Question About What The Dealer Told Me (first time gun owner)

[Maxpower]

I recently purchased my first gun, a factory reconditioned Glock G22. I was originally planning on buying a brand new G22, but when I went to the dealer he advised me new Glocks cannot be sold in MA. Is this true?

Also, the gun came with 3 high cap magazines. After reading the sticky regarding this (all 29 pages), I called the dealer to ensure they were pre ban. He explained they come back from Glock, and if they weren't legal in MA, the distributor wouldn't be able to sell the gun to the dealer, and the dealer wouldn't have been able to sell to me. Does any responsibility lie with the dealer/distributor or is it all on me? Sorry to bring up a subject that has been beaten to death already.

Thanks.

 

[scouter-rick]

The sale of MA Non-Compliant guns by dealers would result in the penalties being applied to the dealers. There is nothing illegal about you owning the firearm. As for the High Cap magazines, I would search here and elsewhere for methods to identify Pre-Ban magazines based on the "lip" of the Glock magazines and the shape of the feed area. This is not an exact science but will likely give you some comfort factor.

You are a wise man to ask and.... welcome to the forum.

 

[meth0d]

To your firts point: Yes and no, the new Glocks don't meet AG regulations, so they cannot be sold by a FFL/DEALER in MA. You can however, buy a brand new 3rd Gen Glock from a MA resident via face to face sale with proper paperwork. You will undoubtedly see a large mark up on the gun due to the rarity/scarcity of the new Glocks in the state.

Someone else would have to answer on where the responsibility or liability lies regarding the magazines, as I'm not 100% sure and don't want to provide false information.

ETA: Per info provided by M1911.

 

[Bob P]

Nothing to add here except welcome and good on you for asking!

 

[richc]

If Glock and the dealer says the mags are pre-ban, then you should be all set. Someone else would have to answer on where the responsibility or liability lies regarding the magazines, as I'm not 100% sure and don't want to provide false information.

As indicated earlier, possession of the Glock is fine.

Although there are some fine FFL dealers out there who know their stuff, you should know that you are on the hook for possession of magazines. And dealers can/do make mistakes. High cap magazines require an LTC-A and must be preban to possess in MA (unless there are LE/military exceptions). In the case of magazines the law is about possession. The dealer may or may not be on the hook for selling post ban high cap mags, but you are on the hook for the possession of these.

Smart of you to double check...

 

[Rob Boudrie]

nd if they weren't legal in MA, the distributor wouldn't be able to sell the gun to the dealer

Incorrect. Dealers may possess post-ban AWs and mags, but may not sell them in-state except to other dealers.

 

[MA_Shooter]

There are some excellent threads that cover this topic and more...good to do your homework to avoid problems as pointed out above.

Welcome.

http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/threads/37553-MA-Handgun-Compliance-Q-A-Thread-(new)

 

[Powerslide]

Concerning the sale of high-cap post-ban mags: I've witnessed first-hand a dealer try to sell my buddy a gun with a brand new, >10-round magazine. On my friend's behalf, I told the dealer to give him a 10-round mag for that gun and keep the high-cap mag. The dealer did.

There are some dealers that will sell post-ban high-cap mags. If you're ever caught by a LEO possessing such a mag, you'll be able to tell your prison mates all about the careless dealer.

 

[glide]

If Glock and the dealer says the mags are pre-ban, then you should be all set. Someone else would have to answer on where the responsibility or liability lies regarding the magazines, as I'm not 100% sure and don't want to provide false information.

Liability regarding the hi cap mags falls on YOU, the owner.

And plenty of dealers around here will sell you 'new' hi caps marked as 'pre-ban'. When in doubt...toss them. It's not worth the risk.

 

[M1911]

If Glock and the dealer says the mags are pre-ban, then you should be all set. Someone else would have to answer on where the responsibility or liability lies regarding the magazines, as I'm not 100% sure and don't want to provide false information.

I'm sorry, but that is just not the case.

