Home > Glock Talk > Local Glock Forums > California Glockers > Thoughts on 10-round magazine restrictions in CA ?

Thoughts on 10-round magazine restrictions in CA ?

  1. I may be moving to California soon.

    I have some thoughts & questions concerning the CA 10-round magazine restrictions.

    It seems to me, that one of the main advantage of the larger Glocks is their increased ammo capacity. If it's true that each handgun magazine in CA can only carry 10 rounds, you may as well get a smaller and more concealable pistol. You don't need an oversized gun with an oversized grip just to store larger magazines, since the max rounds you can carry is only 10. Right?

    Also, since you can ONLY get 10 rounds, you would want the most powerful rounds you can carry. Right?

    For example..... the old debate of "17 rounds of 9mm vs. 13 of .45" goes out the window. The debate there should be "10 rounds of 9mm vs. 10 rounds of .45"... unless I'm missing something.



    So in California, is there even a reason to get a full size Glock or other handgun, that's designed to hold more than 10 rounds? Why not get something like G30 over a G21, or a G26 over a G19 or G17?

    A G21 with 10 rounds seems like an unnecessarily large weapon, with some "wasted space" compared to a G30 with the same ammo capacity in CA. Also, a G17 is a large 9mm to only carry 10 rounds, why not carry a G26?




    What do you all think about this? Am I faulty in my logic?

    Seems to me that with only 10-rounds, you want to get the most powerful rounds you can handle (since you have less of them), and in the smallest gun you can shoot (to make it easier to conceal, since ammo capacity is fixed at 10)

    Thoughts?
     
  2. Larger handguns have other possible advantages besides mag capacity, like barrel length and grip size. Smaller guns are generally harder to shoot accurately.

    I'm far from an expert, but beyond that small quip, your logic seems perfectly accurate to me. If you're comfortable with the smaller handguns, there's no reason not to save some wasted space.

    PS "10 bullet clip" limits are absurd ;).
     
  3. Pisses me off, since I have a G21 already. :sad:
     
  4. **********

    1) I mostly agree--except for dedicated target shooters.

    2) A moot point if you miss. But the hardest hitting ammo, for sure!

    3) Assuming you shoot that caliber well, yes. Nines are controllable.

    4) Only if it's a dedicated target gun, does the big frame make sense.

    5) Ergonomics play no small part in gun selection.

    6) No. You're right. It's a stupid Liberal solution that solves nothing, but gets in your face--like all their crap solutions do! :upeyes:

    Stuck in Ca., I'd look at that S&W .357, 8-shot, tactical revolver, with a light rail. :thumbsup:

    Also, don't forget that there are proposals to limit personal weapons to .38 caliber, or less.

    These people don't want you armed at all, and this is their incremental way of eventually denying you firearms completely. Get out and vote these people out of office, or lose your precious liberties! :soap:

    --Ray
     
  5. There is no way I'd live in Cali. I was watching Cops the other night and a guy got arrested and treated like a criminal of the worst kind for having a loaded .22 in his back seat. F that. The man did nothing wrong.

    My buddy out there told me that you are not allowed to carry guns and ammo in the same box even. He said that your guns have to be unloaded, in the trunk, with ammo in separate container.
     

  6. Same here in Wisco-World. Then county to county, township to township, rules apply too. What are they? Nobody knows! You find out when they pull you over!

    A while back, in Milwaukee, an elderly lady held an intruder at gunpoint, while she called 911. The cops read her the riot act for pointing a loaded gun at that poor man! Meanwhile the news showed some old granny taking karate lessons, saying never pull a gun on an intruder, because there ARE alternatives.

    They never did address why the intruder complied and waited for the cops, why she wasn't mugged or robbed, or raped, because they're really not concerned so much with that. What matters is the idealogy by which they live, and FEEL GOOD about themselves...

    --Ray
     
  7. just to throw something in... you might take a look at the new XD 45's. They make one that is the 5 inch tactical slide with the smaller "compact" model grip on it, that way you have the best of both worlds, but the whole thing doesn't make sense to me..

