New restriction on transport of mags?

[wheelgun]

GOAL says:

"Hi cap mags.... Mandatory Storage:
When traveling to and from the “permitted” locations they must be stored unloaded and secured in a locked container in compliance with the storage and transportation laws."

So now hi cap mags (not under direct control) not only have to be unloaded, but must be locked up in the vehicle?
Even for instance 15 round pistol mags?

.

 

[Rick O'Shea]

Only after Oct 23rd.

 

[snax]

Locked for your safety. Hicaps been walking the streets far too long.

 

[LuvDog]

They're just trying to protect us. Have you seen the Rapetile prices for old standard cap mags? By weight, they are worth more than Gold. We should be transporting them in armored bank trucks.

 

[EJFudd]

GOAL says:

"Hi cap mags.... Mandatory Storage:
When traveling to and from the “permitted” locations they must be stored unloaded and secured in a locked container in compliance with the storage and transportation laws."

So now hi cap mags (not under direct control) not only have to be unloaded, but must be locked up in the vehicle?
Even for instance 15 round pistol mags?

.

Slimy Leftist MA Pols: "Hmmm. How can we do a taking without actually doing a taking"?

 

[G4Y4HK]

Savage. At least in CT, if you were a gud boi and registered your mags with the state, you're graciously allowed to carry them but only put 10 bullets in it. Load 11, insta-felony.

 

[APFSDS]

GOAL says:

"Hi cap mags.... Mandatory Storage:
When traveling to and from the “permitted” locations they must be stored unloaded and secured in a locked container in compliance with the storage and transportation laws."

So now hi cap mags (not under direct control) not only have to be unloaded, but must be locked up in the vehicle?
Even for instance 15 round pistol mags?

.

I think they must be unloaded and locked unless you're at home or a shooting range. Direct control doesn't matter any more.

 

[Varmint]

I think they must be unloaded and locked unless you're at home or a shooting range. The constitution doesn't matter any more.

FIFY

 

[pastera]

Using "permitted" is a bad choice of wording - "permissable" would fit better since there is no permitting for a location for LCFDs.

1534 (c) Subsection (a) shall not apply to large capacity feeding devices lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994 only if such possession is: (i) on private property owned or legally controlled by the person in possession of the large capacity feeding device; (ii) on private property that is not open to the public with the express permission of the property owner or the property owner’s authorized agent; (iii) while on the premises of a licensed firearms dealer or gunsmith for the purpose of lawful repair; (iv) at a licensed firing range or sports shooting competition venue; or (v) while traveling to and from these locations; provided, that the large capacity feeding device is stored unloaded and secured in a locked container in accordance with sections 131C and 131L. A person authorized under this subsection to possess a large capacity feeding device may only transfer the device to an heir or devisee, a person residing outside the commonwealth, or a licensed dealer.

The requirement of a licensed club is mooted by the available option of "with permission" since any member of a club has express permission to shoot at the club.

 

[wheelgun]

I think they must be unloaded and locked unless you're at home or a shooting range. Direct control doesn't matter any more.

For a rifle, yes I get that. But for a pistol it doesn't make sense. It would mean having a loaded CCW (i.e. under direct control) with a hi-cap mag in a vehicle would be illegal.

 

[pupchow]

That doesn't make sense, at least not in the case of pistols. It would mean having a loaded CCW with a hi-cap mag in a vehicle would be illegal.

Nonsensical but true.

 

[slap shot]

this , this! will be the straw...


maybe not

 

[pastera]

For a rifle, yes I get that. But for a pistol it doesn't make sense. It would mean having a loaded CCW (i.e. under direct control) with a hi-cap mag in a vehicle would be illegal.

Correct
As of 10/23, you will no longer be able to carry with a magazine over 10 rounds, period.

 

[Palladin]

Move

 

[MGnoob]

Correct
As of 10/23, you will no longer be able to carry with a magazine over 10 rounds, period.

Sure… I’m just gonna put a Glock switch in become a felon and then I just get released from jail. I can do it all over again.

But I think Glocks are gayYyyyy

 

[Uzi2]

Operators are standing by for reservations.

 

[M1911]

One thing I don't understand is this:

(v) while traveling to and from these locations; provided, that the large capacity feeding device is stored unloaded and secured in a locked container in accordance with sections 131C and 131L

Does the requirement that it be stored unloaded and in a locked container only apply to section v (that is, when traveling)? Or does it also apply when at home? The punctuation is confusing...

 

[AJK129]

View attachment 908246 Operators are standing by for reservations.

Thats the goal by October, the question is where to after the trucks loaded lol

 

[pastera]

One thing I don't understand is this:



Does the requirement that it be stored unloaded and in a locked container only apply to section v (that is, when traveling)? Or does it also apply when at home? The punctuation is confusing...

Only that section which is transport

 

[Picton]

Correct
As of 10/23, you will no longer be able to carry with a magazine over 10 rounds, period.

Oh, you'll certainly be able to.

The State will tell you you're not able to. If you feel like they're right, then sure. You won't be allowed to. But you'll most definitely be able to.

