Boston "Assault Weapons Ban" ... n00b content

[browncoat]

I was reading the SBR workaround thread, about possibly using ARMR2 to make an AR pistol with a non-detachable magazine. Since I'm a Boston resident, I understand that I can't own a regular AR while in boston. I'm wondering though, if section 2(i) "Assault weapon" shall not include: a rifle which employs a fixed magazine with a capacity of ten rounds or less" of the boston AWB means that I could buy an AR, install a 10 round magazine fixed in place with a bullet button or ARMR2 device and be ok with regards to the boston AWB. Any ideas?

 

[5 DOLLAR FOOT LONG]

Is it ok to tape together (e.g., end to end) two 10 round magazines to facilitate rapid reloading, or would this constitute making an illegal device?

 

[PATRON]

Yes,because each mag can only hold 10 rounds.slow or rapid you still have to reload after 10 rounds.So your good to go, tape away.

 

[Waher]

I understand that I can't own a regular AR while in Boston.

If you go and read the text of the bylaw it is pretty clear that changing the magazine won't help you because the AR platform itself is banned:

Special "Assault Weapons" Law
for the City of Boston
Acts 1989, ch. 596, sections 1-7, entitled "An act relative to assault weapons in the city of Boston", which was approved Dec 9, 1989; by section 8, effective upon its passage, provide as follows:

SECTION 1.
For the purposes of this act the following words shall have the following meanings:

1. "Assault weapon", all rifles and shotguns designated as assault weapons in this section and all other semi-automatic rifles and shotguns which are determined by the assault weapon roster board, established under the provisions of section five, to be assault weapons. Such term shall include, in addition to any other rifles and shotguns identified by said board, all versions of the following, including rifles and shotguns sold under the designation provided in this section and rifles and shotguns which are substantially identical thereto sold under any designation:

1. Avtomat Kalishnikov, also known as AK-47 semi-automatic rifles;
2. Uzi semi-automatic rifles;
3. AR-15 semi-automatic rifles;
4. FN-FAL and FN-FNC semi automatic rifles;
5. Steyr Aug semi-automatic rifles;
6. SKS semi-automatic rifles;
7. shotguns with revolving cylinders known as the Street Sweeper and the Striker 12;
8. any other semi-automatic rifle with a fixed magazine capacity exceeding ten rounds;
9. any other shotgun with a fixed magazine, cylinder, drum or tube capacity exceeding six rounds; and.
10. any semi-automatic firearm which is a modification of a rifle or shotgun described in this subsection; that is, having the same make, caliber, and action design but a shorter barrel or no rear stock.

Is it ok to tape together (e.g., end to end) two 10 round magazines to facilitate rapid reloading, or would this constitute making an illegal device?

The legality of that is ambiguous under the current law as far as I can tell. No clue about any legal precedents in state about this either. Since some judges in this state have taken the attitude: that if it isn't explicitly stated to be legal than it is illegal, I'd say you are proceeding at your own risk.

 

[browncoat]

If you go and read the text of the bylaw it is pretty clear that changing the stock won't help you because the AR platform itself is banned:

Section 2 (which you didn't quote) specifically exempts from being assault weapons rifles that use non-detachable magazines. See my quote in my previous post. I'm not talking about changing the stock, I'm talking about making the magazine non-detachable.

- - - Updated - - -

Similarly, if one were to make an AR non-semi automatic (as they do in Britain) it would specifically *not* be a AR-15 semi-automatic rifle. The law is not completely unambiguous.

 

[Waher]

Sorry for the typo in responding above.

I think the the phrase "sold under the designation provided in this section and rifles and shotguns which are substantially identical thereto sold under any designation" still bans anything based on the AR platform despite the exemption implied by the later section as it explicitly states the AR-15 as being banned and any variation is going to be considered"substantially identical" of "any designation", be it semi-auto or not.

The "semi-auto" and "action" text in the bill does leave the slight possibility open for a modification of action. However, trying to use a what you interpret as a loophole in the law isn't going to play well with authorities whose interpretation, more likely than not, will be that there is no loophole. Keep in mind that if you go to court the interpretation of the law will be entirely at the whim of a judge and not some 3rd degree black belt firearms technical expert ninja.

Really for that amount of work, cost, and risk to try to legally circumvent the silly law and risk being taken to court you'd be better off buying some other non AR rifle not on the ban list and enjoying the heck out of it.

 

[Neuro]

I think the the phrase "sold under the designation provided in this section and rifles and shotguns which are substantially identical thereto sold under any designation" still bans anything based on the AR platform despite the exemption implied by the later section as it explicitly states the AR-15 as being banned and any variation is going to be considered"substantially identical" of "any designation", be it semi-auto or not.

