Magazine Capacity Restrictions and FFL Holders

Since this involves MA law why not contact the MA State Police? I am sure they deal with quite often and would like to know who these people are so they can straighten out the situation. To me it sounds as if you are being set up for a serious fall. I tell my wife when she asks if she should throw out food that may be questionable "When in doubt throw it out". I would throw this bid out as far as I could get it.
 
Your idea to contact a law enforcement agency directly is a good one and I've already decided to do just that.
At this point I feel that the law says one thing, the winning bidder seems to feel that it says something different. A reasonable case can be made for either view.
I have the number to the MA AG's office and intend to phone them during their normal business hours on Monday to get clarification straight from the authority having jurisdiction.
I will either be completing the auction in the standard fashion within the law, or I will decline to complete the auction and have a legitimate reason as to why that is hopefully backed up by documentation.
 
And lest us forget that Bill Senior also sents crates upon crates of Mini-14s, with standard capacity magazines I'm sure, to the Rhodesian defense forces during the Brush War
 
Considering that Smith & Wesson's main production plant is in Springfield, MA, and that the company and its employees presumably possess quite a few >10rd magazines there, I presume there MUST be an exception for FFLs in MA but we just don't know what it is. :rolleyes:
 
It's been an interesting day of phone tag with some of the MA AG's different departments. What is a little disturbing is that the particular offices that one would believe to know the answer to a reasonably simple and straight forward question were clueless.

I was referred to a couple of different departments, one of which was the office of Consumer Advocacy. Initially they informed me that if it did not fit into an actual 'assault weapon' as defined by law, it was in fact legal. I am glad that I kept asking because there was a problem with their answer.
First that there is currently no list of firearms that are defined as assault weapons, and secondly that is absolutely wrong according to the Firearms Regulations office.
Any magazine having a capacity greater than 10 rounds for any firearm that is brought into the state is a violation, period.

I am currently waiting on a call back from FR office attorney to direct me to where I can find the correct documentation to back that up. Needless to say I will be returning the winning bidder's check which arrived in today's mail along with a copy of that documentation.
I'm betting that I'll receive negative feedback on the auction site.... as I continue to move about freely while retaining my constitutional rights.

Thank you for your input gentlemen and if anyone is interested I can post the documentation that I am directed to once it happens.
 
turkeestalker said:
...if anyone is interested I can post the documentation that I am directed to once it happens.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the update, turkeestalker, and yes, if you could post the documentation, or a link to it, that would be great. :)
 
Does the buyer have a LTC class "A"? (I think they stopped issuing class "B" but I think there are still some valid class "B" LTC out there)


I do not believe the following overrides the 'pre-ban' requirement



All of these Sections come from Title XX Chapter 140

https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXX/Chapter140/Section131M

Section 131M. No person shall sell, offer for sale, transfer or possess an assault weapon or a large capacity feeding device that was not otherwise lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994. Whoever not being licensed under the provisions of section 122 violates the provisions of this section shall be punished, for a first offense, <snip>
Click to expand...





Section 122

https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXX/Chapter140/Section122

Section 122. The chief of police or the board or officer having control of the police in a city or town, or persons authorized by them, may, after an investigation into the criminal history of the applicant to determine eligibility for a license under this section <snip>
Click to expand...


Section 131

https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXX/Chapter140/Section131


[Introductory paragraph effective until January 1, 2021. For text effective January 1, 2021, see below.]

Section 131. All licenses to carry firearms shall be designated Class A or Class B, and the issuance and possession of any such license shall be subject to the following conditions and restrictions:

[Introductory paragraph as amended by 2014, 284, Sec. 46 effective January 1, 2021. See 2014, 284, Sec. 112. For text effective until January 1, 2021, see above.]

The issuance and possession of a license to carry firearms shall be subject to the following conditions and restrictions:

[Paragraphs (a) to (c) effective until January 1, 2021. For text effective January 1, 2021, see below.]

(a) A Class A license shall entitle a holder thereof to purchase, rent, lease, borrow, possess and carry: (i) firearms, including large capacity firearms, and feeding devices and ammunition therefor, for all lawful purposes, subject to such restrictions relative to the possession, use or carrying of firearms as the licensing authority deems proper; and (ii) rifles and shotguns, including large capacity weapons, and feeding devices and ammunition therefor, for all lawful purposes; provided, however, that the licensing authority may impose such restrictions relative to the possession, use or carrying of large capacity rifles and shotguns as it deems proper <snip>
Click to expand...
 