OP, it's up to you what level of risk you want to assume.

 

[AJK129]

Oh, you'll certainly be able to.

The State will tell you you're not able to. If you feel like they're right, then sure. You won't be allowed to. But you'll most definitely be able to.

OP, it's up to you what level of risk you want to assume.

Im still laughing at the fact that I bet people were physically putting uppers on non FA10ed lowers so they could fill out the form.

 

[M1911]

Only that section which is transport

While that is my guess, the punctuation could imply otherwise. It uses semicolons to separate sections (i), (ii), (iii), etc. The only semicolon that is not directly associated with a section change is in section (v). So does that semicolon mean the following clause only applies to (v) or applies to all clauses? 131C is carrying in a vehicle. 131L is storage, which could apply to the other sections.

So while I suspect it means that it only applies to transport, I'm not confident in my suspicion.

 

[Dench]

Oh, you'll certainly be able to.

The State will tell you you're not able to. If you feel like they're right, then sure. You won't be allowed to. But you'll most definitely be able to.

OP, it's up to you what level of risk you want to assume.

Whatever you have to do to pretend MA gives a shit about liberty!

 

[expedition03]

This state sucks

 

[pastera]

While that is my guess, the punctuation could imply otherwise. It uses semicolons to separate sections (i), (ii), (iii), etc. The only semicolon that is not directly associated with a section change is in section (v). So does that semicolon mean the following clause only applies to (v) or applies to all clauses? 131C is carrying in a vehicle. 131L is storage, which could apply to the other sections.

So while I suspect it means that it only applies to transport, I'm not confident in my suspicion.

C&P 131m into an editor
Remove the line numbers and then start formatting the enumerated sections

(i) through (v) are conditions of the "only if such possession is:"
The enumerated exceptions end at "A person authorized...:

 

[M1911]

C&P 131m into an editor
Remove the line numbers and then start formatting the enumerated sections

(i) through (v) are conditions of the "only if such possession is:"
The enumerated exceptions end at "A person authorized...:

I'm sorry, but I'm not following you. It seems to me that it could be:

1534 (c) Subsection (a) shall not apply to large capacity feeding devices lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994 only if such possession is:

(i) on private property owned or legally controlled by the person in possession of the large capacity feeding device;
(ii) on private property that is not open to the public with the express permission of the property owner or the property owner’s authorized agent;
(iii) while on the premises of a licensed firearms dealer or gunsmith for the purpose of lawful repair;
(iv) at a licensed firing range or sports shooting competition venue; or
(v) while traveling to and from these locations; provided, that the large capacity feeding device is stored unloaded and secured in a locked container in accordance with sections 131C and 131L.

In which case the clause "provided,..." only applies to (v).

But it also could be:

1534 (c) Subsection (a) shall not apply to large capacity feeding devices lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994 only if such possession is:

(i) on private property owned or legally controlled by the person in possession of the large capacity feeding device;
(ii) on private property that is not open to the public with the express permission of the property owner or the property owner’s authorized agent;
(iii) while on the premises of a licensed firearms dealer or gunsmith for the purpose of lawful repair;
(iv) at a licensed firing range or sports shooting competition venue; or
(v) while traveling to and from these locations;

provided, that the large capacity feeding device is stored unloaded and secured in a locked container in accordance with sections 131C and 131L.

In which case "provided..." applies to all sections.

While I suspect that it only applies to transport, I don't think it is definitively clear. But I am not a lawyer, because my parents were married.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

They're just trying to protect us. Have you seen the Rapetile prices for old standard cap mags? By weight, they are worth more than Gold. We should be transporting them in armored bank trucks.

No, they are not. Never even saw an asking price at that level.

 

[pastera]

Im still laughing at the fact that I bet people were physically putting uppers on non FA10ed lowers so they could fill out the form.

Well, if you want some assembly marks to prove it was legally a rifle per the law...

Some people's acceptable risk is negative.

 

[CrackPot]

Here, just read the language yourselves. Its not hard.

For reference:

• subsection (a) is what makes LCFD and ASFs illegal to possess.
• Section 131C is transport
• Section 131L is storage

(c) Subsection (a) shall not apply to large capacity feeding devices lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994 only if such possession is: (i) on private property owned or legally controlled by the person in possession of the large capacity feeding device; (ii) on private property that is not open to the public with the express permission of the property owner or the property owner’s authorized agent; (iii) while on the premises of a licensed firearms dealer or gunsmith for the purpose of lawful repair; (iv) at a licensed firing range or sports shooting competition venue; or (v) while traveling to and from these locations; provided, that the large capacity feeding device is stored unloaded and secured in a locked container in accordance with sections 131C and 131L. A person authorized under this subsection to possess a large capacity feeding device may only transfer the device to an heir or devisee, a person residing outside the commonwealth, or a licensed dealer.

 

[M1911]

Here, just read the language yourselves. Its not hard.

The language isn't hard. The punctuation is ambiguous, in my uneducated opinion.