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

LE/Military marked mags

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by gulfmp, Mar 25, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Cuda444

    Cuda444 NES Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2006
    Messages:
    2,403
    Likes Received:
    93
    Location:
    Centrally located in the PRM

    I THINK that Chief Glidden put down his interpretation that mags with reference to LEO shall be treated like you would any civilian. In other words, Cops don't get personal high cap mags just because of their title. They have to be issued through the employing Dept. That said, Glidden's newest rendition in his interpretation isn't exactly popular amongst the masses, obviously... So I don't think many, if any, really pay attention to it. Just my observations, and before anyone asks, I have no way of confirming or denying it, just what I've heard through the grape vine. Take it with a grain of salt.
     
  2. MassBan

    MassBan

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    733
    Likes Received:
    62
    Location:
    Sagamore beach
    What if you pinned a may that said "restricted ... etc" so it would only accept 10 rounds.. would it then be legal
     
  3. mass

    mass NES Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2005
    Messages:
    6,137
    Likes Received:
    2,019
    Location:
    Merrimack Valley
    Yup
     
  4. mass

    mass NES Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2005
    Messages:
    6,137
    Likes Received:
    2,019
    Location:
    Merrimack Valley
    This topic has been discussed ad nauseam for years. Hundreds of folks have tried to find that comma or word grouping in the MA laws that would make LEO mags OK. I for one wouldn't want to be the test case.
     
  5. Gillham

    Gillham

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,507
    Likes Received:
    793
    Location:
    Peoples Republik of Massachusetts
    Yes, as long as it's "permanent" - IANAL
     
  6. PaulD

    PaulD

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Messages:
    12,171
    Likes Received:
    1,237
    Yes, I should have said possession instead of own. A MA resident could own a post ban 30 rounder as long as it stays out of the state (like in a vacation home in NH as an example). As for cops, Len's answer is what I've always understood.
     
    1 person likes this.
  7. Len-2A Training

    Len-2A Training Instructor Instructor NES Life Member NES Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2005
    Messages:
    50,927
    Likes Received:
    8,384
    Location:
    Escaping to NH
    It is the interpretation by the current administration. I do not believe it is Glidden's personal opinion, but believe it came down from either the AG or EOPS and Glidden publishes the info he gets from them. I am unsure of any prior "ruling" . . . it was just commonly believed that if a LEO CCW'd off-duty that his carrying/using post-ban large-capacity mags was within the scope of this part of the law . . .

    LEOs are now being told differently.

    I do know that at least one LEO was being charged with illegal possession of post-ban large capacity magazines. No idea how that shook out.
     
    1 person likes this.
  8. GhostArcher

    GhostArcher

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2012
    Messages:
    1,055
    Likes Received:
    117
    Location:
    South Shore
    Fixed it for ya. The alligator always eats the bigger number, haha.
     
  9. Apathesis

    Apathesis

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2013
    Messages:
    2,327
    Likes Received:
    394
    Location:
    The Black Lodge
    This state is retarded. The fact that possession of a cripple-free magazine can get you ten years or a $10,000 dollar fine--whereas illegal possession of a firearm (1st offense) will only get you a max of two years and/or a $500 fine--showcases how utterly brain-damaged/vindictive our local government is.

    I'm sure there's a few people who defiantly possess standard-capacity mags in this hellhole of state. This clip demonstrates their potential reasoning to disobey the law:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 18, 2017
  10. nes

    nes

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2013
    Messages:
    345
    Likes Received:
    22
    My AR15/ 556, 30nd rnders are blank, let go to court.
     
  11. RKG

    RKG NES Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    3,678
    Likes Received:
    472
    Location:
    Boston
    I'm guessing you went to a different law school than I did.
     
