Storage of gun with slide removed?

[Varmint]

If I store a handgun in a car with slide removed, that wouldn’t need to meet Mass storage laws since it’s not a firearm, is that right?

But if you have any ammo in the case with it that requires safe storage?

 

[wmass]

Once a frame is completed in to an operable piece it is a firearm. Is it then possible to unmake a firearm by removing operationally necessary pieces? I believe the answer is no and MA will treat it as a firearm cuz guns.

Since a trigger lock covers storage, I'd say cover your ass and not skirt perceived grey area.

 

[greencobra]

.....and MA will treat is a firearm cuz guns.

i think this would be true also.

 

[Sparky123]

If I store a handgun in a car with slide removed, that wouldn’t need to meet Mass storage laws since it’s not a firearm, is that right?

But if you have any ammo in the case with it that requires safe storage?

From what I understand the frame is considered the firearm, not the slide or barrel. So probably the safest thing to do is put a trigger lock on the frame. But once you put the trigger lock on you really don't have to take the pistol apart at all. But a small hidden safe would probably be a better idea.

 

[June4th]

Interesting question, MGL’s definition of a firearm says it has to be able to discharge a projectile. A frame alone cannot do that.

 

[CrackPot]

From what I understand the frame is considered the firearm, not the slide or barrel. So probably the safest thing to do is put a trigger lock on the frame. But once you put the trigger lock on you really don't have to take the pistol apart at all. But a small hidden safe would probably be a better idea.

The frame is usually the serialized component and therefore a firearm federally. Under Ma law it’s a chunk of metal/plastic.

A Ruger mark iv (and earlier models) the serialized component is the upper with the barrel so don’t assume.

I would not store a previously FA10ed (proof it was once a functioning firearm) in pieces and feel confident I was safe. This is MA after all.

 

[Len-2A Training]

You can bet your freedom that a Marsupial judge (and prosecutor/police) will rule that it still needed to be locked up/locked even without a slide. I wouldn't play that game, it would be costly.

 

[LuvDog]

I wouldn’t risk it since federally it’s the serialized part of the firearm in most cases

I even lock up my stripped lower receivers.

 

[bill o]

You can bet your freedom that a Marsupial judge (and prosecutor/police) will rule that it still needed to be locked up/locked even without a slide. I wouldn't play that game, it would be costly.

Wasn't there a case in Boston where a guy was caught carrying a cap and ball revolver and still got charged (maybe convicted?) even though it's not a firearm under state law?

 

[Varmint]

Thanks everyone, I guess it wasn’t such a simple question!

I meant for the slide to be in the same case, but I guess another danger in Mass is the arresting officer just assembles the gun and says “Lookie what we got here, a firearm in an unlocked case! You goin to jail!”

So I’ll file this under Legal but Bad Idea in Mass, like open carrying.

Thanks!

 

[Mike Stanton]

But do I have to lock up

???

Even if I "remove" the slide ?

 

[Mike Stanton]

On a serious note, Harbor Freight has a nice "Under the Car Seat" safe for $19.99.

Personal Portable Security Safe

Use a Coupon to save %20, and get a Free Flashlight while you're at it.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Wasn't there a case in Boston where a guy was caught carrying a cap and ball revolver and still got charged (maybe convicted?) even though it's not a firearm under state law?

The case was Bibby and he was convicted. A number of years later another case ruled such to overturn that decision.

Thanks everyone, I guess it wasn’t such a simple question!

I meant for the slide to be in the same case, but I guess another danger in Mass is the arresting officer just assembles the gun and says “Lookie what we got here, a firearm in an unlocked case! You goin to jail!”

So I’ll file this under Legal but Bad Idea in Mass, like open carrying.

Thanks!

Someone was convicted and they had a broken or missing (forget which) firing pin. Judge ruled that it was a "readily available part" and thus the guy was guilty of illegal storage.

 

[Ae1m]

From what I understand the frame is considered the firearm, not the slide or barrel. So probably the safest thing to do is put a trigger lock on the frame. But once you put the trigger lock on you really don't have to take the pistol apart at all. But a small hidden safe would probably be a better idea.

In MA (only) a firearm must be able to shoot as I read the definition. What the s/n is on makes no difference. That's why we can have "frame transfers". So a frame is not a firearm, and the barrel is not a firearm. Put them together, and voila you have a firearm. Not sure that makes a difference to some judges as Len posted with the firing pin story.

 

[one-eyed Jack]

Just lock it up and stop with this happy horseshit. Jack.

 

[AHM]

If I store a handgun in a car with slide removed, that wouldn’t need to meet Mass storage laws since it’s not a firearm, is that right?

Where is the slide "removed" to?

Legal Jeopardy Home Game

C_nstr_ct_v_ P_ss_ss__n​

Vowels for sale, cheep.

But if you have any ammo in the case with it that requires safe storage?

You're confusing Mass. laws on storage and transportation
with interstate travel under the FOPA safe harbor.

Or being unnecessarily conservative about the meaning of "unloaded"
in the Mass. laws about transport of weapons.
(The meaning of a gun be "unloaded" is that
there is no ammo anywhere inside the gun -
not that there is no ammo anywhere inside the same zip code).

Of course, few can claim that they haven't had similar vague concerns gnaw at them,
and you've come to the correct therapy group...

 

[M1911]

If I store a handgun in a car with slide removed, that wouldn’t need to meet Mass storage laws since it’s not a firearm, is that right?