The LTC (License To Carry) is for pistols and a step up from a Firearms I.D. A Firearms I.D. is all that's needed for a rifle. The LTC A can also come with different levels of restrictions.

People in Massachusetts do buy pre ban mags in other states and at gun shows from out of state vendors. I'm not sure how legal that is but they talk about it openly on the Northeast Shooters Forum and they are very paranoid (with or without good reason) about what they talk about there.

I doubt the A.G.'s office will have a clear answer for you. The gun laws in Massachusetts tend to be vague and open to interpretation by a A.G. that often favors the anti gun view. They also sometimes flip flop on their answers. If in doubt, don't sell it you could be leaving yourself open to the A.G's wrath and they have gone after out of state companies who unknowingly sent restricted items to Massachusetts.
 
Well I never received a call back from the Firearms Regulations attorney, go figure. I did call a few more offices within MA government and also the State Police as was suggested.

Each and every person that I spoke with throughout this has insisted that it would be illegal, but most could not point to a specific section of the law that would make it such. The few that could pointed to MA General Laws, Chapter 140, section 131E and 131M.

When I read those sections of that chapter online, what I get from it is that so long as the winning bidder holds a class A LTC, the sale would in fact be legal.
I am not a lawyer, and perhaps I'm missing something in the language which is causing me to misinterpret what I'm reading, I don't know.

Bottom line is that I am not going to complete the auction, but I believe that the powers that be are intentionally misleading me... imagine that.

All I know for certain is that I have a headache and I've learned a valuable lesson regarding including specifics when posting an item for sale in an online auction.
I also know that I may be doing the winning bidder a real injustice, and that bothers me a great deal.
 
Turkeestalker, go to Northeast Shooters Forum and look through the Massachusetts gun law forum. They have lawyers there who should know the answer. Also, you will find references to Com2A its a group of lawyers who fight for gun rights in Massachusetts you can get in touch with them also.

Don't trust the Massachusetts government for a honest reliable answer. They are not above misleading you or even violating federal law to push an anti gun agenda.
 
Well that didn't quite pan out.
Made a profile over there and posted my question pretty plainly in my opinion, nothing but ridicule and harassment.
Friendly bunch, but I should've known that as my ex-wife is from Tewksbury.
*shrugs*
 
turkeestalker said:
Well it got better, but nothing got backed up in written law. *shrugs*
Click to expand...
We already have the written law. What we DON'T have is how the aw-thaw-ri-tays and the courts are interpreting it. The grandfather date is 1994, but ... does "lawfully possessed" mean possessed by anyone, anywhere in the United States, or does it mean by possessed by someone within the state of Massachusetts?

Considering that it's a state law, my conservative view would be that Massachusetts doesn't care what people in the other 56* states are doing, they're referring to lawful possession by people within Massachusetts.





* See what I did there?
 
Made a profile over there and posted my question pretty plainly in my opinion, nothing but ridicule and harassment.
Friendly bunch, but I should've known that as my ex-wife is from Tewksbury.
Click to expand...

That doesn't surprise me either. Quite a few people from Massachusetts strike me as a bit odd especially some of the gun owners. They seem to have a lot of contempt and bottled up anger and some gun owners seem to be more paranoid than normal. Some people from Massachusetts have earned the nickname That begins with an M and ends with holes (The censor won't let me print it) but not all of them. Although, people seem to get nicer as you get farther from Boston.

We already have the written law. What we DON'T have is how the aw-thaw-ri-tays and the courts are interpreting it. The grandfather date is 1994, but ... does "lawfully possessed" mean possessed by anyone, anywhere in the United States, or does it mean by possessed by someone within the state of Massachusetts?
Click to expand...

This is a good example of Massachusetts gun laws being vague. Its open to interpretation but how do you think the government would interpret it if they really wanted to stick it to some nobody and how do you think they would interpret it for someone who has wealth and power? Another area that's vague is letting the police chiefs make up what ever they want when it comes to requirements for getting a license to buy firearms. I get the impression gun laws are vague on purpose so they can interpret it how ever they want or they are just very bad at making laws.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top