    I lived in LA for 2 years and there is ne'er a more screwed up place in the world, i'm glad to be back in TX with my G17 and my 33 rounders.
     
  8. That is sad. If she were in Ky she could have shot the intruder without fear of reprieve. We have castle law that covers your home, your car and your barn (only if someone is trying to burn it down).
     
  9. Friend, you really have to realize that what size gun you can get may not matter in California.

    Depending on where you live you may be UNABLE to get a carry license.

    Cache your hi-cap magazines outside the state until you become a free citizen again...
     
  10. Buy your magazines while on vacation out of state!
    I would rather have a full capacity mag as a momento of my vacation than a lousy tee shirt!
    You owned them before they were banned so they were grandfathered.
    P.S. this will not work if your model of gun was not around before the ban!
    No mags with LE or date stamps either!
    Just because it is law does not make it right.
    M:thumbsup:
     
  11. Well, I'll tell you...your line of thinking was pretty much what I was using in 1999 when the ban was on and I got a Glock 30 instead of a 21. I actually sold my 1911 for the extra three rounds in a smaller package of the 30. You've pretty much nailed it. These days however, I'd judge a bit more differently now than I did then. Then, I thought bigger was better. Now, I don't really differenciate between the defensive powers of 9mm., .40, .357sig, or .45acp. I really mean that after doing the amount of reading I've done on GT. With that having been said, If I had a choice again between Glocks that will only ever use 10 round mags, (and I might again in a matter of months after all....)I'd take a 26 or 19 these days instead of the .45. Just my two cents. I left Kalifornia in 90'. I can't even imagine returning today. Good luck to you.
     
  12. Loaded guns in a vehicle led to road rage shootings on our freeways.

    I don't understand why anyone needs more than 10 rounds in a mag usless you are in-country. The 10 round limit does not apply to LEOs here.

    I only shoot at a range and the time reloading 4 10 round mags is a very good break and helps my shooting accuracy. Please do not say you may need it for self defence. If you really need more than 10 rounds you are in a shoot-out not a self defence situation.

    Basically, I do not know what the 10 round limit accomplishes but it doesn't bother me.
     
  13. If you can avoid moving here, do. The taxes and cost of living will cause your head to explode compared to Texas. Car insurance, gas prices, home prices are MUCH higher here.
    We are stuck with 10 round mags and whatever preban mage we had.
    The places to shoot are limited in some areas. Legally bringing your guns into CA is a whole nother matter. Very limited CCW. Best answer
    ......stay away.
     
  14. that reminds me, i have 2 15rd g22/24/35 preban nfml mags for sale, leave me an offer in the fs section :thumbsup:
     
  15. Sorry to take issue with your first sentance but someone has to do it. Loaded guns in a vehicle didn't lead to shootings on your freeways rather, psychopaths that belong in mental institutions driving on your freeways led to unjustified shootings while a gun was in their possession. Road rage is a make believe term often employed by egg heads to rationalize and downplay behaviors of fruitcakes in society while at the same time purposefully over emphasizing the use of guns in their deviant actions.
     
  16. I carry loaded cocked and locked in or out of a car all over the State 24/7 on a CCW. Some of my guns will only carry 10 or less rounds. Some can carry more and I have grandfathered regular (hi-cap)mags for them.

    Never listen to any one from the "Frisco" area about their opinions on guns. 99.9 % of them are wacked out and do not know there ass from their heads. Road rage is not caused by loaded guns. Road rage is caused by Morons.

    Marin County is a beautiful place filled with escapees from the Peoples Zoo. When I am in Marin County I carry two guns just to be safe.
     
  17. CCW in CA is not a lost cause. It really depends on which county you live in.

    Since, you are moving to CA. You should also check to see if you have any "assault weapons". Because you can't bring them with you.

    Also, once you move here, you have 60 days to register your handguns with CA DOJ.

    Also, if there's a handgun you would really like to own, buy it before you move here. CA restricts the sale of different make/model handguns depending on if they are deemed "unsafe" by CA DOJ.
     
