MA Gun Laws

So long as:

1. The once-collapsible stock is permanently fixed; and

2. You have not contravened any other laws;

You should be fine.
 
hollewud7 said:
yes, but the adjustment needs to be permanent. A legally pinned adjustable stock has more modifications than just a pin IIRC.
Click to expand...

IMO A pin is more than likely "enough" as it means that a person is not going to be able to adjust it without tools, and it is basically a fixed stock. It would take the same amount of effort to remove the pin (eg, something like a roll pin) as it would be to take a removable stock and replace it with one of a different length. Of course one item of fun with the law is it's anyone's guess as to what the real "spirit and intent" of that garbage is. [laugh]

ETA: There are probably BATFE tech branch decisions regarding this issue, but I am unsure of the relevance as I don't think there is any enabling statute in MGL
that makes those decisions legally binding in an MA sense. Same thing with the flash suppressor determination- it's all open to whether or not MA would
adopt the BATFE standards (or not) that are not codified in law.

-Mike
 
ASHDUMP said:
Does anyone know where I could find a "cliffs note" version of the MGL's? i.e. the most common questions asked?

Or a full PDF version so I can print it out? I can only read so much online before my eyes get bugged out.
Click to expand...

There is a Massachusetts Gun Laws" poster which is supposed to be in every city hall and town hall.

Chapter 269: Section 11. Printing statutes for posters; display

PART IV. CRIMES, PUNISHMENTS AND PROCEEDINGSIN CRIMINAL CASES

TITLE I. CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS

CHAPTER 269. CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC PEACE

Chapter 269: Section 11. Printing statutes for posters; display

Section 11. The state secretary shall, annually, cause to be printed, in English and in such other languages as he may deem necessary, and in large letters so as to be easily read, for use as a poster, section one hundred and thirty-one of chapter one hundred and forty and sections ten, twelve B, and fourteen of this chapter. Sufficient copies of the said posters shall be sent to the clerks and to the superintendents of schools in all cities and towns for their use as herein provided. The city or town clerks shall cause posters received by them to be displayed in such places as they may select, and in such numbers, according to the population of the city or town, as its clerk may deem expedient. The superintendents of schools shall cause the posters received by them to be distributed among the schools within their jurisdiction, and in such numbers as they may deem necessary. The cost of preparing and printing the posters and of distributing them to the various cities and towns shall be paid by the commonwealth, and the cost of placing or affixing them in each city or town shall be paid by that city or town.
Click to expand...
 
Quick question. A personal defense handgun/weapon according to Mass law cannot be modified in any way internally and must be stock, is this correct? I can have different sights but that's about it, right? I've pretty much rendered my G21 to sport shooting only with the upgrades I've done. However, would the same hold true for say, the state of NH? Thanks all.
 
esswun said:
Quick question. A personal defense handgun/weapon according to Mass law cannot be modified in any way internally and must be stock, is this correct? I can have different sights but that's about it, right? I've pretty much rendered my G21 to sport shooting only with the upgrades I've done. However, would the same hold true for say, the state of NH? Thanks all.
Click to expand...

what law is that?
 
esswun said:
Quick question. A personal defense handgun/weapon according to Mass law cannot be modified in any way internally and must be stock, is this correct? I can have different sights but that's about it, right?
Click to expand...

Wrong.

Who is filling your head with that nonsense?

Do you NOT see all those threads about trigger jobs on M&P's, etc.?
 
Scrivener said:
Wrong.

Who is filling your head with that nonsense?

Do you NOT see all those threads about trigger jobs on M&P's, etc.?
Click to expand...

It's as if anti-gun groups are air dropping disinformation leaflets into the parking lots of gun clubs and gun shops. And the leaflets encourage readers to post their newly gathered information on NES.
 
economist said:
It's as if anti-gun groups are air dropping disinformation leaflets into the parking lots of gun clubs and gun shops. And the leaflets encourage readers to post their newly gathered information on NES.
Click to expand...

Who blindly do so, making NO effort to do any investigation of their own first.
 
Quick question. A personal defense handgun/weapon according to Mass law cannot be modified in any way internally and must be stock, is this correct? I can have different sights but that's about it, right? I've pretty much rendered my G21 to sport shooting only with the upgrades I've done. However, would the same hold true for say, the state of NH? Thanks all.
Click to expand...
Time to set down the USPSA rulebook which you have open to appendix D4 and pick up the book on MA law :)
 
Ha, the responses are encouraging. I didn't read any laws as it's all a bunch of mumbo jumbo to me anyways, but I knew you guys would know. I just threw it out there for you's to tear apart. I work with a few LEO's and they're always telling me their duty guns have to be stock according to their respective departmenst rules. I assumed that if a LEO couldn't engage a crook having a modified handgun, neither could we sheepdogs. I've installed a lot of upgrades to my Glock and was just concerned about the legality of it. You know MA, they'll protect the criminal and go after the law abiding, just had to check.
 
esswun said:
I work with a few LEO's and they're always telling me their duty guns have to be stock according to their respective departmenst rules. I assumed that if a LEO couldn't engage a crook having a modified handgun, neither could we sheepdogs.
Click to expand...
Department rules are department rules, not laws. Departments have reasons for those rules (some of which make sense and some that don't). They don't want Officer Random J. Goonsmith mucking up his gun. They also have serious liability issues.