I absolutely would not try that. Even if that was true from the letter of the law (and I’m not sure it is) if discovered I expect that you would be arrested, charged, tried, and quite likely convicted.

Just lock up the gun, whether assembled or disassembled.

 

[MuzzleDiscipline]

The case was Bibby and he was convicted. A number of years later another case ruled such to overturn that decision.



Someone was convicted and they had a broken or missing (forget which) firing pin. Judge ruled that it was a "readily available part" and thus the guy was guilty of illegal storage.

The MSP expert made the case it was a small part and not difficult to replace and the judge went for it. At some point in the future case law will take the leap and mirror fed policy of constructive possession. Here is the citation.
COMMONEALTH vs. JEFFERSON, 461 Mass. 821

 

[whacko]

Wasn't there a case in Boston where a guy was caught carrying a cap and ball revolver and still got charged (maybe convicted?) even though it's not a firearm under state law?

I think that was overturned.

Another point.....black powder guns while not fire arms can be considered "dangerous weapons". So.....a PP in possession of a black powder gun can still get pinched if the gun is in possession during committal of a crime. How I know this.....a friend is a pp due to stupid shit in his 20s.......he asked his attorney if he could buy a bp revolver to keep in the house.....his attorney strongly advised against it.

 

[nstassel]

The law of inoperable firearms in Mass:

A weapon that was originally a (firearm) (rifle or shotgun) may become so defective or damaged that it will no longer fire a projectile, and then the law no longer considers it to be a (firearm) (rifle or shotgun). But a weapon remains a (firearm) (rifle or shotgun) within the meaning of the law when a slight repair, replacement or adjustment will again make it an effective weapon. Commonwealth v. Colton, 333 Mass. 607, 608, 132 N.E.2d 398, 398 (1956) (insertion of ammo clip); Bartholomew, 326 Mass. at 220, 93 N.E.2d at 552 (insertion of firing pin); Commonwealth v. Raedy, 24 Mass. App. Ct. 648, 652-656, 512 N.E.2d 279, 282-284 (1987) (jury question whether gun that could be fired if inverted was “firearm”; judge who distinguishes between “major” and “minor” repairs need not instruct that Commonwealth must prove that this particular defendant had ability and knowledge to repair gun); Commonwealth v. Rhodes, 21 Mass. App. Ct. 968, 969- 970, 489 N.E.2d 216, 217 (1986) (not a firearm where bent part rendered inoperable until repaired). See Commonwealth v. Gutierrez, 82 Mass. App. Ct. 1118, 977 N.E.2d 105 (No. 11-P-1612, October 25, 2012) (unpublished opinion under Appeals Ct. Rule 1:28) (noting objective “slight repair” standard for operability of firearm).

 

[MuzzleDiscipline]

The law of inoperable firearms in Mass:

A weapon that was originally a (firearm) (rifle or shotgun) may become so defective or damaged that it will no longer fire a projectile, and then the law no longer considers it to be a (firearm) (rifle or shotgun). But a weapon remains a (firearm) (rifle or shotgun) within the meaning of the law when a slight repair, replacement or adjustment will again make it an effective weapon. Commonwealth v. Colton, 333 Mass. 607, 608, 132 N.E.2d 398, 398 (1956) (insertion of ammo clip); Bartholomew, 326 Mass. at 220, 93 N.E.2d at 552 (insertion of firing pin); Commonwealth v. Raedy, 24 Mass. App. Ct. 648, 652-656, 512 N.E.2d 279, 282-284 (1987) (jury question whether gun that could be fired if inverted was “firearm”; judge who distinguishes between “major” and “minor” repairs need not instruct that Commonwealth must prove that this particular defendant had ability and knowledge to repair gun); Commonwealth v. Rhodes, 21 Mass. App. Ct. 968, 969- 970, 489 N.E.2d 216, 217 (1986) (not a firearm where bent part rendered inoperable until repaired). See Commonwealth v. Gutierrez, 82 Mass. App. Ct. 1118, 977 N.E.2d 105 (No. 11-P-1612, October 25, 2012) (unpublished opinion under Appeals Ct. Rule 1:28) (noting objective “slight repair” standard for operability of firearm).

Thanks for the facts.

 

[nstassel]

Thanks for the facts.

That's from the jury instructions that op will have read to the jury.

 

[jayhitek]

But do I have to lock up

???

Even if I "remove" the slide ?

Strawberry Frosted is still the best.

 

[MuzzleDiscipline]

So if someone were to have a complete lower assembly but no upper? It would seem far from a small repair.

 

[MAJoe]

So if someone were to have a complete lower assembly but no upper? It would seem far from a small repair.

While maybe expensive, any idiot can slap a complete slide or upper on and shoot. They are readily available to anyone and take near zero skill to install. I assume that's how a jury would see it.

 

[MuzzleDiscipline]

While maybe expensive, any idiot can slap a complete slide or upper on and shoot. They are readily available to anyone and take near zero skill to install. I assume that's how a jury would see it.

Yeah rereading it adding a complete upper falls into replacement.

 

[42!]

You'll get charged for sure, convicted? who knows. And you will be deemed unsuitable.
Don't take the chance.

 

[MuzzleDiscipline]

Well speaking with friends from free states, the idea keeps getting tossed about when is a firearm not? nstassel has offered up the most comprehensive answer so far.

Folks that have a receiver that has been registered and then they gone on to sell it as just a receiver would seem to be treading the shallows of Massprudence as well as free staters looking to skirt by separating the components. No desire to be anyone's test case.