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)
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 .