MA: Identifying Pre-Ban Glock Mags

natf said:
These five Glock 21 magazines were purchased in the late 90s while I was living in MA. If you look at the two magazines with the Grams Engineering base plates you can see the left hand magazine has the markings "up high" while the two on each side have the lower markings. Since then I have moved to NH and enjoyed living free so I've purchased "post ban" Glock 21 magazines but I have documents that show I purchased three "pre ban" magazines (at pre ban prices) while in MA so I consider it fairly well documented that these high marking pre ban magazines exist.

ma_glock_mags.jpg


-Nat
Click to expand...

Thanks for that, it's helpful to not just have some anecdote, but to actually have pictures. +1 to you.
 
I thought it might be interesting to note to some of you Glock owners:

I just purchased two genuine (round notch) pre-ban g21 high caps. When I brought them home, I noticed that they did not drop from the weapon when I pressed the mag release. Concerned, I called Glock (who were excellent by the way).

According to the gentleman on the phone the early mags were designed not to drop from the weapon freely as the gun was originally designed to be used in high-altitude/snowy areas. An accidentally dropped mag could disappear in soft snow, so they were designed to stay in the weapon after the mag release was pressed. Friction keeps them in the well, and they require only light pressure to remove once the mag release has been pressed.

I thought this was an interesting little tidbit. I sure would prefer my mags to drop free (the new ones do of course), but knowing that the old ones don't by design was really interesting to me. This could be yet one more way to determine (at least with G21 mags) whether the mag you're tempted to purchase is in fact pre-ban.
 
Last edited:
I merged this with the never-ending glock mag sticky thread to consolidate
it.

-Mike
 
When did the ambi notch come out?

I have seen this notch incorporated in current 9mm and .45 mags- both standard capacity and 10 rounders.

Did they have the ambi notch before 94?



Thanks!
 
I beleive in this pic, the metallic notch is for ambi release. Also the newest mags have a very "pointy" lip on the top of the follower.

glock-ambi-1-1-1.jpg
 
also this is an interesting picture showing the evolution of Glock G17 Mags from left to right. I got this from GlockTalk and have permission from "ButchG17" the OP over on GlockTalk to post this here on our forum for informational purposes. From left-to-right 1-4 appear to be preban. Note this does not included latest generation Ambi-mags. He has another pic of the side view of the mags I will post later as well.
-G

glockG17mags.jpg
 
Pre-ban glock mag confusion?

hey guys saw a post about identifying pre-ban glock mags and have a question

..im still kind of puzzled after reading other threads because theres an auction on gunbroker.com that are selling what looks like pre-ban/non-le mags but the are saying its 2008 production.. but the mags look pre-ban. its really confusing. please check out this link to the current auction. just to let you know, i have a CLASS A in MA with no restrictions.

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/Vie...Item=115491183

tell me what you think..i bought couple preban mags from four season in woburn ma recently and one of the mags i got was a first gen and the other look to be 3rd gen(with pointed follower"9mm5")...and the mag i have thats 3rd gen looks exactly like the ones pictured in the auction.. and #7 in the posted picture above this post.

will i be safe in buying these hi-caps on gunbroker? i mean they have no way of proving it since theres no markings on it. right?

any advise would be appreciated. -franco
 
Last edited:
If you get a reciept that says it's a pre-ban mag, and it's unmarked, yes you should be safe, but to the best of anyone's knowledge on NES no one has ever been prosecuted under MGL Chapter 140 Section 131m, so we have no case law to base this on.

Glock refuses to date their mags, so do your best to confirm they're pre-ban and keep your eyes open for a case about this.
 
GSG said:
If you get a reciept that says it's a pre-ban mag, and it's unmarked, yes you should be safe, but to the best of anyone's knowledge on NES no one has ever been prosecuted under MGL Chapter 140 Section 131m, so we have no case law to base this on.

Glock refuses to date their mags, so do your best to confirm they're pre-ban and keep your eyes open for a case about this.
Click to expand...

