TexasCHLforum.com

Is there any reason i should not carry a LEO marked mag? Reason i ask this is i have a .40 cal mag for my 9mm USPc that i can stuff 15 rounds in it with no reliability problems at all (i have tested it quite a bit) But the mag is LEO marked. Can anyone chime in with a reason why i should not do this?

Thanks in advance (and for what its worth i did a search so if i missed it forgive me)

killerfly128 wrote:Is there any reason i should not carry a LEO marked mag? Reason i ask this is i have a .40 cal mag for my 9mm USPc that i can stuff 15 rounds in it with no reliability problems at all (i have tested it quite a bit) But the mag is LEO marked. Can anyone chime in with a reason why i should not do this?

Thanks in advance (and for what its worth i did a search so if i missed it forgive me)

IIRC, those mags were marked that way during the Dark Times (all the crazy bans and such during the Clinton Administration).

They could also come from CA or other crazy state regime where only the police get to be properly equipped.

Legally speaking, there's nothing wrong with carrying such magazines. If for some reason you have to defend yourself in court, the magazine being stamped as an LEO mag is probably the least of concerns, and any halfway decent lawyer should be able to demonstrate the irrelevance of the markings here in the state of Texas.

I wouldn't sweat it and carry whichever mags work reliably for your gun.

Same with "law enforcement ammo" the distinction is for marketing reasons, not legal.

nitrogen wrote:Same with "law enforcement ammo" the distinction is for marketing reasons, not legal.

.... strange, I thought it was marked for legal reasons during the clinton AWB. I must be wrong.

LE ammo i am not worried about ... I am slightly concerned if using a mag marked "LEO/Military use only"

(the LE ammo i use is not marked in such a fashion so i think i am ok there)

They were marked that way because they were prohibited during the ban.

When the ban expired, so did the restriction, so now they are as legal as non marked mags.

Mike1951 wrote:They were marked that way because they were prohibited during the ban.

When the ban expired, so did the restriction, so now they are as legal as non marked mags.

I am aware that they are legal to possess and use at the range. I just dont know if that might be something used to make me look like a blood thirsty killer type ... much like this fellow

(except he used a LEO marked knife ......and gloves)

Someone? anyone?

My take would be that you could actually use it to your advantage if ever challenged on it. For instance, it is the practice of many who carry concealed to carry whatever ammunition their local police agency uses because it will survive the "blood thirsty killer" test in a courtroom. Similarly, if a prosecutor or plaintiff's attorney were to question you on your use of an LEO magazine, my response would be, "well, they are legal in Texas, and I always try to use police recommended ammunition and products because they have thoroughly tested them and researched the legal implications before deploying them for field use, and I want to do what is right."

Then hand the attorney a hanky to blow his nose with when he breaks down in tears....

The Annoyed Man wrote:My take would be that you could actually use it to your advantage if ever challenged on it. For instance, it is the practice of many who carry concealed to carry whatever ammunition their local police agency uses because it will survive the "blood thirsty killer" test in a courtroom. Similarly, if a prosecutor or plaintiff's attorney were to question you on your use of an LEO magazine, my response would be, "well, they are legal in Texas, and I always try to use police recommended ammunition and products because they have thoroughly tested them and researched the legal implications before deploying them for field use, and I want to do what is right."

Then hand the attorney a hanky to blow his nose with when he breaks down in tears....

"So you're just a wannabe cop running around town deploying your own brand of unregulated vigilante justice now?"

or at least thats what they'd say.

zach wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:My take would be that you could actually use it to your advantage if ever challenged on it. For instance, it is the practice of many who carry concealed to carry whatever ammunition their local police agency uses because it will survive the "blood thirsty killer" test in a courtroom. Similarly, if a prosecutor or plaintiff's attorney were to question you on your use of an LEO magazine, my response would be, "well, they are legal in Texas, and I always try to use police recommended ammunition and products because they have thoroughly tested them and researched the legal implications before deploying them for field use, and I want to do what is right."

Then hand the attorney a hanky to blow his nose with when he breaks down in tears....

"So you're just a wannabe cop running around town deploying your own brand of unregulated vigilante justice now?"

or at least thats what they'd say.

And I would counter that by reading the relevant PC code back to him regarding my right to self defense, and I would ask that the judge make sure that the jurors understand the relevant passages. In any case, the fact of the matter is that, as long as it is legal to carry the magazine - and in Texas, it is legal - and as long as it is a righteous shooting, the OP would likely be no-billed. And if he is no-billed, or if he is charged and then successfully defends himself against the charge, then he is also protected from a vengeful lawsuit on the part of the perpetrator (if he survives) or his family (if the doesn't), and plaintiff's attorney can go hang himself.

