Handgun mag >10 rounds question

He responded that way because your post was filled with falsehoods and declarations not grounded in reality. People will respond like this when it sounds like some bullshit overheard at a box store. [rofl]

"It must come from a dealer" Seriously? You really need to stay in your lane. [rofl]
Oh but his response on "readily converted" is a gold standard. riiight.
 
Yes, posessor is always liable in criminal terms.

The dealer can face penalties too, as there is another law they can violate for selling you a postban LCAFD.

In practice prosecution of either is patently rare.

-Mike
"Always" depends on if the offense requires scienture. Some offenses aren't unless you know you are committing them or intentionally do so. Others are per-se and there is no requirement that you even know one of your items does not meet the criteria. Not sure where possession of > 10 round mags is on this spectrum, or if it has even been decided.

For example, district courts had been known to dismiss ADs inside houses as violating the 500ft of occupied dwelling law because of the lack of intent, but it was eventually taken to the SJC that ruled it to be a per-se offense - the total lack of intent to commit it is not a defense.
 
Last edited:
"Always" depends on if the offense requires scienture. Some offenses aren't unless you know you are committing them or intentionally do so. Others are per-se and there is no requirement that you even know one of your items does not meet the criteria. Not sure where possession of > 10 round mags is on this spectrum, or if it has even been decided.

I've never seen or heard of a mass case where that actually mattered. Of course under MGL there's two LCAFD charges- the easy one, which if you have an LTC-A you skate on automatically. The AWB charge is a whole other ballgame.

You do bring up an interesting point though. For example there are a few types of 10rd mags that will take an 11th round if you force it, and they will wirk, but won't actually seat in a gun with the slide closed. Are these 11 rd mags. or just an "aberration" of use where a "reasonable person would not think that they were so it doesn't count" ?
 
I've never seen or heard of a mass case where that actually mattered. Of course under MGL there's two LCAFD charges- the easy one, which if you have an LTC-A you skate on automatically. The AWB charge is a whole other ballgame.

You do bring up an interesting point though. For example there are a few types of 10rd mags that will take an 11th round if you force it, and they will wirk, but won't actually seat in a gun with the slide closed. Are these 11 rd mags. or just an "aberration" of use where a "reasonable person would not think that they were so it doesn't count" ?
Another interesting case is mags with the long dent down the side to limit the follower travel. Some, but not all, brand make a cut in the undented portion of metal circumscribing the area with the dent to removal of the dented area destroy the mag. Others just use the dent and, if the dent is cut out, can be used as > 10 round mags. Nobody can tell you if the later qualifies, except people who feel their guess bears legal weight.
 
Oh but his response on "readily converted" is a gold standard. riiight.
You need to reread my post. I said "I have my opinions on what this language means and as a MA dealer act accordingly. But a feisty DA, activist judge and 12 soccer moms named Karen could feel otherwise and ruin my year."

I am very clear I have an opinion. I did not indicate what that opinion is, but that I act on it as part of my business and take the risk associated with those actions. I also indicated that I don't think I have zero risk as I could get arrested, charged and convicted. I think the probability is infinitesimal, but I am not naive enough to believe in absolutes with regards to the law, ESPECIALLY in MA when it involves GUNZ. The SJC has twisted themselves in knots to get the desired outcome regardless of the law when GUNZ are involved.

You made insane pronouncements in your post. So many in fact it was not worth tearing them down one by one. You are either profoundly ignorant, a troll, possessed of some serious issue, or a combination of all of the above. Your basic lack of understanding of MGL and its practice in MA escapes comment.

Take a serious look at the responses you are getting here and revisit your post that caused the issues. Spend some money and consult a good lawyer ( I can give you recommendations). Take a civics class. Read a good book.

Look at the post count of the people responding to you and the number of "Likes" and other indicators of being good NES citizens. You are not being "picked on" by newbies or NES trolls, but respected members of NES. Reflect.