Anyone can fake a receipt.
 
JonJ said:
Anyone can fake a receipt.
Click to expand...

Yup, but having one could show good faith that it was actually pre-ban. I've seen juries buy much less believable stories than that.

IMHO, if it works, then you saved a reciept and beat a felony case. But it's all just opinion here, absent of any case law on it, and I don't think any of us want to be that guy/girl.
 
Baystatesuks said:
Here you go (note that it is from Sec. 131M and not Sec. 131, sub-section (m) - caps matter in this case)

Chapter 140: Section 131M. Assault weapon or large capacity feeding device not lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994; sale, transfer or possession; punishment


Section 131M. No person shall sell, offer for sale, transfer or possess an assault weapon or a large capacity feeding device that was not otherwise lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994. Whoever not being licensed under the provisions of section 122 violates the provisions of this section shall be punished, for a first offense, by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000 or by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than ten years, or by both such fine and imprisonment, and for a second offense, by a fine of not less than $5,000 nor more than $15,000 or by imprisonment for not less than five years nor more than 15 years, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

The provisions of this section shall not apply to: (i) the possession by a law enforcement officer for purposes of law enforcement; or (ii) the possession by an individual who is retired from service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited from receiving such a weapon or feeding device from such agency upon retirement.

A large capacity feeding device is defined as:

(i) a fixed or detachable magazine, box, drum, feed strip or similar device capable of accepting, or that can be readily converted to accept, more than ten rounds of ammunition or more than five shotgun shells; or (ii) a large capacity ammunition feeding device as defined in the federal Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(31) as appearing in such section on September 13, 1994. The term “large capacity feeding device” shall not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with,.22 caliber ammunition.
Click to expand...


Just spent 3 hours reading the 20 pages of this thread (and all the referenced threads) so I feel somewhat justified in beating this deceased equine.

The section I bolded above "Whoever not being licensed under the provisions of section 122..." seems to indicate that persons THAT ARE licensed under sec 122 are NOT in violation...

So I read sec 122 and it seems to describe the licensing procedure that we're all familiar with.

http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/140-122.htm

What am I missing here?
 
Aaron[MA];726170 said:
What am I missing here?
Click to expand...

That section talks about dealer sales licenses, not individuals. As a result, the exemption you speak of, only applies to MA licensed
dealers.

-Mike
 
drgrant said:
That section talks about dealer sales licenses, not individuals. As a result, the exemption you speak of, only applies to MA licensed
dealers.

-Mike
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply!
Where does it say that they're talking about dealer licenses?
 
Aaron[MA];726662 said:
Thanks for the reply!
Where does it say that they're talking about dealer licenses?
Click to expand...

Read MGL Chapter 140 S122. It is not talking about FIDs and LTCs. It is talking about dealer licenses. To make it easier, just read the bold parts as though they made up a sentence (I've excised various limiting clauses).

SALE OF FIREARMS

Chapter 140: Section 122. Licenses; contents; fingerprints of applicants; procedure on refusal of license; fees; punishment for improper issuance

