Is this a gun in MA?

42!

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
7,968
Likes
5,788
I'm not saying that it needs to be registered, just that AG & DAs may consider it one for prosecution. Paging @Rob Boudrie as he tracks the case law and I recall him mentioning a case where the judge ruled that if all it took was replacing parts, it's a functional gun as far as the Marsupials are concerned. Rob can fill in detail as I don't track case law (with minor exceptions).
this would be a pretty big change for those that have bought finished but bare lowers and did not register them in MA
 

Rob Boudrie

NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
38,485
Likes
17,183
I'll see if I can find the minor repair/replacement case.

United States v. Thompson-Center Arms Company, 504 U.S. 505 (1992) is an interesting case. The Supremes held that possession of a Thomspon Contender kit that contains a stock and a 10in bbl did not constitute possession of an SBR unless the stock, frame and barrel were assembled into an SBR configuration.

It is interesting that the feds brought this case against Thompson, rather than selecting a hapless in-duh-vidual who bought uch a kit and coercing a plea our of him/her/it.
 

Brewer

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Messages
3,881
Likes
10,521
Location
Erebor
To mostly reiterate but slightly expand:

I bought a G19 Gen4 cutaway identical to this one in Jul 2018 from Matt @Odyssey Arms in Lowell for $649. Fantastic dealer. I had just taken a Glock armorer's course and wanted to be able to inspect and show the internal safeties. I guess a slick 3D animation gives most of the benefit but it's really fun to slowly pull the trigger and see the internal parts responding, safeties disarming, etc. It's my only gun that is truly a toy.

He ran all the Federal process since the frame met legal definition of a firearm but did no state paperwork, having a slide with no firing pin hole, etc. He explained it actually started its life on the G19 assembly line but with additional cuts added and the firing pin hole never drilled (and a modified shortened firing pin to match). All parts were serialized together and came from the factory in this unfiring configuration, so it did not technically meet the definition of a modified unit that previously fired.

I thought about mounting it on the wall at home since it technically wouldn't need to be secured by MGL, but I didn't feel like tempting fate for an improper storage lawsuit and then paying $10k just to prove I was right.

The one odd Mass state restriction was the cutaway magazine. It was standard G19 capacity of 15 but with cutaways identical to the grip so you could see ammo, follower, and spring inside. You could potentially use it as a standard capacity G19 mag, so as an unwashed civilian I couldn't receive it from the dealer. He mailed that mag to someone in Tennessee for me and I was reunited with it last month when I moved.
 

Mtn_Guy

NES Member
Rating - 100%
50   0   0
Joined
Oct 1, 2016
Messages
1,259
Likes
2,882
Location
a little bit east of Worcester, MA
... if the frame is serialized get a letter from Glock indicating that frame is an inoperable cutaway model, and not capable of firing. No need to register in that case, IMO (because not a “firearm” by M.G.L. Definition)

^ ^ ^ Ok, so this... although not incorrect to register it just to avoid the potential of hassle, so that v v v

Under make/model I would definitely register it as a cutaway, if it was me...
 

nstassel

NES Member
Rating - 100%
20   0   0
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
3,444
Likes
8,520
Location
Middlesex County
I'll see if I can find the minor repair/replacement case.

This is the main case on the point:


The jury instruction:
20201102_061831.jpg
I've had to bristle each time the term "gun" has been used interchangeably with "firearm" in this thread. As noted this is not a firearm in Mass nor do i think replacement of such major components would change that. Could it be charged and wreck someone? Yes. Convicted? Doubtful.
 
Last edited:

Len-2A Training

Instructor
Instructor
NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 98.6%
71   1   0
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
53,236
Likes
12,064
Location
90% in NH
^ ^ ^ Ok, so this... although not incorrect to register it just to avoid the potential of hassle, so that v v v
I'm unaware of anyone being prosecuted for failure to register a gun or non-gun (it may have happened and we just didn't hear of it however), so for such a non-gun, I personally wouldn't bother registering it.

This is the main case on the point:


The jury instruction:
View attachment 406752
I've had to bristle each time the term "gun" has been used interchangeably with "firearm" in this thread. As noted this is not a firearm in Mass nor do i think replacement of such major components would change that. Could it be charged and wreck someone? Yes. Convicted? Doubtful.
The "ride" is oftentimes the punishment. After the DA and courts string you along for 18 months or so and you pay $10K+ in legal fees, you lose even if you "win" the case.
 
Top Bottom