Or be prepared to continue to get hostile responses to your postings
 
Last edited:
So your interpretation of "readily converted" is ok but someone else's is "delusion". Got it!
You're missing the point. You made sweeping statements to the effect of "if a dealer converts a mag, it's legal" and that's just not true because, as CrackPot explained, the law doesn't specify what constitutes a legal mag block. Just because it's done by an FFL, doesn't mean it will get held up in court. If an FFL uses spit and gum to secure the mag block in your mag, that's something you have to answer for in court, not the FFL.

It's just another example of MGL being clear as mud. What's considered "under the influence" when carrying? What's a collapsing stock and how do you legally set it in place? Can a muzzle device be "permanently" attached with JB Weld? Are separated lower and upper a gun in my possession that I need to FA10 or just parts?

The list of asinine examples goes on and on. The best we can do is basically guess at what's legal, so we look at case law, past federal laws, etc to try to figure it out. At the end of the day if you own a gun in this state you're taking a risk somewhere.

So yes, when you try to pass something off as a fact when it's not, you'll get called out for it. I trust CrackPot's opinion in these matters way more than yours.
 
I'm by no means even qualified to post about laws
But it seems like the biggest issue with mgl discussions is many people read one or two sentences and take from it what they want it to say.
On the flip side you have lawyers and ffls that have studied it for years.
Opposing sides are not even in the same arena
 
Another interesting case is mags with the long dent down the side to limit the follower travel. Some, but not all, brand make a cut in the undented portion of metal circumscribing the area with the dent to removal of the dented area destroy the mag. Others just use the dent and, if the dent is cut out, can be used as > 10 round mags. Nobody can tell you if the later qualifies, except people who feel their guess bears legal weight.
And manufacturers often have different ways in concurrent production. Sig P320 has a simple dimple to stop the follower that can be drilled out on both sides in under a minute and you have full capacity. Some other Sig mags use the LARGE plastic base plate with reduced metal such that no conversion is ever possible. They seem to think it is ok but then again, who knows...
 
How does Maura and staff entertain themselves? They read these threads. They leave some bs laws on the books and watch as ridiculous theoretical self regulation consumes us. I only regret the time that I lose by reading through all of this. I remember some of these guys from first grade…. The kid holding a finger an inch from you and saying “ not touching you not touching you.”
 
This one really makes me angry. Mag question falls on defendant to prove pre ban but here is mass law definition of BOP
“In a criminal trial, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution. The prosecution must convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of the charges brought against them.”
 
The burden of proof doesn't fall on the defendant but he's the one who has to face the charges in court, not the dealer that sold him such and such mag.
 
Well, this is a blast from the past, but...

MGL 140-123 says NOTHING about magazines. nothing! not a single sentence regarding magazine capacity.

Really?

MGL 140-123 (Sixteenth Condition) said:
...no licensee shall sell, lease, rent, transfer or deliver or offer for sale, lease, rent, transfer or delivery to any person any ... large capacity feeding device that was not otherwise lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994.

MGL 140-128 says NOTHING about magazines. All it says is that there will be penalties for selling firearms(not magazines) by an unlicensed dealer/person.

Wrong again!

MGL 140-128 said:
Any licensee under a license described in section one hundred and twenty-three ... who violates any provision of the ... sixteenth ... condition of said license ... shall be punished by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than ten years, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

And as for this...

MGL 140-131M talks about large capacity magazines but it says nothing about magazines reworked/modified by a dealer to become a non-large capacity mag. In other words, if a dealer sells you a Magpul AR mag that has been reworked/modified to accept no more than 10 bullets, it is a regular magazine.

The modification question of magazines is no different from the modification of an AR to become Mass-compliant. As long as the dealer can modify the part to be compliant, it is compliant. The most important aspect here is WHO can work on a magazine to make it Mass compliant. The individual must be able to legally possess large-capacity magazines in MA AND manufacturing license. As a non-manufacturer, an individual cannot go to NH, buy a large capacity mag and modify it themselves prior to bringing it back to MA. It must come from a dealer. To protect yourself, keep the purchase receipt to prove that the magazine was indeed sold by a MA FFL.

So yes, you FFL's can turn a large capacity mag into a 10 rounder and re-sell it. They won't get in trouble legally if they do. Not even a little. On the other hand, you as a buyer must be able to prove that the magazine was a 10 rounder since the day you bought it(ie: KEEP THE RECEIPT!)