What about Ar pistols that have non-detachable magazines? They are not assault pistols with the fixed magazine, and they are not sold under the designation of AR rifles....?h

 

[Len-2A Training]

What about Ar pistols that have non-detachable magazines? They are not assault pistols with the fixed magazine, and they are not sold under the designation of AR rifles....?h

I'll not address the Boston issue . . .

It must be MA-pre-ban (9/13/1994) or watch out for the #of evil features as defined in C. 140 S. 121) or you run afoul of the state law (AWB).

 

[bhires]

+1

 

[kalash]

I believe it is legal for a Boston resident to purchase an AW but not to keep it within the city. I could be wrong...

 

[NickyBangBang]

I believe it is legal for a Boston resident to purchase an AW but not to keep it within the city. I could be wrong...

That is the impression I got too when I lived in the city.

 

[Waher]

I believe it is legal for a Boston resident to purchase an AW but not to keep it within the city. I could be wrong...

In the city of Boston, it shall be unlawful to sell, rent, lease, possess, purchase, barter, display, or transfer an assault weapon.
In the city of Boston, it shall be unlawful to sell, rent, lease, possess, purchase, barter, display, or transfer a large capacity magazine or a large capacity ammunition belt.

The ordinance only states that you cannot do x,y,z or possess that prohibited items in the city of Boston,it doesn't state that "It shall be unlawful for a resident of Boston to......". So it is perfectly legal for a Boston resident to sell, rent, lease, possess, purchase, barter, display, or transfer an assault weapon or a large capacity magazine or a large capacity ammunition belt as long as they do so outside the boundaries of the city.

 

[bhires]

1

 

[roosster]

Hi guys, im a new member, this is my first post. I have advanced searched the forums but i cant seem to find a specific answer to my question.
I am thinking about moving to boston. I am also interested in buying an HD shotgun, 20 inch barrel that holds 8 in the tube, PUMP ACTION.
We have boston defining an AW as :any other shotgun with a fixed magazine, cylinder, drum or tube capacity exceeding six rounds
Directly below in the next section it says this is OK: a rifle or shotgun which operates by slide action;

Im confused. slide action = pump action correct? so i should be ok??

 

[Len-2A Training]

Hi guys, im a new member, this is my first post. I have advanced searched the forums but i cant seem to find a specific answer to my question.
I am thinking about moving to boston. I am also interested in buying an HD shotgun, 20 inch barrel that holds 8 in the tube, PUMP ACTION.
We have boston defining an AW as :any other shotgun with a fixed magazine, cylinder, drum or tube capacity exceeding six rounds
Directly below in the next section it says this is OK: a rifle or shotgun which operates by slide action;

Im confused. slide action = pump action correct? so i should be ok??

Welcome but no you aren't OK. Boston's ban specifically calls out tube-fed shotguns and they can't hold more than 6 rds (different from MGL on large-capacity feeding devices for the entire state). The mag capacity is regardless of what type of action the gun has.

 

[vietboy1st]

i talked to a few FFL dealers. they said they had sold a lot of ar , ak and weapon in AWB to boston residents with LTC. So i don't think nobody is enforcing this law. This is an unconstitutional law and the city should get sue.. Why are we taking off our hat and bow down to this stupid law?

 

[BostonGuns58]

as a boston resident I can say anyone I know with an ltc in the city minus myself (to broke) had an ar or ak a friend of mine has 4 aks I asked a bp Sgt once what would happen if someone got busted (he's a pro 2a guy) he said anyone that fought It would win because state law trumps city ordinance everyday

 

[roosster]

Ok thanks very much guys.
I was just going through the goal.org website. they have a "record of success" section that lists their achievements in legislation over the years (click on goal information, scroll down to record of success). You think they would be willing to attempt to scrap this boston AWB bologna?

 

[browncoat]

Ok thanks very much guys.
I was just going through the goal.org website. they have a "record of success" section that lists their achievements in legislation over the years (click on goal information, scroll down to record of success). You think they would be willing to attempt to scrap this boston AWB bologna?

There are a bunch of green/Orange towns really close to Boston. If you are thinking of moving maybe just move to one of them.

 

[Len-2A Training]

State law does NOT trump the Boston ban!! Like most cops, they are clueless about the law.

I have been told that nobody has ever been prosecuted for this Boston law, but that doesn't mean that if a case was brought forward that an activist judge would let the person go with no penalty (other than legal fees).

GOAL's charter does NOT include suing people/towns/states . . . they tried it once and was summarily dismissed from the suit as having "no standing". Look up Am. Shooting Sports Council v. Harshbarger, 711 N.E. 2nd 899 (Mass 1999) for proof of what I just stated.

