New Massachusetts Gun Law Revealed: One Gun A Month, Seven Round Mag Limit, Etc.

Massachusetts Governor Patrick’s office has released the text of An Act To Strengthen and Enhance Firearms Laws in the Commonwealth [Click here for the text of the bill. Click here for the Governor’s Press Release touting the civilian disarmament package]. TTAG legal eagle Chris Dumm parsed the laws and provided the following bullet points. Make the jump for the key text change on magazine capacity.

Seven round mag limit – Magazines are now limited to seven rounds. Current 10 round mags are grandfathered. Owners of so-called “pre-ban” Mass mags (magazines with more than 10-rounds which were allowable under existing law) have one year to ditch them
One Gun A Month – Sales – Bay Staters may not purchase more than one firearm per month. To exceed that rate is a felony. (2.5 years in prison, $1000 fine)
One Gun a Month – Rental/Lease – Citizens may not rent or lease more than one firearm a month (2.5 years in prison $1000 fine)
Universal background checks – All firearms sales (including private sales) must be preceded by a NICS criminal background check
Gun show registration – Gun shows must report every seller at a show to the Department of Criminal Justice Services and pay a $500 fee to same
No Bail for Gun Offenders – If a gun is used in a violent crime the offender may be held without bail until trial
NERF-free schools – Airguns, BB guns, paintball guns, air rifles and yes NERF guns may not be possessed on school property ($500 and a year in jail)
“Rat Rule” – Any staff or administrators who fail to report a violation of the above law are criminals ($500 fine)

Chapter 140, Section 121 “Large capacity feeding device”, (i) a fixed or detachable magazine, box, drum, feed strip or similar device capable of accepting, or that can be readily converted to accept, more than ten rounds of ammunition or more than five shotgun shells; or (ii) a large capacity ammunition feeding device as defined in the federal Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(31) as appearing in such section on September 13, 1994 containing more than seven rounds of ammunition; or (iii) obtained after the effective date of this act and capable of accepting, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than seven rounds of ammunition.. The term “large capacity feeding device” shall not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with,.22 caliber ammunition.

Chapter 140, Section 131M. No person shall sell, offer for sale, transfer or possess an assault weapon or a large capacity feeding device that was not otherwise lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994; or (ii) a large capacity feeding device that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than ten rounds of ammunition; or (iii) a large capacity feeding device that such person lawfully possessed before the effective date of this act that has a capacity of, or that can readily be restored or converted to accept, more than seven but no more than ten rounds of ammunition, where such device contains more than seven rounds of ammunition.” Whoever not being licensed under the provisions of section 122 violates the provisions of this section shall be punished, for a first offense, by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000 or by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than ten years, or by both such fine and imprisonment, and for a second offense, by a fine of not less than $5,000 nor more than $15,000 or by imprisonment for not less than five years nor more than 15 years, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

The provisions of this section shall not apply to: (i) the possession by a law enforcement officer for purposes of law enforcement; or (ii) the possession by an individual who is retired from service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited from receiving such a weapon or feeding device from such agency upon retirement.

comments

  1. avatar Skeev says:

    There goes buying two guns to haggle a discount.

    How does limiting the renting of a gun at a range stop violence?

    1. avatar Silver says:

      Since when is gun control of any kind about stopping violence?

      1. avatar Skeev says:

        It obviously isn’t, but since they are operating under that guise I’d be curious to hear their thinking on that even if only to make my head ache.

        1. avatar Flit Andersen says:

          “Thinking”….HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-..SNORT…HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-

    2. avatar Evan says:

      They probably don’t understand what renting a gun entails. They probably think it’s like renting a car where you take it wherever you want as long as you get it back on the return date. They’re probably thinking, “people will rent guns to commit murders and then return them so they won’t be traced.”

      1. avatar WC says:

        I predict this section will be the first to get a big fat line drawn through it.

      2. avatar rangered says:

        “Whatcha in for?”
        “I forgot that there were 31 days in July.”

        Nobody knows the trubble I sees.

    3. avatar Bill F says:

      Right. I guess renting at the range every 4 weeks is out.

    4. I think they are under the illusion that when you rent a gun you get to take it home, like renting a video from blockbuster.

      1. avatar Ivy Mike says:

        Does anybody know how to get the gun I rented out of this damn stubborn VHS player?

