MA magazine limit/AWB

Mtn_Guy said:
It certainly will knock down the pricing significantly on “Pre-Healey…” (lowers) and “Pre-Ban…” magazines instead of $50+ per magazine, it may be $5 for used USGI mags when everyone can go buy cases of PMags at $10-15/Ea
Click to expand...

Good point. I'll have to make an adjustment to my existing (embarrassingly real) "hell freezes over" mag shopping list to account for this, as I have no issues buying some decent shape $5. USGI's. Sig is really still the money pit on my list though. Why do damn expensive?
 
I think we are screwed.

Everyone knows at the time of the 2A, citizens were only allowed to possess deer skin pouches that could hold 10 balls of shot or less.

We are doomed!!!!!
 
nstassel said:
On July 11 the SJC decided a case called Vega v. Commonwealth. It includes this gem:

This means that if unlicensed firearm possession presents a menace of dangerousness, then including it as a predicate offense furthers the legitimate and compelling government interest of preventing extremely serious crime by arrestees. We conclude that unlicensed firearm possession is a dangerous menace.

A then Justice of this court explained in 2009 why unlicensed firearm possession is dangerous to the community:

"When a handgun or automatic weapon is involved, the purpose of the firearm is to injure or kill; there is no other reason for that weapon's existence. . . . The risks associated with the possession of any firearm quite clearly are increased when those firearms are unlicensed. It is generally understood in the Commonwealth that there are licensing requirements applicable to firearms, and that it is unlawful to violate them. That the owner or user of an inherently dangerous instrumentality subject to licensure chooses not to abide by licensing requirements suggests powerfully that that person has obtained the weapon for an unlawful purpose that involves violence or the threat thereof. This is nothing more than common sense. . . . The fact that some otherwise law-abiding individuals may possess unlicensed firearms due to neglect or mistake does not alter the basic nature of the act in most situations or reduce the danger of death or serious personal injury that accompanies the use of the great majority of firearms that have not satisfied licensing requirements. . . . [A] fair reading of the statute would reject the pretense that a firearm is some neutral piece of equipment that is harmless in and of itself, and would recognize at a minimum the deadly sequence that so often follows on the possession of an unlicensed firearm."

Young, 453 Mass. at 718-721 (Cowin, J., dissenting).
Click to expand...
That Judge is not right in the head, he should not be in any court room. holy f*** !!
 
Dennis in MA said:
Gentlemen. I respect your fear and hope that you use it as an inspiration to fight instead of running and/or hiding.

But this is the end for states attempting this crap. It's falling like dominos. Might it take 5 years? Yes. In mASS it might. Will it end epically ugly for them? Oh yes it will.

As much as a DB that Maura and others are, they will ultimately respect the rule of law. It may take a bit. But at some point, they'll just acquiesce. It's inevitable.

Again, as so many, myself included, if you look to hte Civil Rights era, it took years in some cases to get states (read: MASS) to follow the law. I'm actually AOK with that. Let's fight. I'm not doing this for me. I own all that I really want and I've got plenty of preban mags. To me, this is nothing. This is about securing our creator-endowed rights for the next 250 years.
Click to expand...
Don't get me wrong, we are fundamentally in agreement. My point is that this isn't changing overnight nor will they passively acquiesce.
The lefties are on their heels right now because their irresponcible and reckless governance is resulting in an schizophrenic economy and record levels of crime and poverty in the big cities.
This when they will pivot to the scare tactics on fringe issues like guns and abortion. They will make a big stink about it and double down. Frankly I am all for it, they are digging the grave of gun-control deeper and deeper.
I have been absolutely consistent that the only hope is the courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court.
Clarence Thomas is making good on that faith.
 
Mtn_Guy said:
Tell me about it… you pay for quality? I’m an HK fanboy myself, so…
View attachment 643014

View attachment 643015
Click to expand...

Hold up. After a decade or more of people telling me that it was Colt or nothing else now they're second tier??? LOL. Basically, just go get something. I remember when Bushy - now Windham Weaponry - was the ABC tier. That's going back 20+ years.
E.Stoner said:
Don't get me wrong, we are fundamentally in agreement. My point is that this isn't changing overnight nor will they passively acquiesce.
The lefties are on their heels right now because their irresponcible and reckless governance is resulting in an schizophrenic economy and record levels of crime and poverty in the big cities.
This when they will pivot to the scare tactics on fringe issues like guns and abortion. They will make a big stink about it and double down. Frankly I am all for it, they are digging the grave of gun-control deeper and deeper.
I have been absolutely consistent that the only hope is the courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court.
Clarence Thomas is making good on that faith.
Click to expand...