    1 person likes this.
  12. RKG

    RKG NES Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    3,678
    Likes Received:
    472
    Location:
    Boston
    Half correct: It applies to possession (and other acts in quoted statute) within the Commonwealth de facto, because Massachusetts has no power to control conduct outside its borders. However, possession (ditto) within those borders is prohibited regardless of whether the possessor is a resident of the Commonwealth or some other state.
     
  13. OfficerObie59

    OfficerObie59

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    5,442
    Likes Received:
    1,896
    The LE carve out of 131M only allows posession (and sale, purchase, etc.) of hi-caps "by a law enforcement officer for purposes of law enforcement" and retirees, though its arguable whether he has to actually be given the mag or gun from his agency.

    Just exactly how this has been interpreted varies and has never been adjudicated, but to even have an argument, I think you'd need to be a retiree, not someone who simply left the profession. Otherwise, I'm inclined to agree it's a no go.

    http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXX/Chapter140/Section131m
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2013
    1 person likes this.
  14. RKG

    RKG NES Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    3,678
    Likes Received:
    472
    Location:
    Boston
    I don't doubt for a moment that Len is correct about the "current interpretation" of some folks; he's pretty well informed about such things.

    For what it is worth, however, I do not believe that the "current interpretation" is consistent with the literal terms of the statute, and, since it is a criminal statute, a Court would be required to interpret it narrowly and within its literal terms.

    For instance, Joe retires from Nowhere PD. At the time of his retirement, he is not prohibited from receiving a large capacity firearm (because he has his own LTC-A). Under the literal terms of the second paragraph of section 131M, therefore, the first paragraph of section 131M "shall not apply" to him.
     
    2 people like this.
  15. OfficerObie59

    OfficerObie59

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    5,442
    Likes Received:
    1,896
    +1,000

    When read literally, the provision for retirees says nothing about the department giving you the mag or assualt weapon, only that 131M does not apply if the retiree would not be prohibited from receiving the rifle--i.e., as long as the retiree is not a PP, has the proper license, and leaves under positive circumstances.

    The problem is that the plain language is terribly at odds with the exception for ACTIVE law enforcment, as it is far more broad. Then again, shame on me for expecting any coherence in the MA licensing scheme.
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2013
    2 people like this.
  16. OfficerObie59

    OfficerObie59

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    5,442
    Likes Received:
    1,896
    Possession is just one of the many sticks in the bundle of ownership...
     
  17. Len-2A Training

    Len-2A Training Instructor Instructor NES Life Member NES Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2005
    Messages:
    50,927
    Likes Received:
    8,384
    Location:
    Escaping to NH
    The current interpretation meets a specific agenda of those in power at the state level. They have no respect for LEOs anymore than they have no respect for the "common folks" and are doing this to "level the playing field" so to speak. It goes with the "LEOs are to leave their large-cap mags (for their service guns) at the PD at the end of every shift and carry only low-capacity mags off-duty" BS that they spewed!

    Might some rogue DA looking to higher political aspirations charge a LEO, hmmm . . .
     
    1 person likes this.
  18. bill o

    bill o

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    5,452
    Likes Received:
    1,679
    Incorrect. When used informally in a sentence, "<" means less than, and ">" means greater than.
     
  19. Terminator03

    Terminator03

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2010
    Messages:
    6,920
    Likes Received:
    612
    While this may be true, we all know that the likelihood of a LEO ever being charged, or prosecuted just for possessing a high cap mag is <0. Maybe if he committed other felonies, they would use the possession as as add on charges, but simple possession - no way.
     
  20. JFR2

    JFR2 Army Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    1,316
    Likes Received:
    268
    Location:
    County Norfolk
    Ive marked all my pre-ban 30-rnders "For Civilian Use Only". Problem solved.

    -JR
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2013
    3 people like this.
  21. Livefreeormass

    Livefreeormass NES Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2011
    Messages:
    1,325
    Likes Received:
    114
    Location:
    128495
    /delete
     
  22. gulfmp

    gulfmp NES Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    1,484
    Likes Received:
    142
    Location:
    Central MA
    Ahhh....clear as mud!

