Competitions and Mass.

[Timberwolf]

I have an M4 that's US legal - 16" barrel and a working collapsable stock.

What are the implications of attending a match in Mass. with this rifle?

 

[Cross-X]

If you are attending a competition in MA, and you do not have a non-resident LTC, you can attend the competition, but you cannot bring your post-ban large capacity magazines here when you come. Be sure to bring a copy of the notice to the match when you come.

 

[drgrant]

The rifle itself might not be legal either, unless it's pre-ban, in that configuration.

The laws suck here.

-Mike

 

[M1911]

If the rifle is pre-ban, you are OK as long as you only bring pre-ban magazines or post-ban 10 round (or less) magazines.

If the gun and/or magazines are post-ban, that would be a felony.

 

[jdubois]

If you are attending a competition in MA, and you do not have a non-resident LTC, you can attend the competition, but you cannot bring your post-ban large capacity magazines here when you come.

Cross-X is the lawyer, so listen to him. But anything AR-15 like would be considered a large capacity weapon, which you cannot possess in MA without an LTC, even with a competition flyer.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

But anything AR-15 like would be considered a large capacity weapon, which you cannot possess in MA without an LTC, even with a competition flyer.

Ch 140 Section 131G contains an exemption for pistols or revolvers, but does not impose any constraint or restriction excluding high capacity handguns from said exemption.

Since 140/131G would is limited to pistols and revolvers, one would have to look elsewhere in MGL for an exemption covering rifles or shotguns. I'm not aware of one covering high capacity rifles. (That does not, however, mean there is no such exemption - just not one I am aware of).

 

[jdubois]

Ch 140 Section 131G contains an exemption for pistols or revolvers, but does not impose any constraint or restriction excluding high capacity handguns from said exemption.

C 269 § 10(m) disallows anyone who does not hold an LTC (and a few other exceptions from C 140) from possessing a large capacity weapon. C 140 § 131G does allow non-residents to possess pistols but does not specify 'large capacity' ones. Unless one interprets § 131G to mean that non-residents can possess ANY pistol (a preposterous interpretation, as it would include post-ban assault weapons) one must interpret C. 269 § 10(m) to apply even to the non-residents covered under § 131G, and thus they cannot possess large capacity handguns without a non-resident LTC.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

C 269 § 10(m) disallows anyone who does not hold an LTC (and a few other exceptions from C 140) from possessing a large capacity weapon. C 140 § 131G does allow non-residents to possess pistols but does not specify 'large capacity' ones. Unless one interprets § 131G to mean that non-residents can possess ANY pistol (a preposterous interpretation, as it would include post-ban assault weapons) one must interpret C. 269 § 10(m) to apply even to the non-residents covered under § 131G, and thus they cannot possess large capacity handguns without a non-resident LTC.

An interesting interpretation - any attorneys care to weigh in?

 

[jdubois]

any attorneys care to weigh in?

No, they won't comment specifically, I'm sure. I don't see how you can interpret it any other way, but I believe Cross-X has insinuated in the past, as well as in this thread, that large capacity weapons in such situation are not a problem. I seem to recall somebody asking a lawyer offline and the response was, "grey area".

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I expect some of the attorneys on this list will have the stones to comment.

Case law in MA is clear that ambiguity must be resolved in favor of the defendant. In this situation, you have two laws - one of which specifically allows something. Other areas of the law which prohibit something otherwise allowed by permit contain a clause stating that the "allowed with permit" law does not apply to that prohibition in those cases where such is the intent (for example, the MGL 260 10j school carry ban).

There are plenty of absurdities in the law -for example, allowing a non-resident legal alien to get a MA LTC but prohibiting a resident legal alien from getting one. I would not be surprised if a competent attorney would be able to successfully argue that the explicit permission in MGL does indeed authorize possession of post ban items by non-residents. As to the "absurdity" of the situation - CA law explicitly allows possession of post Caliban assault weapons (but not high cap mags) by non-residents visiting the state for a competition, but does not allow residents to possess them.

 

[jdubois]

I expect some of the attorneys on this list will have the stones to comment.

It's not so much about stones as about giving out free legal advice. Pretty much anything you say, if you are a lawyer, will be interpreted as legal advice, even if you say it is not. You are now responsible for that advice you have given. Why would you want to be responsible for such advice without getting compensated for it?

Case law in MA is clear that ambiguity must be resolved in favor of the defendant. In this situation, you have two laws - one of which specifically allows something.

131G does not specifically allow large capacity weapons. It implicitly allows them.

I would not be surprised if a competent attorney would be able to successfully argue that the explicit permission in MGL does indeed authorize possession of post ban items by non-residents.

Again, it's not explicit permission, it's implicit permission. Nothing in 131G specifically says anything about large capacity. If they ruled that 131G is explicitly allowing things even banned elsewhere in the MGL, then the court would also have to allow non-residents to possess full auto pistols, also by extension of 131G. I just don't see it happening.

 

[Timberwolf]

To the Mod/Admin who moved this post - Thanks.

So far thanks for the answers.

Mag caps aren't a problem because in Canada we're restricted to 5rds for semi rifles and 10 for pistols.

We have a legal loophole that allows us to use pistol mags in rifles. ie - 10rd LAR15 pistol mags in our AR's. The mags are marked as pistol.

My question is on the rifle.

Can it be brought in to Mass for comps?

BATFE paperwork isn't a problem, but I'm reminded that I have to renew it.

 

[jdubois]

My question is on the rifle.

Can it be brought in to Mass for comps?

Yeah, sorry, we got side tracked on pistols. C 140 § 129C allows you to transport and possess rifles and shotguns in the state as a non-resident (no competition needed). However, the issue is the same as with the pistols. If C 269 § 10(m), disallowing large capacity, takes priority over C 140 § 129C allowing rifles and shotguns, you cannot bring an AR into MA without an LTC. If it doesn't, you can.

I know that's not very helpful. But the lawyer in the thread did chime in and say you are ok as long as you don't have a large capacity magazine, and I'd take his word over mine any day.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

If they ruled that 131G is explicitly allowing things even banned elsewhere in the MGL, then the court would also have to allow non-residents to possess full auto pistols, also by extension of 131G.

Only if MGL, and the courts, established that the term "Pistol" includes full auto weapons.

 

[jdubois]

Only if MGL, and the courts, established that the term "Pistol" includes full auto weapons.

Since there is no MGL definition of a pistol, the court would have to rely upon common usage (a legal convention which is seen repeatedly in case law*), and in common usage, a full auto pistol is without a doubt still a pistol. You'll also note that the MGL definition of "Firearm", under which a pistol falls in MA, does not exclude full auto guns. A full auto pistol in MA is both a Firearm and a Machine Gun.

* See for an example, MARTIN vs. RENT CONTROL BOARD OF CAMBRIDGE 1985, where the court says, "in ascertaining the meaning of statutory language, we usually look to the words themselves, defining them in keeping with their common usage and ordinary meaning"