Walther Forums banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have been researching the legality of P99 hi-cap magazines. and here is what I have discovered.
A few years back, there was a "loophole" in the hi-capacity magazine ban, that was exploited to make 100% legal hi-cap magazines available, even for pistols made well after '94.
I will try and explain this "loophole", which was closed btw, so this is no longer legal.
The "loophole":
While the manufacture of new hi-capacity magazines is illegal, you can re-build existing magazines to like new condition. You can replace a worn out magazine body, followers, springs etc.. This is still legal, you can still buy "replacement" magazine tubes, springs, followers etc. (at the manufacturers discretion). But you must destroy the old magazine, and the re-built magazine must be for the same firearm. Here is the "loophole", the old law did not specify that the "re-built" magazine had to be for the same firearm. So people were buying up surplus AK-47 magazines at $10 apiece or so, destroying them, then "re-building" them into P99 magazines.
Hence you destroyed a cheap AK-47 magazine, and "re-built" it as a new AK-47 magazine, that just so happened to fit a P99.
Clear as mud?
So the legality of the unmarked magazine tubes is not-definate, and therefore un-prosecutable.
Even the magazines with the patent date showing post '94 production, are legal, if they were "re-built" AK-47 magazines.
So, the date of the magazine tube manufacture is irrelavent. If there is any question as to legality, it would rest with the person who legally (at the time) re-built the magazines.
And since there is no paper trail required by the law or the ATF for the re-built magazines, once again prosecution would be impossible.
This has been verified thru many different sources.
This is the reason for the ATF's "hands off" policy towards any unmarked hi-capacity magazine.

Anybody with more info, please add.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I ran across the "rebuilt" AK mag loophole over on another forum that is devoted to that kind of thing.
Then I started looking at the Scherer Glock mag tube "replacements".
Wheels started turning in my head.
I started researching.
I dug real deep into the ATF web site, and found the technical briefs referencing the change in interpretation regarding rebuilding magazines. The interpretation used to not specify that the rebuilt mags had to work as originally manufactured, then it was changed to specifically state that rebuilt or modified high capacity magazines must function in the firearm they were originally designed for.
Like I said:
1) Replacement parts for high-capacity magazines, including the tubes, are 100% legal, and always have been (ie: the Scherer Glock tubes)
2) Repairing pre-ban magazines is 100% legal, using new replacement parts. (hence manufacture dates are irrelevant)
3) Prior to the "loophole" being discovered, many many people took advantage of it and "rebuilt" magazines for several different pistols, P99's and H&K USP45's are the big 2.
4) These mags are 100% legal, due to their existing prior to the revised ruling, I have seen the letter from the ATF to a individual who was doing the AK mag rebuilds, stating that as long as he was destroying the "damaged" magazine, the rebuilds were legal.
5) This is why the ATF has a "hands off" policy regarding magazines that are not marked "Gov/LEO ONLY", since there is no way to prove that they are not "rebuilds".
...
This is an on going project (at least until the AWB sunsets), if anyone has anything to add, please do.
The more ammo we have for or against the existance of "legal" P99 hi-cap mags the better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
I just wanted to add and I'm just playing devil's advocate here, but your last comment assumes that the Brady bill will not go into permanent law right? I myself and you and millions of other legal gun owners hope it does'nt!!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Actually it was filed on July 19, 1993.
It was issued on February 7, 1995.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Items/inventions are made before it can be pattended. Thus many mags may have been made before the patten was finalized in 1995.

Its hard to believe Walther made the P-99 before a mag was made for it ? I think they were made together well before 1994.


Joe
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
While the magazines might have been made prior to '95, and prior to the patent being issued, I doubt they would have put the not yet issued patent number on the magazine tube.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
When you apply for a patent in the USA, you are issued a patent number immediately until its officially patented. Just like going to the grocery store and taking a number at the deli before they call your number.

A patent is an invention that you created and wish to protect from copying.

Again its obvious Walther was going to produce mass amounts of P-99 pistol and needed Meggar to make as many mags for them as possible, thus production on these mags could have gotten started immediately or even before the patent since there was no one else making these mags for Walther. Stamping of the number could have also started before the official patent date. Afterall its just a copyright number.


Joe
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
This is true. I just bought a ton of AR-15 USGI replacement mag bodies a little while ago. This is perfectly legal so long as you don't assemble them into new magazines.

I was cautioned to keep the old damaged magazines, however. If I need to destroy them I will happily do so. Anyone have some clarification on this?
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top