They can panic and scare all they want. Again, the Dems did the same thing with civil rights in the 50's and 60's. "We can't let them N-words have rights - they may impregnate our babies!"

It's a process. We're on a good stretch right now after 15 years of good rulings and NOTHING being done about them.
 
nstassel said:
On July 11 the SJC decided a case called Vega v. Commonwealth. It includes this gem:

This means that if unlicensed firearm possession presents a menace of dangerousness, then including it as a predicate offense furthers the legitimate and compelling government interest of preventing extremely serious crime by arrestees. We conclude that unlicensed firearm possession is a dangerous menace.
Click to expand...
Exercising civil rights outside your home makes you dangerous to the people that don't want you doing that. -The Great Legal Minds on the MA SJC

Flies in the face of SCotUS and I hope the attorneys appeal even if Vega isn't an ideal defendant (no idea of the backstory).
 
Mtn_Guy said:
It certainly will knock down the pricing significantly on “Pre-Healey…” (lowers) and “Pre-Ban…” magazines instead of $50+ per magazine, it may be $5 for used USGI mags when everyone can go buy cases of PMags at $10-15/Ea
Click to expand...
Big kids club already does this and doesn't pay shit prices. All that would happen is most would just go to their free state stash house/storage and bring home a case of mags.
 
nstassel said:
On July 11 the SJC decided a case called Vega v. Commonwealth. It includes this gem:

This means that if unlicensed firearm possession presents a menace of dangerousness, then including it as a predicate offense furthers the legitimate and compelling government interest of preventing extremely serious crime by arrestees. We conclude that unlicensed firearm possession is a dangerous menace.

A then Justice of this court explained in 2009 why unlicensed firearm possession is dangerous to the community:

"When a handgun or automatic weapon is involved, the purpose of the firearm is to injure or kill; there is no other reason for that weapon's existence. . . . The risks associated with the possession of any firearm quite clearly are increased when those firearms are unlicensed. It is generally understood in the Commonwealth that there are licensing requirements applicable to firearms, and that it is unlawful to violate them. That the owner or user of an inherently dangerous instrumentality subject to licensure chooses not to abide by licensing requirements suggests powerfully that that person has obtained the weapon for an unlawful purpose that involves violence or the threat thereof. This is nothing more than common sense. . . . The fact that some otherwise law-abiding individuals may possess unlicensed firearms due to neglect or mistake does not alter the basic nature of the act in most situations or reduce the danger of death or serious personal injury that accompanies the use of the great majority of firearms that have not satisfied licensing requirements. . . . [A] fair reading of the statute would reject the pretense that a firearm is some neutral piece of equipment that is harmless in and of itself, and would recognize at a minimum the deadly sequence that so often follows on the possession of an unlicensed firearm."

Young, 453 Mass. at 718-721 (Cowin, J., dissenting).
Click to expand...
To paraphrase MASJC: "Blackstone, who?"
 
greencobra said:
so besides having to issue an ltc for the reason of cc for self defense, and in mass, now it will be an unrestricted ltc, please enlighten me on what i missed. i'd be grateful for the education. i also think you can still be denied an ltc in mass if the licensing authority deems you "unsuitable", whatever that means. i guess being a felon, that jumps into mind first.
Click to expand...
Certainly being a federally prohibited person will still result in a legal denial. The AG is claiming that police chiefs can still deny for being "unsuitable" but her letter claims they can still use subjective assessments of suitability. That seems to be counter to the Bruen decision.

I think we have a good chance of the mag and awb bans being struck down, but not quickly.
 
Last edited:
Mtn_Guy said:
It certainly will knock down the pricing significantly on “Pre-Healey…” (lowers) and “Pre-Ban…” magazines instead of $50+ per magazine, it may be $5 for used USGI mags when everyone can go buy cases of PMags at $10-15/Ea
Click to expand...
I consider myself very lucky to have got into firearms when I did. I feel bad for people in MA who either just became old enough or discovered an interest here in MA in the last couple years.

