There are three branches of government in this country on both the federal and state levels. 1) The legislative branch is charged with making law; 2) The judicial branch is charged with interpreting/applying all laws passed by the legislative branch , particularly with regards to the constitutionality of such laws; 3) And, the executive branch is charged with enforcing these laws. Also, a few of the tests that courts are supposed to apply to any laws passed by a duly elected legislature are: a) What was the original intent of the Founding Fathers? See Federalist No. 46 for the original intent concerning the right to keep and bear arms, b) All laws have to be written in clear plain language that the average person can understand; c) These laws need to be applied equally throughout the applicable jurisdiction, etc.
It should be very clear from the discussion in this thread that there is no clear language that the average person can understand concerning the preban v. post ban magazine issue. Furthermore, the Founding Fathers intended that all able bodied male citizens were in fact part of the militia, and should be armed with military style weapons, as noted by the Supreme Court in Miller, Federalist No. 46, etc. However, even in the 1994 federal ban law, language was added to this law to the effect that when there is any doubt as to whether or not a magazine was pre or post ban that it would be presumed to be preban under the new law to avoid an unfair prosecution.
There should have been a better prepared effort to bring legal challenges to confusing and unconstitutional laws. In fact, many of these laws can be challenged just on the basis that they are unclear to the average person, and not applied equally throughout the Commonwealth, etc.
There is also the issue of the "Chilling Effect" of a constitutional right, which Judge Benitez addressed recently in California with the magazine capacity issue. In other words, allowing citizens to own and carry a single shot muzzle loading rifle unrestricted, but not allowing citizens to own and carry/use current level technology weapons that any militia would utilize is reducing this constitutional right to a privilege. This is ultimately what Judge Benitez was addressing in his recent opinion in California concerning magazine capacity laws that restrict the average citizen's 2nd Amendment rights. "Either way, Judge Benitez ruled, the law would fail. Indeed, he characterized the California law as “turning the Constitution upside down.”"
Concerning the effect of a license in or outside the state of issue, I have encountered several people over the years that have had to move to Massachusetts for employment purposes that refused to obtain even an FID card, and refused to register any of the firearms that they purchased legally in the state or states that they previously resided in. These people firmly believe that their rights travel with them, and that if they didn't have to obtain a license just to possess their legally obtained firearms prior to moving into Massachusetts, they do not have to do anything different just because they were transferred by their employer to work in Massachusetts for 3-5 years time. I have warned these people that they could encountered serious legal issues if they were otherwise found in possession of these firearms and/or high capacity magazines. Most of these people simply ignored me and didn't believe that they as law abiding citizens working in white collar jobs would ever be prosecuted for what they viewed as infractions of local regulations. Once you are outside of the southern New England and Mid-Atlantic down to DC areas of this country, most people cannot imagine the level of firearms regulations that exists in the 6-10 extreme Socialist states and jurisdictions in this country. In fact, I find that the former Confederate states practice a constitutional form of government closer to the original intent than a state like Massachusetts, where the Revolution of 1776 started when British soldiers tried to disarm Colonists that owned and carried military style weapons of that era. Yet, during the Civil War Massachusetts was supposed to be leading the effort to "Save The Republic".
