AR mag prices in '08 and '12 panics?

[StovePipe_Jammer]

Just curious, what is the thought process when stacking mags? Are we all getting prepared for a full out federal AWB where all mags will be illegal to own? Isn't it more likely that they would put a round limit to it first? Or are we preparing for much more of a doomsday scenario just in case they have to be used? I am generally curious, because I already deal with an AWB of sorts and a 10 round limit on all mags here in NJ. So I cant get anyone to ship me 30 rounders anyway. I try to get as many pinned PMags from Jesticearms as I can, but they are much more expensive than buying standard ones.

The standard logic is usually a look at what has happened in the past and going from there. With the '94 AWB, if you had standard capacity mags when the ban took effect, you were GTG. You could buy "pre-ban" mags (>10 rounds) after the fact but the cost was reflected with the now finite supply. For a lot of new shooters, they were priced out of their reach (myself included). When the ban expired and prices fell as the supply jumped, it was smart to stack em deep if you could afford to do so.

There is no guarantee that any new ban would be similar to the previous ban. As the gun grabbers "evolve" in their policies, it wouldn't shock me if something was proposed that anything with a detachable magazine was verboten. If you are behind the lines living in NJ, purchasing reduced capacity mags and ammo would be wise in any case. I would rather have it and not need it when it comes to parts, ammo and mags.

Something to keep in mind with another ban is even reduced cap mags will be flying off the shelves/going for a premium. As the greater part of the gun owning country has a bad day boating with their standard cap mags, they will be looking for safe-to-have-at-the-range mags to still continue training/shooting.

[kirkland]

I can't believe we're talking about this in '19. Everything has been super cheap and super available for the last 5 years. Anyway, if you haven't already bought everything you could possibly need, do it now.

[Tx_Aggie]

The standard logic is usually a look at what has happened in the past and going from there. With the '94 AWB, if you had standard capacity mags when the ban took effect, you were GTG. You could buy "pre-ban" mags (>10 rounds) after the fact but the cost was reflected with the now finite supply. For a lot of new shooters, they were priced out of their reach (myself included). When the ban expired and prices fell as the supply jumped, it was smart to stack em deep if you could afford to do so.

There is no guarantee that any new ban would be similar to the previous ban. As the gun grabbers "evolve" in their policies, it wouldn't shock me if something was proposed that anything with a detachable magazine was verboten. If you are behind the lines living in NJ, purchasing reduced capacity mags and ammo would be wise in any case. I would rather have it and not need it when it comes to parts, ammo and mags.

Something to keep in mind with another ban is even reduced cap mags will be flying off the shelves/going for a premium. As the greater part of the gun owning country has a bad day boating with their standard cap mags, they will be looking for safe-to-have-at-the-range mags to still continue training/shooting.

I'd agree, the laws are evolving and become more restrictive. The SAFE act seems to be the template for what has been pushed in Virginia, including much it's lack of grandfathering and excessively vague language designed to make entrap and make it impossible to know the limit of exactly what's legal and what isn't.

The proposed changes to VA law specific to magazines are:

448 A. For purposes of this section, "large-capacity firearm magazine" means any firearm magazine, belt,
449 drum, feed strip, or similar device that has the capacity of, or can be readily restored or converted to
450 accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition, including any such device with a removable floor plate or
451 end plate if the device can be readily extended to accept more than 10 rounds of ammunition.
452 "Large-capacity firearm magazine" does not include (i) a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar
453 device that has been permanently altered so that it cannot accept more than 10 rounds of ammunition
454 or (ii) an attached tubular device designed to accept and only capable of operating with .22 caliber
455 rimfire ammunition.
456 B. It is unlawful for any person to import, sell, transfer, manufacture, purchase, possess, or transport
457 any large-capacity firearm magazine. A violation of this section is punishable as a Class 6 felony.
458 C. The provisions of this section shall not apply to (i) any government officer, agent, or employee, or
459 member of the Armed Forces of the United States, to the extent that such person is acquiring,
460 possessing, transferring, or transporting a large-capacity firearm magazine within the scope of his
461 official duties;

Under that definition, a 10 round magazine that can accept a magazine extension (such as a 10 round pmag, and many 10 round handgun magazines) is prohibited. I suspect there are many more who choose to ignore rather than comply, as we've seen with registration.

The AW definition is similarly nightmarish, but because it's vague instead of specific.