The Myth of “High Capacity” Gun Magazines

Politicians adore the term, “high capacity magazine,” in references to guns. President Biden has made it a favorite when advocating for “gun control” and he blames the ills of weapon-related deaths on such accessories. It is important, however, that despite the rhetoric, people understand what this term means, and how it is being misused.

“High capacity” would logically refer to something excessive from the norm. Generally, politicians advocating for bans of such items claim this includes any firearm magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition (some states, such as Colorado, have set this limit at 15 rounds). One should ask, is this appropriate? The clear answer is no. More than 10 rounds of ammunition does not logically mean these magazines are “high capacity.”

In the 1960s, the introduction of civilian M16 variants came standard with a 20-round magazine. It was only a few short years later the United States Army set a standard of 30-round magazines accompanying said rifles. In 1980, NATO–through STAGNAG–adopted the 30-round magazine as a standard, as well. Thus, for roughly 60 years, magazines of more than 20 rounds have been normal in the world’s most popular rifles, and for over 40 years, the 30 round standard has been the norm.

Regarding pistols, the most famous of all is the Glock 17, designed by Gaston Glock. That pistol, introduced in 1982 and having since become a stalwart in both civilian and law enforcement circles, has 17 rounds and has since its inception. That is over 40 years of a 17 round capacity, with more than five million of these models sold (most other full size Glocks also carry similar amounts of ammunition, meaning more than 10 million exist).

Additionally, the Beretta M9/92SF, made famous by its use in the United States Army, has also come standard with 15-round magazines since the model’s adoption in 1990.

Under any consideration, there is no fair basis for referring to magazines with over 10 rounds of capacity as “high capacity.” It is irrational, and irresponsible, for politicians to adopt such terms. One could find it reasonable to refer to pistol magazines of more than 17 rounds, and rifle magazines over 30 rounds, as “high capacity,” but below those numbers is nothing more than made up political hyperbole.