        1. avatar Leo338 says:

          You get an extra fee applied if you don’t rewind prior to returning it.

      2. avatar Skeev says:

        Or maybe like a Rent a Center couch.

      3. avatar JWhite says:

        Wouldn’t put it past them.

      4. avatar JWhite says:

        They are gun experts ya know…. 😉

    5. avatar Tommy Knocker says:

      Well it just follows Eric Holder back when he spoke of BRAINWASHING people so they think negatively about guns. If you keep pushing the idea that guns inherently are bad folks will absorb that. At that point we are lost.

  2. avatar DrewN says:

    Ah, the good old one-a-month rule. One of the more nonsensical gun control ideas ever conceived.

    1. Yup, we have that in NJ. The result is NJ has handgun registration. In order to inforce that rule you have to acquire a handgun permit from your local police department. This triggers reference questionaires to two people and your employer and a background check. It can take up to a month to get said permit, then it is only good for 90 days and cost $20.

      1. avatar Evan says:

        Dont forget the 70$ fingerprint, the 5$ fee for the pappers, the 20 or so visits to the police station, the Facebook stalking by the police, the meeting with the police officers issuing the permit, the meeting with the police chief, the police visit to your house, and all the secret phone calls to everyone that you know. Or does that just happen to me…8 months into the permit. And that is just for long arms.

    2. avatar Joke & Dagger says:

      Oh good, gun violence in Mass is now going to be fixed. NY got their gun violence fixed sooner.

      1. avatar DAN III says:

        Why is it “gun” violence ? You folks play right into the hands of the anti-2As using their terms. Words have meaning and you play right into their hands.

    3. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

      yeah – since Bloomie blamed VA for being a source of crime guns, even when they had the 1x per rule!

  3. avatar Evan says:

    Better get ready to buy more revolvers and 1911’s. There is no way that this isn’t coming to NJ and CA

    1. avatar Bill F says:

      And NY. Cuomo has got the head in now. Another push and here comes the rest.

      1. avatar Nathan says:

        Dude he already signed the same law yesterday. Check back a couple pages on TTAG.

        1. avatar Bill F says:

          Not about nerf guns and rentals or one gun-a-month. Or rat rule. I know what Cuomo signed signed–I watched the vote live. Whatever is proposed in Mass that isn’t in what Cuomo passed soon will be. That’s my point. Dude.

        2. avatar Nathan says:

          Sorry, thought you were talking about the 7 round mags.

    2. avatar Mark N. says:

      CA already has a one handgungun a month law, but it does not apply to rentals.

    3. avatar Mr Pierogie says:

      If you look at the bills that are going to be introduced in NJ, the mag capacity limit they mention is 10. But there’s nothing stopping them from amending that to 7, of course. Time to move out.

  4. avatar pk in AZ says:

    What a crock of crap..

    How do these asshats get elected?

    1. avatar Bill says:

      Because too many people are needy, ignorant, sheep that refuse to take responsibility for themselves about damn near everything.

    2. avatar Joke & Dagger says:

      These pols are elected by citizens who want them elected. Really rather simple. Mass and NY and NJ and IL, etc. are creating their own version of what their people think is Utopia. This is why I don’t get involved in criticizing other state’s business (too much). This is what the people of each state desire via the politicians they elect. Truly is becoming Love It or Leave It.

      1. avatar LibertyToad says:

        As an Illinois citizen living behind enemy lines, most of the state’s problem is Chicago. The city is so large and so corrupt that the rest of the state pretty much is being held hostage by the democrats.

        Believe me, it sucks, I wanted to move to TX a couple of years ago but the wife wouldn’t have it….she’s starting to regret her decision now so maybe there is hope.

    3. avatar RKflorida says:

      By a majority. Doesn’t that give you a warm, fuzzy feeling? You’re a minority now.

  5. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

    What, no AWB? Come on, MA. I’d expect more from the land of Ted Kennedy.

    Seriously, though. Would the last one (held without bail) apply to those automatically arrested for DGU?

    1. avatar Silver says:

      Don’t they already have one?

      1. avatar imrambi says:

        They already have an AWB:

        http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXX/Chapter140/Section121

        They already have a mag limit of 10 rounds without a class A permit. You must have no restrictions on your license to carry pre-94 magazines that are more than 10 rounds.