  18. We have the same here in NJ, must carry gun in trunk unloaded, and ammo in seperate container.
     
  19. *********

    This is nothing personal, so disregard my intensity; I'm using it to make a point:

    1) Because it's my freaking gun and I don't need a nanny-state deciding how many cartridges I can put in it! Okay?

    From a design point of view, that that big honken grip is half empty because some Liberal ragamuffin says so, pisses me off no end!

    And what do I care what LEOs carry?!

    Back when the speed limit was 55 mph on our best highways, we had people saying, "I don't see why anybody needs to go any faster, anyway..." These are the jerks that hang in the left lane doing 61 mph today!

    2) So what? Who cares? The point is, nobody's imposing this on you. To me, that big honken gun with ten rounds is as dumb an RV with a 200-mile range!

    And who are you to say what I may need for self-defense? Who made you Bullet Monitor?

    3) It accomplishes nothing--like most Liberal mandates. It's a half-measure from that wanker, Bill Clinton, to appease those hand-wringing Liberal ragamuffins, that wanted to disarm you completely. What's next, six shots? Why do you need more than six? Even Dirty Harry got by with six! Six is plenty--lets make it six next!

    How nice that this arbitrary and senseless mandate works so well for you. It would piss me off!

    Hillary's comment at one speech was, "Who knows how many lives it saved?", referring to the last assault weapons ban. Who knows indeed, since they were involved in less than 2% of gun crimes. At that time, some four years into the ban, some four people were prosecuted for violation. Four people...

    --Ray
     
  20. Interesting comments. Totally incorrect and basically ignorant of the facts.
     

  21. The only statement that I said, That may be questionable is - the comment on Marin County having escapees from the Peoples Zoo. You however prove my point. You are in the "Frisco Area" and do not know California Gun Laws.

    I do know California gun laws and I have a California CCW and I carry concealed weapons in the "Frisco Area" and Marin County all the time and you can not. Because you listen to the stupid newspapers and elect officials that you think will protect you and they, then deny you, the basic rights that are protected by the Constitution of the USA.

    Have fun skipping through the Tulips in the Peoples Zoo!
     
  22. Glock-Ewe, after your last post you don't have much credibility.

    The ENTIRE point of the second ammendment was to ensure that the citizens of this country would have the ability to muster armed resistance against the government if it ever came to that. This also served as a check on governmental power, because as long as the common people were armed, the people in government would be careful not to overstep their bounds. Gun control is less about guns than it is about control.

    The second ammendment states that "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed". The US supreme court has ruled that, because of the nature of the constitution as applies to the federal government and because of the militia phrase, the 2nd ammendment does not apply to states, only the federal government. This is a mistake. This country does not allow the state governments to infringe on the free exercise of religion (ammendment 1) or to practice unreasonable searches and seizures (ammendment 4). The Bill or Rights is supposed to be guaranteed to the people.

    The being said, let's look at what it means to infringe someone's right...

    INFRINGE -
    1. to commit a breach or infraction of; violate or transgress
    2. to encroach or trespass

    Maybe we need to look at what encroach means

    ENCROACH - to enter by gradual steps or by stealth into the possessions or rights of another

    So, when the state of California or New York sets 10 round limits, or the state of New Jersey sets a 15 round limit, the state government is entering by gradual steps into the constitutionally guaranteed right of the people (not the state, as the state does not exercise religion and is not unreasonable searched and siezed) to keep (or own) and bear (or carry) arms (or guns).

    That, my friend, is what the big deal is about 10 round limits. Especially since LEOs, as agents of the government, are not held to this limit. Seems to me that a round count that applies to the common people and NOT to the agents of the government would be using gun control to unfairly stack the deck in the government's favor. Now why would anyone want to do that? ehem, so they can control.
     