    Your responses are appreciated. Only MA legislators could turn a easy answer into a convoluted supreme court destined decision.

    I guess the next question is what is the definition of retired? If you leave it, are your retired from it? Does a pension and not working anymore mean retired? Another mess!
    Does someone have to be given the mag upon retirement? Show a receipt? This is madness!

    I'm sure we will all just interpret it the way it fits our needs since no politicians want to make it clear for us.
     
  23. Len-2A Training

    Len-2A Training Instructor Instructor NES Life Member NES Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2005
    Messages:
    50,927
    Likes Received:
    8,384
    Location:
    Escaping to NH
    Indeed!

    I think that the commonly accepted definition of "retired" (IANAL) would be after x years (as required minimum under contract or state law) and able to collect a pension. For an example, LEOSA originally required this and MA CMR was written that way. LEOSA law was changed to separation after 10 years or more under good terms, but MA hasn't changed their CMR and has no intention of doing so (this shows mindset). I served 17 years as a Reserve PO, since we were only paid when we worked a detail or shift, there is no retirement and thus under MA CMR we are never eligible under LEOSA . . . whereas we are eligible under Federal Law.

    I'm not going to go back and read the black-letter law on possessing the mags after retirement, but I KNOW (having heard Glidden state this) that they had to be "gifted" to you upon retirement by the city/town. Implication being you'd need this written and always carry it with you when in possession of the mags in question. Just like LEOSA (the MA annual cert card is a 8.5x11" sheet of paper . . . purposely making it most inconvenient to carry around with you everywhere you go), they do it this way to make it totally impractical to implement these exceptions to the general law.
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2013
  24. That Guy

    That Guy Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    1,535
    Likes Received:
    302
    Location:
    Nobleboro, ME
    Edited to delete my previous statement. I think I am wrong.
     
  25. ThePreBanMan

    ThePreBanMan

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    7,418
    Likes Received:
    2,644
    Location:
    A Fair Haven in an unfair state.
    Aren't we all? We're firearm owners after all...
     
    1 person likes this.
  26. OfficerObie59

    OfficerObie59

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    5,442
    Likes Received:
    1,896
    Yeah, I don't know about that. If its the option of the DA, don't be so sure.

    I actually know of a specific case at the moment where a police officer is being charged with a weapons violations. I can't get into any details, but just know it had nothing to do with any larger, more serious incident.
     
  27. Len-2A Training

    Len-2A Training Instructor Instructor NES Life Member NES Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2005
    Messages:
    50,927
    Likes Received:
    8,384
    Location:
    Escaping to NH
    Ditto and we may (or may not) be thinking of the same case.
     
  28. mikem317

    mikem317

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    14,000
    Likes Received:
    1,511
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    Of course, there are other states that have adopted their own AWBs, in addition to MA. I can't remember them all but I'm *pretty sure* NJ, NY, CA and DC have similar bans (and some, of course, are more restrictive.)
     
  29. Terminator03

    Terminator03

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2010
    Messages:
    6,920
    Likes Received:
    612
    Interesting. I agree with you on the DA option, but my thinking was that it was unlikely to even get to the arrest stage in most cases. Guess this case you mention was a situation where someone may have had an agenda that transcended the thin blue line and all that it implies.
     
  30. Len-2A Training

    Len-2A Training Instructor Instructor NES Life Member NES Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2005
    Messages:
    50,927
    Likes Received:
    8,384
    Location:
    Escaping to NH
    Different issue but read the Comm v. Reyes case. CO has IA approach him to search his car just after he returns to the car to lock his gun in the car when he finds all the gun lockers are occupied as he gets to work at a prison. Tell me that he wasn't setup? Then they charge him with both illegal transportation (facts are he wore the gun until he walked up to the prison) AND illegal storage! Yes as a PO/CO you can make enemies "within" as well as without!
     
    1 person likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page