        The one-gun-a-month will have a legal battle as NJ attempted it and failed:
        http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/09/court_nixes_jersey_citys_one_g.html

        1. avatar ALH says:

          If I read the article right though, the law that was struck down was struck down because it was a local city ordinance and the court found the state laws preempted the local city law. This would be at the state level so the courts findings wouldn’t be applicable. At the state level you would have to either argue the national laws preempted state laws or that it was simply unconstitutional.

    2. avatar damocles says:

      Too late. That happened long ago already.

    3. avatar Richard W. says:

      Already had one. Romney signed it.

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        No. The MA AWB was passed in 1994, way before Romney. It was permanent, not like the Fed AWB. Romney signed the reform bill in 2004.

        1. avatar Bill F says:

          We need a link to all of Ralph’s fact based comments on Romney and gun control. The facts are somewhat different from the myths.

        2. avatar Richard W. says:

          So you are saying that the law that he signed did not make the AWB permanent? SO, without his signature, expired AWB…with it, permanent AWB? Sounds like he signed on the dotted line.

        3. avatar Hal says:

          Hi Ralph,
          Will you consider abandoning Mass the way Farago is calling it quits in RI? That State doesn’t deserve you.

        4. avatar BlinkyPete says:

          Um, incorrect Ralph and Bill. The myth has always been that he signed some reform bill, or that what he signed was the result of a compromise between pro and anti gun groups. The truth is that he signed a carbon copy of the 1994 assault weapons (which passed at the Federal Level, not in MA) ban that applied to MA only, that he knew full well what he was doing and that he supported and campaigned for extending the AWB every single step of the way. In a press release released by his office prior to his signing, he refereed to spooky black rifles as “instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”

          That is proven, demonstrable fact.

        5. avatar Ralph says:

          Blinkypete and Richard W, your “information” is wrong. MA had a PERMANENT AWB passed in 1994. When the federal law expired, so did all the federal exemptions that were incorporated into the 1994 MA bill. In other words, we lost our grandfathered stuff. So the law was reauthorized, which saved all our grandfathered mags and guns. Added was a firearms review board so that people who were denied their LTC could have an appeal, which did not exist before Romney. Romney also extended the length of permits from 4 to six years, and on and on.

          Stop shilling for the POS-POTUS.

        6. avatar BlinkyPete says:

          I just posted a direct quote from Mitt. Please share the source of your information. I’m not shilling for anyone, I’m merely stating fact. The 1994 AWB was at the federal level, it would not have affected Massachusetts law.

          You may be thinking of Boston’s 1989 (or thereabouts) AWB, which was and is mostly an empty gesture. It’s never been enforced and most legal opinions on the matter indicate it could not be.

        7. avatar BlinkyPete says:

          I just double checked GOAL’s website, and their information seems to mirror my own:

          http://www.goal.org/masslawpages/awfacts.html

        8. avatar Ralph says:

          BlinkeyPete, you are very selective in your reading. Read this:

          http://www.goal.org/newspages/romney.html

        9. avatar BlinkyPete says:

          So based on your own link, you were wrong on the date – this was a subsection of the 1998 gun control act, which drastically changed the licensing and sales rules for FID, Class A and B and gun dealers – and you were wrong on the implications. The section reads:

          “No person shall sell, offer for sale, transfer or possess an assault weapon or a large capacity feeding device that was not otherwise lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994.”

          While I guess you were technically right that there was another MA AWB (which was likely lip service), it did not contain a definition and would have been difficult to enforce without precedent. Why GOAL shilled for Romney is beyond me, but the very link you shared says he replaced one never-expiring AWB, which was likely unenforceable, with another never-expiring AWB, which according to NorthEastShooters has been enforced numerous times. All this under the pretext of protecting gun owners. What a stand up guy.

          Yeah, we’re the shills.

      2. avatar WLCE says:

        jesus f^cking christ.

        blinky pete is correct and i have already refuted the romney apologist BS back before the election. here’s my link again.

        http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/may/18/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-exhibits-marked-change-gun-rhetoric/

        “In 2004, in the middle of his single four-year term as governor, Romney signed a permanent ban on assault weapons — reportedly the first such state law in the country. “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense,” the Globe quoted Romney as saying. “They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”

        now…can we let this myth die a painful death?

