New Thompson 1927 A1

[ithacaartist]

Originally Posted by rhuff

David,

Is it legal for you to purchase a WWll original TSM mag where you live? These mags are very nice quality and function 100% in my 1928. I purchased a "ton" of them from Sarco still in the wrappers many years ago for next to nothing. They are still inexpensive in excellent condition. I just don't know your laws concerning these mags.

Richard, from http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...J7ll0AoVjCRJ1A

"New York Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device
It is a class D felony to manufacture, transport, dispose of, or possess a large capacity ammunition
feeding device, which N.Y. Penal Law § 265.00(23) defines as "a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip,
or similar device" manufactured after September 13, 1994, "that has a capacity of, or that can be
readily restored or converted to accept, more than ten rounds of ammunition." Section 265.02."

It should not be a problem for me to use or possess a high capacity mag, even the 100 round drum, according to this--IF it was made before 1994. I heard mentioned the irony that when a police officer sells his high-capacity Glock, it puts another gun of the type legislators are so antsy about right back out for the public. In my mind, it is not so much what a firearm is, as who owns/operates it. Our law makes about as much sense as limiting the size of vehicular fuel tanks because some people have accidents while driving! This is a knotty problem, keeping unstable people from obtaining and using these tools in an irresponsible way, without restricting law-abiding as they exercise their 2nd Amendment rights.

Nonetheless, I'll work with this 30-shot mag either until it fits and functions properly, or I encounter an extra, pre-ban, unaltered SMG mag that I can afford.

Hmmm... I would say that the current 10-round drums are not particularly "readily restored or converted to accept, more than ten rounds of ammunition." It would take a lot of time and effort to extend the capacity from 10 to 100 rounds, but it could be accomplished. Is this, indeed, a loophole?