

    @Obsidian – Don’t give him ideas, he’ll have everyone wearing velcro shoes and footie pajamas or something ridiculous.

  37. MCPO NYC USN (Ret.) says:

    @ EX-PH2

    The artcle says: “accidentally (we can only assume) kicked it and it fired a bullet into Lanier’s leg”.

    Other reports have indicated that owner (Lanier) reduced the dogs “Snausages” allowance and that the dog willfully and knowingly discharged the weapon with an intention to harm the owner.

    The dog ain’t out of the doghouse yet!