        1. avatar blinkypete says:

          My guess is Ralph will ignore being corrected and continue insisting he’s right.

  6. avatar Evan says:

    Better get ready to buy more revolvers and 1911’s. There is no way that this isn’t coming to NJ and CA. Also is that one hangun a month or (gulp) one gun of any type a month?

    1. avatar Elliotte says:

      They mean 1 firearm a month, not one handgun a month. Here’s the text of that section:

      “No person licensed under section 122 shall sell, rent or lease, to another person, other than to an exempt person under subsection (c) of section 131E, more than 1 rifle, shotgun, firearm, machine gun, large capacity weapon or large capacity feeding device in any 30-day period.”

      For reference, those exempt persons are as follows:
      “(i) any law enforcement agency or authority;
      (ii) any branch of the United States military, including the National Guard;
      (iii) any person in any branch of the United States military, police officers or other peace officers who are acquiring firearms for the purposes of performing their official duties or when duly authorized by their employer to purchase them;
      (iv) any licensed watch, guard or patrol agency of their licensed employees for the purposes of performing duties in the course of employment under sections 22 and 25 of chapter 147;
      (v) a federal, state, or local historical society, museum or institutional collector open to the public;
      (vi) any person who purchases, rents or leases a rifle, shotgun, firearm, machine gun, large capacity weapon or large capacity feeding device and then exchanges it for another rifle, shotgun, firearm, machine gun, large capacity weapon or large capacity feeding device provide by a license dealer within a 30-day period; and
      (vii) a firearms surrender program authorized by and in compliance with section 131O.”

      So as best I can tell, there are no exemptions for police, unless the weapon/magazine is required for their job.

  7. avatar Aharon says:

    Nice photo capture of the air around the gun after firing.

    “Gun shows must report every seller at a show to the Department of Criminal Justice Services and pay a $500 fee to same”
    — WTF?

    “One Gun a Month – Rental – Citizens may not rent or lease more than one gun a month”
    — WTF?

    1. avatar Elliotte says:

      See my response to Evan a couple of posts up, there appears to be (from my layman’s reading of the text) an exemption for people who “exchange” one rental for another. So while you may only be limited to one trip every 30 days, you can make one “rental” and trade out the weapon as many times as you like.

      The way this legislation groups rentals in with sales, it’s almost like someone else said above, that they think a gun rental is like renting a movie from Blockbuster, go into the store, pick it out & take it home with you.

      1. avatar Aharon says:

        Thanks.

  8. avatar stateisevil says:

    Effective immediately: Only white financially independent males can vote. Gun control goes bye bye.

    1. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

      that would include Rep. Markey. wanna try again?

  9. avatar KnowWhatIamTalkingAbout says:

    You have a constitutional right to bail; unless it is a murder charge, so that portion would violate the Constitution. Oh, and innocent until proven guilty anyone?

    1. avatar Bill F says:

      No longer valid.

    2. avatar Ralph says:

      What Constitution?

    3. avatar DAN III says:

      “….violate the Constitution.” Pal, when you going to realize those in power don’t care about the law or the Constitution ? You folks cite the Constitution like it has some magical compliance power. Quit whining about your elected scum “violating”. The ONLY solution is a tall tree or lampost and a short rope. Until we are ready to go en masse, heavily armed, and yank everyone last one of them out of the capitol building, NOTHING will change.

  10. avatar kalel666 says:

    That’s Gov (spit) Deval Patrick, I believe.

    1. avatar Robert Farago says:

      D’oh! In my defense, it was Stoli Gold last night. Who knew they had a Stoli Gold?

      1. avatar Brooklyn in da house says:

        Russians!

  11. avatar TangledThorns says:

    NY, MA and soon MD. The Potomac River is the new Mason Dixon line.

    1. avatar Robert Farago says:

      RI too.

    2. avatar ChainsawWieldingManiac says:

      We’re still fighting it out in Maryland, not to worry.

    3. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

      Damn, need to take steps to make sure nothing gets proposed in PA.

      Posted on state websites at NY, NJ, and DE:

      Free to a good home.
      Fine, modern city. Cradle of liberty. City of brotherly love. The police force is not totally house-broken, but the citizens get along well with institutionalized corruption, draconian firearm laws, and high taxes. We love our dear old Philly, but we just can’t afford to keep her anymore.