  23. I don't understand why anyone needs more than 10 rounds in a mag usless you are in-country. The 10 round limit does not apply to LEOs here.
    quote

    It's obvious that the LEO'S in Marin co. have sense enough to know they are "in country"


    This may not have been clear to all. I was quoting the following post. My reply was intended as satire.

    glock-ewe
    Senior Member
    Location: Marin County, CA

    I don't understand why anyone needs more than 10 rounds in a mag usless you are in-country.
    The 10 round limit does not apply to LEOs here.

    edit 5-5-07
     
  24. TROLL ALERT!!!!!!!!TROLL ALERT!!!!!!!!! Heads up!!
     
  25. Maybe. Maybe not. I see no reason to kill the thread because you think so.

    This is a vital issue. This is how these LW whackos approach a thing. Bullets and spinach...

    You live in a Stand Your Ground state. CCW permits are available in Florida. Don't take it for granted, as Billary will change that in a heartbeat, given the slightest encouragement. That last magazine ban was a compromise of what the Left was really after.

    Nice area, where you indicate you're at. My sister lives nearby, in Dunedin.

    --Ray
     
  26. I need to move there from Texas.... :rofl: I thought we had it bad here:animlol:
     
  27. I don't take anything for granted.:hugs: Just having a little fun. Be well,MB.
     
  28. Couldn't agree more and was thinking the same thing.

    Remember when that old man plowed through the streets killing a couple of people and wounding several others. I guess that was the cars fault. I think CA should pass a law that cars are not allowed to be running while on the road.
     
  29. I don't like the restriction and I don't ever plan on moving to Cali because I love my 33 round mags. :)
     
  30. Back to the original post--part of the question was whether a Glock that was designed to hold 15 rnds was an illogical pistol once compromised by a state law mandating a 10 rnd limit. I have thought about that many times. Since I live in CA my G20 has never seen the mag it was designed around. Of course that is an irksome proposition. The only response can be to train even harder and practice reloads with more mags. I think most ordinary defensive uses of a handgun don't require triple-digit round counts, and are ended in split-seconds once the decision to escalate to deadly force is made. With that being said, if civilization collapses or the zombies arise, those of us with guns in CA will be at a distinct disadvantage.

    The CA 10-rnd limit is really noticed by those who would like to go black rifle/AR-15. You can buy a Bushmaster with a ten-round fixed mag but anything else skirts legality. I would love to get a business going that sold CA citizens a .223 stripper clip/guide accessory set-up for the CA-legal Bushmaster--and I'd be the first customer too.

    10-rounders are better than nothing. If you live in CA spend a buck or two to make sure your pro-gun feelings are heard in Sacramento. Everyone is so pessimistic about the future of guns in CA they've just about given up even trying to protect such a vital and elemental freedom/right.

    NRA! Support your Gun Shows and local Gun stores! Every dollar spent on this great hobby/freedom is another vote for the 2nd Amendment 'cuz we all know money talks......

    Later!
    Fragster out.
     
  31. To quote an idea from a local conservative radio host here in DFW... The gun.. any gun, is morally neutral. My G17 in my hand with a 33 round mag loaded with armor piercing ammo would be 100% unlikely to be used against the government, a cop, or anyone but a burgular / robber / rapist who is trying to harm me or mine... this exact same setup in the hands of a criminal minded or psycho person is a mass murder waiting to happen. If i owned an m16 i would use it to see how many holes i could put into a coffee can in 2 seconds, and that is about it... a crazy person would try to take out as many people as possible with it... (sepecially with that evil pistol grip and flash suppressor) It is not the gun, the ammo, the magazine capacity, or anything else but who is using said weapon that makes it dangerous. just my $.02.. which is currently trading down .004 at $.016 :p
     
  32. Umm, I believe your thinking is a little fuzzy there. That's like saying that money in banks causes bank robberies. By the way, I haven't heard of a "road rage" shooting in No. Calif. for quite some time now. You act as if it is a daily event or something.

    Once again, fuzzy thinking. 10-round limit? Tell that to the legally armed citizen in AZ that engaged a cop-killer with his GLOCK .357Sig and only had 14 rounds in his pistol's magazine (which was the only ammo that he had on his person). He fired all 14 rounds and then rushed the cop-killer and actually physically disarmed the murderer because he shot his gun to slide-lock! When I carry my G-19 I have a minimum of two extra 15-round magazines on my person. It's always better to have and not need than to need and not have!