But, yeah, if our AWB is repealed, I will probably need to find some funds for unbudgeted expenses.
 
meh. All you need is One round and the balls to use it.
Everything else is icing on the cake... [rofl]
 
drgrant said:
All that would happen is most would just go to their free state stash house/storage and bring home a case of mags.
Click to expand...
If only we could all have a Free State home or storage stash! [thumbsup]

This is a strange time magazine capacity-wise as we look to new restrictions happening all around us... AND... the real possibly of fewer restrictions if the courts ever get around to taking SCOTUS rulings and decisions seriously.

On the one hand, I'm out looking for 10-round pistol magazines to replace 12 & 15-round pre-ban mags so that I'll be able to continue to shoot at ranges in RI.

On the other hand, Congress may come back with their new AWB and say that (up to) 15-round magazines are good-to-go everywhere.

On the next hand, SCOTUS may come back and ultimately say that bans and limits are unconstitutional... meaning I can go buy standard capacity magazines to replace all my neutered post-ban magazines.

I am so confused. 🥴
 
I think if Congress passed any sort of AWB/Magban at this point, it's going to be shot down by the SC. Basically, they've stated that anything currently in common use is not fair game to ban. Ever. EVER! Again to hammer the Civil Rights legislation. It's sort of "yeah, separate but equal doesn't work and you trying to shoehorn it STILL doesn't work. It's not equal. Period."
 
Mtn_Guy said:
It certainly will knock down the pricing significantly on “Pre-Healey…” (lowers) and “Pre-Ban…” magazines instead of $50+ per magazine, it may be $5 for used USGI mags when everyone can go buy cases of PMags at $10-15/Ea
Click to expand...

Reptile said:
The cost of hiring a lawyer to defend you on a pre ban mag charge will cost you $5,000.00.

I could imagine myself paying $5,000 just to have hi cap mags.

Therefore, if the law changes and I lose the value of all my pre bans - it will be like losing $5,000.

To me that is worth it to have freedom.

In the mean time, I'll keep buying pre bans because the law may never change.
Click to expand...

Dennis in MA said:
Buying???


"Potter's not selling. Potter's buying!" [rofl] [rofl]
Click to expand...

This reads like Reptile-speak for the Bruen decision and the promise of overturning mag capacity limit laws is hurting the market for the overpriced mags sold by Reptile.
 
NewGuyRay said:
This reads like Reptile-speak for the Bruen decision and the promise of overturning mag capacity limit laws is hurting the market for the overpriced mags sold by Reptile.
Click to expand...
Can someone explain what Mr. Reptile said or meant? Yes, I understand he is an "investor" in pre-ban mags. But he lost me with the $5,000 loss thing. 🤔
 
EJFudd said:
Can someone explain what Mr. Reptile said or meant? Yes, I understand he is an "investor" in pre-ban mags. But he lost me with the $5,000 loss thing. 🤔
Click to expand...
I might have thousands invested in pre ban mags.

That value would diminish if the ban ended.

If I sold my stash AFTER the ban ends I’d get $5,000 less than if I sold now.

A $260 mag would only be worth $35.

I would not mind takin that loss though.

Because I could then buy a new stash of new high cap mags.
 
If there are suddenly no more magazine laws the only people who will want U notch glock mags are 1. those who cannot afford a new $25 mag and 2. Antique Glock Collectors.

I’ve never heard of the Antique Glock Collector Society. Has anyone else? Maybe they hold monthly meetings at the deli ticket emporium?
 
Reptile said:
I might have thousands invested in pre ban mags.

That value would diminish if the ban ended.

If I sold my stash AFTER the ban ends I’d get $5,000 less than if I sold now.

A $260 mag would only be worth $35.

I would not mind takin that loss though.

Because I could then buy a new stash of new high cap mags.
Click to expand...
Okay, this post I understand. Thanks! [thumbsup]
 

Similar threads

VA Governor Youngkin vetoes AWB
Replies
2
Views
180
Reptile
Reptile
Study Confirms 10+ Firearm Magazine Capacity Is 'Standard'
Replies
8
Views
454
tuna
tuna
Washington state high-capacity magazine ban remains on books for now
Replies
1
Views
123
pastera
pastera
Video: Female University of Chicago Student Disarms Would-Be Robber by Ejecting His Magazine
Replies
18
Views
396
Masswhole
Masswhole
Magazine adapter question
Replies
3
Views
239
joejoe717
joejoe717
Back
Top Bottom