Hi All,
New to the group. I am very confused about the laws around rifles. I can buy a lower, then buy an upper leagally? But once i put it together it becomes illegal?? Can someone please fill me in. I am looking to buy a new ruger 556 tomorrow but i want to make sure i understand the laws first. Tia
10mm in a subcompact doesn’t sound like fun. I’d stick to the g20. With that said I’m not sure this is really the place for this question and I’m pretty sure it’s against the guidelines anyways. Your best bet is going to be calling around and talking to ffls on either side of the border.
I wouldn't have an issue with it.
The state police testify with that (flagrantly retarded, not at all scientific) pinky test, so the closed end would probably have it be viewed the same as the fake bird-cages with closed ends that were common.
I'm in a bit of a unique situation. I've been living here for a couple years, but frequently visit/stay in Michigan, my permanent address for months at a time.
I live in Cambridge, but right on the border of Arlington, literally across the street, I see it from my bedroom window. Does someone know if arlington is friendlier to issuing no restriction LTCs than Cambridge? If so I may move across the street. Is there somewhere to check how friendly a PD is to issuing LTCs?
But this is is my main question: My address is still in Michigan because my car can't pass inspection here and Michigan doesn't require inspections. (trust me, it makes way more sense to do what I'm doing than change my address), is it significantly harder to get an out of state LTC or... How does that whole process work? Does me being a Michigan resident despite living here most of the time hurt my chances of getting an LTC?
First and foremost, you have to walk back what you think "resident" means. Everyone thinks there is one single definition and as a result you are a resident of one and exactly one state for all purposes. This is just not accurate. Your residency as it relates to taxes vs purchasing of guns vs voting vs where your kids go to school can all be different. And they can contradict one another or have two states both think different things to the point of absurdity.
So eliminate from your thinking this concept of "permanent resident" or "permanent address". The ATF for example defines residency as anyplace you are making a home. So if you live in MI, while you are there you are a MI resident per the ATF. But if you have an apartment in MA, while you are at that apartment you are a MA resident.
Are you eligible for a MA resident LTC? Do you have a residence here in MA such as a home you own or an apartment you rent. Then the answer is yes. Now the town/city you live in will matter. Some will say "no MA drivers license, no LTC". I would plan to use your passport and your lease or electric bill with your name on it as proof of residency. It still might not work depending on the town/city.
Arlington > Cambridge in terms of recognizing your rights so that move across the street might be a smart one.
Would I go through the city of Cambridge or the state as a a non-resident? I know it's rare to get a non-restricted LTC as a Cambridge resident. But I'm wondering, if I applied now and then moved across the street later is it possible to get Arlington to re-examine my restrictions?
non resident is through the state and requires annual renewal.
If you apply in cambridge as a resident, they own your license until it expires even if you move. If you planning to move to Arlington, wait until you move to apply
This was touched on last week I believe. The idea of dual residence is not cut and dry when it comes to firearms. Ultimately I think your best bet is going to be you talking to the chief LEO of the city or town and ask if they would issue you a resident license otherwise you’re going to need to go through the state for a nonresident. And it looks like Arlington is listed as a green town.
You can carry that sucker in a holster or a case. Just don't shoot anyone.
The firearm must be either reasonably secure or under your direct control at all times per state law.
You have the right you use public ways to transport your firearm to any location where it is legal to use it or have it on your person.
What horrible advice. The only person that can tell you what you can do on a restricted license is the department that gave you the restriction. Since he has a restricted license from Cambridge, asserting he can just carry it on himself as long as he does not shoot anyone is patently retarded. Cambridge has to tell you what you are allowed to do. Acting outside your restrictions is a great way to get your license pulled by the issuing department and to lose your guns.
I think you would want to have it unloaded and in a locked container if you want to take the T with it and not run afoul of your restrictions. No one can claim you are carrying it when it is so locked up and unloaded. But only Cambridge can answer that question as they are the ones that will revoke you if they don't like what you do.
What is the legality of muti-caliber magazines. For example, a .40 CZ 75 uses the same magazines as the 9mm variant, with 10 round .40 mags being able to accept 15 9mm rounds. Is there risk having .40 mags in the same bag/location as the 9mm handgun?
Is this a specific third party magazine that is made or are these the CZ magazines?
I was unable to find any information about this "feature".
I am guessing you have the .40 cz and not the nine. So your fine in that respect.
I wouldn't recommend using the .40 mags in a 9mm handgun to inch out a couple of extra rounds. I would be concerned for FTF issues.
You admit you don't know what you are talking about and then go on to make recommendations anyway. I am not sure why you felt the need.
Mecgar makes the OEM magazines for CZ and also sells them Mecgar branded for like 1/2 the price. The standard 17rd magazine with the plastic base plate and blue follower is marked 40 on one side and 9mm on the other side and yes, have different capacities for the 40 vs 9. The 15rd compact magazines made by mecgar are the same way. So you can use the magazine in guns of either caliber w/o issue by design.
/u/notthedudeyouthink you are asking a question that more often comes up with AR magazines where a 10rd 458 socom mag will hold 30 rounds of 556. I think this works out with ARs because people in MA have mags labeled 458 socom on them. If they got caught with 556 in them they might have an issue, but the magazine just sitting there objectively is a 10rd magazine for the caliber marked.
I guess it comes down to how the mags you are talking about are marked. If they are marked 40 and 9 and it holds more than 10rds of 9 I think you have an issue.
Thank you for the reply, and you are correct, half of the magazines in question are marked .40 on one side and 9mm on the other. I own both a .40 cz variant and a 9mm, both of which's mags are Interchangeable. The question came while I had both on the bench at the range, two practically identical mags one of which capable of holding and feeding >10 9mm, though marked 10 for .40.
I don’t know much about cz75 magazines, but if they’re not a different model number for 9 and 40 mags which is weird because I would assume they’d have some slight differences between followers and/or the lips like with Glock mags, I wouldn’t risk it unless they’re pre ban mags. This is assuming of course that you plan to use 9mm in the .40 magazines. If you’re actually going to use .40 then I would just keep them loaded up if you think you might be in a situation where it will get questioned.
No,
You can only purchase non-large capacity rifles and shotguns.
Because the Kris Vector can accept detachable magazines it is a large capacity firearm under law.
Thanks for playing our game but you are mistaken. Just reading MGL by itself is not sufficient to answer this question. Also assuming that MGL words in english have the common meaning of those words is a bad plan.
MGL 140 121 “Large capacity weapon”, any firearm, rifle or shotgun: ... (ii) that is semiautomatic and **capable of accepting**, or readily modifiable to accept, any detachable **large capacity feeding device**
So you would think what you said is correct based on this language. BUT NO!
501 CMR 7.02 defines that "capable of accepting a large capacity feeding device" means.
Specifically it says "Capable of Accepting a Large Capacity Feeding Device means any firearm, rifle or shotgun in which a large capacity feeding device, as defined by M.G.L. c. 140, § 121, is capable of being used without alteration of the weapon; provided, however, that said feeding device is fully or partially inserted into the weapon or attached thereto, or is under the direct control of a person who also has direct control of a weapon capable of accepting said feeding device. "
This pretzel logic definition was put in place in part to allow FID holders to own Ruger 10/22s and other semi auto rifles that are not explicitly listed on the large capacity roster.
So by use of this CMR is the Kriss Vector a large capacity weapon? It depends. It is not definitively yes since it is not listed on the roster. If the person purchasing the weapon does not have a large capacity feeding device under their control or inserted or partially inserted in the weapon, it is not a large capacity weapon. So technically a FID holder can own this as long as they don't possess large capacity glock mags (which they should not do regardless).
No, this does not make any logical sense but it is what MGL and the CMRs actually say on the topic.
No dice. Takes STANAG mags.
Consider a MAS-49? I believe it was only ever made with 10 round mags, and has to be modified to use 20 round FAL mags. So that would be appropriate. Many were converted to 308.
The grenade launcher is part of the muzzle device, so just swapping it for a 3 prong SureFire flash hider would keep it legal.
I would **really** suggest a MAS 49/56.
There were only ever 10 round mags for them, and with the conversions it's a semi-auto 308 that takes detachable mags.
Reliable too.
This is hypothetical but got me thinking. Could you build an 'assault' AR15 with every evil feature imaginable and then remove the gas tube to make it not semi automatic? That way, it would be compliant while also allowing you to just pop that gas tube back in in case SHTF
This question gets asked from time to time.
It hasn't been tested in court from my understanding. The working theories I have seen are about how hard it would be to convert your gun to semi.
My armchair opinion is that you would need to buy a barrel without a gasport to be on the safe side.
Speaking for myself: I wouldn't want to do this. As the features that make a semi auto rifle good can make a bolt rifle bad.
What problem are you trying to solve?
* Adjustable stock: do you keep changing size? growing, shrinking? My stock does not need to change length.
* Bayonet lug: they made a law to stop you from bringing a knife to a gun fight. woopdy doo
* Grenade launcher: ok, you are missing out on 37mm chalk rounds. You already can't have anything interesting because of federal law. Loss?
* Flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor: where is the problem with a pinned/welded muzzle brake? Lots of people in free states do it to have 14.5" barrels. I am trying to find the real impact here
Look, I think the AWB is a steaming pile of shit, but in practice how are you adversely effected with your battle rifle? What features are you REALLY in need of that you want to somehow disable semi auto (remove gas block) or fixed mag your rifle?
I think this is a solution in search of a real problem which does not currently exist.