      1. avatar DAN III says:

        Well, you folks sure kept Fast Eddie Rendell in power, didn’t you ?

  12. avatar Chas says:

    As far as universal background checks go, what’s to stop me from gifting a firearm to a family member? Or if I sell one to a friend? How can they be sure that I didn’t transfer it before the new law was enacted?

    Sounds like one of those “loopholes” – that they oppose – to me.

  13. avatar Gs650g says:

    Call the movers. Or else suck it up and deal with it.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      This legislation won’t affect me very much, but I’ve called the movers anyway. I’m awaiting quotes now and I’ll be getting outta this sh!th0le as fast as I can.

      1. avatar Aharon says:

        Are you serious? Where are you going to if real?

        1. avatar Ralph says:

          Las Vegas or Nashua, NH. LV is my home away from home, and southern NH is close enough to friends in MA. I’m licensed in both NV and NH. I’m checking rentals (at my age, I no longer wish to own a home) and movers.

  14. avatar damocles says:

    Pick up your nerf and follow me, I am the infantry.

    1. avatar rangered says:

      If Nerf guns are outlawed in schools, seniors will still have water balloons….

      1. avatar AlphaGeek says:

        Amendment filing to include water balloons in 3… 2… 1….

  15. avatar Chas says:

    Deval – what a fitting name.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Actually, his original name wasn’t Patrick. He added the “a” and the “t.”

      1. avatar Steve in MA says:

        Why did you leave wherever you were to come to MA? You Fvcked up

      2. avatar Steve in MA says:

        sorry Ralph, my post below was supposed to be a reply to you

        1. avatar Ralph says:

          It’s okay. Actually, I left RI where I couldn’t get a carry permit, and now I live in MA where I did. But actually, I moved to MA for a woman, so I definitely got hosed any way you look at it.

        2. avatar Steve in MA says:

          Damn. If the woman didn’t work out then you got screwed. Mass would be great if the people here gave two shits about the Constitution. Make sure you tell Deval to FOAD if you see him, I’m gonna do the same. along wih writing my rep and senator of course

  16. avatar Wasabi38 says:

    How can I (MA resident )stop this ? Oh wait im screwed.

  17. avatar Joe Grine says:

    Has anyone figured out a rational reason for picking 7 rounds as a limit? The only thing I can think of is that they know that virtually no mags in existance are 7 rounders, except maybe some 1911s and some subcompacts.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      You answered your own question, Joe. They picked 7 rounds because they do not exist.

      1. avatar tdiinva says:

        This is going to make the 1911 very popular.

        1. That and really piss off manufacturers.

        2. avatar Billy says:

          Say goodbye to that Garand from the CMP then…

        3. avatar Pascal says:

          @Billy

          You can get 8, 5, 2 and 1 round clips for the M1 from various websites. I know, I own them for when I teach Rifle classes.

      2. avatar Jesus says:

        Isn’t the Garand considered a historical weapon?

        1. avatar Human Being says:

          It’s legendary, but I believe they restrict “historic” to mean weapons manufactured a century ago; original Winchesters, early Mosins, and such.

      3. avatar Billy Wardlaw says:

        Its an engineered number to limit semi-automatics, without saying you are banning them.

  18. avatar kalel666 says:

    So glad I left in 2006. Michigan has its problems, god knows, but I can still buy any damn gun i want like a free citizen. wish I could get the rest of the family out here, too.

    1. avatar Will says:

      Fix the job situation and I just might come back myself.

    2. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

      I too live in MI was listening to a Detroit radio station on my way home from a job interview and called in response to what the president had just said yesterday, the guy from the radio station was calm and collected until I got a chance to speak. This guy was pushing you don’t need an AR to hunt so you don’t need one, I reminded him the need to enforce the second amendment had nothing to do with hunting and started making points when the Libtard started yelling over top of me and then shut my ability to have speech off so he could win the argument, kinda like PM would have done…

  19. avatar imrambi says:

    The best solution if you live in MA is to move either to NH or VT. Both of these states have very little rights restrictions.

      1. avatar Outlaw says:

        Move South, otherwise you’re wasting time and money.