1) Glock says they don't know which magazines are pre-ban and which are post-ban. So Glock won't make a statement that will help you.

2) Mere possession of post-ban large capacity magazines is a felony. The fact that the dealer told you the magazines were pre-ban doesn't change that fact, and dealers have made mistakes.

 

[meth0d]

I'm sorry, but that is just not the case.

1) Glock says they don't know which magazines are pre-ban and which are post-ban. So Glock won't make a statement that will help you.

2) Mere possession of post-ban large capacity magazines is a felony. The fact that the dealer told you the magazines were pre-ban doesn't change that fact, and dealers have made mistakes.

I've edited my post, thank you for providing the information.

 

[jenlynn724]

Welcome to the forum.

 

[Maxpower]

Thanks for all the replies. Comparing the mags to the pictures, they aren't marked LE only,and dont have any date stamps. On the phone, the dealer didn't sound like he was willing to swap my 15's for 10 rd's so I am thinking I will dump these, eat the cost of some 10's, find a new dealer, and chalk it up as a lesson learned. Thanks.

 

[jasons]

Thanks for all the replies. Comparing the mags to the pictures, they aren't marked LE only, but they look closer to the right side of the picture of 8 than to the left. On the phone, the dealer didn't sound like he was willing to swap my 15's for 10 rd's so I am thinking I will dump these, eat the cost of some 10's, find a new dealer, and chalk it up as a lesson learned. Thanks.

[STRIKE]Please post the dealer's name so that I can be sure to avoid them in the future.[/STRIKE]

Never mind. I do hope you review this dealer's (lack of) good customer service in the appropriate forum.

 

[BradM]

If you have someone in a free state that could hold the mags for you, see if they will find someone wants to swap their old mags for your newer ones.

 

[drgrant]

Please post the dealer's name so that I can be sure to avoid them in the future.

Why? So the AG (or whoever) can give the dealer a ration of crap? (They read this forum, btw... )

If I black crossed every dealer that gave out bad legal advice (one way or the other) I wouldn't have any dealers left to buy guns at. The ones that invent imaginary laws are just as bad, if not worse, than the ones that don't know the law or give out false information.

I go to gun shops to buy stuff, not to get legal advice. Gun owners in MA should review the laws themselves or talk to a competent firearms attorney.

This isn't any different than the situation with some LEOs in this state who give out equally bad info about gun laws. (There are some LEOs who really know the law, and then there are others that will scare the crap out of you because the badge goes to their head and they are -right- no matter what.... )

-Mike

 

[Powerslide]

Please post the dealer's name so that I can be sure to avoid them in the future.

.

 

[KMaurer]

While it's always good to be safe, there are a couple of points you should realize regarding those Glock magazines. There are only two ways to prove that a magazine is post ban. Either it's specifically marked as "LEO only" or with a post-ban date as required by the old federal AWB, or it's specifically designed to fit a gun that didn't exist before 9/94. The result is that all the effort spent of examining the cuts and caliber stamps on Glock magazines is the modern equivalent of examining goat entrails to predict the future. Any prosecutor dumb enough to try to get a conviction in this sort of situation, where Glock has officially stated on numerous occasions that it's impossible to tell the difference, would almost certainly be dumb enough to charge you for possessing any large capacity magazine at all.

Ken

 

[PaulD]

While it's always good to be safe, there are a couple of points you should realize regarding those Glock magazines. There are only two ways to prove that a magazine is post ban. Either it's specifically marked as "LEO only" or with a post-ban date as required by the old federal AWB, or it's specifically designed to fit a gun that didn't exist before 9/94.

Realizing you're talking about Glocks, it's not quite that simple for all guns. You probably know this but it's worth clarifying for the OP.

For some guns, it is possible based on characteristics to recognize a post ban magazine even if it doesn't have a date code or say "LEO only". Forinstance, Mec-Gar now manufactures OEM Sig magazines for the P series guns. These magazines have "SIG Sauer" imprinted on them but have a shiny finish and say "Mec-Gar" in fine print. Whether SIG would testify to that fact or not, I don't know, but it's well known that these are post ban. I wouldn't want to test the legal waters on that even if SIG wouldn't testify. Similarly, there are now many AR15 magazines from manufacturers that didn't exist before '94 and will fit old ARs, but are quite obviously post ban.