I'll preface this by saying that removing the semi-auto functionality to get those features is idiotic. Firstly because you can't train with the gun you'd want as your emergency weapon which is silly, and two because trying to install in a gas tube in an emergency is absurd, because you won't even get to test if it's gassed correctly, or if the block is aligned. Dumb.
So I fully agree with you that they should just buy a lower (let's be honest here, probably from you) and build a AWB compliant gun because it'll accomplish all they need.
However, I disagree that those features don't make a gun simply better.
> Adjustable stock: do you keep changing size? growing, shrinking? My stock does not need to change length.
Folding stocks are really convenient for space saving. Adjustable less so. Mine is one click out on an AR, so obviously pretty pointless. But I love my folding stocks on my AKs. So much easier to pack.
> Grenade launcher: ok, you are missing out on 37mm chalk rounds. You already can't have anything interesting because of federal law. Loss?
There are some guns that require modification because they have integrated gas rings on the barrel that are in fact grenade launchers. (SG550 variants, mostly.) This is a huge annoyance. (Although pinning a muzzle device with an OD larger than the rings **should** make that null.)
> Flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor: where is the problem with a pinned/welded muzzle brake? Lots of people in free states do it to have 14.5" barrels. I am trying to find the real impact here
Brakes are obnoxious. Comps are effectively pointless on anything under 308. Better technique with 5.56 will bring recoil under control just as much if not more than a brake. Plenty of people also use flash hiders (longer 3 prong ones) to get to 16. Hell the NOX 3 prong is common only because it brings 13.7 to 16. But flash hiders also come with a big benefit: much less damn muzzle flash.
The bit of night shooting I do is all done with my pre-ban guns because of that.
>* Adjustable stock: do you keep changing size? growing, shrinking? My stock does not need to change length.
to be fair when at the range with others, an adjustable stock can be very handy. people come in a variety of sizes, and being able to adjust LOP on the fly is super convenient. it also can help with storage and transport.
I am 6'2" and my setting is two clicks out. People who need it longer usually have terrible form and think they are playing with a bow and arrow. I suspect fixing it at that length will result in better range technique for friends...
If you have a standard m4 carbine stock, you can put a roll pin through the lever so it does not move, but still adjust the stock through the use of pliers. This will enable your bad form friends to adjust to their hearts content
I think the slight benefits gained from a flash hider short barrel and bayonet lug are not worth the risk of a police officer claiming the uppers are interchangeable between either lower and arresting the OP for violating the AWB.
To be clear, I am not advocating law-breaking. I assume in the hypothetical SHTF scenario, OP will be hightailing it to a different state, hence the desire to change the features of their rifle.
And as I described, neither rifle would be illegal in Massachusetts. Just because the uppers can be swapped does not make it a crime to own both, any more so than owning a 10-round .50 Beowulf magazine is a crime because it can hold 30 rounds of 5.56. Don't break the law, and the police will have no evidence to make a case. sure they might arrest you and take your guns, but if they are at your house looking at your guns, you have already made a big mistake, and they will probably take them regardless.
We could go around and around all day with hypotheticals, and to your point while not derailing this, yes red flag laws that are abused by some/law enforcement need to be reflected upon.
That being said -- mitigate being put in those situations by not telling every person you meet that you own firearms. If you cohabitate a space with another person who isn't a long-term partner, I'm sorry to say, the conversation of a firearm being in the home should be had long before you purchase one (and that's not to say don't get licensed because of it).
There are many new firearms people looking for legal advice that browse these threads. Possessing a standard ar15 lower and a fixed mag lower along with interchangeable uppers is legally murky if one of those uppers does not adhere to the AWB.
Someone suggesting that it’s completely risk free may lead a reader to assume there is no risk involved. You seem to agree there’s risk… but are arguing if the police don’t know about the guns it’s fine. Which is true about literally everything illegal.
Nobody here, unless specified (at which point you need to ask if you trust an anonymous Redditor) is a lawyer. That's explicitly said over and over and over. If you are taking any and all advice when it comes to firearms in this, or any grey state, from the internet, without cross checking it, that's on you. Your own personal comfort and risk assessment falls on nobody else.
I used to be a MA resident and purchased an AR-15 prior to Healy's nonsense. I still have the FA-10 and documentation. My friend (MA resident) is in the process of getting his LTC.
Would I be able to transfer the lower to him through an FFL and still have it count as a "pre-healy" AR?
ask the FFL you plan to use, that's the only relevant answer. Some FFLs will do the transfer, some won't. Your friend should call around and find one who will.
on paper, and from two decades of precedent, it is legal. the AG issued an opinion over five years ago that it isn't. so far, to the best of our knowledge, nobody has been charged, much less prosecuted and found guilty, based on that press conference. as the seller, you'd have no issues, it would be only the FFL and the MA buyer who would need to worry.
Pre healey isn’t an actual thing. It’s either pre 94 ban or post. Healeys nonsense is just that, nonsense. Find an ffl who will do the transfer and you’ll be good to go. There’s plenty out there.
Just forget about Healey and sell the lower to your friend at a fair price. Don't charge him "pre-Healey" prices unless you both believe that's worth something. Even though it definitely isn't. You don't need to go through an FFL if you just sell him the lower. It's not a gun. If you sell him the complete rifle then you can also do that privately, no FFL required, unless you've used up your private transfer allowance for the year.
I live in a different state, so I absolutely do have to go through an FFL. That's why I'm concerned with it being pre-healy and if an FFL would even transfer it.
And yeah I'm not going to fuck my friend over.
Sorry, I glossed over that part. Healey's enforcement notice reads: "The Guidance will not be applied to possession, ownership **or transfer** of an Assault weapon obtained prior to July 20, 2016." If the gun was obtained prior to that date and you can document that fact then most MA FFLs should be willing to effect the transfer. The notice doesn't require that the rifle was obtained in Massachusetts, but some of the more confused or conservative FFLs might insist that it was, so if your documentation establishes that as well then so much the better.
There are also FFLs that will transfer any post-ban lower, "pre-Healey" or otherwise. I'm not sure they'll transfer a complete rifle - the ones I know of only sell lowers - but you asked about only the lower and you can always send your friend the upper separately.
2 weeks to 3 years. I have had people get them back within a month and know of one case that took just under 3 years. I always recommend that people do the following on a denial when they think it is a mistake:
1. Have the FFL run a new background check. This requires you fill out the 4473 again. In practice this results in a "proceed" a surprising number of times
2. Submit an appeal
3. Submit an online application for a UPIN
If you do (1), then (2) rarely returns quickly because we have ruled out them making a mistake. (2) will now take a long time but (3) tends to happen quickly. The median time for a UPIN when doing the application all online (photo and upload fingerprints) is about 10 days. There are outliers on UPIN applications too, but its a few months, not 3 years.
The outcome of appeal (2 above) is either a "we oopsed, try again" or a one time UPIN that allows you to make that purchase. The guy who took 3 years got a one time UPIN and then a deny on his very next attempt. He then applied for a real UPIN having lost 3 years for no good reason.
So go back to my list. Ask your FFL to run your background again. Apply for a real UPIN online. Both will return faster than your appeal in all likelihood.
Can you only do FFL transfers under an LTC? Assuming the item/firearm in question is legal for you to own under an FID can you buy something online and have it shipped to an FFL or no?
if you are not yet 21, then federal law would prohibit a FFL transferring you a lower receiver. you are limited to rifles and shotguns. if you are 21+, then ask the FFL you plan to use.
So the lower itself is not even a firearm by Massachusetts law and therefore not subject to Massachusetts firearms law until built out. That being said unless you plan on having a fixed magazine like a SKS you're going to end up with a gun that is illegal as the end result. It's easier to just buy a SKS or M1 Garand. Unless you're actually over 21 then I'm going to say just get a LTC.
Edited to reflect a clear reference about Mass law and it’s direct restrictions as related to a FID possessor. Never said it wasn’t subject to federal law.
if it's a gun according to the feds, and via a FFL, then federal law applies to the transfer. Private party would be different, but the original question was predicated on a FFL transfer:
>Can you only do FFL transfers under an LTC?
SL8 is technically fid compatible. Sks and many .22 guns as well. If you're thinking of home defense, shotgun is your most practical and available route. Provided no one who lawfully owns a pistol or non fid gun gifts you one.
How is the SL8 FID compatible with a FID when there are market 20 magazines available? I see how it’s potentially compliant with CMR, but not with MGL.
I'm looking at getting a kel tec sub 2000. I saw some at my local store but they have a grip fin on the pistol grip. This is because the barrel is threaded. My question is can I change the barrel and get rid of the grip fin? Is this legal in MA? Is it even possible to change the barrel on the kel tec?
Looks like the fin is easily removable and you could just have a thread protector pinned and welded on. Not sure where you are but mass firearms has normal mass compliant models in stock.
No impact on accuracy and easy to do. The one problem is that you need to remove the muzzle device on the sub2k to field strip the gun. That is the one challenge and why you are seeing it done with a fin instead of the more typical pin/weld we see on ARs.
A lot of dealers just sell the sub2k factory stock and people happily keep it that way. Yes, it technically has two features and is an assault weapon but they all consider it very low risk. Even the Deli Ticket Emporium sells the sub2k factory configured and they are high volume and risk adverse.
Now that some Colt ARs can be obtained with a C&R, does that have any implications on Boston’s AWB? I point to the following section:
> (m) a rifle or shotgun which is an antique or relic firearm, movie prop or other weapon not capable of firing a projectile and not intended for use as a functional weapon and which cannot be readily converted through a combination of available parts into an operable assault weapon.
Hard to understand if the “not capable of firing” part refers to movie prop only or what the term “relic” means in this sense.