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      There seems to be a concentrated effort to create a gun restriction zone from PA north, and to the east in the PDRNJ. Maine will surely go along since they are full of mass transplants now leaving VT and NH as an island of gun ownership bordered by Canada to the north.
      Despite having more Birkenstock wearers than any area on Earth I don’t see these two states following suit.

  20. avatar Skyler says:

    Can they sell magazines? I’m trying to get some, is all I’m saying.

  21. avatar Matt in FL says:

    Some of that won’t pass. Some of it will, but won’t pass constitutional muster. Some of it you poor bastards might be stuck with.

    1. Well fortunately for them you don’t need to pass strict constitutional review to pass laws, you just need votes. It’s a fundamental flaw in the system of passing laws that annoys me. Laws should be strictly reviewed for constitutional muster before being passed, as opposed to just being passed and up to citizens/lawyers to challenge them after they’ve gone into effect. Meanwhile you are under the influence of said laws.

      1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

        They supposedly have committees for that, for what it’s worth (not much, it seems).

        1. avatar Ivy Mike says:

          A committee is a life form with six or more legs and no brain. ~Robert Heinlein

    2. avatar Human Being says:

      Unless Chief Justice John Roberts gets told all the papers will say flattering things about him again. Then he’ll find it all constitutional as…well he’ll think of something clever.

    3. avatar BlinkyPete says:

      Last week I would have agreed with you Matt. This week I gotta tell you, the polls in my state ain’t any better than the ones in NY. Unless you know something I don’t, I’d recommend my former compatriots fight like all of that and more is gonna pass.

  22. avatar Wasabi38 says:

    Ditch LegalPre-bans?! Wtf? How does that stop crime.

    1. avatar JoshinGA says:

      Its not about preventing crime or saving lives. Where have you been?

  23. avatar TV says:

    This 7 round limit craze is driving me crazy.

    1. avatar Shire-man says:

      Ive been wondering if it came from anywhere in particular of it was just a whim of a politician and now since NY got away with it all the others will try it too. Like some game of “how low can you go.”

      1. It’s completely arbitrary. One positive thing that can come of this is it gives an example to demonstrate the slippery slope concept that we are called paranoid for preaching. 10 has been the magical arbitrary limit preached for sometime now, and look how quickly that slipped.

      2. avatar Steve-O says:

        I think the arbitrary 7 rounds came from a concession to Kimber and Remington in NY.

    2. avatar GS650G says:

      Do they realize how many magazines are in circulation already and how ridiculously easy it is to make them and smuggle more in? Mags don’t have serial numbers allowing tracing, they are not tied to a particular gun and don’t lend themselves to traditional detection methods. There are no magazine sniffing dogs available.

      1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

        So people can’t prove that the already had them, either. “Produce the receipt or give it up, citizen.”

      2. avatar JoshinGA says:

        I saw an article the other day where you can now 3d print magazines for ARs. So there is that too.

    3. avatar Ralph says:

      They settled on seven because that’s the total number of fingers that Bloomberg was able to fit into Cuomo’s rectum. We should all be thankful that Bloomie has small hands.

  24. avatar Skyler says:

    Since when is no bail the same as getting rid of Habeas Corpus? I think you are using the wrong legal term, Robert. You can be delivered up to the judge but still held pending trial.

  25. avatar Dave says:

    A year in jail for a NERF gun on school property? yeah, keep those violent criminals off the street.

    Others have commented on the other ones.. what a attack on freedom. Crazy.

    seriously, the nuts are coming out of the madhouse now.. I cant believe what I have been reading lately.

    1. avatar WC says:

      They weren’t thinking about nerf when they wrote, “Whoever, not being a law enforcement officer, knowingly possesses or knowingly has under control in a vehicle a dangerous weapon, or an air gun, so-called BB gun, paintball gun, air rifle or air pistol or other smoothbore arm capable of discharging a shot or pellet by whatever means or replica of a firearm, large capacity weapon, rifle, shotgun, sawed-off shotgun, machine gun, assault weapon in any building or on the grounds of a public or private elementary or secondary school, college or university without the prior written authorization of the board or officer in charge of such elementary or secondary school, college or university shall be punished by a fine of not more than $500 or by imprisonment in the house of correction for not more than 1 year, or both, and may be arrested without a warrant.”
      They need to re-write that section, or I would organize a weekend nerf battle on school grounds , as a form of civil disobedience. That would take civil disobedience to a new level of fun.

