Registering a .22 autoloader - Large Capacity Firearm?

[Xeo]

Hello,

I have a Mossberg 715T, which is a semiautomatic .22 rifle that uses a 10-round detachable clip. The FA-10 it is asking if the Firearm is a large capacity firearm. Everything I've read on these forums seems to say that it isn't, but this line of text on the Large Capacity Firearm Roster has me wondering:

Weapons not listed on this roster may also be large capacity weapons if they are semi-automatic and are capable of accepting or readily modifiable to accept a large capacity feeding device. Definitions of ‘capable of accepting’ and ‘readily modifiable to accept’ are defined in 501 CMR 7.02.

I didn't spot that bit of text until after I already registered the firearm as non-large capacity. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

 

[SJan]

You are filling out a FA-10, a MA document. The large capacity firearms roster, also a MA document does not list that model. With that reasoning I would not check the box for large capacity.

Is that model offered from the factory with a magazine over 10 rounds?

 

[Kevlar]

.
Welcome to NES!

As SJan stated, this is the determinative criteria...

Is that model offered from the factory with a magazine over 10 rounds?

In this case, the answer is "yes"...

http://www.mossberg.com/products/rifles/rimfire/mossberg-international-715t

...therefore the 715T is in fact "large capacity".

 

[jasons]

Is that model offered from the factory with a magazine over 10 rounds?

What does that have to do with anything? The test (as the OP noted) is "capable of accepting" or "readily modifiable to accept." That's it. Makes no difference if you can "readily modify" it with factory parts, or aftermarket parts, or something you find in your kitchen junk drawer.

As SJan stated, this is the determinative criteria...

Where's the cite for that? It would seem to contradict the letter of the law....

“Large capacity weapon”, any firearm, rifle or shotgun: (i) that is semiautomatic with a fixed large capacity feeding device; (ii) that is semiautomatic and capable of accepting, or readily modifiable to accept, any detachable large capacity feeding device; (iii) that employs a rotating cylinder capable of accepting more than ten rounds of ammunition in a rifle or firearm and more than five shotgun shells in the case of a shotgun or firearm; or (iv) that is an assault weapon. The term “large capacity weapon” shall be a secondary designation and shall apply to a weapon in addition to its primary designation as a firearm, rifle or shotgun and shall not include: (i) any weapon that was manufactured in or prior to the year 1899; (ii) any weapon that operates by manual bolt, pump, lever or slide action; (iii) any weapon that is a single-shot weapon; (iv) any weapon that has been modified so as to render it permanently inoperable or otherwise rendered permanently unable to be designated a large capacity weapon; or (v) any weapon that is an antique or relic, theatrical prop or other weapon that is not capable of firing a projectile and which is not intended for use as a functional weapon and cannot be readily modified through a combination of available parts into an operable large capacity weapon.

 

[KMaurer]

That's the literal reading, but attempting to use simple English grammar to interpret legalese is inherently dangerous. After the '98 gun law changes were rammed through at the last minute, people quickly realized that a literal interpretation would effectively make every semiautomatic with a detachable magazine "large capacity", even the venerable 1911. Since that wasn't the intent of the legislature, EOPS based their determination on whether the gun was sold by the manufacturer with a large capacity magazine. That's the basis for the EOPS list. For example, Ruger has never sold their Mini-14 with anything other than a 5-round magazine. As a result, even though almost everyone who has one also has 20 or 30 round magazines for it, the Mini-14 isn't per se "large capacity". In contrast, a Beretta 92 is considered to be large capacity, even though new ones are sold with 10-round magazines in Massachusetts, since they are routinely sold with larger magazines in free states.

Ken

 

[jasons]

Were I prosecuted for this, I would hesitate to hang my defense on non-binding "interpretations" when that same state which would be prosecuting me could simply change it's "interpretation" at will. If there's case law or something that's one thing. EOPS's flights of legal fancy are are not worth the paper that they're printed on in my opinion (if indeed they are printed and not just heard "word of mouth" at some point.)

 

[Xeo]

My understanding is that Mossberg's mass-compliant version of the 715T is only sold by Mossberg with 10-round mags, however they do in fact sell 25-round mag versions to non-Massachusetts residents. Does this mean I should resubmit my FA-10 and list it as large capacity?

 

[Lank]

.

 

[jasons]

My understanding is that Mossberg's mass-compliant version of the 715T is only sold by Mossberg with 10-round mags, however they do in fact sell 25-round mag versions to non-Massachusetts residents. Does this mean I should resubmit my FA-10 and list it as large capacity?

It's large capacity based on the definition in the law. Do what you want with that info. You're a big boy.

 

[jasons]

For example, Ruger has never sold their Mini-14 with anything other than a 5-round magazine.

http://www.ruger.com/products/mini14TacticalRifle/models.html

 

[Xeo]

It's large capacity based on the definition in the law. Do what you want with that info. You're a big boy.

Thanks for letting me know I'm a big boy. Highly appreciated.