JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
730
Reactions
2,026
So my wife and I have discussed the possibility of us moving to another state. We don't have a specific destination, or timeline, or even have decided that we will move.

One of my criteria would be consideration of the gun laws in the other state.

This morning we were talking about Vermont and I discovered they passed a high capacity feeding device law in 2018.

.

(e)(1) As used in this section, "large capacity ammunition feeding device" means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept:

(A) more than 10 rounds of ammunition for a long gun; or

(B) more than 15 rounds of ammunition for a hand gun.

So my question, which I'm interested in hearing others opinions is: What about my ruger pc carbine when using my glock 19 mag?

Clearly, since this is the original mag provided by glock for the use with the glock then it's a handgun mag. But being inserted into a long gun.

Discuss
 
There are state compliant versions of everything, sometimes those versions come with no mag at all. If Vermont says no to 11+, that's how it is. Of course, you'd need to be caught and the authorities would need to care
 
There are state compliant versions of everything, sometimes those versions come with no mag at all. If Vermont says no to 11+, that's how it is. Of course, you'd need to be caught and the authorities would need to care

So your position is that the firearm it is inserted into determines compliance and not the magazine itself nor the caliber?
 
Yes. Rifles are 10 and less, pistols are 15 and less. I believe Canada has a similar system but opposite? As soon as a standard g19 mag is inserted into a Ruger PC carbine, the law has been broken. Unless there's some grandfathering, but since you'd be a new resident, I don't think that'd apply.

Same thing with ARs, which would head me to believe AR pistols are extremely popular there compared to rifles
 
Simply having the mag one could argue that it is meant for a pistol. But if all you have is a rifle that accepts it and not a pistol, constructive intent could be argued. If caught with the mag in a rifle, then not only intent, but actual usage would almost assuredly be illegal by the intent of the law.

Vermont used to be the bastion of gun rights. If there is ever an example of how our rights are being slowly but surely infringed by law, Vermont is a good one.
 
Simply having the mag one could argue that it is meant for a pistol. But if all you have is a rifle that accepts it and not a pistol, constructive intent could be argued. If caught with the mag in a rifle, then not only intent, but actual usage would almost assuredly be illegal by the intent of the law.

If it could be argued that having the rifle and not the pistol is constructive intent, then wouldn't it also be constructive intent even if you do have a pistol?

Unless you also had a 10 round glock mag as well.

Of course this is hypothetical and assuming the mag is not inserted in any firearm.
 
there are a thousand ways to try and get around laws. Its takes getting caught on one technicality to eff up your life real bad. Buy some 10 rounders and a g19 and call it a day, never have that rifle around without the low cap mag and if the higher cap mag is around, make sure the pistol is, too. Annoying, yes, but probably not worth the headache otherwise
 
Same thing with ARs, which would head me to believe AR pistols are extremely popular there compared to rifles

This is actually a different position that I hadn't considered before and I see how it reinforces your thought.

I had originally interpreted the statute as x rounds of ammunition determined by the common ammunition type. Therefore, 9mm being a common handgun, it would not matter if it were in a rifle or pistol, 15 its the limit.

If that were true, then an ar pistol would be limited to 10 as the common ammo use being considered for rifles.
 
there are a thousand ways to try and get around laws. Its takes getting caught on one technicality to eff up your life real bad. Buy some 10 rounders and a g19 and call it a day, never have that rifle around without the low cap mag and if the higher cap mag is around, make sure the pistol is, too. Annoying, yes, but probably not worth the headache otherwise

For the record, I wasn't intending to try and tiptoe the legal lines. I was just starting the thread to see how others might interpret the law. There is undoubtedly unaccounted ambiguity here, but I personally don't have a desire to be the case that would clarify the law
 
if you have a 50 BMG pistol, it's still a pistol. If you have a 38 special rifle, it's still a rifle. Vermont doesn't seem to have language that suggests they care about the common usage of any given cartridge, but they definite;y care about the type of firearm said cartridge is fed into
 
If it could be argued that having the rifle and not the pistol is constructive intent, then wouldn't it also be constructive intent even if you do have a pistol?

Unless you also had a 10 round glock mag as well.

Of course this is hypothetical and assuming the mag is not inserted in any firearm.

If the mag is legal for the pistol, then you have a legal use for it. But if you don't have a pistol that it is legal in, and it isn't legal for a rifle you have, then you could wind up in court, and lose the case.

