• 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.

New member, lots of questions.

appraiser said:
sorry, but you are screwed if the DUI was after after 1993 ( the exact date is sometime in 1994), short of getting a Governor's pardon ( ain't happening and sometimes that will not restore gun rights) you are not going to get a permit.
Click to expand...


On or after May 27, 1994.
 
I'd be curious to hear what swatgig has to say, but I would think that since the definition of unsuitable is the same for an LTC and an FID, wouldn't it be difficult for the CoP to defend a suitability denial for an LTC when the person already has an FID?
 
swatgig said:
To answer your original question, with an FID, you should be able to possess a fixed magazine rifle that looks like an AR. However, you face two possible problems:

1) A know-it-all dealer who says he can't sell it to you because you don't have a Class A LTC. He'd be wrong, but that doesn't mean he'll sell it to you.

2) A know-it-all cop who says you can't possess an AR (super-duper killy, black, military style assault rifle) who takes you to jail for carrying a prohibited item. Then you get to hire me (or another lawyer) and pay me a shit-ton of money to have an expert (for whom you get to pay another shit-ton of money for) to explain to the judge that the item seized is not prohibited. Even so, if you get the wrong (gun hating) judge, he'll still find you guilty, thus making you a prohibited person.

Please note that I don't see #2 as a likely occurrence, but my job is to hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

Since you already have an FID, go ahead and apply for a LTC. If the chief denies you, you're only out $100. You'll still have your FID. If the chief later denies the renewal of your FID, you'll have a great argument that the decision was arbitrary and capricious.
Click to expand...

Regarding the "location" in your profile (chained with 999 of my associates at the Bottom of the Sea)...

Google Maps

upload_2018-10-14_12-48-37.png

I thought you were in Central Mass, not Philly!

(Don't mind me, I'm just trying to delay going down to clean the basement)
 
swatgig said:
Since you already have an FID, go ahead and apply for a LTC. If the chief denies you, you're only out $100. You'll still have your FID.
Click to expand...

... and you have to answer "yes" to "have you ever been denied... " for the rest of your life.


42! said:
I'd be curious to hear what swatgig has to say, but I would think that since the definition of unsuitable is the same for an LTC and an FID, wouldn't it be difficult for the CoP to defend a suitability denial for an LTC when the person already has an FID?
Click to expand...

FIDs aren't subject to suitability anymore. They can only be denied for statutory reasons.

LTCs can be denied for suitability, but the CoP has to put them in writing in an articulateable form. (no, "he didn't seem safe" nonsense)
 
I'd buy an un-neutered AR privately, here or in another state and risk arrest before I'd ever plunk hard-earned cash down on one of those fixed-magazine abominations...

...but, that is me.

Besides, as a post-1994 AR owner you would already be a Criminal-In-Waiting...

Welcome to NES!
~Matt
 
enbloc said:
I'd buy an un-neutered AR privately, here or in another state and risk arrest before I'd ever plunk hard-earned cash down on one of those fixed-magazine abominations...

...but, that is me.

Besides, as a post-1994 AR owner you would already be a Criminal-In-Waiting...

Welcome to NES!
~Matt
Click to expand...

The fixed magazine ar's do not a felon in waiting make.

Still, I don't especially like them.
 
milktree said:
... and you have to answer "yes" to "have you ever been denied... " for the rest of your life.




FIDs aren't subject to suitability anymore. They can only be denied for statutory reasons.

LTCs can be denied for suitability, but the CoP has to put them in writing in an articulateable form. (no, "he didn't seem safe" nonsense)
Click to expand...

Not entirely correct. An FID can be denied for Suitability but the LO/CoP has to file for the court to do this in an administrative hearing. The definition of suitability in this case is identical to that for an LTC. So if the CoP doesn't at least attempt to deny for suitability for an FID then the applicant is obviously suitable under the definition used. Consequently the person would be suitable for an LTC.

So far, these administrative hearings, with their lax standard of evidence and no ability to question/cross examine, have always gone in favor of the LO/CoP and will commonly cite "broad discretion", this may change since the recent overtun of a suitability revocation of an LTC, witch didn't apply the new standard of "risk to the public". Admitadly this was for an LTC not an FID, but I would think it's an easy argument (lawyers speak up) that the same standard applies whan it it literally the same in the laws.

While the law may say "he didn't seem safe" isn't enough, vague reasons are still used routinely, and the appeal with it's administrative hearing isn't likely to overturn a denial. In fact this is what is happening, So plan on an appeal. The recent case actually makes taking it beyond the initial appeal somewhat hopeful.
 
enbloc said:
I'd buy an un-neutered AR privately, here or in another state and risk arrest before I'd ever plunk hard-earned cash down on one of those fixed-magazine abominations...

...but, that is me.

Besides, as a post-1994 AR owner you would already be a Criminal-In-Waiting...

Welcome to NES!
~Matt
Click to expand...
Of course this is only a MA problem.
 
namedpipes said:
The fixed magazine ar's do not a felon in waiting make.

Still, I don't especially like them.
Click to expand...


if they don't already have them someone should develop a speed loader or a kind of stripper clip for them. Won't be as fast as a mag change but it would be so much faster than one at a time...
 
robjax said:
if they don't already have them someone should develop a speed loader or a kind of stripper clip for them. Won't be as fast as a mag change but it would be so much faster than one at a time...
Click to expand...

There are two common ones on the market, the Bear Flag BF10 and the Mean Arms MALoader. Some smart guy did a nice review on them.
 
robjax said:
if they don't already have them someone should develop a speed loader or a kind of stripper clip for them. Won't be as fast as a mag change but it would be so much faster than one at a time...
Click to expand...
Good idea. Mean Arms Loader already solves the problem and loads 10 rds faster than you can change the magazine.
 
BigIndian said:
I have a valid fid please read my posts, that is not the issue just bought ammo yesterday. just curious if I had a shot at my ltc and if anyone had any experience with the two rifles I mentioned in my OP.
Click to expand...
To answer your rifle question, yes I have one and like it. It’s a quality rifle and worth the buy in my opinion. Bought it from Eddie Coyle here on NES. Good rifle and good guy.
 
Wasr 10s are fid compliant? You mean the Detachable mag ak style variant? How do you own one of theses as you mention in the op? The sks I could see but not a wasr. Am I not connecting some dots here? Maura?
 
413dan said:
Wasr 10s are fid compliant? You mean the Detachable mag ak style variant? How do you own one of theses as you mention in the op? The sks I could see but not a wasr. Am I not connecting some dots here? Maura?
Click to expand...

Original single stack WASR-10s and PAP/N-PAP M70 Yugos were sold a lot to FIDs before the 2016 skullduggery.

That's because they come to the country with single stack magazines, and a very narrow mag well that could only accept uniquely shaped 5 and 10 round single stack magazines (no other magazines are made), and a thumbhole stock/threaded barrel OR pistol grip/no threaded barrel - thus only 1 "evil feature". The logic behind this design was originally to get them into the country under the 1989 import regulations which expanded the 1968 GCA, and they kept coming in during the 1994 ban because of their relative compliance.

Today, tons of import AKs/AK-likes come into the US with a thumbhole stock, and a narrow magwell which is widened by the importer after the gun is made 922(r) compliant by parts count; CAI does this a lot. Some are sold unmolested, in the import configuration, for the purpose of compliance with state/local laws and ordinances. That's what we got in Massachusetts.

Many preban "non-PAP" M70 imports came in this way; compliant furniture and narrow magwell, later converted. The PAP M70 rifles had a single feedramp and wouldn't work reliably with double stack magazines after the receiver was modified to accept them; these were made after the 1994 ban, but before its sunset in 2004. (Most) newer N-PAP and O-PAP M70s have the proper ramps to feed from double stacks, but all still come in to the US in the narrow magwell single stack configuration, and are then converted by the importer/manufacturer.

There are a lot of preban Romanian AKs but none are "WASRs". The WASR-10s started coming in to the US around 96/97, all are post-ban. The "10" in the name signifies the factory 10rd magazine configuration, where the "10/63" signifies it is made with surplus parts which is why you might see different dates stamped on the trunnions. After the sunset of the 1994 AWB in 2004, importers/manufacturers began to modify their mag wells before sale.


Mad Maura's edicts aside, I don't think it would be hard to argue that Yugo-spec "AKs" are not AK copies or duplicates at all; too many major differences in parts and compatibility. I would not like to be the test case, however. But anyway the logic on an FID was if the "10 round limit" is good enough for the feds, it's good enough to not be a large capacity firearm for the state. And if they came in during the '94 ban, they must not be part of our '98 ban which is the same word for word.
 
Last edited:
milktree said:
... and you have to answer "yes" to "have you ever been denied... " for the rest of your life.




FIDs aren't subject to suitability anymore. They can only be denied for statutory reasons.

LTCs can be denied for suitability, but the CoP has to put them in writing in an articulateable form. (no, "he didn't seem safe" nonsense)
Click to expand...

I think you have the FID part backwards, it used to be no suitability with FID but was added in the 2014 gun reform BS
 
42! said:
I'd be curious to hear what swatgig has to say, but I would think that since the definition of unsuitable is the same for an LTC and an FID, wouldn't it be difficult for the CoP to defend a suitability denial for an LTC when the person already has an FID?
Click to expand...
Should be difficult, but in reality it's not. Court upheld the denial.
 

Similar threads

The new NES stud club member badge - the blue envelope from state police!
2
Replies
54
Views
1K
headednorth
headednorth
NEW- Gun Grab Bill Six-member conference committee to decide Legislature's gun control proposal
Replies
24
Views
1K
StevieP
StevieP
Boston gang member who posed with guns on Snapchat goes to prison
2
Replies
31
Views
815
1sern
1
New England gun tourism
Replies
26
Views
631
MisterHappy
MisterHappy
Mall of NH shooting
2
Replies
51
Views
2K
hunt4riches
H
Back
Top Bottom