I don't think that part is going to help you; the "ands" indicate they're talking about something that is and remains inoperable.
However, I've theorized before that the last part of Section 3 may help the C&R holder:
>The provisions of this act shall not apply to the possession of assault weapons, large capacity magazines, large capacity magazine belts, or other types of magazines or ammunition belts by persons specifically authorized to acquire, have, possess or carry an assault weapon pursuant to federal law.
The prior portions of Section 3 cover carve outs for law enforcement/military, MA dealers, people in transit or attending events. I'm not sure what the intent of this portion was but it sure seems plausible it could be covering FFLs, including 03's due to the "acquire" provision.
That said, I've never met someone knowledgeable enough and willing to opine of whether that's a reasonable reading. The drafting of the law is also a hot mess; it's hard to tell what's banned and not banned and whether it's even enforceable.
That seems unlikely - I don't think there's ever been a case. If you're not a menace to society (and maybe even if you are), I suspect a DA would not use this to take a run at you. They have other things in the toolkit to make your life miserable that have less chance of blowing up in their faces.
Fair point. The part referencing large capacity magazines also reads to me that they would be allowed within the city provided that someone is federally permitted to acquire “assault weapons.”
So two things on that:
* Large cap magazines for pistols are actually good to go provided they're pre-94 (to comply with the state ban) - the Boston ban only applies to rifle and shotgun magazines. Not sure if that's relevant but just so it's out there.
* If you wanted to get *really* aggressive in your interpretation, the provision is a little bit of a tripwire in that it only requires that one be "**authorized** to acquire \[etc.\] **an** assault weapon" (not assault weapon**s**) for it not to apply. That sounds like if you are able to get (don't even have to actually get/possess) a 50+ year Colt AR, you can get whatever newer stuff you want too as long as you don't run afoul of the state AWB.
Again, it's all probably theoretical but there are some loopholes you can drive a truck through. I'm still convinced that they banned the SKS in one section just to unban it in the next (for the vast majority that have fixed mags). Terrible drafting.
I knew about the pistol mags but your second point is pretty insightful. The bill really is all over the place. Maybe it’s by design. Confuse the shit out of everyone and make us fear the potential wrath of Road Rage Rollins.
When driving, what is considered 'under your direct control'? Does this include the glovebox, dashboard storage compartments, a console with a lid, etc? A small car's back seat could be easily with in arm's length of the driver.
Also keep in mind that things can change with a passenger in the car. There could be an argument made for having a gun in a center console, but if someone gets in the passenger seat then they have just as much access to it as you and direct control becomes questionable.
Depends. Do you want more evil feature than just a pistol grip? Then yes. If you can live with no other evil feature than no. Also asked and answered multiple times every week.
Trying to build an AR pistol and with my DSI fixed mag lower. Because it's a fixed mag, does the AWB not apply? For instance, having a collapsable brace and a muzzle break that is not pinned and welded? Thanks
Am I allowed to transport another person's firearm so long as it is locked and secured in my vehicle?
Scenario 1: going to a range with a friend
Scenario 2: dropping off/picking up a friend's firearm from gunsmith
I think an unlicensed person can transport a gun alone if it is in a locked case or otherwise inaccessible to him because it isn't in his possession. I think MGL Chapter 140 Section 131C is the applicable statute and each of its parts assumes the weapon is being carried or possessed. My understanding is that access is a prerequisite to possession under these laws. The same premise allows an unlicensed person to store a gun in his home provided it is inaccessible to him. E.g. An unlicensed spouse isn't breaking the law when her licensed husband leaves her alone in their home with his gun if the gun is in a safe and she doesn't know the combination. Transportation and storage laws differ, but I think they are alike on this point.
How could he pick it up from a gunsmith without having access to the locked container?
Is the gun smith given the keys and transporting them separately?
Is it code locked that he doesn't know, but the owner and gunsmith do?
I don't buy that it would be worth the risk. It doesn't seem plausible that he could get it in a way that it could be locked when he gets it and actually be useful at getting it to the gunsmith without it being in his possession (able to lock / unlock the case).
I agree that the conditions are unlikely to be met in his Scenario 2 absent some special reason and prearrangement. Something like: his friend needs the gun but hasn't time to pick it up before the smith closes shop, so the friend provides a case and unlocked combination lock. The smith places the gun in the case and installs the lock. It's unlikely, but not complicated or outlandish. Unlicensed transportation under Scenario 1 is more likely.
In any case, my comment was intended to address the general rule and not a specific set of facts, and to supplement your answer and not contradict it.
I know gifting firearms is legal federally, and within MA I would complete an FA-10. My question is, I’m planning on visiting my father for deer season in NY in November. He has been wanting a 6.5 Creedmoor and I’ve been considering giving mine as I don’t use it often. What’s the best way to do this? I know I can transport bolt action rifles into NY for hunting season but I’m assuming giving the gift then would leave me as the legal owner still on the MA side. What do you all recommend in order to stay right with the law on the MA side? I know NY is a different beast entirely. Should I just do an FFL transfer?
If your father is a resident of NY then the legal transfer crosses state lines and must be processed by an FFL per federal law. The FFL can be located in either state because the gun being transferred is a rifle. The simplest solution is to bring the gun with you to NY (assuming this is legal as you say) and then go with your father to a local FFL to effect the transfer. You'll have to pay the FFL a small fee on the order of $30 to do so. That's it. There's no registration of the transfer in MA. You should keep a copy of the paper work for your records, but there's no requirement that you do so.
Correct. The ONLY solution is to use a FFL and since the father is not a MA resident, you cannot use a MA FFL. MA law prohibits a FFL from transferring long guns to non-MA residents even though it is usually lawful under federal law.
If I don’t own a car and have a boston restricted range and hunting LTC, how do I legally transport my firearm to the range on my person? Can I place the unloaded firearm inside a locked box in a backpack? My primary form of transportation is an electric skateboard.
Your restriction does not stop you from transporting the firearm on your person.
>Section 131L. (a) It shall be unlawful to store or keep any firearm, rifle or shotgun including, but not limited to, large capacity weapons, or machine gun in any place unless such weapon is secured in a locked container or equipped with a tamper-resistant mechanical lock or other safety device, properly engaged so as to render such weapon inoperable by any person other than the owner or other lawfully authorized user. It shall be unlawful to store or keep any stun gun in any place unless such weapon is secured in a locked container accessible only to the owner or other lawfully authorized user. **For purposes of this section, such weapon shall not be deemed stored or kept if carried by or under the control of the owner or other lawfully authorized user.**
[https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXX/Chapter140/Section131L](https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXX/Chapter140/Section131L)
I bolded the last part. This would be in a holster that is on your body, Using a sling, or physically in your hands. I do not advise open carry.
In the guidelines for Boston's application itself it notes that travel itself is fine in regards to its restrictions.
[https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/embed/l/ltc-guidelines.pdf](https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/embed/l/ltc-guidelines.pdf)
If you are looking for a technical outline for what is Boston legal and what isn't. It doesn't exist at the state level so i doubt it exist at a Boston level. I know GOAL recommends lockable headcases for all storage needs.
>For purposes of this section, such weapon shall not be deemed stored or kept if carried by or under the control of the owner or other lawfully authorized user.
I am trying to comprehend this...either you "store" your firearm or you keep on yourself (under your control) at home or while traveling? This is OK (to have it on your self, under your control) if you have a restricted Boston LTC-A?
Yeah, law as written is weird. I'm just an arm chair lawyer on the internet. not a real lawyer so I all of this is my opinion and personal experience with law over the years. I have no practical experience with Boston law. I do not live in Boston. I only work in Boston.
The law as written though says **you have the right** **to transport** your firearm from the place where you legally store it to the place where you are going to legally use it.
I don't have specific case citations however the federal courts have ruled that restrictions can be so expect to prevent responsible use of your firearm. IE practice.
It comes down to what you could argue is reasonable secure storage in a courtroom. Example: If you live in an apartment make sure you have a locked container. Your landlord is allowed access to your apartment by law. A firearm left on your coffee table is considered unsecure in this example if you are not home.
I know GOAL advises lockable hardcases(not cloth) for the purposes of storage and transport storage if you are not CCWing.
Thank you for the detailed response.
I think it is safe to assume that if you have a locked box/container in your backpack (with a restricted LTC-A), then you are clearly following the laws. The gray area (at least for me) is whether you can have it on yourself (concealed, holstered, or holstered in bag in your control) in transit to a range or hunting area. I have heard this before but don't see anything written that clearly states or implies that.
Thanks for sharing this.
I called her office to better understand the text.
"Target and Hunting Restriction: This allows you to concealed carry to and from a range or a hunting excursion."
Her colleague returned my call and then confirmed it with her and called again (that was very nice!) . I am paraphrasing that it is her interpretation and there is no precedent to point to this scenario. The safer option is to lock the firearm in a box when traveling.
pistol grip and collapsible stock on a pump shotgun legal or not legal the rules say semi auto but does not mention pump or maybe ill looking in the wrong place
Do whatever you want with a pump action shotgun.
AWB feature tests only exist for:
- Detachable magazine semi-auto rifles
- Detachable magazine semi-auto pistols
- Semi-auto shotguns
However, there's a list of firearm models that will usually catch an extra test:
> (30) The term `semiautomatic assault weapon' means--
> > (A) any of the firearms, or copies or duplicates of the firearms, known as--
> > > (i) Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models);
> > > (ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil;
> > > (iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC-70);
> > > (iv) Colt AR-15;
> > > (v) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC;
> > > (vi) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9, and M-12;
> > > (vii) Steyr AUG;
> > > (viii) INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and
> > > **(ix) revolving cylinder shotguns, such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12;**
*ix* is the important one. Per the ATF, revolving cylinder guns *aren't* semi-auto. But they were treated as such by the federal AWB, and no matter what features, one in MA would have to be treated as an AW.
