FTF transfer, post ban high capacity magazines

[joncalibur]

Hi,

I did an advanced search and didn't find this combination and wanted to be absolutely sure of the answer.

Here's the scenario. Person buys a 3rd generation G23 from a LEO. It is a FTF and the FA10 is filed/mailed to the Firearms Record Bureau in Chelsea. The G23 comes with a 10 round magazine, and two 13 round magazines. The problem, one of the 13 round magazines is marked LEO/Mil and the other determined by its features, is a "post ban" magazine, ie. manufactured after 9/94.

I want to assume that those two 13 round magazines are illegal for that person two own, even with a Class A LTC, because they are either post ban and/or LEO marked. Is this the case?

Thanks for your help.

Jon

 

[Moderator]

If the high capacity magazines are post ban they are illegal to posses by anyone in Massachusetts except LEO, FFL holder (not C&R) or issued to military personnel.

 

[vellnueve]

The magazines cannot be transferred to a non LEO or FFL.

 

[drgrant]

The LEO mag is definitely bad juju.

The other one is "in all probability" bad juju depending on who you want
to believe. My gut reaction is that if it looks new and the
person said it came with the gun with the LE hicap as well (glock may
have been sprinkling the infield with marked LE mags to get rid of them)
then it's most likely post ban. (and thus it's not legal, either.)

-Mike

 

[FPrice]

Hopefully this "hypothetical" LEO would know better than to give one of the AG's unwashed masses an item which about 75% of the rest of the United States citizens can legally own.

[/sarcasm]

 

[joncalibur]

Thanks for the responses, that is what I had figured, but wanted confirmation.

Jon

 

[Moderator]

The magazines cannot be transferred to a non LEO or FFL.

If the magazines cannot be transfered to an FFL then how did many LEO get these magazines during the ban? I can tell you from firsthand knowledge that it is not uncommon for LEO to buy from local gun shops. Is this or was this done illegally? I honestly don't know of a MGL that includes or excludes FFL's from having high capacity magazines.

 

[Len-2A Training]

IIRC, FFLs (dealers) can possess them as stock for sale to LEOs or out-of-state.

 

[vellnueve]

If the magazines cannot be transfered to an FFL then how did many LEO get these magazines during the ban? I can tell you from firsthand knowledge that it is not uncommon for LEO to buy from local gun shops. Is this or was this done illegally? I honestly don't know of a MGL that includes or excludes FFL's from having high capacity magazines.

I mistyped. I meant non-LEO/non-FFL.

 

[KMaurer]

Hopefully this "hypothetical" LEO would know better than to give one of the AG's unwashed masses an item which about 75% of the rest of the United States citizens can legally own.

[/sarcasm]

This is one that the AG doesn't even enter into; according to the law, possession of the mags by non-LEO's are a straightforward felony.

Ken

 

[FPrice]

This is one that the AG doesn't even enter into; according to the law, possession of the mags by non-LEO's are a straightforward felony.

Ken

Like the man said after his hernia operation, I stand corrected. Hopefully this is more correct:

"Hopefully this "hypothetical" LEO would know better than to give one of the Commonwealth's unwashed masses an item which about 75% of the rest of the United States citizens can legally own."

 

[ScottS]

Is this true for non-res, as well? i.e. if I come down to shoot a match with my legal-in-the-rest-of-the-free-world XD or AR-15 mags, am I in violation? Makes a 3-gun kind of iffy.

 

[JonJ]

Is this true for non-res, as well? i.e. if I come down to shoot a match with my legal-in-the-rest-of-the-free-world XD or AR-15 mags, am I in violation? Makes a 3-gun kind of iffy.

Yes, you will be in violation.

 

[FPrice]

Is this true for non-res, as well? i.e. if I come down to shoot a match with my legal-in-the-rest-of-the-free-world XD or AR-15 mags, am I in violation? Makes a 3-gun kind of iffy.

Per previous discussions yes. Possession by anyone in the People's Commonwealth, resident or non, except for authorized LEOs is against the law.

 

[ScottS]

Thanks for the info. So much for shooting anything other than my 1911 in MA matches, and no 3-gun for me, either.

 

[LoginName]

Per previous discussions yes. Possession by anyone in the People's Commonwealth, resident or non, except for authorized LEOs is against the law.

Just to clarify things a bit... that also includes retired LEOs whom are "not otherwise prohibited from receiving such a weapon or feeding device from such agency upon retirement".

 

[Scrivener]

Thanks for the info. So much for shooting anything other than my 1911 in MA matches, and no 3-gun for me, either.

PRE-ban mags are perfectly legal and, for AR-15s, MIAs, H&Ks, etc., fairly plentiful.

3-gun IS "do-able."

 

[JonJ]

PRE-ban mags are perfectly legal and, for AR-15s, MIAs, H&Ks, etc., fairly plentiful.

3-gun IS "do-able."

True but he'd also have to make sure that his AR or M1A if an "AW" by Massachusetts definition were preban or neutered.

 

[ScottS]

True but he'd also have to make sure that his AR or M1A if an "AW" by Massachusetts definition were preban or neutered.

There's the rub. While most of my AR mags are pre-ban, many are not (at $9.99 per, how can you refuse??), and my AR is most certainly not. So that means either new/old mags, new upper, replace stock, sleep on the couch for a few months, or just not shoot 3-gun in MA.

 

[Scrivener]

There's the rub. While most of my AR mags are pre-ban, many are not (at $9.99 per, how can you refuse??), and my AR is most certainly not. So that means either new/old mags, new upper, replace stock, sleep on the couch for a few months, or just not shoot 3-gun in MA.

If your AR is post-ban, the only problem is if it has the bayo lug, threaded muzzle brake/flash suppressor, etc. If it does not manifest those evil features, you are fine.

 

[ScottS]

If your AR is post-ban, the only problem is if it has the bayo lug, threaded muzzle brake/flash suppressor, etc. If it does not manifest those evil features, you are fine.

It has all those things, as well as a collapsible stock, hence my comment about "new upper, replace stock..." being required to be "street legal" in MA.

Too much time in a free state, I guess.

 

[drgrant]

If your AR is post-ban, the only problem is if it has the bayo lug, threaded muzzle brake/flash suppressor, etc. If it does not manifest those evil features, you are fine.

Scriv-

Most of the ARs sold in free states nowadays have a combination of one or
all of those things. FFLs in free states don't bother stocking lightweight
barreled guns that have "ban compliant" features anymore.... So
basically anyone thats bought a new combat-grade M4-Gery in a free state
since like sept of 2004 or thereabouts, likely has ban features on their
gun.

It's not impossible, as you say... but for free staters shooting 3 gun
here, at least for the newbies, is going to be a pain in the ass if they want
to do everything legally.


-Mike

 

[ScottS]

Scriv-

Most of the ARs sold in free states nowadays have a combination of one or
all of those things. FFLs in free states don't bother stocking lightweight
barreled guns that have "ban compliant" features anymore.... So
basically anyone thats bought a new combat-grade M4-Gery in a free state
since like sept of 2004 or thereabouts, likely has ban features on their
gun.

It's not impossible, as you say... but for free staters shooting 3 gun
here, at least for the newbies, is going to be a pain in the ass if they want
to do everything legally.


-Mike

For me the real impact is it raises the "entry fee" for something like 3-gun. You better be damn sure you're going to like it, and do it a lot, because you have no real way of "try before you buy."

BTW, do MGL's address auto shotguns in any way, like mag extensions or pistol-grip stocks? Could be another "entry fee."