Illegal to USE mags larger than 10 in MD?

[lazarus]

And she was ROR'd! Thanks Criminal Justice Reinvestment Act - now her customers can stop jonesing for their fix. Be warned though, you come to the rural counties and CJRA be damned, you will be held without....

Diminuition credits. Outside a crime of violence generally, you serve 24% of a sentence in prison at most and 50% of a sentence in jail. If there is overcrowding or other issues it is possible to go down from there. So 2 years of local time is work 1 year - but you need to get over 4 years of prison time in the state system to do the same year. You can tell the folks that know the system because they specifically ask me for state rather than county time (state time is also more palatable because there are more privileged).

I'd recommend getting some standard capacity magazines. Neutering your CCW doesn't make sense.

Thanks for the info. That just sucks.

I am a believer in reform and incentivizing people to improve their lives, but none of that sounds like a good way to do it to me.

 

[lazarus]

How can they honor their Oath, and continue to legitimize this travesty against the Constitution? It renders their Oath, meaningless.

Because understandings vary.

Same reason we are having fights over abortion, freedom of religion, etc.

 

[Jimgoespewpew]

That’s unfortunate. Because it may take more than a few rounds to stop a single attacker, if you are in any sort of urban or crowded environment, you might want/need more than 10 on you if you carry. Sad to think the state has yet another charge to throw at someone who is defending themselves. But that’s how this lovely state works.

Thanks for the info.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Notice he said in the commission of a crime, not defending yourself against a crime.

 

[10mmAuto]

That’s unfortunate. Because it may take more than a few rounds to stop a single attacker, if you are in any sort of urban or crowded environment, you might want/need more than 10 on you if you carry.

Carry a 45 and you may not need a few more rounds, lol ...

But seriously, an extra mag regardless of capacity is good to have.

 

[TheOriginalMexicanBob]

Carry a 45 and you may not need a few more rounds, lol ...

But seriously, an extra mag regardless of capacity is good to have.

View attachment 370092

 

[tjaw]

So, a hypothetical situation regarding magazines with a higher capacity than 10 rounds: If I buy, say a Glock 17 in Maryland, and I find that the case includes two 17 round magazines, I should...?

 

[chilipeppermaniac]

" Maryland should have..."

Fixed it for you.

Sadly, MD has ...

Fill in the blanks. Gerrymandering, crooked government, Bloomberg funded @ JHU, entrenched Dems, libtard General Assembly, crying MOM's but do these same mom's cry about legalized baby murder? Joe Curran's edict to eradicate guns, and on and on and on from all who want to destroy America and MD and our 2a 1a, and all our rights. Yup MD Should...

 

[DC-W]

So, a hypothetical situation regarding magazines with a higher capacity than 10 rounds: If I buy, say a Glock 17 in Maryland, and I find that the case includes two 17 round magazines, I should...?

 

[DC-W]

So, a hypothetical situation regarding magazines with a higher capacity than 10 rounds: If I buy, say a Glock 17 in Maryland, and I find that the case includes two 17 round magazines, I should...?

 

[Art3]

So, a hypothetical situation regarding magazines with a higher capacity than 10 rounds: If I buy, say a Glock 17 in Maryland, and I find that the case includes two 17 round magazines, I should...?

Go to a neighboring free state and remove whatever device was installed to limit the capacity to 10. Come home, and enjoy your standard capacity magazines. Just don't commit any violent crimes with them.

 

[tjaw]

In the hypothetical, the Seller did an Oops when selling a pair of (unblocked) 17 rounds mags.

Question: Does being a Patron Member of the NRA make me a terr-ist?

 

[dblas]

Illegal to use, period.

What? Illegal to use a magazine of more than 10 rounds?
You sir, are completely wrong.

 

[10mmAuto]

So, a hypothetical situation regarding magazines with a higher capacity than 10 rounds: If I buy, say a Glock 17 in Maryland, and I find that the case includes two 17 round magazines, I should...?

If you went to a MD FFL to buy this Glock 17, the FFL (seller) would not have (2) 17 rounds in the case, b/xc when they order the gun from the distributor, and they see they are located (selling) in MD, they will make sure the mags included w/ the pistol are State compliant -- in this case, 10-round (max) mags. Same as CA, NJ, NY, etc. It protects the mfg, distributor, seller (FFL) and buyer from legal hassles.

Sincethe MD seller (FFL) knows they are liable for following State law, they would not show a buyer any semi-auto+mag combo with more than 10 round mags, as they would be liable if they sold an over 10 mag to a buyer, and there was ever an issue. In this case, shit flows backwards, from buyer, to seller, to distributor, etc. until the law finds out "who did it". No FFL would risk a legal issue for a $20 mag.

BTW, the limit of rounds in a mag is simply done by the mfg crimping the magazine sides, so it cannot physically hold more than X rounds. Been done this way for 20+ years.

In answer to your question "I should ..." I would point out the error to the seller, and keep you both safe. He may give them to you under the table, but also give you compliant 10-round mags. Later, if you wanted (more) 10+ mags, go up to PA, or the Internet and buy them.

 

[Stoveman]

If you went to a MD FFL to buy this Glock 17, the FFL (seller) would not have (2) 17 rounds in the case, b/xc when they order the gun from the distributor, and they see they are located (selling) in MD, they will make sure the mags included w/ the pistol are 10-round (max) mags. Same as CA, NJ, NY, etc.

The limit of rounds in a mag is done simply by the magazine mfg being crimped so it cannot hold more than X rounds. Been done this way for 20+ years.

 

[Stoveman]

So, a hypothetical situation regarding magazines with a higher capacity than 10 rounds: If I buy, say a Glock 17 in Maryland, and I find that the case includes two 17 round magazines, I should...?

Maybe your basement identifies as Pennsylvania, who's to say?

 

[Bullfrog]

Maybe your basement identifies as Pennsylvania, who's to say?

So theoretically, if a person has a planter box filled with dirt from PA, he could stand in it and then say he always unblocks his mags on Pennsylvania soil.

 

[[Kev308]]

So if a Kyle Rittenhouse CC'd a 15 round pistol in MD and was attacked by a mob, and the events played out the same. Would this hypothetical person also be charged with the high capacity magazine crime?

 

[rbird7282]

So if a Kyle Rittenhouse CC'd a 15 round pistol in MD and was attacked by a mob, and the events played out the same. Would this hypothetical person also be charged with the high capacity magazine crime?

He could've been charged with that as well if it happened in MD but since he was found innocent he didn't commit a crime, therefore that charge wouldn't apply AFAIK.

 

[chilipeppermaniac]

Knows of a scenario where a handgun was purchased in another state and shipped to a MD FFL, including one 10 round and one- more that 10 round Mags. Maybe the Owner needs to move to Rhode Island and turn in his 13 round ammo feeding device for the other device of self protection.

 

[Ellis Gordon]

Yup BUT. Due to "Control" they have acquired, now even if a legal gun owner should shoot a person in the act of posing a threat to life such as a home invasion, car jacking, kidnapping etc, even with a CCW in public, or in the home use of our firearm, litigious society we now have possible charges against the endangered shooter vs the corpse/ surviving perp. It is F'd up, like you said. No regard for our Constitutional, let alone God given right to protect one's life.

“You may be interested to know that in 2010 Maryland expanded the Castle Doctrine to include immunity from civil lawsuits if the person reasonably believes that force or deadly force is necessary to repel an attack by the individual (in the home). 2010 Maryland Code COURTS AND JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS TITLE 5 - LIMITATIONS, PROHIBITED ACTIONS, AND IMMUNITIES Subtitle 8 - Immunities and Prohibited Actions - Miscellaneous Section 5-808 - Civil immunity for defense of dwelling or place of business. § 5-808 Civil immunity for defense of dwelling or place of business. (a) Person.- In this section, "person" does not include a governmental entity. (b) Civil immunity.- A person is not liable for damages for a personal injury or death of an individual who enters the person's dwelling or place of business if: (1) The person reasonably believes that force or deadly force is necessary to repel an attack by the individual; and (2) The amount and nature of the force used by the person is reasonable under the circumstances. (c) Exception.- Subsection (b) of this section does not apply to a person who is convicted of a crime of violence under § 14-101 of the Criminal Law Article, assault in the second degree, or reckless endangerment arising out of the circumstances described in subsection (b) of this section. (d) Costs and attorney's fees.- The court may award costs and reasonable attorney's fees to a defendant who prevails in a defense under this section. (e) Other provisions not limited or abrogated.- This section does not limit or abrogate any immunity from civil liability or defense available to a person under any other provision of the Code or at common law. [2010, ch. 555.] Maryland follows several common law principles relating to self defense, which include: Duty to Retreat - In situations that take place outside of a person's home the individual defending themselves has the duty to retreat, unless doing so is unsafe or impossible. The Castle Doctrine - In a person's home they do not need to retreat, but can stand their ground and attempt to defeat or deter the invader. However, the use of force here must still be reasonable. The Castle Doctrine laws are designed to effectively answer the question under the common law and establish that any intruder can be treated as a threat to life — warranting the use of lethal force. Maryland does not have a specific Castle Doctrine statute. It is rather a common law doctrine supported by case decisions and a standard jury instruction. There is a law requiring retreat in self-defense outside of the home. However, the standard “castle doctrine” instruction makes clear “that a person in his own home has no duty to retreat before using reasonable force against his attacker.” The rule is [p]remised on the common law principle that a man’s home is his castle, indeed his ultimate sanctuary, [and] permits a person who is without fault and is attacked within his dwelling or its curtilage, to stand his ground and defend himself, even if retreat could be safely accomplished. Gainer v. State, 40 Md. App. 382, 388, 391 A.2d 856 (1978)”