LE/Military marked mags

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 19, 2012
Messages
83
Likes
7
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.
Bill,
Your mags are illegal, no way around it no matter how YOU interpret.
 

That Guy

Banned
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Jul 15, 2012
Messages
1,535
Likes
302
Location
Nobleboro, ME
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!
That was my take on that case as well - that guy was clearly set up. That guy could have been the biggest scumbag on earth and the way they did that to him is a travesty of justice.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 7, 2013
Messages
536
Likes
41
Location
South East MA
And do me a favor. If this is wrong (it may be, I don't work for glock) then post WHY it is or how you know it please. To just send me NEG rep and state "wrong info" to me doesn't help anyone including myself. The link I posted is the thread on AR15.com where they talk about this exact issue. The guy who posted this photo talks about how if the stamp 9mm is lower then it's pre ban, because Glock had to MOVE the 9mm UP to fit the LE/GOV on the mag. Again, if this is wrong then please state why instead of useless NEG rep.
 

Len-2A Training

Instructor
Instructor
NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 98.4%
61   1   0
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
52,232
Likes
10,352
Location
Escaping to NH
And do me a favor. If this is wrong (it may be, I don't work for glock) then post WHY it is or how you know it please. To just send me NEG rep and state "wrong info" to me doesn't help anyone including myself. The link I posted is the thread on AR15.com where they talk about this exact issue. The guy who posted this photo talks about how if the stamp 9mm is lower then it's pre ban, because Glock had to MOVE the 9mm UP to fit the LE/GOV on the mag. Again, if this is wrong then please state why instead of useless NEG rep.
I don't play the Neg Rep game, but can tell you that it is not that simple. If this thread was posted where it belonged, in the MA Gun Law sub-forum, perhaps someone might have found the very lengthy sticky there on this exact subject.

I don't have time to go into all the details, but you should read Patrick Sweeney's book on Glocks for details (I posted the PDF of the page not long ago). And no less than Fred, Glock-USA's lead customer support technician and Carlos G., Glock-USA's Chief Counsel will disagree with this simplistic approach that the experts on ARfcom (and everywhere else) espouse. I personally talked with both on this subject a few years ago.
 
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
5,442
Likes
1,896
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.
I'm not disagreeing that this isn't he conventional wisdom or the official EOPSS interpretation, but I don't agree that it's a correct interpretation of the law since it assumes language not in the law. The statutory text says nothing about the guns being received by a retiree--only that a retiree be ELIGIBLE to receive said guns and hi caps.

Do we know if the Federal ban had a similar provision and, if so, how that provision was interpreted by BATFE?
 
Rating - 100%
55   0   0
Joined
Jan 13, 2009
Messages
30,781
Likes
8,655
Location
free hampshire
Glock-USA's Chief Counsel will disagree with this simplistic approach that the experts on ARfcom (and everywhere else) espouse. I personally talked with both on this subject a few years ago.
+1 for actually posting the correct information. funny, primus, i believe i negged you (aww aww aww) and said that glock does not even play this game you're playing and will not ID mags now that the 1994 ban has expired. it's bullshit, so stop posting it. i told you i'll continue to neg you every time you post this crap or any of the other wildly inaccurate shit that comes out of your mouth--and i fully intend to continue doing so not because i enjoy trolling you, but because you could get someone in legal trouble, or you could simply confuse a new member looking for actual info and i want people do know the trash you post is just that.
 

Len-2A Training

Instructor
Instructor
NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 98.4%
61   1   0
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
52,232
Likes
10,352
Location
Escaping to NH
Obie, I agree with you. I was just reporting what the pundits are claiming to be the case. They want to jam up cops as well as mere mortals . . . it's their "equal opportunity" (for prosecution) agenda at work! [sad]
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Mar 18, 2012
Messages
8,229
Likes
3,467
Location
A Fair Haven in an unfair state.
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.
A police officer is being charged? Really.... I'm all for closing the police loophole - hell the magazine ban itself is freaking stupid and should go away. But to charge someone when there is no connection to a larger crime or issue is just dumb. Especially so when that person is in law enforcement....

I thought law enforcement was exempt? (police loophole)... Is the person retired or something?
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 7, 2013
Messages
536
Likes
41
Location
South East MA
I don't play the Neg Rep game, but can tell you that it is not that simple. If this thread was posted where it belonged, in the MA Gun Law sub-forum, perhaps someone might have found the very lengthy sticky there on this exact subject.

I don't have time to go into all the details, but you should read Patrick Sweeney's book on Glocks for details (I posted the PDF of the page not long ago). And no less than Fred, Glock-USA's lead customer support technician and Carlos G., Glock-USA's Chief Counsel will disagree with this simplistic approach that the experts on ARfcom (and everywhere else) espouse. I personally talked with both on this subject a few years ago.
Thank you for the info, I appreciate it. I'll look for that page and sticky.
 

drgrant

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
60   0   0
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
71,467
Likes
33,300
And do me a favor. If this is wrong (it may be, I don't work for glock) then post WHY it is or how you know it please. To just send me NEG rep and state "wrong info" to me doesn't help anyone including myself. The link I posted is the thread on AR15.com where they talk about this exact issue. The guy who posted this photo talks about how if the stamp 9mm is lower then it's pre ban, because Glock had to MOVE the 9mm UP to fit the LE/GOV on the mag. Again, if this is wrong then please state why instead of useless NEG rep.
It's wrong because everything I've seen about properly dating glock mags is based off of hearsay.

That is the problem with this entire issue, most of the data is absolute horseshit, unless its an explicit DATE STAMP or a LEO marketing, it's not incontrovertible. Ambi cuts generally are reliable, but what if someone made their own cuts? (doubful, but not impossible. )

This whole topic sucks.

NSFW:


We also have a dumpster pile in MA gun laws for this crap, too... why this is being posted here and not there?

-Mike
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom