• 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.

Preban Mag Question (I promise, slightly more specific)

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Messages
22
Likes
1
Location
Medford
Sorry, I hate to ask a question on a topic that has been covered a bunch of times, but I've seen a bit of conflicting info. My question relates legality of owning a preban mag IF the owner did not possess the mags prior to 1994. I ask because I was in middle school at the time, so its not quite like I could say I owned them back in '94.

Thanks

PS: Long time lurker, but this site has been an awesome source of knowledge.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Messages
22
Likes
1
Location
Medford
I ask because I stumbled across something that I saved a while back. It was a letter from some agency 'clarifying' the AWB laws:

A weapon or large capacity feeding device defined in G.L. c. 140 s121, or a weapon having the characteristics outlined in 18 U.S.C. s921 (a) (3), may not be possessed, sold or transferred in the Commonwealth if the weapon was not lawfully possessed under a Massachusetts firearms license on September 13, 1994


I thought the MA law was related to manufacture date and not necessarily possession, but I wanted to check if anyone had heard of someone catching heat in my situation.
 

PennyPincher

NES Member
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Aug 27, 2007
Messages
11,529
Likes
3,792
Location
Texas
no. they would never be able to prove whether someone actually possessedit prior to the ban going into effect.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Messages
22
Likes
1
Location
Medford
no. they would never be able to prove whether someone actually possessedit prior to the ban going into effect.
Well that's my point: in my case it would be pretty easy to prove. A 6 year old probably didn't have a 30 round mag.

Basically I'm just trying to clarify this for someone of my age whether its:

A. Legal and good to go
B. Legal, but poorly advised
C. Illegal
 

PennyPincher

NES Member
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Aug 27, 2007
Messages
11,529
Likes
3,792
Location
Texas
It doesn't state that YOU must have been in possession of it. Just that it was possessed. SInce magazines are untraceable the point is moot.

The only way they could prove it wasn't possessed is if they could prove the magazine was produced after the magic date that made the new ones more killy. So stay away from things like M&P 12round mags since they never existed prior to the date of the ban.
 

Canndo

NES Member
Rating - 100%
52   0   0
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
8,447
Likes
5,908
A) You're good to go. Lawfully possessed under a license doesn't mean you're license.

***sorry PennyPincher I was typing at the same time
 
Last edited:

Len-2A Training

Instructor
Instructor
NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 98.1%
51   1   0
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
51,300
Likes
8,938
Location
Escaping to NH
That memo is BS. Please read the law for yourself and see where the words "under a Massachusetts firearms license" are in C. 140 S. 131M.

They aren't there. This was intentionally made up by EOPS and sent out to intimidate people, dealers, distributors with mis-information in an attempt to slow down the sales/possession of legal guns in MA.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Messages
22
Likes
1
Location
Medford
Thank you guys for clarifying. I just wanted to check on the laws appliction regarding personal ownership vs just being owned prior to 1994. Makes sense now.

Just trying to get my ducks in a row before moving. I was originally looking @ watertown but almost had a heart attack after reading their LTC requirements. But again, this site has been a huge resource
 
Top Bottom