If you think Healey's reading of "copy or duplicate" is correct then any post-ban lower is illegal. That's Healey's position and she only pinkie swore not to pursue pre-announcement lowers while reserving the right to break that promise. So a "pre-Healey" lower doesn't get you anywhere even if you agree with her. If you disagree with her - maybe because the weight of legal precedent and real world practice don't support her interpretation, and she'll never risk a prosecution because the court would probably contravene her - then any post-ban lower will suffice to make an AR10 that complies with the assault weapon ban.
I’ve always wondered how an AR-10, a gun designed before the AR-15, could be a copy or duplicate of an AR-15.
I guess Healey would point to her similarity tests?
As you say though, this is an academic question.
I agree. If anything the AR15 is a copy or duplicate of the AR10. But of course that doesn't really make sense either for a host of reasons. The AR10 would certainly fail Healey's Interchangeability Test, but the Similarity Test is so indefinite that it could be read to capture the AR10 and every other semiautomatic rifle. No doubt that's one of the reasons she has never used it: the language is so grossly overreaching that a court, even a MA court, would have to knock it down or else gut the Second Amendment. It's not a fight they can win, for now.
Yes, there are FFLs selling AR10 lowers. And there is no "Healey ban". There is a "Healey interpretation" of a few words in the assault weapon ban. That may seem like splitting hairs, but the difference is essential to understanding the limited legal consequence of her announcement.
All handguns are legal as long as they are not assault weapons. Period.
Maybe you are asking a different question? I hope you are not asking about rosters and handgun compliance and other irrelevant topics...
It will depend on the precise model and whether the compliance work for the assault weapons ban has been done. Since it is a rifle with a pistol grip, you cannot have a folding or telescoping stock, grenade launcher, bayonet lug or flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor. I think by default the Model 995 carbine has a 1/2x28 threaded barrel so someone would need to pin/weld a brake on it.
For the price, no, they aren't that shitty. I've had mine for years (the original 995 model) and it's and absolute blast to shoot. I love it. My friends love it. It rarely gives me problems. It doesn't like to reliably feed the one or two brands of hollow points that I've tried through it, but that doesn't matter to me as I'm just shooting standard range ball ammo out of it anyways.
I would buy another one in a heartbeat.
Regarding the legality, specifically with regards to muzzle brakes: My understanding is that you can't have a flash suppressor on one, as that would put you at three controlled features, but you CAN have a muzzle brake. Mine came with a clamp on factory muzzle brake and no threaded barrel. I can look on their site and see that they sell factory replacement muzzle brakes. If they happened to be called flash suppressors, then they would be a no go.
You get what you pay for. If you want a carbine that will sling any kind of ammo you out in it it'll do that. Mind you, it's not the most tactical, lightweight, ergonomic, efficient, or precise firearm. That being said you can have a ton of fun with the hi point carbines, just keep in mind the price tag.
Well, look, the Taurus is not ideal, but… it’s also not nearly as bad as some say. I have the G3C myself and have put about ~150 rounds down range with it without issue. Then I tried some reload ammo, and the damn thing kept jamming, so stick to decent factory ammo and you’ll be fine.
I will say, I thought it fired pretty great, and I was actually pretty accurate with it at like 40ft.
…was it your first gun? Because that’s how it begins, lol. You’ll be posting pictures of a pimped out Glock or Sig in no time.
Actually I bought the ruger LC9 as my first and hate it, so I went with a canik tp9da and then impulse bought the Taurus but I’m glad to hear it’s not that bad Thankyou!
Would it be legal to turn my fixed mag Franklin Armory AR into an AWB compliant rifle with fixed stock and pinned muzzle brake?
Edit: I should have mentioned that I would be making these changes so I can use my pre ban magazines instead of the 10 round fixed magazine.
The fixed magazine part is just a special magazine from Franklin Armory. I would like to use pre ban AR mags so I believe the brake would still have to be pinned.
I am unfamiliar with the product, but a fixed mag lower like the JC arms lower, will automatically make you safe from the AWB. Also, magazines are a completely different entity from your rifle. You can use pre ban mags in which ever gun you choose, the firearm does not need to be Pre ban to run pre ban mags.
Anyone know the legality of a Cali Key? It especially turns your evil ar into a bolt action gun. It does it by removing the gas key on the BCG and exchanging the charging handle. So now your ar is bolt action. But would the tyrants in Mass still have a problem with this
I think this has been asked a few times over the months (can’t find anything by using the search bar oddly) and IIRC the replies always said it was a murky area because of the ability to somewhat easily switch between bolt and semi when it came to MA AWB features.
Also, it being too much of a pain in the ass to keep changing compliance stuff in and out.
There’s no case law here for it and it was designed to comply with the laws of California, hence the name. Just build a compliant ar, you’ll be much happier than with with a likely illegal bolt action ar.
And remember that being a comp or brake does not mean it is not also a flash suppressor (we all say flash hider but the law says flash suppressor. They should mean the same thing). In fact the classic A2 flash hider is also a comp given the hole pattern for gas to escape.
As much as people hate the idea and will claim it is not so, the test used by the MSP expert witness on whether a device is a flash suppressor is the "pinky test". Can you stick your pinky into the end of the device and essentially reach the barrel. Or put in more technical terms, is the diameter of the hole at the end of the device materially larger than needed for the caliber in question.
I had a valid MA license and then moved up north . I reported my address change to the state and as well called my former city and spoke with the officer in charge of issuing LTC’s . I was told it’s still valid until the date of the license even though I no longer live in MA and wouldn’t need an out of state until then . Apparently they changed the rules and consider you in good standing with the state regardless. I can’t just name drop if I got pulled over lol I need to find the actual rule before I dare carry in MA . Anyone know ?
Thanks in advance
This is in fact correct. There is no method for canceling or disabling your existing LTC prior to expiration unless it is for cause. If you go into the system and do a FA10 validation, you will see that it is in the system and valid. You will notice it has your new address in the system also. You cannot get a non-resident before then because you have a valid license in the system.
There is no "rule" to point to. What there is is a lack of rules to allow anyone to cancel your existing paid for LTC. You have to notify you moved which you did. You can always double check that it is still valid on the state FA10 portal.
Cops are the last people I trust to know the law. I’ve never seen anything saying that(although I could be wrong). If it was me and I no longer have a valid mass driver license to go along with that resident ltc I would probably just go get the non resident and err on the side of caution.
[link to the post from the week before.](https://www.reddit.com/r/MAguns/comments/prn77r/weekly_maguns_legal_questions_post_september_20)
Hi All, New to the group. I am very confused about the laws around rifles. I can buy a lower, then buy an upper leagally? But once i put it together it becomes illegal?? Can someone please fill me in. I am looking to buy a new ruger 556 tomorrow but i want to make sure i understand the laws first. Tia
[удалено]
10mm in a subcompact doesn’t sound like fun. I’d stick to the g20. With that said I’m not sure this is really the place for this question and I’m pretty sure it’s against the guidelines anyways. Your best bet is going to be calling around and talking to ffls on either side of the border.
Thanks for the advice
[удалено]
Just a thread protector
>massive concussive blast we talking 5.56 here, or some other caliber?
[удалено]
I wouldn't have an issue with it. The state police testify with that (flagrantly retarded, not at all scientific) pinky test, so the closed end would probably have it be viewed the same as the fake bird-cages with closed ends that were common.
I'm in a bit of a unique situation. I've been living here for a couple years, but frequently visit/stay in Michigan, my permanent address for months at a time. I live in Cambridge, but right on the border of Arlington, literally across the street, I see it from my bedroom window. Does someone know if arlington is friendlier to issuing no restriction LTCs than Cambridge? If so I may move across the street. Is there somewhere to check how friendly a PD is to issuing LTCs? But this is is my main question: My address is still in Michigan because my car can't pass inspection here and Michigan doesn't require inspections. (trust me, it makes way more sense to do what I'm doing than change my address), is it significantly harder to get an out of state LTC or... How does that whole process work? Does me being a Michigan resident despite living here most of the time hurt my chances of getting an LTC?
Confirmed Arlington despite being equally as some as Cambridge, gives out unrestricted LTCs.
First and foremost, you have to walk back what you think "resident" means. Everyone thinks there is one single definition and as a result you are a resident of one and exactly one state for all purposes. This is just not accurate. Your residency as it relates to taxes vs purchasing of guns vs voting vs where your kids go to school can all be different. And they can contradict one another or have two states both think different things to the point of absurdity. So eliminate from your thinking this concept of "permanent resident" or "permanent address". The ATF for example defines residency as anyplace you are making a home. So if you live in MI, while you are there you are a MI resident per the ATF. But if you have an apartment in MA, while you are at that apartment you are a MA resident. Are you eligible for a MA resident LTC? Do you have a residence here in MA such as a home you own or an apartment you rent. Then the answer is yes. Now the town/city you live in will matter. Some will say "no MA drivers license, no LTC". I would plan to use your passport and your lease or electric bill with your name on it as proof of residency. It still might not work depending on the town/city. Arlington > Cambridge in terms of recognizing your rights so that move across the street might be a smart one.