The answer is to do as much research as possible on how to identify a pre vs. post ban magazine for the gun you're interested in.

 

[jasons]

Why? So the AG (or whoever) can give the dealer a ration of crap? (They read this forum, btw... )

If I black crossed every dealer that gave out bad legal advice (one way or the other) I wouldn't have any dealers left to buy guns at. The ones that invent imaginary laws are just as bad, if not worse, than the ones that don't know the law or give out false information.

I go to gun shops to buy stuff, not to get legal advice. Gun owners in MA should review the laws themselves or talk to a competent firearms attorney.

This isn't any different than the situation with some LEOs in this state who give out equally bad info about gun laws. (There are some LEOs who really know the law, and then there are others that will scare the crap out of you because the badge goes to their head and they are -right- no matter what.... )

-Mike

They didn't just give bad legal advice, they sold him illegal (Ok, possibly illegal) post ban mags and then refused to work with him after the sale. I'd avoid them for the crappy customer service alone.


(I edited my original post. Mike has a good point, we don't want to give the AG going on a witch hunt.)

 

[drgrant]

They didn't just get bad legal advice, they sold him illegal (Ok, possibly illegal) post ban mags and then refused to work with him after the sale. I'd avoid them for the crappy customer service alone.

Ok, reading comprehension fail on my part. If they wouldn't swap out the mags on the request of the customer, that's a little absurd, especially considering that 10 round cripplemags are pretty much considered garbage anyways.

-Mike

 

[Maxpower]

Is it completely inconceivable that when Glock is reconditioning mags and guns, they cut out a notch in the plastic of the mag to make it compatible with their newer models? I am starting to think I am getting way too wrapped around the axle about this, instead of enjoying my first firearm.

 

[PaulD]

Is it completely un-conceivable that when Glock is reconditioning mags and guns, they cut out a notch in the plastic of the mag to make it compatible with their newer models? I am starting to think I am getting way too wrapped around the axle about this, instead of enjoying my first firearm.

From a business perspective, yeah, I think it's pretty inconceivable.

 

[Maxpower]

I called Glock tech support today and the person confirmed that the magazines I had were post ban and in current production. He was also able to provide me with the month and year the gun was manufactured. I went back to the sporting goods shop, explained the issue. The guy said he would get 3 different mags for me, but they would probably be 10's (which I am fine with), but there might be some wait time because he has to get them from his distributor. The guy said he didn't have any in stock or he would have swapped them right there.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Is it completely inconceivable that when Glock is reconditioning mags and guns, they cut out a notch in the plastic of the mag to make it compatible with their newer models?

Yes.

 

[Turbocharged]

I called Glock tech support today and the person confirmed that the magazines I had were post ban and in current production. He was also able to provide me with the month and year the gun was manufactured. I went back to the sporting goods shop, explained the issue. The guy said he would get 3 different mags for me, but they would probably be 10's (which I am fine with), but there might be some wait time because he has to get them from his distributor. The guy said he didn't have any in stock or he would have swapped them right there.

I hope you gave the 15 rounders back to him. I know that would mean you wouldn't have any mags for the time being, but it's not worth the risk.

 

[GSG]

After reading the sticky regarding this (all 29 pages), I called the dealer to ensure they were pre ban.

There's only two ways to tell if a Glock mag is post-ban; if it has the "Law Enforcement/Government" restrictions stamped on the body of the magazine that were stamped on mags made during the 1994 AWB, or if it has the ambidextrous magazine release. There is no other way for anyone to prove that it's post-ban, because that is the stance of Glock's legal department.

Does any responsibility lie with the dealer/distributor or is it all on me?

Both of you are on the hook for this. Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 140 Section 131M says:

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.

It's the exact same penalty to sell it or possess it; it's a 15 year felony.

