Safe storage of disassembled firearms

[kel]

Hi,
Quick question about safe storage for disassembled firearms. I have heard that in Mass law a frame is not considered a "gun" which is why some dealers are willing to transfer a frame for a non MA compliant gun. Does this definition also apply to safe storage?

Can I field strip my AK and then leave the receiver lying around without a lock in the mag well? Similarly, can I field strip, or detail strip my 1911, put the parts in a box and leave it around unlocked?

 

[M1911]

No.

 

[rapture]

When I was kid, I loved taking things apart and trying to put them back together again. If I ever found a gun taken apart, I would have been in my glory! You're better off putting them in a safe, or at the very least, putting a trigger lock on them. The only time a gun should be unlocked is if it's under your DIRECT control. It's better to be safe then sorry.

 

[kel]

I am specifically interested in legal safe storage requirements. Something along the lines of the original question that asks "What is the legal definition of firearm when it is used in the subsection pertaining to safe storage requirements for firearms?"

It's better to be safe then sorry.

Maybe that's what they were thinking when they wrote Chapter 180. Sounds nice for the camera, but may not be the reality of the situation.

No.

Source? Reasoning? Credentials? I don't care which of the three, I would just like more to go on.

 

[M1911]

I am specifically interested in legal safe storage requirements.

As I said above, the answer to your question is no. Disassembling the gun does not make it legal to leave unsecured. The only thing that would do that is if you permanently disabled the gun.

 

[kel]

Okay, still not getting what I am looking for. What if I put the barrel in the safe, is that enough? Trigger? Firing pin? What is the distinction that the law is looking for between a collection of parts and an actual firearm. Is it the serialized part as the ATF does things? Or is every single piece of a firearm in Massachussetts considered a gun in and of itself?

Is it the locking aspect that safe storage is looking for, what must the lock be denying access to? The mag well? Chamber? Does locking the gun simply mean "Requires manipulation with a key for the firearm to function"?

Which again leads me to my question, "What is the legal definition of firearm when it is used in the subsection pertaining to safe storage requirements for firearms?" That one is the key to what I am driving at and should provide an answer to all the others. What was the intent and how has it been interpreted by DAs, LEOs, and Judges.

 

[Twigg]

Well, I'm putting everything either in the safe or a locked container.

 

[M1911]

The receiver (i.e., the part with the serial number).

 

[Chris]

Not sure of the source - if it was a court case, or just a legal opinion - but the act of removing the bolt from a rifle and then securing the bolt and not the rifle was seen as non compliant.

(To those that don't know, without the bolt, the rifle is basically useless.)

 

[kel]

The receiver (i.e., the part with the serial number).

Thank you, not the answer I was hoping for, but it shoud let me squeeze a few extra guns in the safe sans slide and barrel.

 

[M1911]

Not sure of the source - if it was a court case, or just a legal opinion - but the act of removing the bolt from a rifle and then securing the bolt and not the rifle was seen as non compliant.

That's what Ron Glidden's book says. I don't have it here with me, but I'll check it tonight when I get home. I'm not sure if that's his opinion, or if he's citing a decision.

 

[Coyote33]

Let's put it this way. Is a barrel a gun? Can a barrel be stored alone outside the safe? Especially considering the rest of it is the part with the serial number, and the barrel is the longest/largest part of many guns.

I think if that is answered a certain way, it would help this individual in his quest.

 

[M1911]

The receiver (the part with the serial number) must be secured. If the barrel is not attached to the receiver, then it does not have to be securely stored.

Note that on some guns (e.g., FAL), the upper receiver is the part that has the serial number. On others (e.g., AR15), it is the lower receiver. It wouldn't surprise me if such subtleties are a very gray area in MA law.

IANAL, this isn't legal advice, etc., etc.

 

[Chris]

That's what Ron Glidden's book says. I don't have it here with me, but I'll check it tonight when I get home. I'm not sure if that's his opinion, or if he's citing a decision.

Correct. It's in his comments on exceptions regarding Chapter 140 Section 131L. However, the source for his statement is not given.

MY opinion (and I'm nobody when it comes to this) is that removal and secure storage of the bolt does meet the requirement of "...to render such weapon inoperable by any person other than the owner or other lawfully authorized user."

Chief Glidden however states that the exemptions require "permanently made inoperable". However, neither the law, nor the commentary define exactly what "any firearm, rifle, or shotgun" is, so I would assume that it falls back on the definitions in Chapter 140 Section 121 which define each of those three words as requiring the ability of "discharging" a shot. Obviously a rifle without its bolt is incapable of that act.

But, since the chief has given this opinion to the MCPA, you can be sure that you'd be arguing it in court if called upon.

And there is as much about the subject as I know.

 

[KMaurer]

Mass doesn't treat any part or parts of a gun as special or "the gun". The problem with the safe storage laws is that there is very little case law. The one ruling I've heard of ruled against the "throw a cheap luggage lock on the zipper of a gun rag" approach, saying that the law required something that was actually "secure", without any further guidance as to what that might mean. While a lot of people have said that it doesn't count to take the bolt out of a rifle and lock it in the safe, I'd argue that that meets the requirement pretty good. If wrapping a cheap trigger-lock around the trigger guard makes it safe, then surely wrapping a 600 pound steel safe around the bolt does an even better job. Of course I'm neither a lawyer nor looking to act as a test case.

Ken