    There's a difference between people who own a firearm and take it to the range and punch paper targets, and those of us who have a CCW and carry on a daily basis. I guess it is difficult for those of you who do not carry a firearm for SD to understand the many aspects of the use of a firearm for SD. Just because YOU think that there's no need for magazine capacity over 10 rounds doesn't mean that there is no REAL NEED for more than 10 rounds per magazine. If you had any amount of knowledge regarding the actual dynamics that take place during a life or death SD shooting, you would realize just how silly your comments really are.


    I'm not sure what you mean by "Peoples Zoo". Maybe emotionally disturbed people that should be locked up at Napa University...I mean Napa State Hospital? Tell ya one thing, the Bay Area (and I usually spell that with a capital "G" and not a "B") certainly has a good many of the nutcases (and liberatards) of this state and I don't go to that area of No. Calif. without two guns either! Oh, and by the way, another good reason to carry hi-cap mags in the G...Bay Area (including Marin, Napa & Solano) is because of the increase of Sureno gang members that are being paroled to these locals from the L.A. area. If that's not a good enough reason to carry several spare hi-cap magazines or even a second gun, I don't know what is!
     
  33. 1) How do you figure? Don't cars lead to road rage? Ban them!

    2) What does a 10-round limit accomplish? Why arbitrarily limit capacity? Why should we be required to reload our mags at 10 rounds just because it helps your accuracy? I can shoot 15 rounds just fine, thank you. (BTW-can you seriously not come up with a single situation in which more than 10 rounds would be useful?)

    3) I don't know what the 10-round limit accomplishes either. The fact that it's been used to limit what I can do for no reasonable reason bothers me.
     
  34. Ten rounds........

    You guys argue about it . I'm going to the beach. ;)
     
  35. Good lord man....don't give those leftist politicians in Kalifornia anymore nutty ideas to implement!!
     
  36. Originally posted by glock-ewe
    ---------------------------------------------------------------
    --------------------------------------------------------------

    This did lead to a killing on a Houston,TX street.

    Driver 1 did something in traffic to make
    Driver 2 mad. Eventually both drivers had to stop at a
    light at an intersection. It was hot weather and Driver 1
    had his window closed and A/C running. Driver 2 got out of
    his vehicle and charged up to Driver 1 cursing and shaking
    his fist. Driver 1 lowered his window because he could not
    hear all Driver 2 was saying. As soon as the window went
    down Driver 2 started punching Driver 1 in the face and
    trying to pull him out of the car through the window.
    Driver 2 was much larger than Driver 1.
    Driver 1 has a CHL (TX Concealed Handgun License). He, by
    now, was in fear of his life and proceeded to shoot
    Driver 2 dead. No charges of any sort were filed against
    Driver 1 and still has his CHL. Too bad Driver 2 didn't
    have better manners. I'm sure it will be a long time before
    Driver 1 is able to forget this. I believe this happened
    within the last 2 years.
     
  37. Just picked up my G26 last Friday. For pretty much the same reasons you site.
     
  38. If I was a non-LEO and a gun owner, I would NEVER live in Kali.
     
  39. if the terrorists would just take out sanfran and la, cali would be red.
     
  40. Got that straight! :thumbsup: I am not an LEO, I am a gun owner, and I left the DPRK in 1978 and never went back!

    Well, I DID visit my parents eight times between '78 and '96, but they're gone now...
     
  41. Got that straight! :thumbsup: I am not an LEO, I am a gun owner, and I left the DPRK in 1978 and never went back!*

    *Except a few times to visit my parents, but I always tried to convince them to come visit me instead. :supergrin:
     
  42. As a citizen of this communist state, I'll say this...

    I'm not sure why LEO's need 15+ rounds when they are trained to shoot properly and we are not. Seems to me that we should get more and they get less, of course that's just my opinion.

    Now as for the black rifles, magazines that are unable to be removed are dangerous. Anyone who has shot a AR knows they can jam in the worst way. How does the DOJ suppose we should get the jam out of a loaded weapon if we cannot remove the device that loads the ammo?

    I guess they just don't care about real safety, only perceived versions of it.