Section 122. The chief of police or the board or officer having control of the police in a city or town, or persons authorized by them, may, after an investigation into the criminal history of the applicant to determine eligibility for a license under this section, grant a license to any person except an alien, a minor, a person who has been adjudicated a youthful offender, as defined in section fifty-two of chapter one hundred and nineteen, including those who have not received an adult sentence or a person who has been convicted of a felony or of the unlawful use, possession or sale of narcotic or harmful drugs, to sell, rent or lease firearms, rifles, shotguns or machine guns, or to be in business as a gunsmith. Every license shall specify the street and number of the building where the business is to be carried on, and the license shall not protect a licensee who carries on his business in any other place. The licensing authority to whom such application is made shall cause one copy of said applicant’s fingerprints to be forwarded to the department of the state police, who shall within a reasonable time thereafter advise such authority in writing of any criminal record of the applicant. The taking of fingerprints shall not be required in issuing a renewal of a license, if the fingerprints of said applicant are on file with the department of the state police. The licensing authority to whom such application is made shall cause one copy of such application to be forwarded to the executive director of the criminal history systems board. Any person refused a license under this section may within ten days thereafter apply to the colonel of state police for such license, who may direct that said licensing authorities grant said license, if, after a hearing, he is satisfied there were no reasonable grounds for the refusal to grant such license and that the applicant was not barred by the provisions of law from holding such a license. The fee for an application for a license issued under this section shall be $100, which shall be payable to the licensing authority and shall not be prorated or refunded in case of revocation or denial. The licensing authority shall retain $25 of the fee; $50 of the fee shall be deposited into the general fund of the commonwealth; and $25 of the fee shall be deposited in the Firearms Fingerprint Identity Verification Trust Fund. A person licensed to sell, rent or lease firearms, rifles, shotguns or machine guns shall not be assessed any additional fee for a gunsmith’s license. Whoever knowingly issues a license in violation of this section shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than six months nor more than two years in a jail or house of correction.
Click to expand...
 
Yes, I have read chap 140 sec122; I posted a link to it in my post above.

What I have not read is where it says that its referring to Dealer Licenses and NOT private citizen's LTC and FID. Is this indicated in some other section? IAobviouslyNAL, but section 122 reads to me as describing the LTC licensing process, which would seem to mean anyone with an LTC is authorized to posses, transfer etc. large cap feeding devices.

I must be incorrect, but where does it say so?
 
Aaron[MA];727192 said:
Yes, I have read chap 140 sec122; I posted a link to it in my post above.

What I have not read is where it says that its referring to Dealer Licenses and NOT private citizen's LTC and FID. Is this indicated in some other section? IAobviouslyNAL, but section 122 reads to me as describing the LTC licensing process, which would seem to mean anyone with an LTC is authorized to posses, transfer etc. large cap feeding devices.

I must be incorrect, but where does it say so?
Click to expand...

If you had seriously found a loophole in the law that no one else here had, I would be thrilled. I don't think you have, but I'll still keep on [popcorn]
 
Aaron[MA];726662 said:
Thanks for the reply!
Where does it say that they're talking about dealer licenses?
Click to expand...

It's implied from the context of the law. The top of S122 says "SALE OF FIREARMS".

For example, S122 says...

"sell, rent or lease firearms, rifles, shotguns or machine guns, or to be in business as a gunsmith. "

S122 is for dealer licenses, it's that simple.


-Mike
 
Aaron[MA];727192 said:
Yes, I have read chap 140 sec122; I posted a link to it in my post above.

What I have not read is where it says that its referring to Dealer Licenses and NOT private citizen's LTC and FID. Is this indicated in some other section? IAobviouslyNAL, but section 122 reads to me as describing the LTC licensing process, which would seem to mean anyone with an LTC is authorized to posses, transfer etc. large cap feeding devices.

I must be incorrect, but where does it say so?
Click to expand...

No, you are not understanding it. Removing all of the junk in between, it reads:

The chief of police may grant a license to sell, rent or lease firearms, rifles, shotguns, or machine guns, or to be in business as a gunsmith.
Click to expand...

None of that is allowed as an LTC or FID holder. This section describes a business license.
 

Similar threads

Post-ban High Capacity Magazines
Replies
6
Views
397
CrackPot
CrackPot
Post ban fixed mag AR15 style rife question
Replies
3
Views
93
Shevchenko
Shevchenko
A local MA Gun Ban Group - Falmouth Gun Safety Coalition
Replies
9
Views
491
LLF
LLF
Expired MA LTC = useful?
Replies
21
Views
586
67ray
67ray
Personal transfer of pre-Healy MA compliant AR and/or lowers
Replies
4
Views
296
Mesatchornug
Mesatchornug
Back
Top Bottom