You are not subject to internal police department regulations.
 
I'm gonna ask what might be a dumb question, but I'm a newbie, so what the heck: what is it that makes an adjustable stock, in of itself, "evil". I just don't get it. Figure you guys will have an opinion...
 
The consensus of those who wish to infringe upon your civil rights believe that a collapsible stock is evil because it decreases the length of the rifle making it more easier to conceal under your trench coat. Note: It does not matter if you are wearing any clothes under the trench coat.
 
Ahh, concealment is the issue...
Is my understanding correct that only two "evil" features are allowed in MA? But we can choose which two. So concealment alone isn't inherently bad, but only in combination with another evil feature?
Just trying to understand the intent, if that's possible...
 
No, it can't be the length that makes it evil, because you can have the stock collapsed and pinned. It must be that they're afraid of having more things that go back and forth (not to mention up) on the stock. All those things moving around make anyone near the gun want to kill everyone around.

Ken
 
mark2 said:
Just trying to understand the intent, if that's possible...
Click to expand...

The problem that the writers of the 1994 Fed Assault Weapons ban had, was that they wanted to ban "assault weapons," so they had to define what an "assault weapon" was, in contrast to gentle, "hello kitty" semiautomatic guns. So they did it by banning guns that, to them, look bad -- black, scary guns, with evil features like:

- pistol grips
- flash suppressors
- bayonet lugs
- collapsible stocks
- barrel shrouds
- threaded barrels

So there isn't a lot of logic to the law that you can divine.
 
So there isn't a lot of logic to the law that you can divine.
Click to expand...
There is a LOT of logic.

The proponents wanted to ban as much as they could. They very effectively identified some items that had virtually no political constituency to speak of, and took the most territory they could get.
 
For roughly the 13.7 trillionth time, there is not nor has there ever been any such thing as the AG's list. Giving a definitive answer as to which guns were approved by their office and which ones were not would take away the fear factor that scares away so many manufacturers and dealers.

There are only 3 guns on the "Formar Target Competition Roster", none by Ruger (or Colt). Most Ruger revolvers are included on the EOPS Approved Firearm Roster.

Ken
 
I still can't swallow statements made by PD's on their site about how the chief can put restriction on the LTC.

Sentence such as 'The Chief of Police maintains the right to place any restrictions he deems necessary on individual Class A License to Carry permits' -- Andover PD, Haverhill PD

Sure pass your background check and firearms safety etc but we will still treat you like a second class citizen.

Is that really legal for PD's to do that? Who gives the chief that much power?

Is there anything that can be done to change that (short of ticking the chief off) ?
 
NRA4Life, do some reading of MGL Ch. 140 S. 131 (a) for the "how can they do this".

Only a change in MGLs can change this. H. 2259 was an attempt to do this and went nowhere. MCOPA makes sure that chiefs can discriminate whatever way they wish with legal impunity.
 
NRA4Life said:
I still can't swallow statements made by PD's on their site about how the chief can put restriction on the LTC.

Sentence such as 'The Chief of Police maintains the right to place any restrictions he deems necessary on individual Class A License to Carry permits' -- Andover PD, Haverhill PD

Sure pass your background check and firearms safety etc but we will still treat you like a second class citizen.

Is that really legal for PD's to do that?
Click to expand...
Yes.

Who gives the chief that much power?
Click to expand...
The legislature. Specifically, MGL Chapter 140 Section 131, which reads, in part:

(a) A Class A license shall entitle a holder thereof to purchase, rent, lease, borrow, possess and carry: (i) firearms, including large capacity firearms, and feeding devices and ammunition therefor, for all lawful purposes, subject to such restrictions relative to the possession, use or carrying of firearms as the licensing authority deems proper; and (ii) rifles and shotguns, including large capacity weapons, and feeding devices and ammunition therefor, for all lawful purposes; provided, however, that the licensing authority may impose such restrictions relative to the possession, use or carrying of large capacity rifles and shotguns as it deems proper. A violation of a restriction imposed by the licensing authority under the provisions of this paragraph shall be cause for suspension or revocation and shall, unless otherwise provided, be punished by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000; provided, however, that the provisions of section 10 of chapter 269 shall not apply to such violation.
Click to expand...

Is there anything that can be done to change that (short of ticking the chief off) ?
Click to expand...
The law is against you, unfortunately.
 

Similar threads

How do the new laws affect face to face ammo sales in MA?
Replies
14
Views
626
zboys
zboys
legal clarification on new laws
Replies
25
Views
767
milktree
milktree
MA lawrs in action
Replies
10
Views
580
Rat187
Rat187
MA Firearms Roster questions / Maine to MA transfer
Replies
14
Views
331
maverickx31996
M
Private Sales in MA in 2024
Replies
7
Views
670
not new guy
N
Back
Top Bottom