What is the writing does it say reserved or restricted? I couldn’t make it out.
They’re from the ~‘90s - they say something like “Restricted Law Enforcement Only” because they’re 15-round “High Capacity” magazines.
I’ve got a couple around here somewhere I got from my LGS, and I don’t even live in a Totalitarian State.
Edit:
To be fair - I can’t really read them either, I just know what they say because I have a few. One of my M&P .40 gen1’s also has something similar molded into the grip.
Oh 
I couldn’t read it either.
Wow yeah, I thought it said restricted for sure. I have seen other things that said restricted law enforcement only, I remember Glock did that whole direct to police officer sales for super low prices. Of course it was just marketing to get them hooked on the Glock Crack.
@TheAirHawk is correct Restricted LE / GOVT use only and it applied everywhere.
Those magazines were produced during the Clinton Assault Weapon Ban. All high cap magazines during that time had restricted government & LE only to distinguish between pre ban mags and the mags produced during the CAWB so that they couldn’t be sold to the public.
Just like Apple giving schools free computers…
Our arguments are based in case law. ANY DOJ employee that continues the Biden era crap needs to be fired.
Case law Should be black and white!
It IS… when it’s being used as a Legal Cudgel against the Ignert Flyover Proles. It’s conveniently forgotten when it might hurt the Government’s Case.
Hawaiii judge disagrees
Latest update:
This is wonderful news. lets hope it gets moving!
There are now THREE Lawsuits working their way through the system, aimed at killing the NFA/GCA.
Yes, but if i am correct, i believe this one from the GOA/PSA and group was the first filed the next business day that the BBB was passed.
True, but in this instance, Three is far better than One. Especially when they are cross-pollinating their prosecution against that unholy abomination.
The more the better. We need it in different districts of appeal.
I thought there was supreme court precedent about how one’s victory at law shouldn’t be dependent on WHERE the lawsuit was filed.