LOL!
 
Well, this is a blast from the past, but...
So I take it reading comprehension is not a strong suit. Let's review:

statement #1 on MGL 140-123:
...no licensee shall sell, lease, rent, transfer or deliver or offer for sale, lease, rent, transfer or delivery to any person any ... large capacity feeding device that was not otherwise lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994.
Dealer cannot sell large capacity mag, true. That said, the statute says nothing about manufacturing a non-large capacity mag, does it? A dealer can manufacture and sell non-large capacity magazines if licensed so. A dealer can manufacture them from anything, including large capacity mag components as long as the end result IS a non-large capacity magazine. Now, you may argue that a person could potentially reverse the mag to make it large capacity. As with adding a +5 extension to a 10-round Glock mag that you bought at BassPro: modifying magazines to make them large capacity IS illegal but DOES NOT implicate the seller/dealer in the crime.

I can even take it a step further. Let's say a bad guy buys a 10-round mag, replaces the body with a 3D printed longer version capable of accepting 11 rounds. He keeps the original spring, follower and base plate. Should the dealer that sold him a 10-round mag be now responsible to?

But let's continue reading your quotes:
Any licensee under a license described in section one hundred and twenty-three ... who violates any provision of the ... sixteenth ... condition of said license ... shall be punished by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than ten years, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
Where in the above sentence do you see ANYTHING about magazines? the entire MGL 140-128 talks about punishment, NOT the legality of feeding devices.

Find better quotes next time. Better yet, read them before you post.
 
Yes, posessor is always liable in criminal terms.

The dealer can face penalties too, as there is another law they can violate for selling you a postban LCAFD.

In practice prosecution of either is patently rare.

-Mike
Possession of a gun requires that the possessor (a) Knew he possessed it and (b) Knew it was a gun.

If the same logic is applied to high cap mags, the possessor would have to know a mag is post ban. This defense is untested and there is no ruling I can find either way on this. But, it would be best for someone possessing post ban mags not to brag about their skill at identifying such in online forums. A receipt from a dealer could be used as contributory evidence the defendant did not have reason to believe a mag as post-ban.

And no, the defense is not "obligated to prove" a mag is post ban. The prosecution is obligated to prove it is.

I know people who can convert bar stock into 1911s, and it is actually easy for them (something about pushing "start" on a CNC machine). That does not mean they are subject to arrest in MA if caught with "readily convertible" bar stock.
 
Last edited:
So I take it reading comprehension is not a strong suit. Let's review:

statement #1 on MGL 140-123:

Dealer cannot sell large capacity mag, true. That said, the statute says nothing about manufacturing a non-large capacity mag, does it? A dealer can manufacture and sell non-large capacity magazines if licensed so. A dealer can manufacture them from anything, including large capacity mag components as long as the end result IS a non-large capacity magazine. Now, you may argue that a person could potentially reverse the mag to make it large capacity. As with adding a +5 extension to a 10-round Glock mag that you bought at BassPro: modifying magazines to make them large capacity IS illegal but DOES NOT implicate the seller/dealer in the crime.

I can even take it a step further. Let's say a bad guy buys a 10-round mag, replaces the body with a 3D printed longer version capable of accepting 11 rounds. He keeps the original spring, follower and base plate. Should the dealer that sold him a 10-round mag be now responsible to?

But let's continue reading your quotes:

Where in the above sentence do you see ANYTHING about magazines? the entire MGL 140-128 talks about punishment, NOT the legality of feeding devices.

Find better quotes next time. Better yet, read them before you post.
You read one statue and declare it does not cover what you are talking about so what you are talking about must be ok. MGL 140 123 is about the conditions on a MA Dealers license. Just because something it not a condition of the license does not make it either legal or illegal.

MGL 140 131M
MGL 140 121

Those are the two relevant statues. No one cares who manufactures or makes or modifies the magazine. All that is cared about is "is it a large capacity feeding device"? What "readily modifiable" means is ultimately the test that no one knows the answer to. But please, keep up the good work.
 
Back
Top Bottom