1. If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

  2. Dismiss Notice

Advice on Mag Rifles that are Mass FID Compliant

Discussion in 'Massachusetts Laws' started by TimMcG74, Feb 13, 2010.

  1. TimMcG74

    TimMcG74 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2009
    Messages:
    2,718
    Likes Received:
    397
    Location:
    Worcester County
    Wondering if anyone has any advice on reasonably affordable mag fed rifles that are Mass FID compliant. Looking for something in a cartridge larger than .22
     
  2. M1911

    M1911 Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Messages:
    36,320
    Likes Received:
    3,341
    Location:
    Near Framingham
  3. Scrivener

    Scrivener Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    10,164
    Likes Received:
    499
    M1 Garand

    I presume you mean semi-autos, as ANY bolt, lever or pump gun meets FID criteria.
     
  4. Kevlar

    Kevlar Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Messages:
    4,717
    Likes Received:
    513
    Ruger Mini-14
    Ruger Mini-30
    WASR-10 (single stack)
    Hi-Point 995
    Beretta CX-4 (.45 cal. only)
    H&K USC
    H&K SL8
    SKS (stripper clips)
    M1 Garand (en bloc clips)
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2010
  5. M1911

    M1911 Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Messages:
    36,320
    Likes Received:
    3,341
    Location:
    Near Framingham
    Mmmm, better idea than the Mini-30. Much better idea.
     
  6. Scrivener

    Scrivener Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    10,164
    Likes Received:
    499
    Marlin Camp Rifle in ..45 - IF you can find one.
     
  7. Mach

    Mach Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    314
    Likes Received:
    13
    By definition of the law any semi-auto rifle that is not on the large capacity list as long as in your possession or your control you only have 10 or less round mags. You could have a Colt Match Target with 10 round mags and it meets the definition of the law, since a Colt Match Target is not on the list and you can readily get 10 round mags for it.

    "Capable of accepting" and "Readily modifiable to accept" definitions both require that the high cap mag be in your possession / under your direct control.
    http://www.mass.gov/Eeops/docs/chsb/firearms/501%20CMR%207.pdf

    So an AR-15 type rifle not on the list that has 10 round mags is good to go, by letter of the law. now whether that means it's legal or not I don't know.

    The new Essential arms and RRA and Remsport names don't appear to be on the list. Of course they can always change the list and make you a criminal, so I would go with an SKS or something that has an internal magazine of 10 rounds or less.
     
  8. Scrivener

    Scrivener Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    10,164
    Likes Received:
    499
    Utter CRAP

    As the definition EXPRESSLY refers to AR-15 designs as an "assault weapon," your assertions are patently absurd and egregiously WRONG.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2010
  9. Mach

    Mach Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    314
    Likes Received:
    13
    You are confusing "Assault Weapon" with "Large Capacity" weapon. They are NOT the same and are completely independent definitions. And your assertion that the assault weapon definition expressly refers to AR-15 designs as 'assault weapons' is completely wrong.

    The large capacity roster names weapons by name. It also states again:
    http://www.mass.gov/Eeops/docs/chsb/firearms/largecap_10_2007.pdf


    I can't copy and paste CMR 7.02 because it is an image, but here is the link.
    http://www.mass.gov/Eeops/docs/chsb/firearms/501%20CMR%207.pdf

    Look at the definition "capable of accepting" and readily modifiable to accept" a large capacity feeding device. Both definitions require the large capacity feeding device to be in your possession in your direct control or in the weapon.

    But NONE of this has anything to do with Assault Weapons. You seem to be confusing assault weapon with a weapon on the large capacity roster. They are completely independent.

    The FID card holder can not have a LARGE CAPACITY WEAPON as legally defined. Show me where it says anything about Assault Weapon.

    That assault weapon law expressly NAMES BY NAME the guns that are assault weapons by NAME. The Colt AR-15 model is designated as an assault weapon and is grandfathered as legal if it was made before Sep 1994. It DOES NOT refer to the AR-15 design, it refers to the Colt AR-15 or copies or duplicates which has been shown to legally mean EXACT copies or Exact duplicates. If AR-15 type guns were assault weapons made after 1994, they would be banned in MA, you would not be able to walk into any gun shop in MA and buy as many post-ban AR-15 guns you want. You can right now walk into any gun shop in MA and buy a (order if they don't have one on the shelf) Colt Match Target ( AR-15 ) because after the 1994 ban, Colt like everyone else changed the name of the models to get past the law that named the models that were assault weapons. AR-15 Type guns are readily available and legal in MA and are not assault weapons. So I fail to see the relevance of you quoting the Assault weapon definition.

    The law specifies 2 ways to define an assault weapon. By a named Model, as in Colt AR-15 or duplicate or copy, and by features as in a detachable magazine with any two of the following features. pistol grip, flash hider, bayonet lug, threaded barrel, collapsible stock. Copies or duplicates of weapons has been shown by law to mean exact copies which is why you CAN buy an AR-15 without any of those evil features on a post ban ( non-designated assault weapon) AR-15 or you can buy any one of the BANNED Assault weapons because they were made before Sep 1994 and grandfathered.

    But non of this has anything to do with the Large Capacity List at the beginning of this thread. A post ban Rock River Arms LAR-15 is NOT an assault weapon when it has none of the evil features. It is perfectly legal to own in MA. The question is weather it is a large capacity weapon as defined or not. It is not on the large capacity weapons roster and not being on the roster is NOT a large capacity weapon and legal for an FID holder if the person that has it has no large capacity magazines, by definition, that is what the law says, I didn't write. But I did read it. I also said it could be added to the list anytime so I would stick with a gun with an internal 10 round or less mag.

