How to plug a pistol magazine?

1874

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119121954#Comment_119121954

"This point was discussed before and some argued its allowed, others saying its not. The problem here, or the "grey area", is the chamber is not the mag and the law says only the mag must be limited to 5 rounds. So if you had one in the spout and someone asked you to drop out the mag and they counted the five rounds then technically you're in compliance with the law. I personally think its a risky thing (keeping one in the chamber) but to each their own."

I think context is relevant, That poster who seems well informed about firearms to me stated as above, BUT only they can say themselves what they meant in their reply to you when saying "grey area" in the context of that paragraph. Imo, it reads to me they are stating its considered a Grey area generally. My reading of that paragraph is (context), They are replying to you that "the chamber is not the mag and the law says only the mag must be limited to 5 rounds." That seems unequivocal to me, it's not illegal and it's compliant with the law, significantly as the only reason to have a pistol loaded anyway is when you are at a firing line at practice or competition on an authorised shooting range, it will be blatantly obvious why you have a round legitimately in the breech, because certain competitions are geared for that. There is no breach of law and the reason the round is there is for a specific competition

IMO either that law should be left alone and not amended, as any such amendment may only make it worse for shooters (as in its present form it allows shooters to participate in existing competitions legally) OR amended to only clarify that for this firearm type that the maximum total loaded capacity is increased to 6 rounds. If an amendment was made, who knows what could be slipped in or added, so I think, leave well enough alone and don't invite problems or trouble.

What you are doing imo, is inviting attention to everyone (especially if you explain your logic), because imo you have no grounds for what you are doing, it seems to me to be a workaround for some other reason, no offence, but your explanation for how you have "complied" with the requirements is the worst explanation I have ever heard and not one I ever expected. Capacity was it seems put to rest with an amendment, if it is decided a further amendment is needed to deal with outliers, what may be formulated may be very specific AND that may not be beneficial for most owners who are compliant already. Specific isn't a good thing imo because although most magazines are similar, there must be differences from manufacturer to manufacturer. At the moment the wording of the law allows people the freedom to choose how (physically/technically) they limit their magazine capacity so long as it is done. A specific amendment across the board for all pistol owners with different manufacturer types could be problematic or costly at best (for reasons I won't highlight as I don't want to give ideas to anyone which imo would be bad for firearms owners).

What exists now is the best of a bad situation, e.g. The component I have in my magazines to limit capacity can be removed by disassembling the magazine, which is a good thing, because the magazine can be cleaned and no damage to the magazine parts occurs that may affect warranty, reliability, safety, functionality, something permanent added by law, not designed/approved/authorised by the manufacturer, instead made by some (no offence) gundealer, that doesn't pass muster to me.

I say leave well enough alone and just comply with it, that's my take on it.