The Annoyed Man wrote:My take would be that you could actually use it to your advantage if ever challenged on it. For instance, it is the practice of many who carry concealed to carry whatever ammunition their local police agency uses because it will survive the "blood thirsty killer" test in a courtroom. Similarly, if a prosecutor or plaintiff's attorney were to question you on your use of an LEO magazine, my response would be, "well, they are legal in Texas, and I always try to use police recommended ammunition and products because they have thoroughly tested them and researched the legal implications before deploying them for field use, and I want to do what is right."

Then hand the attorney a hanky to blow his nose with when he breaks down in tears....

Thank you sir.

I still would love to see Chas' input on this issue just out of curiosity.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

zach wrote:
"So you're just a wannabe cop running around town deploying your own brand of unregulated vigilante justice now?" or at least thats what they'd say.

And I would counter that by reading the relevant PC code back to him regarding my right to self defense, and I would ask that the judge make sure that the jurors understand the relevant passages. In any case, the fact of the matter is that, as long as it is legal to carry the magazine - and in Texas, it is legal - and as long as it is a righteous shooting, the OP would likely be no-billed. And if he is no-billed, or if he is charged and then successfully defends himself against the charge, then he is also protected from a vengeful lawsuit on the part of the perpetrator (if he survives) or his family (if the doesn't), and plaintiff's attorney can go hang himself.

While "on the subject" I would point out that (as worded) his statement suggests that "Cops" run around town deploying "unregulated vigilante justice" (or UVJ). I would ask him/her to explain that, as I feel it applies to neither LEO or ME.

As far as using anything that Law Enforcement uses (provided it is legal for civilians to have/use), I would think that would strengthen your argument...NOT work against you. After all, most (if not all) of their equipment has been field tested and approved by one entity or another (State or Federal).

I would then ask the objector if he/she feels that "cops" have the right to "defend themselves". I would follow that with the same question concerning myself (or them).

Lastly, I would politely tell this person...that until the State/City provides with my own personal cop, I will continue to take responsibility for my own safety, nothing more or less. It has nothing to do with "vigilantism" or "wanna be a cop".

It has everything to do with: "Wanna" protect myself and family.....and "Wanna" be able to do it right now!

I read an article written by Ayoob in GUNS&AMMO (special addition dedicated to self-defense) recently. Ayoob basically said that every choice you make about your carry piece needs to be defensible…everything from the gun itself to the ammo used and etc. He cited several cases where people were convicted, in otherwise justifiable shootings, because a lawyer (probably not a good one) could not defend the use of 10mm cartridge or something similarly stupid.

In the case of using the 10mm cartridge the prosecutor convinced a jury that the 10mm cartridge was simply overkill and designed to kill and not to stop. The defendants lawyer did not defend the use of the 10mm properly and the guys was convicted.

I’m not saying that you can’t or should not use LEO marked mags…I’m just saying, make sure you and your lawyer can defend the choice to use it.

The Annoyed Man wrote:Then hand the attorney a hanky to blow his nose with when he breaks down in tears...

If you had a good lawyer:

- You probably wouldn't be testifying.

- And if you were testifying, he would object to these types of questions.

- He would tell you just answer the questions and not to argue with the DA.

killerfly128 wrote:Is there any reason i should not carry a LEO marked mag? Reason i ask this is i have a .40 cal mag for my 9mm USPc that i can stuff 15 rounds in it with no reliability problems at all (i have tested it quite a bit) But the mag is LEO marked. Can anyone chime in with a reason why i should not do this?

Thanks in advance (and for what its worth i did a search so if i missed it forgive me)

IANAL but the type of ammo, type of gun, markings on gun/mag, etc. should have no bearing on whether you are justified in the use of deadly force. I suspect that if these items came up it would be in a civil suit brought by the criminal or their family against you, not in the criminal case(if any) against you.

Now I do want to comment that the way I read your statement you are using a magazine designed to hold .40 caliber rounds, and using it to hold 9mm rounds and shoot them through a 9mm handgun. I wish you the best of luck with this, but I would never do such a thing with a defensive carry pistol. At best you are getting 2 extra rounds, and worst you are carrying a non functioning paper weight. YMMV