• 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.

Readily Capable of accepting large capacity

dwarven1 said:
Dude, if you can read EVERY post on this board, you're A) the fastest reader I've ever heard of and B) about to be made a Mod as soon as Derek reads this.
Click to expand...

Huh? Did I post that I read everything? I was just busting your chops for fun...that's why I said that most people prob didn't know...and I just remembered seeing it posted somewhere. And it popped back into my head when you posted about the mag.

Sorry for teasing with you...
 
Leave it to MA to have us all guessing


I see this like how I see a mini 14, 10/22, and SKS. All of these guns are FID compliant but they all also have aftermarket magazines that can make them high cap guns. I don't see how a sporterized AK that is shipping anywhere in the U.S. with only 10 round magazines is any different then a 10/22. And I'm talking about a IZ 132 not just any saiga so because it's a low capacity model I don't see the problem.
 
Gman021 said:
Leave it to MA to have us all guessing


I see this like how I see a mini 14, 10/22, and SKS. All of these guns are FID compliant but they all also have aftermarket magazines that can make them high cap guns. I don't see how a sporterized AK that is shipping anywhere in the U.S. with only 10 round magazines is any different then a 10/22. And I'm talking about a IZ 132 not just any saiga so because it's a low capacity model I don't see the problem.
Click to expand...

Aftermarket high-cap magazines are irrelevant. If it is not on the large capacity roster and was never sold from the manufacture to any of the 50 states with high cap mags then it is FID compliant. As far as I can see that Saiga is FID compliant. The thing is convincing a dealer to sell you one and possible legal trouble because it is an AK variant and most AK's are shipped with high cap magazines even though the specific AK was never sold with high cap mags. I have a FID and personally wouldn't want to be in the legal gray area owing a AK variant, especially since that Saiga is black it is even more dangerous.[rolleyes]
I hate this state!
 
I may catch hell for reviving an old thread but: I was looking for an answer as to whether the 10/22 is hi capacity or not and found this from the MA hi cap. roster:

Weapons not listed on this roster may also be large capacity weapons if they are semi-automatic and are capable of accepting or readily modifiable to accept a large capacity feeding device. Definitions of ‘capable of accepting’ and ‘readily modifiable to accept’ are defined in 501 CMR 7.02.

From: http://www.mass.gov/eopss/docs/chsb/firearms/large-capacity-roster-06-2011.pdf

It would seem the state has included a blanket clause to cover gray areas. From this I'm concluding that under MA classification the 10/22 is hi-cap. FWIW I have found nothing in the MGL's that defines a gun as hi-cap or not based on the mag that it was sold with. If anyone knows to the contrary please cite the laws so we can read them.
 
skeeter, why don't you read the CMR.

The official answer is already here and I'm not going to bother replowing that field.

Gray is the color of almost every MA gun law . . . the result when morons that are totally clueless are allowed to write laws.
 
aw_jeez.jpg
 
JWPaolilliJr said:
When Bill Ruger was alive I refused to buy any Ruger. As far as I am concerned he was no better than the "Old NRA FUDD's" who were only concerned about what was appropriate for target shooting and hunting. His self imposed restriction on magazine capacity, as far as I am concerned was how the magazine restriction got traction.

So I hope the F*** he is "spinning"
Click to expand...

I think you are right about Ruger giving the antis traction on this matter because (if I'm not mistaken), he said something to the effect of "No honest man needs more than 10 rounds". Not sure if that's an exact quote, but I remember reading something similar awhile back and scratching my head as to WHY a manufacturer would make such a statement.[rolleyes] Fortunately those that run Ruger these days have "seen the light", and now manufacture good stuff. I'll bet his statement was picked up and quoted so much that it actually became a common anti argument.
 
Terminator03 said:
I think you are right about Ruger giving the antis traction on this matter because (if I'm not mistaken), he said something to the effect of "No honest man needs more than 10 rounds". Not sure if that's an exact quote, but I remember reading something similar awhile back and scratching my head as to WHY a manufacturer would make such a statement.[rolleyes] Fortunately those that run Ruger these days have "seen the light", and now manufacture good stuff. I'll bet his statement was picked up and quoted so much that it actually became a common anti argument.
Click to expand...

I have heard that it was actually "No honest man needs more than 15 rounds". He had the P89 all ready to go with 15 round mags, I believe, and Congress butt-****ed him and put a 10 round limit in.
 
Just going to point out that I read that approved roster and right at the top thers is a key paragraph.


This roster has been compiled in accordance with M.G.L. c.140, §131¾. It contains weaponsdetermined to have been originally manufactured for the civilian retail consumer market as largecapacity weapons as defined by M.G.L. c. 140, § 121. Weapons not listed on this roster mayalso be large capacity weapons if they are semi-automatic and are capable of accepting or readilymodifiable to accept a large capacity feeding device. Definitions of ‘capable of accepting’ and​
‘readily modifiable to accept’ are defined in 501 CMR 7.02.

Seems to me this ends the debate on semi automatic rifles. Ruger 10/22 and Mini 14 etc. They may not be on the list, but they are readily capable of accepting a large capacity feeding device.
 
Last edited:
TheKingNothing said:
Just going to point out that I read that approved roster and right at the top thers is a key paragraph.


