- Joined
- Oct 2, 2019
- Messages
- 30
- Likes
- 15
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.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
If it were not for Dupes, we'd have, what....maybe two dozen threads on the whole site?
The relevant part of the federal definition is "any firearm (including any firearm with a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system) manufactured in or before 1898" and the relevant part of the MA definition is as quoted above, "any firearm, rifle or shotgun manufactured in or prior to the year 1899" So the two disagree by one year. I've never heard of one that references a specific date; which definition are you referencing?
This part ^^^ (quoting the other thread, and mentioned earlier in this one) is something I've never understood. Maybe it was a typo in the bill that the legislature sent to the governor.
I retract my "no solution" comment. Pepper Spray is an excellent solution for the OP and far less likely to get in hot water.
Not 21 yet, only have my FID. I carry a shotgun in the trunk, but obviously can't do very much with that in an emergency. My only option as far as handguns go would be my 1851 Pietta. Say I loaded it with 6 shots; could I carry this in a holster, while driving? Or would I need to store it in the trunk if it was loaded?
The Mass statute dates to 1911 and was re-worked six times before GCA 68 and the Federal definition, not including a 1968 change to the Mass statute.
I don't know when Mass defined an antique as in or before 1899, but it probably has to do with 1900 being an easy to understand bright line. The 1898 versus 1899 issue is also probably so statistically insignificant as to not make a difference. Someone would have to have something rare, like a 1st year of production G98 or a prototype FN1899 (which became the FN1900) for this to actually make a difference. Real, modern concealable handguns, what gun control historically is about, became a thing with the FN1900. Try concealing a Borchardt or a C96.
+1.
Did someone say 'blackpowder pistol'?
Hey, I've been known to hoist a few.No, but you need a Hoisting License, instead of an Carry Permit.
Thats an INSANE amount of power. I had some surprisingly devastating results when comparing 12 gauge roundball with .45 acp.
Shooting Review and penetration testing of the AGC American Gun Craft Diablo - a 12 gauge Double Barrel Black Powder Side by Side Pistol.
View: https://youtu.be/zs0eVqO2qkE
Noticed the original post. I looked into this several yrs ago and came to the conclusion, legal to buy, legal to own, not legal to load & shoot without an FID or better. Carrying it loaded or in your trunk would/could be treated by law enforcement like any loaded revolver.
I believe it's purchase of powder that requires an FID, or that may just be the shops. But possession and use are OK. So buy in NH and go shooting.Noticed the original post. I looked into this several yrs ago and came to the conclusion, legal to buy, legal to own, not legal to load & shoot without an FID or better. Carrying it loaded or in your trunk would/could be treated by law enforcement like any loaded revolver.
I believe it's purchase of powder that requires an FID, or that may just be the shops. But possession and use are OK. So buy in NH and go shooting.
This WAS true and was overturned a number of years ago. I know one case regarding this was the Bibby case . . . unsure if that is the one that said LTC required or the one that overturned that ruling.Scrivener weighed in on this a long while back.
IIRC he said legal to own but to carry for protection as one would a modern handgun, you'd need an LTC. I don't think he cited a specific law in the comment I recall. (Re-stumbled across it a few weeks ago)
Not sure if his concern was strict legality or it simply want worth the grinder the legal system will put you through if a random police officer decides you're resisting.
This WAS true and was overturned a number of years ago. I know one case regarding this was the Bibby case . . . unsure if that is the one that said LTC required or the one that overturned that ruling.
I agree that probably 90% of cops will arrest and let the courts (perhaps) sort it out.Interesting. (Academically speaking, I mean - I do think it would be a bad idea to try carrying ANYTHING here without an LTC)
The comment was obviously from several years ago.
I agree that probably 90% of cops will arrest and let the courts (perhaps) sort it out.
In the linked GOAL page, it seems clear that a black powder revolver is exempt from someone needing an LTC to carry, but it seems like a can of worms when carrying one that's loaded without an LTC.
GOAL - Primitve Arms
goal.org
Also, Gun ownership in Massachusetts
There is a section that indicates black powder rifles, shotguns must be unloaded during transfer, even though not required to be in a locked case.
I suspect a dedicated DA could find a number of crimes to charge someone with if they were carrying (or transporting) a loaded black powder revolver. The charges may not survive a court case.
These links may already be shown in the three pages of comments, but it's the info I would cite in offer of feedback on this topic.