-
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.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
LTC B Question
- Thread starter DickL
- Start date
The 226 is a no-go. Because it was originally shipped with a normal (i.e., large capacity) magazine, it's on the EOPS large cap roster. The MP-9 is OK.
Ken
Ken
No, you can't buy either. It's based on the original design of the gun. The original design of a 226, M&P9 or similar is to hold more than 10 rounds. Something like a 1911, revolver, SIG 239, etc were originally designed to hold <= 10 rounds.
Yes, the whole thing is stupid. If you're applying now, don't apply for a B. If the town you live in wants to give you a B, I suggest getting a lawyer.
ETA: Ken is right about the M&P9 though I could have sworn the law says something to the effect of what I said. Regardless, don't get b-rammed.
Make It In Mass
NES Member
The M&P 9mm is categorized as a Large Capacity Firearm as magazines with a capacity greater than 10 rounds exist somewhere in the world. Preban/Postban is not a consideration in this instance. This was pointed out to me when I purchased one.
No. That's the literal wording of the law, but it's never been the official interpretation. Since it's sold with 10 round magazines, it's not on the EOPS list I linked to above. As such, it's only considered to be large capacity if possessed in conjunction with a large capacity magazine. If it only required that such a magazine exists somewhere, then 1911s would be large capacity as well, something nobody argues. (30 round magazines were made during WWI for pilots.) The text of the law never refers to the existence of such a magazine, only the guns ability to accept one. If that were the actual criterion used, then every firearm with a detachable magazine would be large capacity, whether or not such a magazine were available, since the gun could accept such a magazine if it existed.
Ken
Ken, my take on this issue is that it is "undetermined" and here's why.
The Large Capacity Weapon Roster 10-2007 states "It contains weapons determined to have been originally manufactured for the civilian retail consumer market as large capacity weapons as defined by MGL c. 140, s. 121."
M&P 9s definitely fit that statement, although not sold that way in MA.
My personal opinion is that GCAB had no desire to go thru all the handguns made post-9/13/2004 to add them to this list. MANY handguns made after that date fits the above statement and it would be a huge project for GCAB, so they have chosen to ignore it.
I've not asked Ron about this, so the above is strictly my conjecture.
NOTE: I do agree with your comments that the law is so poorly written that everything that takes a removable mag could be interpreted as "large capacity" . . . and that causes lots of problems with LTC-B holders dealing with FFLs.
The Large Capacity Weapon Roster 10-2007 states "It contains weapons determined to have been originally manufactured for the civilian retail consumer market as large capacity weapons as defined by MGL c. 140, s. 121."
M&P 9s definitely fit that statement, although not sold that way in MA.
My personal opinion is that GCAB had no desire to go thru all the handguns made post-9/13/2004 to add them to this list. MANY handguns made after that date fits the above statement and it would be a huge project for GCAB, so they have chosen to ignore it.
I've not asked Ron about this, so the above is strictly my conjecture.
NOTE: I do agree with your comments that the law is so poorly written that everything that takes a removable mag could be interpreted as "large capacity" . . . and that causes lots of problems with LTC-B holders dealing with FFLs.
So if they never made 12 Round Mags for the M&P 9c then it would be ok? Am I correct in stating that the 9c comes with 2 12rd Mags? I thought so...
The moral of the story here kids is to not accept B-ramming. Even in the worst towns there are often ways around this problem. Even a restricted-A is a far better license, for a variety of reasons.
-Mike
-Mike
IMHO - The M&P 9 is a large capacity weapon. My dad lives in NH and when he bought his it came with a 17 rd mag. As I understand the Large Capacity Approved Roster that is more like a guide for law enforcement than a restrictive list like the Approved Roster. If you have a class B then I think the M&P may be off limits.
Make It In Mass
NES Member
The M&P 9mm was listed as a Large Capacity firearm on the FA-10 when it was purchased by me. The simple fact is that I could not have purchased that pistol with an LTC-B in that situation. Maybe it would be handled differently at another shop.
The firearms regulations are intended to create confusion and uncertainty in the marketplace. What they also do is create a growing cynicism for the law in normally law abiding citizens. November 2 will tell the story if enough of us have gotten the message.