This roster has been compiled in accordance with M.G.L. c.140, §131¾. It contains weaponsdetermined to have been originally manufactured for the civilian retail consumer market as largecapacity weapons as defined by M.G.L. c. 140, § 121. Weapons not listed on this roster mayalso be large capacity weapons if they are semi-automatic and are capable of accepting or readilymodifiable to accept a large capacity feeding device. Definitions of ‘capable of accepting’ and​
‘readily modifiable to accept’ are defined in 501 CMR 7.02.

Seems to me this ends the debate on semi automatic rifles. Ruger 10/22 and Mini 14 etc. They may not be on the list, but they are readily capable of accepting a large capacity feeding device.
Click to expand...

See Post # 12 here:

http://www.northeastshooters.com/vb...rge-capacity?p=2186011&viewfull=1#post2186011

And this debate will never end! [rolleyes]
 
LenS, I read this entire thread looking for an answer regarding the 10/22 hi-cap issue. I read the CMR before I posted my first response. I posted because the paragraph I quoted (the same one that TheKingNothing posted) seemed to offer an answer within a MA legal document that had not been stated in this thread. I read your argument in post #12 but I cannot find a LAW that states a gun is only hi-cap based on the mag sold with it. Can you please cite? I'm admitting I may be wrong...I don't know. I cited a law that seemed to offer light here that's all.
 
You won't find it in the Law. You will find it in the CMR and EOPS interpretation.

Just understand that when you read the LAW literally, every Colt 1911 becomes "LTC Only" as you can always make an external mag as long as your arm.

Was this the intent of the writers of the law? NO! They screwed up because they are morons, so the only way out was to create a more appropriate definition of "capable of accepting a large capacity feeding device" in 501 CMR 7.02.

Is it a gray area, you bet.
 
I hate the term "large capacity". As far as I'm concerned , ARs in military and law enforcement are standard capacity (30rds) and defining it to large capacity is a such a FUDD word. I'm not calling anyone out , just expressing my hatred for bullshit like this. I can see like a 100rd drum to be called large capacity but not a 30rd mag. Sigh.


Sent from my POS iPhone
 
ColdDayInHell said:
I hate the term "large capacity". As far as I'm concerned , ARs in military and law enforcement are standard capacity (30rds) and defining it to large capacity is a such a FUDD word. I'm not calling anyone out , just expressing my hatred for bullshit like this. I can see like a 100rd drum to be called large capacity but not a 30rd mag. Sigh.


Sent from my POS iPhone
Click to expand...

Its just a classification. Just get over it. Would you want someone to address you as a "warm blooded animal" instead of human being/person or using your given name? In normal society we need to categorize and add structure to things so others we communicate with/to can have a better idea what we are talking about.

And i dont see it being a FUDD term, real FUDDs from my expirience call them m16s or assault rifles(& the occasional "bananna clip") even though they clearly are semi-auto only.
 
Last edited:
ColdDayInHell said:
I hate the term "large capacity". As far as I'm concerned , ARs in military and law enforcement are standard capacity (30rds) and defining it to large capacity is a such a FUDD word. I'm not calling anyone out , just expressing my hatred for bullshit like this. I can see like a 100rd drum to be called large capacity but not a 30rd mag. Sigh.


Sent from my POS iPhone
Click to expand...

100 round drum is still not enough. correct nomenclature for a beta mag on an AR is "100 round titty-mag".
 
Of course it's a Fudd term - or, more precisely, a way to make some Evil guns into MORE Evil guns.

I think it was Bill Jordan that said, "If you need more than six shots, you shoot poorly or have too many enemies."


[laugh]

As a practical matter, it Balkanizes Mass gun owners - FID/ LTC-B / LTC-A. This rifle is ok in a canvas case, that rifle has to be locked up for transport. When these laws/regulations are written, it shows that the pols care, and are doing something about gun violence.

[rolleyes]
 
TheKingNothing said:
Just going to point out that I read that approved roster and right at the top thers is a key paragraph.


This roster has been compiled in accordance with M.G.L. c.140, §131¾. It contains weaponsdetermined to have been originally manufactured for the civilian retail consumer market as largecapacity weapons as defined by M.G.L. c. 140, § 121. Weapons not listed on this roster may also be large capacity weapons if they are semi-automatic and are capable of accepting or readilymodifiable to accept a large capacity feeding device. Definitions of ‘capable of accepting’ and
​
‘readily modifiable to accept’ are defined in 501 CMR 7.02.

Seems to me this ends the debate on semi automatic rifles. Ruger 10/22 and Mini 14 etc. They may not be on the list, but they are readily capable of accepting a large capacity feeding device.
Click to expand...

Actually, a gun is only "readily capable of accepting a large capacity feeding device," if you are in possession of the device as you can see here:

RMTAALCFD.png
 

Similar threads

Washington state high-capacity magazine ban remains on books for now
Replies
1
Views
112
pastera
pastera
Report: Americans Own over 700 Million Ammo Mags with Greater Than 10-Round Capacity
Replies
22
Views
486
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Fall River man charged after 30 firearms, 46 large capacity magazines, thousands of rounds of ammo seized
3 4 5
Replies
145
Views
7K
50wt
50wt
Interesting Article on the "Notching" of Firearms to Keep Track of "Kills"
Replies
8
Views
341
clampett
clampett
Mass. joins 18 states in push to restrict large-capacity magazines
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
G4Y4HK
G
Back
Top Bottom