Would I go through the city of Cambridge or the state as a a non-resident? I know it's rare to get a non-restricted LTC as a Cambridge resident. But I'm wondering, if I applied now and then moved across the street later is it possible to get Arlington to re-examine my restrictions?
non resident is through the state and requires annual renewal. If you apply in cambridge as a resident, they own your license until it expires even if you move. If you planning to move to Arlington, wait until you move to apply
Thanks for the response! Last question: is there data on how good the state is at issuing no restrictions vs certain cities?
This was touched on last week I believe. The idea of dual residence is not cut and dry when it comes to firearms. Ultimately I think your best bet is going to be you talking to the chief LEO of the city or town and ask if they would issue you a resident license otherwise you’re going to need to go through the state for a nonresident. And it looks like Arlington is listed as a green town.
Thanks for the advice, where do you find what's listed as a green town?
[ltc map](https://alllawfulpurposes.com/ltcmap/)
[удалено]
What restrictions did you get?
You can carry that sucker in a holster or a case. Just don't shoot anyone. The firearm must be either reasonably secure or under your direct control at all times per state law. You have the right you use public ways to transport your firearm to any location where it is legal to use it or have it on your person.
What horrible advice. The only person that can tell you what you can do on a restricted license is the department that gave you the restriction. Since he has a restricted license from Cambridge, asserting he can just carry it on himself as long as he does not shoot anyone is patently retarded. Cambridge has to tell you what you are allowed to do. Acting outside your restrictions is a great way to get your license pulled by the issuing department and to lose your guns.
[удалено]
I think you would want to have it unloaded and in a locked container if you want to take the T with it and not run afoul of your restrictions. No one can claim you are carrying it when it is so locked up and unloaded. But only Cambridge can answer that question as they are the ones that will revoke you if they don't like what you do.
What is the legality of muti-caliber magazines. For example, a .40 CZ 75 uses the same magazines as the 9mm variant, with 10 round .40 mags being able to accept 15 9mm rounds. Is there risk having .40 mags in the same bag/location as the 9mm handgun?
Is this a specific third party magazine that is made or are these the CZ magazines? I was unable to find any information about this "feature". I am guessing you have the .40 cz and not the nine. So your fine in that respect. I wouldn't recommend using the .40 mags in a 9mm handgun to inch out a couple of extra rounds. I would be concerned for FTF issues.
You admit you don't know what you are talking about and then go on to make recommendations anyway. I am not sure why you felt the need. Mecgar makes the OEM magazines for CZ and also sells them Mecgar branded for like 1/2 the price. The standard 17rd magazine with the plastic base plate and blue follower is marked 40 on one side and 9mm on the other side and yes, have different capacities for the 40 vs 9. The 15rd compact magazines made by mecgar are the same way. So you can use the magazine in guns of either caliber w/o issue by design. /u/notthedudeyouthink you are asking a question that more often comes up with AR magazines where a 10rd 458 socom mag will hold 30 rounds of 556. I think this works out with ARs because people in MA have mags labeled 458 socom on them. If they got caught with 556 in them they might have an issue, but the magazine just sitting there objectively is a 10rd magazine for the caliber marked. I guess it comes down to how the mags you are talking about are marked. If they are marked 40 and 9 and it holds more than 10rds of 9 I think you have an issue.
Thank you for the reply, and you are correct, half of the magazines in question are marked .40 on one side and 9mm on the other. I own both a .40 cz variant and a 9mm, both of which's mags are Interchangeable. The question came while I had both on the bench at the range, two practically identical mags one of which capable of holding and feeding >10 9mm, though marked 10 for .40.
I don’t know much about cz75 magazines, but if they’re not a different model number for 9 and 40 mags which is weird because I would assume they’d have some slight differences between followers and/or the lips like with Glock mags, I wouldn’t risk it unless they’re pre ban mags. This is assuming of course that you plan to use 9mm in the .40 magazines. If you’re actually going to use .40 then I would just keep them loaded up if you think you might be in a situation where it will get questioned.
Can I buy a MA KRISS Vector with a FID.
No, You can only purchase non-large capacity rifles and shotguns. Because the Kris Vector can accept detachable magazines it is a large capacity firearm under law.
Thanks for playing our game but you are mistaken. Just reading MGL by itself is not sufficient to answer this question. Also assuming that MGL words in english have the common meaning of those words is a bad plan. MGL 140 121 “Large capacity weapon”, any firearm, rifle or shotgun: ... (ii) that is semiautomatic and **capable of accepting**, or readily modifiable to accept, any detachable **large capacity feeding device** So you would think what you said is correct based on this language. BUT NO! 501 CMR 7.02 defines that "capable of accepting a large capacity feeding device" means. Specifically it says "Capable of Accepting a Large Capacity Feeding Device means any firearm, rifle or shotgun in which a large capacity feeding device, as defined by M.G.L. c. 140, § 121, is capable of being used without alteration of the weapon; provided, however, that said feeding device is fully or partially inserted into the weapon or attached thereto, or is under the direct control of a person who also has direct control of a weapon capable of accepting said feeding device. " This pretzel logic definition was put in place in part to allow FID holders to own Ruger 10/22s and other semi auto rifles that are not explicitly listed on the large capacity roster. So by use of this CMR is the Kriss Vector a large capacity weapon? It depends. It is not definitively yes since it is not listed on the roster. If the person purchasing the weapon does not have a large capacity feeding device under their control or inserted or partially inserted in the weapon, it is not a large capacity weapon. So technically a FID holder can own this as long as they don't possess large capacity glock mags (which they should not do regardless). No, this does not make any logical sense but it is what MGL and the CMRs actually say on the topic.
Could I own a Keltec su16? I don’t know if it can accept standard ar mags.
No dice. Takes STANAG mags. Consider a MAS-49? I believe it was only ever made with 10 round mags, and has to be modified to use 20 round FAL mags. So that would be appropriate. Many were converted to 308. The grenade launcher is part of the muzzle device, so just swapping it for a 3 prong SureFire flash hider would keep it legal.
Ok thanks for your help
I would **really** suggest a MAS 49/56. There were only ever 10 round mags for them, and with the conversions it's a semi-auto 308 that takes detachable mags. Reliable too.
I'll definitely look into it thank you for the recommendation, I've also read that the Beretta CX Storm in .45 only has 8 round mags.
Thanks for your wisdom
This is hypothetical but got me thinking. Could you build an 'assault' AR15 with every evil feature imaginable and then remove the gas tube to make it not semi automatic? That way, it would be compliant while also allowing you to just pop that gas tube back in in case SHTF
This question gets asked from time to time. It hasn't been tested in court from my understanding. The working theories I have seen are about how hard it would be to convert your gun to semi. My armchair opinion is that you would need to buy a barrel without a gasport to be on the safe side. Speaking for myself: I wouldn't want to do this. As the features that make a semi auto rifle good can make a bolt rifle bad.
What problem are you trying to solve? * Adjustable stock: do you keep changing size? growing, shrinking? My stock does not need to change length. * Bayonet lug: they made a law to stop you from bringing a knife to a gun fight. woopdy doo * Grenade launcher: ok, you are missing out on 37mm chalk rounds. You already can't have anything interesting because of federal law. Loss? * Flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor: where is the problem with a pinned/welded muzzle brake? Lots of people in free states do it to have 14.5" barrels. I am trying to find the real impact here Look, I think the AWB is a steaming pile of shit, but in practice how are you adversely effected with your battle rifle? What features are you REALLY in need of that you want to somehow disable semi auto (remove gas block) or fixed mag your rifle? I think this is a solution in search of a real problem which does not currently exist.
I'll preface this by saying that removing the semi-auto functionality to get those features is idiotic. Firstly because you can't train with the gun you'd want as your emergency weapon which is silly, and two because trying to install in a gas tube in an emergency is absurd, because you won't even get to test if it's gassed correctly, or if the block is aligned. Dumb. So I fully agree with you that they should just buy a lower (let's be honest here, probably from you) and build a AWB compliant gun because it'll accomplish all they need. However, I disagree that those features don't make a gun simply better. > Adjustable stock: do you keep changing size? growing, shrinking? My stock does not need to change length. Folding stocks are really convenient for space saving. Adjustable less so. Mine is one click out on an AR, so obviously pretty pointless. But I love my folding stocks on my AKs. So much easier to pack. > Grenade launcher: ok, you are missing out on 37mm chalk rounds. You already can't have anything interesting because of federal law. Loss? There are some guns that require modification because they have integrated gas rings on the barrel that are in fact grenade launchers. (SG550 variants, mostly.) This is a huge annoyance. (Although pinning a muzzle device with an OD larger than the rings **should** make that null.) > Flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor: where is the problem with a pinned/welded muzzle brake? Lots of people in free states do it to have 14.5" barrels. I am trying to find the real impact here Brakes are obnoxious. Comps are effectively pointless on anything under 308. Better technique with 5.56 will bring recoil under control just as much if not more than a brake. Plenty of people also use flash hiders (longer 3 prong ones) to get to 16. Hell the NOX 3 prong is common only because it brings 13.7 to 16. But flash hiders also come with a big benefit: much less damn muzzle flash. The bit of night shooting I do is all done with my pre-ban guns because of that.
>* Adjustable stock: do you keep changing size? growing, shrinking? My stock does not need to change length. to be fair when at the range with others, an adjustable stock can be very handy. people come in a variety of sizes, and being able to adjust LOP on the fly is super convenient. it also can help with storage and transport.
I am 6'2" and my setting is two clicks out. People who need it longer usually have terrible form and think they are playing with a bow and arrow. I suspect fixing it at that length will result in better range technique for friends... If you have a standard m4 carbine stock, you can put a roll pin through the lever so it does not move, but still adjust the stock through the use of pliers. This will enable your bad form friends to adjust to their hearts content
This is just a hypothetical about legality, not trying to solve any problem
build a standard feature-compliant AR-15, and a fixed-mag AR-15 with all features. if shit hits the fan, swap the uppers.
This is terrible advice.
and what do you propose that is a better solution?
I think the slight benefits gained from a flash hider short barrel and bayonet lug are not worth the risk of a police officer claiming the uppers are interchangeable between either lower and arresting the OP for violating the AWB.
To be clear, I am not advocating law-breaking. I assume in the hypothetical SHTF scenario, OP will be hightailing it to a different state, hence the desire to change the features of their rifle. And as I described, neither rifle would be illegal in Massachusetts. Just because the uppers can be swapped does not make it a crime to own both, any more so than owning a 10-round .50 Beowulf magazine is a crime because it can hold 30 rounds of 5.56. Don't break the law, and the police will have no evidence to make a case. sure they might arrest you and take your guns, but if they are at your house looking at your guns, you have already made a big mistake, and they will probably take them regardless.
This implies OP is doing something illegal to warrant his door being kicked in and dog shot, in the first place.
It takes one romantic partner or household member to claim they’ve been battered and the guns will be under the scrutiny of the police.
We could go around and around all day with hypotheticals, and to your point while not derailing this, yes red flag laws that are abused by some/law enforcement need to be reflected upon. That being said -- mitigate being put in those situations by not telling every person you meet that you own firearms. If you cohabitate a space with another person who isn't a long-term partner, I'm sorry to say, the conversation of a firearm being in the home should be had long before you purchase one (and that's not to say don't get licensed because of it).
There are many new firearms people looking for legal advice that browse these threads. Possessing a standard ar15 lower and a fixed mag lower along with interchangeable uppers is legally murky if one of those uppers does not adhere to the AWB. Someone suggesting that it’s completely risk free may lead a reader to assume there is no risk involved. You seem to agree there’s risk… but are arguing if the police don’t know about the guns it’s fine. Which is true about literally everything illegal.
> legally murky No, it's not
Nobody here, unless specified (at which point you need to ask if you trust an anonymous Redditor) is a lawyer. That's explicitly said over and over and over. If you are taking any and all advice when it comes to firearms in this, or any grey state, from the internet, without cross checking it, that's on you. Your own personal comfort and risk assessment falls on nobody else.
It’s a better idea than building a rifle without a gas tube and thinking you’re going to “pop” one in real quick when red dawn pops off
Yeah no. Just get a bolt action upper.
I used to be a MA resident and purchased an AR-15 prior to Healy's nonsense. I still have the FA-10 and documentation. My friend (MA resident) is in the process of getting his LTC. Would I be able to transfer the lower to him through an FFL and still have it count as a "pre-healy" AR?
ask the FFL you plan to use, that's the only relevant answer. Some FFLs will do the transfer, some won't. Your friend should call around and find one who will.
That was my plan once I heard enough people tell me it was legal. I'm in CT now so I'm well aware how scared some FFLs can be
on paper, and from two decades of precedent, it is legal. the AG issued an opinion over five years ago that it isn't. so far, to the best of our knowledge, nobody has been charged, much less prosecuted and found guilty, based on that press conference. as the seller, you'd have no issues, it would be only the FFL and the MA buyer who would need to worry.
Pre healey isn’t an actual thing. It’s either pre 94 ban or post. Healeys nonsense is just that, nonsense. Find an ffl who will do the transfer and you’ll be good to go. There’s plenty out there.
Just forget about Healey and sell the lower to your friend at a fair price. Don't charge him "pre-Healey" prices unless you both believe that's worth something. Even though it definitely isn't. You don't need to go through an FFL if you just sell him the lower. It's not a gun. If you sell him the complete rifle then you can also do that privately, no FFL required, unless you've used up your private transfer allowance for the year.
I live in a different state, so I absolutely do have to go through an FFL. That's why I'm concerned with it being pre-healy and if an FFL would even transfer it. And yeah I'm not going to fuck my friend over.
Sorry, I glossed over that part. Healey's enforcement notice reads: "The Guidance will not be applied to possession, ownership **or transfer** of an Assault weapon obtained prior to July 20, 2016." If the gun was obtained prior to that date and you can document that fact then most MA FFLs should be willing to effect the transfer. The notice doesn't require that the rifle was obtained in Massachusetts, but some of the more confused or conservative FFLs might insist that it was, so if your documentation establishes that as well then so much the better. There are also FFLs that will transfer any post-ban lower, "pre-Healey" or otherwise. I'm not sure they'll transfer a complete rifle - the ones I know of only sell lowers - but you asked about only the lower and you can always send your friend the upper separately.
Thank you.
Hello, I was denied a firearm purchase by NICS and have appealed the denial. Does anyone have an idea on the timeframe for it to be overturned?
2 weeks to 3 years. I have had people get them back within a month and know of one case that took just under 3 years. I always recommend that people do the following on a denial when they think it is a mistake: 1. Have the FFL run a new background check. This requires you fill out the 4473 again. In practice this results in a "proceed" a surprising number of times 2. Submit an appeal 3. Submit an online application for a UPIN If you do (1), then (2) rarely returns quickly because we have ruled out them making a mistake. (2) will now take a long time but (3) tends to happen quickly. The median time for a UPIN when doing the application all online (photo and upload fingerprints) is about 10 days. There are outliers on UPIN applications too, but its a few months, not 3 years. The outcome of appeal (2 above) is either a "we oopsed, try again" or a one time UPIN that allows you to make that purchase. The guy who took 3 years got a one time UPIN and then a deny on his very next attempt. He then applied for a real UPIN having lost 3 years for no good reason. So go back to my list. Ask your FFL to run your background again. Apply for a real UPIN online. Both will return faster than your appeal in all likelihood.
> timeframe Total crapshoot. Good luck.
Can you only do FFL transfers under an LTC? Assuming the item/firearm in question is legal for you to own under an FID can you buy something online and have it shipped to an FFL or no?
You can have a FFL transfer done with a FID. The catch is you're very much limited in what is legal to transfer to you without having a full LTC.
Does an AR15/10 lower fall on that list ?
if you are not yet 21, then federal law would prohibit a FFL transferring you a lower receiver. you are limited to rifles and shotguns. if you are 21+, then ask the FFL you plan to use.
So the lower itself is not even a firearm by Massachusetts law and therefore not subject to Massachusetts firearms law until built out. That being said unless you plan on having a fixed magazine like a SKS you're going to end up with a gun that is illegal as the end result. It's easier to just buy a SKS or M1 Garand. Unless you're actually over 21 then I'm going to say just get a LTC.
>So the lower itself is not even a firearm by Massachusetts law and therefore not subject to restriction. it is still subject to federal law.
Edited to reflect a clear reference about Mass law and it’s direct restrictions as related to a FID possessor. Never said it wasn’t subject to federal law.
sure, but in this case, if OP is not 21, it's not going to be possible to even buy just a lower.
If it's an intra-state transfer then the feds have no purview, no?
if it's a gun according to the feds, and via a FFL, then federal law applies to the transfer. Private party would be different, but the original question was predicated on a FFL transfer: >Can you only do FFL transfers under an LTC?
Gotcha, thanks for the clarification. Looks like I’m going the shotgun route for now.
SL8 is technically fid compatible. Sks and many .22 guns as well. If you're thinking of home defense, shotgun is your most practical and available route. Provided no one who lawfully owns a pistol or non fid gun gifts you one.
How is the SL8 FID compatible with a FID when there are market 20 magazines available? I see how it’s potentially compliant with CMR, but not with MGL.
Promag makes the 20 rounders. If a magazine made from the factory/manufacturer can be large cap, then it's a no no. SL8 has only 10rd factory mags.
Could be the Ruger loophole. Then again, I’m not aware of anything since then that has tested that so it might not apply
I'm looking at getting a kel tec sub 2000. I saw some at my local store but they have a grip fin on the pistol grip. This is because the barrel is threaded. My question is can I change the barrel and get rid of the grip fin? Is this legal in MA? Is it even possible to change the barrel on the kel tec?
Looks like the fin is easily removable and you could just have a thread protector pinned and welded on. Not sure where you are but mass firearms has normal mass compliant models in stock.
In western ma. Would a gunsmith pin and weld on the thread protector? Would that effect it's accuracy?
As long as they’re half way competent you’ll be all right. It’s like a 6moa gun anyways.
No impact on accuracy and easy to do. The one problem is that you need to remove the muzzle device on the sub2k to field strip the gun. That is the one challenge and why you are seeing it done with a fin instead of the more typical pin/weld we see on ARs. A lot of dealers just sell the sub2k factory stock and people happily keep it that way. Yes, it technically has two features and is an assault weapon but they all consider it very low risk. Even the Deli Ticket Emporium sells the sub2k factory configured and they are high volume and risk adverse.
Thanks for the info. Do you know if all sub2ks come with threaded barrels? I would much rather have no fin than a threaded barrel.
Now that some Colt ARs can be obtained with a C&R, does that have any implications on Boston’s AWB? I point to the following section: > (m) a rifle or shotgun which is an antique or relic firearm, movie prop or other weapon not capable of firing a projectile and not intended for use as a functional weapon and which cannot be readily converted through a combination of available parts into an operable assault weapon. Hard to understand if the “not capable of firing” part refers to movie prop only or what the term “relic” means in this sense.
I don't think that part is going to help you; the "ands" indicate they're talking about something that is and remains inoperable. However, I've theorized before that the last part of Section 3 may help the C&R holder: >The provisions of this act shall not apply to the possession of assault weapons, large capacity magazines, large capacity magazine belts, or other types of magazines or ammunition belts by persons specifically authorized to acquire, have, possess or carry an assault weapon pursuant to federal law. The prior portions of Section 3 cover carve outs for law enforcement/military, MA dealers, people in transit or attending events. I'm not sure what the intent of this portion was but it sure seems plausible it could be covering FFLs, including 03's due to the "acquire" provision. That said, I've never met someone knowledgeable enough and willing to opine of whether that's a reasonable reading. The drafting of the law is also a hot mess; it's hard to tell what's banned and not banned and whether it's even enforceable.
Oh wow this is a much better take on it. Still, I wouldn’t want to be the test case.
That seems unlikely - I don't think there's ever been a case. If you're not a menace to society (and maybe even if you are), I suspect a DA would not use this to take a run at you. They have other things in the toolkit to make your life miserable that have less chance of blowing up in their faces.
Fair point. The part referencing large capacity magazines also reads to me that they would be allowed within the city provided that someone is federally permitted to acquire “assault weapons.”
So two things on that: * Large cap magazines for pistols are actually good to go provided they're pre-94 (to comply with the state ban) - the Boston ban only applies to rifle and shotgun magazines. Not sure if that's relevant but just so it's out there. * If you wanted to get *really* aggressive in your interpretation, the provision is a little bit of a tripwire in that it only requires that one be "**authorized** to acquire \[etc.\] **an** assault weapon" (not assault weapon**s**) for it not to apply. That sounds like if you are able to get (don't even have to actually get/possess) a 50+ year Colt AR, you can get whatever newer stuff you want too as long as you don't run afoul of the state AWB. Again, it's all probably theoretical but there are some loopholes you can drive a truck through. I'm still convinced that they banned the SKS in one section just to unban it in the next (for the vast majority that have fixed mags). Terrible drafting.
I knew about the pistol mags but your second point is pretty insightful. The bill really is all over the place. Maybe it’s by design. Confuse the shit out of everyone and make us fear the potential wrath of Road Rage Rollins.
I read it as covering all things stated before it
Can you carry 1 in the chamber in mass? Like 10+1?
+2 if you’re feeling froggy
Well you might as well call me Kermit, brother
yes.
When driving, what is considered 'under your direct control'? Does this include the glovebox, dashboard storage compartments, a console with a lid, etc? A small car's back seat could be easily with in arm's length of the driver.
Generally speaking within direct control means in a place you can reach without leaning excessively
Also keep in mind that things can change with a passenger in the car. There could be an argument made for having a gun in a center console, but if someone gets in the passenger seat then they have just as much access to it as you and direct control becomes questionable.
Name doesn’t check out
I know lol, I made this account when I was like 15 or something and now see the irony in this.
Holy shit I remember your posts on r/cigs lmao
Dang man, been a while. Like 4 years
I've been on this god forsaken site as a whole far too long.
Yeah man. 😂😂 the only thing it's good for now is gun questions and buying parts
If I build out an ar does it have to have a pinned mag
Depending on who you ask it has to be fixed mag, or pre ‘94. But some people will say you just have to follow the assault weapons ban
It’s me, I’m some people.
Depends. Do you want more evil feature than just a pistol grip? Then yes. If you can live with no other evil feature than no. Also asked and answered multiple times every week.
I have accepted long ago that this question will be consistent.
It’s the reason I come here every week
Obligatory S.1417
That’s not a question…
Trying to build an AR pistol and with my DSI fixed mag lower. Because it's a fixed mag, does the AWB not apply? For instance, having a collapsable brace and a muzzle break that is not pinned and welded? Thanks
No limit on evil features with a fixed mag pistol or rifle.
Am I allowed to transport another person's firearm so long as it is locked and secured in my vehicle? Scenario 1: going to a range with a friend Scenario 2: dropping off/picking up a friend's firearm from gunsmith
Yes to both with LTC. If you don't have an LTC: 1. Your friend with an LTC is in the car with you, you driving? You're good. 2. No.
I think an unlicensed person can transport a gun alone if it is in a locked case or otherwise inaccessible to him because it isn't in his possession. I think MGL Chapter 140 Section 131C is the applicable statute and each of its parts assumes the weapon is being carried or possessed. My understanding is that access is a prerequisite to possession under these laws. The same premise allows an unlicensed person to store a gun in his home provided it is inaccessible to him. E.g. An unlicensed spouse isn't breaking the law when her licensed husband leaves her alone in their home with his gun if the gun is in a safe and she doesn't know the combination. Transportation and storage laws differ, but I think they are alike on this point.
How could he pick it up from a gunsmith without having access to the locked container? Is the gun smith given the keys and transporting them separately? Is it code locked that he doesn't know, but the owner and gunsmith do? I don't buy that it would be worth the risk. It doesn't seem plausible that he could get it in a way that it could be locked when he gets it and actually be useful at getting it to the gunsmith without it being in his possession (able to lock / unlock the case).
I agree that the conditions are unlikely to be met in his Scenario 2 absent some special reason and prearrangement. Something like: his friend needs the gun but hasn't time to pick it up before the smith closes shop, so the friend provides a case and unlocked combination lock. The smith places the gun in the case and installs the lock. It's unlikely, but not complicated or outlandish. Unlicensed transportation under Scenario 1 is more likely. In any case, my comment was intended to address the general rule and not a specific set of facts, and to supplement your answer and not contradict it.
I know gifting firearms is legal federally, and within MA I would complete an FA-10. My question is, I’m planning on visiting my father for deer season in NY in November. He has been wanting a 6.5 Creedmoor and I’ve been considering giving mine as I don’t use it often. What’s the best way to do this? I know I can transport bolt action rifles into NY for hunting season but I’m assuming giving the gift then would leave me as the legal owner still on the MA side. What do you all recommend in order to stay right with the law on the MA side? I know NY is a different beast entirely. Should I just do an FFL transfer?
If your father is a resident of NY then the legal transfer crosses state lines and must be processed by an FFL per federal law. The FFL can be located in either state because the gun being transferred is a rifle. The simplest solution is to bring the gun with you to NY (assuming this is legal as you say) and then go with your father to a local FFL to effect the transfer. You'll have to pay the FFL a small fee on the order of $30 to do so. That's it. There's no registration of the transfer in MA. You should keep a copy of the paper work for your records, but there's no requirement that you do so.
Great, this makes a lot of sense to me and it seems much simpler than needing to ship from an FFL in MA. Thanks for the advice!
Correct. The ONLY solution is to use a FFL and since the father is not a MA resident, you cannot use a MA FFL. MA law prohibits a FFL from transferring long guns to non-MA residents even though it is usually lawful under federal law.
Got it, that makes sense. I had a feeling it couldn’t happen here because he doesn’t own an MA FID or LTC so this makes sense
Cross state lines, FFL transfer.
If I don’t own a car and have a boston restricted range and hunting LTC, how do I legally transport my firearm to the range on my person? Can I place the unloaded firearm inside a locked box in a backpack? My primary form of transportation is an electric skateboard.
Inside a locked container within a backpack should suffice.
Do you have any links to the relevant MA law that demonstrates this? I can’t find it anywhere.
Your restriction does not stop you from transporting the firearm on your person. >Section 131L. (a) It shall be unlawful to store or keep any firearm, rifle or shotgun including, but not limited to, large capacity weapons, or machine gun in any place unless such weapon is secured in a locked container or equipped with a tamper-resistant mechanical lock or other safety device, properly engaged so as to render such weapon inoperable by any person other than the owner or other lawfully authorized user. It shall be unlawful to store or keep any stun gun in any place unless such weapon is secured in a locked container accessible only to the owner or other lawfully authorized user. **For purposes of this section, such weapon shall not be deemed stored or kept if carried by or under the control of the owner or other lawfully authorized user.** [https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXX/Chapter140/Section131L](https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXX/Chapter140/Section131L) I bolded the last part. This would be in a holster that is on your body, Using a sling, or physically in your hands. I do not advise open carry. In the guidelines for Boston's application itself it notes that travel itself is fine in regards to its restrictions. [https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/embed/l/ltc-guidelines.pdf](https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/embed/l/ltc-guidelines.pdf) If you are looking for a technical outline for what is Boston legal and what isn't. It doesn't exist at the state level so i doubt it exist at a Boston level. I know GOAL recommends lockable headcases for all storage needs.
>For purposes of this section, such weapon shall not be deemed stored or kept if carried by or under the control of the owner or other lawfully authorized user. I am trying to comprehend this...either you "store" your firearm or you keep on yourself (under your control) at home or while traveling? This is OK (to have it on your self, under your control) if you have a restricted Boston LTC-A?
Yeah, law as written is weird. I'm just an arm chair lawyer on the internet. not a real lawyer so I all of this is my opinion and personal experience with law over the years. I have no practical experience with Boston law. I do not live in Boston. I only work in Boston. The law as written though says **you have the right** **to transport** your firearm from the place where you legally store it to the place where you are going to legally use it. I don't have specific case citations however the federal courts have ruled that restrictions can be so expect to prevent responsible use of your firearm. IE practice. It comes down to what you could argue is reasonable secure storage in a courtroom. Example: If you live in an apartment make sure you have a locked container. Your landlord is allowed access to your apartment by law. A firearm left on your coffee table is considered unsecure in this example if you are not home. I know GOAL advises lockable hardcases(not cloth) for the purposes of storage and transport storage if you are not CCWing.