Yes, I'm sure that dealers sell ARs and AKs to Boston residents (a violation of BATFE Regulations however) and very many Boston subjects with LTCs possess them (moved in with them). That doesn't make it legal however.

Most of our gun laws in MA are "unconstitutional", however our SJC Chief Justice has publicly stated that "we" (SJC) does not abide by the USSC or the US Constitution and they are proud of that, so good luck suing to change Boston's unenforced law.

 

[Kisspik002]

i talked to a few FFL dealers. they said they had sold a lot of ar , ak and weapon in AWB to boston residents with LTC. So i don't think nobody is enforcing this law. This is an unconstitutional law and the city should get sue.. Why are we taking off our hat and bow down to this stupid law?

Im sure that is the case but...if the OP wants it as a HD gun I wouldnt want a gun that is clearly banned in boston, esp if I ever had to use it defending my home/family. Might not be a big deal at the range but I wouldnt risk it.

 

[browncoat]

i talked to a few FFL dealers. they said they had sold a lot of ar , ak and weapon in AWB to boston residents with LTC. So i don't think nobody is enforcing this law. This is an unconstitutional law and the city should get sue.. Why are we taking off our hat and bow down to this stupid law?

The same reason that we take off our hats and bow down to every other stupid law - we are threatened with government force for non-compliance. Plus, if you move outside of Boston, even to somewhere very close by, you will not have to worry about the Boston AWB.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Im sure that is the case but...if the OP wants it as a HD gun I wouldnt want a gun that is clearly banned in boston, esp if I ever had to use it defending my home/family. Might not be a big deal at the range but I wouldnt risk it.

The reason it's no big deal "at the range" is that there are NO rifle ranges in Boston (we'll leave Murderpan out of this discussion), so nobody in Boston sees the gun unless they are searching your house/apt. Nobody I know IDs people by what city/town they live in when they are shooting at a range outside the city. 99+% of the people in MA have no idea about this law anyway (and that includes cops).

 

[Kisspik002]

Very true


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Waher]

The reason it's no big deal "at the range" is that there are NO rifle ranges in Boston (we'll leave Murderpan out of this discussion), so nobody in Boston sees the gun unless they are searching your house/apt. Nobody I know IDs people by what city/town they live in when they are shooting at a range outside the city. 99+% of the people in MA have no idea about this law anyway (and that includes cops).

Technically people could use a rifle greater than .22LR at BG&RA with frangible ammo but I don't recall anyone ever doing so.

 

[Neuro]

the ban names Ak47s, so I could get a semi auto ak74 within city limits?

 

[warwickben]

the ban names Ak47s, so I could get a semi auto ak74 within city limits?

Build it your self and call it what ever you want . Why do you think colt came up with new names after the fed awb ...
Also ak47 milled . Akm stamped .

 

[Waher]

the ban names Ak47s, so I could get a semi auto ak74 within city limits?

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]"Such term shall include, in addition to any other rifles and shotguns identified by said board, all versions of the following, [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]including rifles and shotguns sold under the designation provided in this section and rifles and shotguns [/FONT]which are substantially identical thereto sold under any designation[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]"[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Direct AK47/AKM clones are obviously out but it's ambiguous if 74s are 'substantially' different enough from 47s to be exempt.[/FONT]

 

[Neuro]

"Such term shall include, in addition to any other rifles and shotguns identified by said board, all versions of the following, including rifles and shotguns sold under the designation provided in this section and rifles and shotguns which are substantially identical thereto sold under any designation"

Direct AK47/AKM clones are obviously out but it's ambiguous if 74s are 'substantially' different enough from 47s to be exempt.

My thinking exactly.

 

[crazymjb]

State law does NOT trump the Boston ban!! Like most cops, they are clueless about the law.

I have been told that nobody has ever been prosecuted for this Boston law, but that doesn't mean that if a case was brought forward that an activist judge would let the person go with no penalty (other than legal fees).

GOAL's charter does NOT include suing people/towns/states . . . they tried it once and was summarily dismissed from the suit as having "no standing". Look up Am. Shooting Sports Council v. Harshbarger, 711 N.E. 2nd 899 (Mass 1999) for proof of what I just stated.

Yes, I'm sure that dealers sell ARs and AKs to Boston residents (a violation of BATFE Regulations however) and very many Boston subjects with LTCs possess them (moved in with them). That doesn't make it legal however.

Most of our gun laws in MA are "unconstitutional", however our SJC Chief Justice has publicly stated that "we" (SJC) does not abide by the USSC or the US Constitution and they are proud of that, so good luck suing to change Boston's unenforced law.

Hows that in violation of BATFE regs? If someone lives in Boston it doesnt mean they dont have some other lawful place to store the "AW."

Mike

Sent from my cell phone with a tiny keyboard and large thumbs...