High cap magazines require an LTC-A and must be preban to possess in MA (unless there are LE/military exceptions). In the case of magazines the law is about possession. The dealer may or may not be on the hook for selling post ban high cap mags, but you are on the hook for the possession of these.

See the info that I posted above, both are on the hook. Also, the LE exemption to the Mass. AWB is only for work guns (typically restricted to duty pistols/rifles/shotguns and approved off duty guns) and work guns that an officer retires with. LE can't just go around buying up post ban mags for all of their personal guns.

Also, there is no exemption under this MA law for military use, at all, not even when on duty. So if you know a soldier who has some post ban mags in their possession that were issued to them for use on duty, they're on the hook.

1) Glock says they don't know which magazines are pre-ban and which are post-ban. So Glock won't make a statement that will help you.

Not quite true, see the top of my post, and KMaurer's post.

Comparing the mags to the pictures, they aren't marked LE only, but they seem like they may look closer to the right side of the picture of than to the left.

If they aren't marked and don't have the ambi mag notch, they're pre-ban.

On the phone, the dealer didn't sound like he was willing to swap my 15's for 10 rd's so I am thinking I will dump these, eat the cost of some 10's, find a new dealer, and chalk it up as a lesson learned.

The dealer would have to be crazy to do this. Pre-ban mags sell for a lot more money in MA than 10 round mags.

If you have someone in a free state that could hold the mags for you, see if they will find someone wants to swap their old mags for your newer ones.

This is also a good idea. Mass. residents can own post ban mags or post-ban configured assault weapons as long as they're stored outside of Mass. (but interestingly, they can't buy post-ban configured assault weapons as a Mass. resident, even from an FFL in a free state, but if they owned them before they moved, then they can still store them out of state).

The answer is to do as much research as possible on how to identify a pre vs. post ban magazine for the gun you're interested in.

Yup. You need to learn all of the MA & federal laws regarding purchase, transport, possession, configuration, carry, hunting, etc. with any gun before you buy it. The penalties are severe, and ignorance is not a defense to violating these laws.

They didn't just give bad legal advice, they sold him illegal (Ok, possibly illegal) post ban mags and then refused to work with him after the sale. I'd avoid them for the crappy customer service alone.

I agree with you that the FFL made a dangerous mistake, and if I were in the OP's shoes I'd definitely go back and get the issue straightened out with the FFL. However, the gun laws in MA are so complex that some dealers are probably accidentally breaking some of them. But the number of gun stores in MA is steadily shrinking, so stirring up trouble will only hurt every other gun owner in the state.

 

[Kevlar]

I think you are mistaken. The dealer is exempted per the bolded portion below...

Originally Posted by Maxpower
Does any responsibility lie with the dealer/distributor or is it all on me?

Both of you are on the hook for this. Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 140 Section 131M says:

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.

It's the exact same penalty to sell it or possess it; it's a 15 year felony.

Originally Posted by richc
High cap magazines require an LTC-A and must be preban to possess in MA (unless there are LE/military exceptions). In the case of magazines the law is about possession. The dealer may or may not be on the hook for selling post ban high cap mags, but you are on the hook for the possession of these.

See the info that I posted above, both are on the hook.

BTW, it's not a "15 year felony" for a first offense. The penalty for a first offense is 1 to 10 years imprisonment and/or $1,000 to $10,000 fine.

 

[GSG]

I think you are mistaken. The dealer is exempted per the bolded portion below...



BTW, it's not a "15 year felony" for a first offense. The penalty for a first offense is 1 to 10 years imprisonment and/or $1,000 to $10,000 fine.

My mistake, it's been a long night. But couldn't a sale like that affect the "suitability" of their license? Or do those licenses even have suitability built in?

 

[M1911]

My mistake, it's been a long night. But couldn't a sale like that affect the "suitability" of their license? Or do those licenses even have suitability built in?

Isn't a crime punishable by 1 to 10 years a felony? Wouldn't they then be a federally prohibited person?