Isn't there something about the way that it's shipped that factors into the whole large cap designation or is that just rifles? For example, the MP 9 is sold with a 10 round mag in MA but if it was shipped from the manufacturer to any other state with a larger cap mag, then MA would consider it a high cap weapon. I seem to remember reading reading this somewhere but God only knows where. Man, I hate the confusing MA gun laws.
Tom
Tom
See my quote above from the EOPS Large Capacity List.
This is the subject of "interpretation" and I agree with you . . . but it's never been clarified by the state. When the law was passed, they were convinced that the Fed hi-cap ban would never be allowed to sunset, in which case we wouldn't be discussing this. Nobody has tackled the problem since the Fed Law sunset and I don't think they desire to do so. They prefer obscure laws that a DA can drag out and club you over the head with when they want to do so before an election.
![[thinking]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/010.gif "Thinking [thinking]")
Yup the M&P 9 is sold with 17 rd mags and the 9c with 12 rd mags in Free States.
Checking off "large capacity" on the FA-10 form is done by the FFL (or seller) and in these cases I think that they are correct in interpreting the "intent" of the MGL and EOPS position.
Checking off "large capacity" on the FA-10 form is done by the FFL (or seller) and in these cases I think that they are correct in interpreting the "intent" of the MGL and EOPS position.
See my quote above from the EOPS Large Capacity List.
This is the subject of "interpretation" and I agree with you . . . but it's never been clarified by the state. When the law was passed, they were convinced that the Fed hi-cap ban would never be allowed to sunset, in which case we wouldn't be discussing this. Nobody has tackled the problem since the Fed Law sunset and I don't think they desire to do so. They prefer obscure laws that a DA can drag out and club you over the head with when they want to do so before an election.
Thanks, Len. Now at least I understand why I read that before.
Sorry to revive a thread and take a turn on it but why is it that I have a Class A that is for High Cap yet can't own high cap post ban? I know its been beaten to death I still can't wrap my head around it? I need an A because of the potential capacity that is illegal to own.
Because the federal Assault Weapon Ban Bill of 1994 was put into MA law.
In the 1994, the federal AWB bill banned the sale or possession of post-ban large capacity magazines to the general public. They couldn't ban the sale or possession of existing magazines (because then the federal government would have had to pay for them). So they had to grandfather the ones made prior to the enactment date (9/14/94, IIRC).
But the federal AWB bill had a 10-year expiration language written into the bill. It would expire in 2004 unless Congress passed it again. Congress didn't pass it again, so it expired. But before it expired, MA legislators passed a state law that put the language of the federal AWB into state law.
So, while you can go buy a post-ban large capacity magazine in NH, you can't in MA. But with your LTC-A, you can purchase and possess pre-ban, large capacity magazines.
Does the law make sense? No, of course not. But that's true of most laws in MA, particularly gun laws.
If you think this law is hard to understand, try to figure out 922r compliance.
Last edited:
I agree with you, the big problem is that it's a felony to possess a large capacity weapon without a Class A. If I was stuck with a Class B in Mass. there's no way I'd risk felony charges to own the latest and greatest gun.
That's how EOPS determined if a gun was "large capacity," if it had ever been shipped from the factory to an FFL for civilian sales in the US with a large capacity magazine. It's the guideline most still go by, and the standard you'll likely be held to.
Glocks are verboten (sp?) because of the AG list not because of the eops list IIRC
Last edited:
So does a Glock 26/27/33, but like the M&P they'll accept super high caps. It says on their website that Glock will ship the subcompacts with the G22 mags, who knows if S&W will. It's still not something I would mess with, since the gun is specifically designed to accept large cap mags.
The only Glocks that are definitely not large capacity are the 36 (slim .45), 37, 38 and 39 (.45 GAP). Mags that hold more than 10 rounds don't exist for those.
DickWanner
Banned
Some folks are over-thinking this much too much, others are just clueless about the law.
![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
There is already precedent for that. Standard, single stack 1911s are considered low capacity, even though there are aftermarket 15 round magazines available.