     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2010
  10. vellnueve

    vellnueve Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2006
    Messages:
    16,917
    Likes Received:
    749
    Location:
    BIOT
    Mach, yet again you are wrong. The AR-15 is listed in several forms on the Large Capacity roster. Because all the various AR-15 clones out there are of the same design, they are all considered covered.

    Scrivener does this for a living and he is damned good at it. You think you know everything, but you really need to get a clue and stop trying to argue with those who know the laws better. You've given some advice that can get people in seriously hot water should they follow it.

    Let me make this clear to the OP. You can NOT purchase an AR-15 type rifle save those that have fixed ten-round magazines.
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2010
  11. Scrivener

    Scrivener Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    10,164
    Likes Received:
    499
    Here 45 months; has one green bar.

    Res ipsa loquitur.
     
  12. Mach

    Mach Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    314
    Likes Received:
    13
    If that is true then why does the roster list 3 different Colt AR-15 Models? All of which say AR-15. It doesn't say Match target, or 6920. It doesn't even say all models that are similar in function or appearance. It's a list.

    If they are all considered covered then why are they not all on the list? The Ruger Mini-14 is not on the list, is that good? Does it matter that 20 and 30 round mags are available for that? How about the Mini-30, same thing. How about a Berretta storm, hi cap mags are made for that? None of these are on the list. At what point does the list that specifically names models of firearms by name have to be interpreted to mean that models not on the list should be on the list but are not, so it is therefore illegal? They could have said all semi-automatic rifles with a detachable magazine, but they did not. They name rifles by model and the models quoted are not on the list. There is specific instructions for models not on the list. How about a Saiga 12 guage? Is that considered High Capacity? It's not on the list and the high cap mags are illegal in this state to possess so is that assumed to be high cap weapon even though it's a felony to have the hi cap mags?

    See where I am going with this. It either is on the list or it isn't. The law as written makes no mention of copies or models that look the same or function the same or sound the same. It's a freakin list that is impossible to keep up to date

    At what point does the law that names names, start assuming names that are not on the list. If they didn't want a list, they would have posted a law with features, but they didn't. They list manufacturer and model.

    And if you read my original post, you might get the fact that I am specifically pointing out how absurd having a list is, I specifically state that since the RRA LAR-15 ( or mini-14, or mini-30 etc ) or anything else could be added to the list at any time and make him a criminal and my advice as posted was to get a rifle with an internal 10 round mag or less, like an SKS. I also said in my original post that just because it's not on the list and no definition of High Capacity firearm is met as written in the law, I specifically said, I didn't know whether it would be legal or not.


    And it still has nothing to do with 'assault rifles' like scrivener's post. Just because somebody is an expert, doesn't mean they don't make mistakes. if that were true, no lawyer would ever lose a case.

    I know his original post was.;
    because I have the email function turned on. But since he then read the large capacity roster and realised it said no such thing about AR-15 designs, he changed his post to quote assault weapon definition.

    Frankly, I am also tired of being insulted and ridiculed for quoting what the law actually says as opposed to what people want it to say. There is no discussion here on what the law means and why it means that, it's just a name calling exercise on people like me that read what it says, instead of just asking questions. I have always backed up my responses with quotes from the law as written and all I get is insults. I have no questions on what the law says as written, because I have read them, but I do have questions on how the courts interpret them, but I will just have to hold my breath and hope for the best until I leave this state because I am done with these insults and lack of discussion from the experts. I'm an expert in unrelated matters in my professional life, but I never belittle people that try to understand things that I am more knowledgeable in, I try to explain where they went wrong and why and justify my opinion in mature and respectful manner. And yea, based on what I do for a living I stand a good chance of having to use a weapon some day in the protection of innocent people and suffer the consequences if my actions are not 100% perfect. Everyday I go to work, I put my safety and freedom on the line to protect people from terrorism.

    I won't be posting in this law part any more, I'll be sticking to the classifieds where I started.
     
  13. Scrivener

    Scrivener Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    10,164
    Likes Received:
    499
    A man's got to know his limitations.......
     
  14. bostonasphalt2

    bostonasphalt2 NES Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    10,862
    Likes Received:
    1,117
    Is there a point to posting that?
     
  15. Scrivener

    Scrivener Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    10,164
    Likes Received:
    499
    If you have to ask........
     
  16. boston_007

    boston_007 NES Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Messages:
    659
    Likes Received:
    36
    Location:
    Plymouth County
    1. It's sadly true
    2. It's funny
     
  17. 06LemansC6

    06LemansC6 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Messages:
    3,171
    Likes Received:
    246
    Location:
    Live Free or Die
    Correct me if I'm wrong......The OP stated "FID compliant". I was under the impression that in MA an AR-15 type rifle requires a LTC-A.
     
  18. M1911

    M1911 Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Messages:
    36,320
    Likes Received:
    3,341
    Location:
    Near Framingham
    No, it requires an LTC-B or LTC-A
     
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2010
  19. Scrivener

    Scrivener Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    10,164
    Likes Received:
    499
    You are misinformed. Don't feel bad; I see that crap on PD websites.

    ANY LTC will cover a "large capacity" long arm. There are only TWO things the holder of an unrestricted A can do that the holder of a B cannot:

    1. Carry concealed; and

    2. Possess a "large capacity" HANDGUN.
     
  20. 06LemansC6

    06LemansC6 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Messages:
    3,171
    Likes Received:
    246
    Location:
    Live Free or Die
    Got it.....Thanks for the correction, but a FID is not sufficient for an AR-15 type rifle in MA.

    I honestly don't know how any of you can live in that state.
     

Share This Page