It is like the hypothetical case where you have a spare 13-17 inch barrel for a Shockwave/Tac-14/et. al. and you actually own a Shockwave and you own a Mossberg 590 shotgun. You have a legal use for that barrel since it can be used legally on the Shockwave. But if you only owned the shotgun and not the Shockwave, then it can be argued that your intent is to use it on the shotgun since you have no legal use for it.
 
@The Heretic - I get your point but don't quite think the analogy works. If it's a spare barrel, then you have 2 shotguns that can still function as intended if you didn't have the spare barrels. The pcc is intended to have a mag feed, therefore if the only mags you had are 15 round, it could be argued you might have intention to use them illegally in the carbine even if you have a pistol.

Seems like the only truly safe scenario is as @MechaNik said and always have a 10 round with the pcc and always have the glock with the 15.

It's unfortunate, the 24 round is my preferred with the pcc and that wouldn't be able to own in any scenario. Might have to cross Vermont off the list entirely
 
Avoiding states that participate in such nonsense is my solution to the problem. If it's nice enough, I'll visit, but I won't call it home.

At the rate things are going, that might be everywhere in the not too distant future.
 
@The Heretic The pcc is intended to have a mag feed, therefore if the only mags you had are 15 round, it could be argued you might have intention to use them illegally in the carbine even if you have a pistol.

The counter argument would be that you have a legal use for the mag, so therefore the mag is legal. Courts will side with the defendant where that is the case.

For example: let's say I have three AR uppers, one has a 12 inch barrel, another a 14 inch barrel and the third has an 18" barrel. Additionally I have two lowers, one with a rifle stock, one is configured as a pistol. Which firearm do the short barreled upper belong to? The pistol upper.

I can't cite cases (too lazy to dig for them) but I am pretty sure this has all been settled in various cases.
 
Avoiding states that participate in such nonsense is my solution to the problem. If it's nice enough, I'll visit, but I won't call it home.

At the rate things are going, that might be everywhere in the not too distant future.

It isn't just the states - in the case of barrel lengths and rifle stocks, etc., it is also federal law that comes into play.
 
I'm not versed on the esoteric ins-and-outs of Vermont law or interpretation of magazines in pistols or rifles. My concern would be that they recently passed such nonsense law.

Moving, particularly 3000 miles, is extremely time consuming and expensive. If you're moving partly due to the anti-gun nonsense (and policies that go hand-in-hand) you'd not be improving your situation in Vermont. Tens of thousands of dollars involved. If gun rights were important, and to me they are, I wouldn't even consider a state that recently enacted such nonsense. It's a bad trend. And Vermont is encircled by mostly anti-gun states (NY, Mass, CT, Maine) and Canada. If one must live in the US NE, pick New Hampshire, which is ranked #17.

That's important because it's 1) the mentality in the New England area, and 2) for road trips you're essentially boxed in by anti-gun states making it a challenge to travel armed.

Check this fairly reliable list of states ranking the best gun rights: Best States for Gun Owners (2019)

New Hampshire #17
Maine #30
Oregon #33
Vermont ranks 37th
Washington State #39
Rhode Island #43
CT #45
Mass #50
New York #51
 
Last Edited:
I don't think you have your priorities set right. To me, magazine capacity is down the list. The odds of the state passing an "assault weapon ban" would top my list, regardless of current laws. To me, restrictions on carry conditions, self defense laws, and restrictions on specific firearm types are way more important than magazine capacity.

Just get a bunch of 10 round mags and get good at magazine changes. No worries about getting in trouble with the law for a magazine capacity that you have a better chance of winning the lottery than needing. Or move somewhere else...

Millions have been killed by firearms in combat that had a lot less than 10 round capacity, or firearms that did, but the capacity was not needed.

That being said, I like having a 30rnd magazine, so I get it. I have, however, been thinking about getting 20rnd mags for my ar15 as they are less bulky. I started out with 20rnd mags for my ar10, and switched to 10rnd mags as they are more convenient shooting prone.
 
Maine just a few years ago used to be the holdout on the North East Coast and was very pro-2nd Amendment and is now almost as bad as Oregon. All it takes is a few bad voting cycles. Moving antwhere in the US and expecting it to remain gun friendly is a crap-shoot.
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top