Auburn.....Didn't if anyone has read the Telegram this morning but ...the are charging a person with (along with other charges) poss. of a high cap. Hand gun? ? ? "because it capable of holding more then 10 rounds"..this is a new one to me!!!
-
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 June Giveaway ***Keltec SUB2000***
Charged with poss. of a Hi -cap GUN
- Thread starter FITH
- Start date
That's why one should ALWAYS have a Class A. I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that any (or virtually any) magazine (detachable) fed firearm is "capable" of holding more than 10 rounds. Chances are somebody, somewhere, at some time made a magazine that will fit that firearm that can hold 11 or more rounds.
edit: in this case it appears to actually be a high cap.
edit: in this case it appears to actually be a high cap.
This is what pisses me off this jerk has been caught before without a LTC and instead of punishing him they will punish all of us with more laws ie: one a month, etc. that only hurt the law abiding gun owner.
![[angry]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/008.gif "Angry [angry]")
From reading the charges, it sounds like they hit him with everything they possibly could...
It would be interesting to learn which of those charges will be plea bargained off
and what the final charge and sentence will be.
It would be interesting to learn which of those charges will be plea bargained off
and what the final charge and sentence will be.
What is and what isn't large-capacity seems to have some subtleties, but in general, if you have a handgun in MA that can take a large-capacity magazine, then the handgun itself is a "large-capacity weapon", as defined in MGL Ch140 S121:
http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/140-121.htm
To legally possess a "large-capacity firearm" in MA, you must have an LTC Class A. See MGL Ch140 S131:
http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/140-131.htm
Of course, if you think the stopping power of 9mm is suspect, then you probably aren't that impressed with a .9mm:
Last edited:
Of course there is considerable controversy about that constitutes a high
capacity firearm, especially if the gun doesn't appear on the large capacity
weapons roster and isn't normally sold with a large capacity mag.
If this law was taken to the extreme, it would mean that LTC-B holders aren't
entitled to buy any handguns but revolvers, as any magazine fed handgun is
certainly "capable of accepting" a magazine which holds more than 10 rounds of ammo.
-Mike
Yup, we've had that debate here before.
The point I was trying to make is that without an LTC-A, possessing a Glock 17 is against the law, regardless of whether you have 10 or 17 round magazines.
The point I was trying to make is that without an LTC-A, possessing a Glock 17 is against the law, regardless of whether you have 10 or 17 round magazines.
tuna
NES Member
This is the part that gets me, I think that I have paid close to $350 in license and class fees in order to legally own a firearm, and until recently I was always restricted.
How many times could I have been caught illegally carrying a firearm before I would have spent that much?
I think it is actually more stringent than "drunk". Since it doesn't specify an allowable blood alcohol level, I suspect that you are in violation of the law if you are carrying and have had ANY alcohol. IANAL...
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,680
- Likes
- 33,835
As a law abiding citizen with a lot to lose, and no other concurrent charges that would result in the gun charge being dropped as part of a plea bargain, I would guess the answer to your question is probably in the range of somewhere between .01 and .1 (representing a range of $3,500 to $35,000 in legal fees).
Just ask a lawyer how much of a retainer (s)he will require to defend an unlicensed carry case, as well as how much the retainer will be if an appeal is required.
Why both of those charges?
Class A allows you to OWN a hicapacity firearm, but the article is clearly misleading. HOWEVER you can only OWN a high cap mag IF it is preban! Unless you are LEO. I can't tell you how many people argue about this or don't believe me. MA laws are stupid but you need to know them.
Because he carried illegaly and owned illegaly, vs. carrying without CLASS A-ALP.
That’s because it’s hard to believe they passed a law where in most cases, mags have no way to be identified of their date of manufacture.
Sounds like the little know fact that you can own a switch Blade knife.......just don't carry it!
The biggest gripe i have about it is the wording...either the paper screwed up or the Dept....because NO gun has A capacity..a Magazine has the capacity. Unless you argue that the gun has an unlimited capacity ..then every modern semi-auto is illegal. And the worst part,much like the "AUTOMATIC handguns", is the average person just reads and believes WHATever the paper prints!!!!!!!!!
The biggest gripe i have about it is the wording...either the paper screwed up or the Dept....because NO gun has A capacity..a Magazine has the capacity. Unless you argue that the gun has an unlimited capacity ..then every modern semi-auto is illegal. And the worst part,much like the "AUTOMATIC handguns", is the average person just reads and believes WHATever the paper prints!!!!!!!!!
The article doesn't say anything about that... it's more misleading in the
sense that anyone who believed the detectives statement verbatim would
be led to believe that a large capacity handgun is completely
illegal under any circumstance.
-Mike
IMO this is why there isn't any real case law on the books WRT the whole
issue.... I personally believe it's too much of a pain in the ass for them
to try to prove it. It doesn't mean, though, that some a**h*** prosecutor
/DA wouldn't try to do it to someone, especially someone that has a lot to
lose. The system will never charge a -real- criminal with that
crime- they'll just charge the legal LTC holder who was carrying a gun that
got hit by a car, and got exposed to police inquiry due to ending up in the
hospital.... that's how this state seems to function in that regard.
![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
-Mike
![[wink]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/002.gif "Wink [wink]")
Talking about stupid law...explain to me this...
My lic. is an class A Large Capacity
yet i can't have a LARGE capacity Magazine!!!!!
Now please explain it to me like i'm2 yrs old....
Well, ok. You should know this.
You CAN own hi cap mags- they just need to be mfrd pre 1994, often referred to as PREBAN mags.
The laws are stupid but you need to understand this. I can't tell you how many people have post ban mags they shouldn't have....
the bottom line is this state has had/does have a bunch of idiots making up laws that have noooooo clue about guns at allll...... i honestly believe in reasonable laws.... but..... come on![[thinking]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/010.gif "Thinking [thinking]")
You expect MA politicians to make sense????
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
Similar threads