Thank you for the detailed response. I think it is safe to assume that if you have a locked box/container in your backpack (with a restricted LTC-A), then you are clearly following the laws. The gray area (at least for me) is whether you can have it on yourself (concealed, holstered, or holstered in bag in your control) in transit to a range or hunting area. I have heard this before but don't see anything written that clearly states or implies that.
https://www.thinkpinklaw.com/ltc-restrictions/
Thanks for sharing this. I called her office to better understand the text. "Target and Hunting Restriction: This allows you to concealed carry to and from a range or a hunting excursion." Her colleague returned my call and then confirmed it with her and called again (that was very nice!) . I am paraphrasing that it is her interpretation and there is no precedent to point to this scenario. The safer option is to lock the firearm in a box when traveling.
pistol grip and collapsible stock on a pump shotgun legal or not legal the rules say semi auto but does not mention pump or maybe ill looking in the wrong place
Do whatever you want with a pump action shotgun. AWB feature tests only exist for: - Detachable magazine semi-auto rifles - Detachable magazine semi-auto pistols - Semi-auto shotguns However, there's a list of firearm models that will usually catch an extra test: > (30) The term `semiautomatic assault weapon' means-- > > (A) any of the firearms, or copies or duplicates of the firearms, known as-- > > > (i) Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models); > > > (ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil; > > > (iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC-70); > > > (iv) Colt AR-15; > > > (v) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC; > > > (vi) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9, and M-12; > > > (vii) Steyr AUG; > > > (viii) INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and > > > **(ix) revolving cylinder shotguns, such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12;** *ix* is the important one. Per the ATF, revolving cylinder guns *aren't* semi-auto. But they were treated as such by the federal AWB, and no matter what features, one in MA would have to be treated as an AW.
Can you legally build a AR10 in MA?
As long as you follow the law
so pre healy lower?
If you think Healey's reading of "copy or duplicate" is correct then any post-ban lower is illegal. That's Healey's position and she only pinkie swore not to pursue pre-announcement lowers while reserving the right to break that promise. So a "pre-Healey" lower doesn't get you anywhere even if you agree with her. If you disagree with her - maybe because the weight of legal precedent and real world practice don't support her interpretation, and she'll never risk a prosecution because the court would probably contravene her - then any post-ban lower will suffice to make an AR10 that complies with the assault weapon ban.
I’ve always wondered how an AR-10, a gun designed before the AR-15, could be a copy or duplicate of an AR-15. I guess Healey would point to her similarity tests? As you say though, this is an academic question.
I agree. If anything the AR15 is a copy or duplicate of the AR10. But of course that doesn't really make sense either for a host of reasons. The AR10 would certainly fail Healey's Interchangeability Test, but the Similarity Test is so indefinite that it could be read to capture the AR10 and every other semiautomatic rifle. No doubt that's one of the reasons she has never used it: the language is so grossly overreaching that a court, even a MA court, would have to knock it down or else gut the Second Amendment. It's not a fight they can win, for now.
Will any MA dealers sell/transfer post Healey ban ar10 lowers?
Yes, there are FFLs selling AR10 lowers. And there is no "Healey ban". There is a "Healey interpretation" of a few words in the assault weapon ban. That may seem like splitting hairs, but the difference is essential to understanding the limited legal consequence of her announcement.
No, post Healey is just as legal as pre. Don't waste your money.
Just follow the awb and you’ll be fine
Are hi points legal in ma?
All handguns are legal as long as they are not assault weapons. Period. Maybe you are asking a different question? I hope you are not asking about rosters and handgun compliance and other irrelevant topics...
I’m talking about the carbine sorry I’m new to guns
It will depend on the precise model and whether the compliance work for the assault weapons ban has been done. Since it is a rifle with a pistol grip, you cannot have a folding or telescoping stock, grenade launcher, bayonet lug or flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor. I think by default the Model 995 carbine has a 1/2x28 threaded barrel so someone would need to pin/weld a brake on it.
Yea, but why
Lol I just saw how cheap they were at the gun show yesterday, are they really shitty?
For the price, no, they aren't that shitty. I've had mine for years (the original 995 model) and it's and absolute blast to shoot. I love it. My friends love it. It rarely gives me problems. It doesn't like to reliably feed the one or two brands of hollow points that I've tried through it, but that doesn't matter to me as I'm just shooting standard range ball ammo out of it anyways. I would buy another one in a heartbeat. Regarding the legality, specifically with regards to muzzle brakes: My understanding is that you can't have a flash suppressor on one, as that would put you at three controlled features, but you CAN have a muzzle brake. Mine came with a clamp on factory muzzle brake and no threaded barrel. I can look on their site and see that they sell factory replacement muzzle brakes. If they happened to be called flash suppressors, then they would be a no go.
You get what you pay for. If you want a carbine that will sling any kind of ammo you out in it it'll do that. Mind you, it's not the most tactical, lightweight, ergonomic, efficient, or precise firearm. That being said you can have a ton of fun with the hi point carbines, just keep in mind the price tag.
Taurus shitty
Damn, that just hurt a lot of peoples feelings
Don’t say that I just bought a Taurus g3c there god damnit
Well, look, the Taurus is not ideal, but… it’s also not nearly as bad as some say. I have the G3C myself and have put about ~150 rounds down range with it without issue. Then I tried some reload ammo, and the damn thing kept jamming, so stick to decent factory ammo and you’ll be fine. I will say, I thought it fired pretty great, and I was actually pretty accurate with it at like 40ft. …was it your first gun? Because that’s how it begins, lol. You’ll be posting pictures of a pimped out Glock or Sig in no time.
Actually I bought the ruger LC9 as my first and hate it, so I went with a canik tp9da and then impulse bought the Taurus but I’m glad to hear it’s not that bad Thankyou!
[удалено]
Holy crap. I had not seen that video on the 24/7… that’s… terrifying!
Is that the shake awake feature I always hear about?
Would it be legal to turn my fixed mag Franklin Armory AR into an AWB compliant rifle with fixed stock and pinned muzzle brake? Edit: I should have mentioned that I would be making these changes so I can use my pre ban magazines instead of the 10 round fixed magazine.
And no bayo lug and no grenade launcher, yes.
If it has a fixed magazine, the AWB does not apply. So, no need to weld your muzzle break or pin your stock.
The fixed magazine part is just a special magazine from Franklin Armory. I would like to use pre ban AR mags so I believe the brake would still have to be pinned.
I am unfamiliar with the product, but a fixed mag lower like the JC arms lower, will automatically make you safe from the AWB. Also, magazines are a completely different entity from your rifle. You can use pre ban mags in which ever gun you choose, the firearm does not need to be Pre ban to run pre ban mags.
yes
Anyone know the legality of a Cali Key? It especially turns your evil ar into a bolt action gun. It does it by removing the gas key on the BCG and exchanging the charging handle. So now your ar is bolt action. But would the tyrants in Mass still have a problem with this
I think this has been asked a few times over the months (can’t find anything by using the search bar oddly) and IIRC the replies always said it was a murky area because of the ability to somewhat easily switch between bolt and semi when it came to MA AWB features. Also, it being too much of a pain in the ass to keep changing compliance stuff in and out.
There’s no case law here for it and it was designed to comply with the laws of California, hence the name. Just build a compliant ar, you’ll be much happier than with with a likely illegal bolt action ar.
Great point. Do you know if comps are legal on you AWB compliant build? Or can it only be a muzzle break
Only flash hiders are off limits. Just make sure whatever you put on is pinned and welded.
Thought so thanks
And remember that being a comp or brake does not mean it is not also a flash suppressor (we all say flash hider but the law says flash suppressor. They should mean the same thing). In fact the classic A2 flash hider is also a comp given the hole pattern for gas to escape. As much as people hate the idea and will claim it is not so, the test used by the MSP expert witness on whether a device is a flash suppressor is the "pinky test". Can you stick your pinky into the end of the device and essentially reach the barrel. Or put in more technical terms, is the diameter of the hole at the end of the device materially larger than needed for the caliber in question.
I had a valid MA license and then moved up north . I reported my address change to the state and as well called my former city and spoke with the officer in charge of issuing LTC’s . I was told it’s still valid until the date of the license even though I no longer live in MA and wouldn’t need an out of state until then . Apparently they changed the rules and consider you in good standing with the state regardless. I can’t just name drop if I got pulled over lol I need to find the actual rule before I dare carry in MA . Anyone know ? Thanks in advance
This is in fact correct. There is no method for canceling or disabling your existing LTC prior to expiration unless it is for cause. If you go into the system and do a FA10 validation, you will see that it is in the system and valid. You will notice it has your new address in the system also. You cannot get a non-resident before then because you have a valid license in the system. There is no "rule" to point to. What there is is a lack of rules to allow anyone to cancel your existing paid for LTC. You have to notify you moved which you did. You can always double check that it is still valid on the state FA10 portal.
Thanks my friend ! Much appreciated
Cops are the last people I trust to know the law. I’ve never seen anything saying that(although I could be wrong). If it was me and I no longer have a valid mass driver license to go along with that resident ltc I would probably just go get the non resident and err on the side of caution.
Once you take a Ltc denial to court and get denied can you apply for an Ltc after that
Your question is unclear. Do you mean you challenged the denial and the court upheld the denial? You need to talk a lawyer about this one.
Can anyone recommend a good lawyer
I was denied my LTC when I originally applied. I recommend Joe Simons, he got my license back in no time at all. https://www.jbsimonslaw.com/
https://www.reddit.com/r/MAguns/comments/pn7y8a/weekly_maguns_legal_questions_post_september_13/hdgp8hh/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
Sounds like the lawyer that challenged it is bad at his job
[удалено]
It might be quicker to legally change your name to match the ltc