Sure it can. The definition of a "large capacity feeding device" is distinct and separate from the definition for a "large capacity firearm."
actually, if you read the definition of "firearm" in that section... a shotgun isn't a firearm.....
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***
Sure it can. The definition of a "large capacity feeding device" is distinct and separate from the definition for a "large capacity firearm."
Not to nitpick, but it's not the gun that's in question. It's the mag tube in and of itself. Unless someone can tell me how I'm misreading the definition of "large capacity feeding device." (I've been wrong before, and when I am I admit it.)
The way I read it is this: A large capacity device can be defined as a magazine AND a shell tube. The exclusion being the tube used on some .22s.
Limitations
For a magazine: 10 rounds
For a tube extension: 5 rounds
Isn't this what it says?
Yea, so........ heres the thing. I see a lot of talk (confusing talk I might add) about the extended choke tubes. THe thing about this is, they didnt pull the gun because of the extended choke tubes. They still have a bunch of shotguns featuring extended choke tubes on the sales floor. It is my belief that they pulled this gun because of its collapsible stock. It is pulled from every Dicks in MA. Just wondering why. Besides the fact that the higher-ups dont know thier ass from thier elbow, im wondering what reason they thought this to be MA law.
Dick's = clueless.
Here's Martha grinning at the people who think pump shotguns are "illegal" in MA.
I am simply stating that to even think that a pump would be illegal is just MA brainwashing at it's finest. You shouldn't have to question everything in a gunshop and worry about compliant BS. I totally understand the OP's honest question and can see why you may hesitate, but with pump shotguns/lever action type firearms, I wouldn't worry too much.
Again, nobody is saying that a pump is illegal. What I'm saying is that whether you or I like it, and despite "expert" opinions from Glidden and his sycophants, a "large capacity feeding device" is most certainly illegal if you read the actual words in the statute.
Should people worry about it? NO. We CAN'T worry too much because if we did we'd all go crazy. Like I've said before, the MA gun laws are so ****ed up that literally even "legal" stuff can be "illegal" depending on who has it out for you. As someone said in the other thread it's "Heads you lose, tails they win." Remember the "grenade launcher" that the guy in Marblehead got jammed up for? Or the guy in Lowell who got charged for making explosives (aka reloading ammo in his basement?) Or even the CO in Salem who got convicted up for "carrying" a gun in his glove box? You really think the DA is going to make those specious legal leaps and not call an extended magazine tube a LCFD? Really?
The only reason that I even commented, against my better judgement, was to point out yet another area in the MGLs that's not nearly as "cut and dried" as many people here think it is. If anyone is brainwashed, it's the people who think that what some retired cop says to some other retired cop has any legal precedence whatsoever.
Not "and," but "or." Also not just a box mag or a tube but pretty much anything that feeds ammo. Old school canvas machine gun belts, links, etc.
And the limits have nothing to do with whether it s a box or a tube, but rather if it holds shotgun shells or some other type of ammo. A post-ban Henry Big Boy that holds 10 rounds in it's tube would be legal.
What I was getting at is that a magazine and tube extension are, in effect, the same thing in the statute and that both had different stipulations on the capacity.
I'm sure that all of those are legal pre-bans or pictures from out of state. Yep, pretty sure.
Dick's = clueless.
That I don't know... Any stock ~should~ be legal the way I read the law, but I'm not Dick's corporate counsel. (Or anyone else's, thankfully.) I think MassMark works there though, so maybe PM him and see what he says?
Are they? Or perhaps they're trying to protect a multi-billion dollar business in the midst of insanity? Gee, I don't know... The "clueless" Dicks Sporting Goods is now approaching 500-stores and pulls in billions of dollars. As clueless as they are, The Lodge in many stores accounts for over half of their business and if you multiply the number of stores by the number of gun sales, I'd say there's an odd chance that they have at least a minimal functional knowledge about what they are doing. Much like Midway, Brownells, J&G et al that will hardly do business in this state at all, Dicks has bigger fish to fry than worrying about getting entangled in the web that is Massachusetts - so forgive them if they err on the side of caution - even to a point of what you or I believe to be stupidity. For all the bitching that goes on about DSG by the superstars of the interwebs, Dicks Sporting Goods is pretty successful - at least out here. I haven't heard of any Massachusetts stores closing due to lack of business, so they must be preying on idiocy...And guess what? Despite what you may think, I'm no cheerleader for big-box anything and have had hair-pulling moments with corporate decision making, but guess what else? I don't own or hold stock in the company - I have no risk. I'm treated and paid pretty well for my customer service and knowledge base - that's it. I have however used my knowledge base to derail more than a few misadventures with over-interpretation of the law, including some pretty humorous edicts about what constituted "high capacity" and/or prohibited firearms. I'll save that for another day.
My opinions on Dicks Sporting Goods are pretty well-known. I do indeed work there - albeit part time. I was hired by them for my functional knowledge on firearms, (as well as kayaks and camping gear - ask me about fishing tackle however and I glaze over). It was not however for my prowess on interpreting the largely uninterpretable. That being said, I have had to use my google-fu on more than one occasion when dealing with inventory. Are all Dicks Sporting Goods employees knowledgeable? Nope. Are some clueless about firearms? Yup. Again, ask me about anything but basic fishing tackle, (jitterbugs, poppers, red devils, etc) and you'll find out what clueless is. I do not however endeavor to advise corporate on how to best traverse an icy slope, so if they seem "clueless", then my guess is they find fiscal longevity and safety in that cluelessness...
And here I was thinking you were pretty much gtg with any features on a pump...
CRAP! why the hell did Cohen have to be banned?
Was he banned recently???????????
I agree that it's not an AWB thing. I also agree that the shotgun itself isn't a "large capacity weapon." The magazine tube, if it holds more than 5 shells, is a large capacity feeding device. That in and of itself is illegal regardless of the gun it's attached to (or even if it's not attached to a gun at all.)
Post-ban "large" capacity feeding devices are not legal in MA. Period. The same law that says that you can't buy a post-ban "large" capacity Glock mag says that you can't buy a post-ban "large" capacity shotgun mag tube.
In that case then nearly every gun shop in the state sells illegal shotguns.
-Mike
Obviously he did something that the boss didn't like. His forum, his rules. It's really none of our business.
I see where the literal reading does provides some evidence, but common sense has to come in at some point here.
Ah, touche...but is it enforced at all?Since when is "common sense" a guiding principle with regard to MA law?
I can't help but note (with our previous discussion in mind) that this is a great example of one of those laws that has been "passed by the will of the people," but that morally shouldn't be enforced.