- Joined
- Jan 31, 2023
- Messages
- 35
- Likes
- 12
I posted this over on the sticky thread, but I figured it might be more appropriate to just create a separate thread for my question.
I’m trying to determine the legality, or the proximity to definite legality, of owning an AR-10 in Boston.
Here’s the Boston AWB AW definition:
Assault weapon: “all rifles and shotguns designated as assault weapons in this section and all other semi-automatic rifles and shotguns which are determined by the assault weapon roster board, established under the provisions of section five, to be assault weapons. Such term shall include, in addition to any other rifles and shotguns identified by said board, all versions of the following, including rifles and shotguns sold under the designation provided in this section and rifles and shotguns which are substantially identical thereto sold under any designation…
AR-15 semi-automatic rifles”
The AR-10 platform
1. Is not a “version” of the AR-15 platform, since it predates the AR-15 platform
2. Is sold under a different designation than the AR-15 platform
2. Is NOT substantially identical to the AR-15, as the ONLY major interchangeable internal component is the trigger assembly
This ignoring the fact that the law is probably null and void, since the board never convened, among other things.
So, my question is two-fold: is the reasoning here sound - am I good to go with an AR-10? - and pragmatically speaking, what are the risks of taking this approach?
I’m trying to determine the legality, or the proximity to definite legality, of owning an AR-10 in Boston.
Here’s the Boston AWB AW definition:
Assault weapon: “all rifles and shotguns designated as assault weapons in this section and all other semi-automatic rifles and shotguns which are determined by the assault weapon roster board, established under the provisions of section five, to be assault weapons. Such term shall include, in addition to any other rifles and shotguns identified by said board, all versions of the following, including rifles and shotguns sold under the designation provided in this section and rifles and shotguns which are substantially identical thereto sold under any designation…
AR-15 semi-automatic rifles”
The AR-10 platform
1. Is not a “version” of the AR-15 platform, since it predates the AR-15 platform
2. Is sold under a different designation than the AR-15 platform
2. Is NOT substantially identical to the AR-15, as the ONLY major interchangeable internal component is the trigger assembly
This ignoring the fact that the law is probably null and void, since the board never convened, among other things.
So, my question is two-fold: is the reasoning here sound - am I good to go with an AR-10? - and pragmatically speaking, what are the risks of taking this approach?