  26. avatar BeninMA says:

    It looks to me like MA residents would lose their pre-ban magazines as well:

    “Any large capacity feeding device that has or can readily be restored or converted to accept more than ten rounds of ammunition that was legally possessed by an individual prior to the enactment of this act must be sold or otherwise lawfully disposed of within one year of the act’s effective date. Such large capacity feeding devices may only be sold or disposed of to a purchaser authorized to possess such weapons.”

    1. avatar ChainsawWieldingManiac says:

      That “readily-restored” bit is a killer. You can’t just dump a mag block in, you’ve got to pin, epoxy, or weld it.

    2. avatar Robert Farago says:

      Yes they do. I put that in the story but it was difficult to convey. Text amended.

    3. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

      Define “readily.”

      “Readily” by the twits that wrote this law? Some paper stuffed under the follower would do.

      “Readily” restored by someone like me? Well then, using a bandsaw to cut it in half leaves me a pretty sweet deal, doesn’t it?

      1. avatar AlphaGeek says:

        Exactly. I’ve seen some “permanent” mag modifications here in CA that use a roll pin in a blind hole, and all I could think was “um, off the top of my head I know at least two ways to pull that pin in without damaging the magazine…”

        On the other hand, it makes it really easy to have a nominally permanent limiter installed in a PMAG then revert it to a “repair kit” before traveling out of CA to visit Free America.

  27. avatar ensitu says:

    All those Win M-92s and rifle leangth M-94s are now a felony

    and citizens being forced to sell their optimal cap. mags which possesion of is outlawed making both partys a fellon?

  28. How is it reasonable to expect manufacturers to design and develop new magazines within one year? And gee, I wonder who that cost will be transferred to…

    1. avatar Mike in NC says:

      I’m sure the hard-core anti’s in NY and MA would prefer for manufacturers to never make seven round magazines. They would love for every magazine-fed firearm to become single-shot only.

      1. avatar gloomhound says:

        Do you really think they want you to have even a single shot firearm of any type? They want ALL of your guns every last damn one of them.

    2. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

      The best defense for gun companies is to refuse sales to law enforcement in these states. Just tell them “Nope, we don’t sell guns in your state – to anyone.”

      1. avatar GS650G says:

        Barrett did just that in Ca when Ahnold banned the .50 BMG. When one was sent for repair Barrett returned it unfixed and said they don’t do business with any LE in Ca any longer’

  29. avatar Dale says:

    I was called paranoid
    I was called a worrier
    I was told I was afraid of my own shadow and that nobody was going to do anything

    I’ve been collecting apologies!

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Well, most of the people who were telling you those lies didn’t apologize because they knew they were lying in the first place.

    2. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

      Really? Cause I haven’t had any apologies offered from the lefties that told me I as crazy

  30. avatar Adam says:

    So if someone exceeds the 1 firearm purchase/month limit, they, the buyer, is fined and/or jailed. 2 Questions:

    1. Shouldn’t the “Rat Rule” apply to this part? Teachers are required to report violations or get fined. But the seller isn’t required to report violations? I guess it’s hard to do when you’re strapped to the electric chair for letting one slip through the cracks. When blue laws were still prevalent in the South (they still are in some parts), who gets in trouble when I buy a six-pack on Sunday? Not me!

    2. Shouldn’t the “improved” universal background checks flag this before the transaction processes?

    But to answer my own questions….there’s way too much common sense and consistent logic in those questions to ever be given a second thought by a gun-grabbing bureaucrat.

    1. They have the one handgun per month in NJ. The result in NJ is handgun registration, straigt up. In order to inforce that rule they have to acquire a handgun permit from your local police department. This triggers reference questionaires mailed to two people and your employer and a background check. It has about 10 questions asking things like, is he an alcoholic, abuse drugs, do you think this person is suitable to own a firearm, etc. It can take up to a month to get said permit, then it is only good for 90 days and cost $20.

      The handgun permit has a couple carbon copies. The police keep a copy when they give it to you, one is kept by the FFL, and you get a copy to keep after your purchase. Somewhere in there after the purchase the police find out the serial # and make of firearm and add that to their copy.

      I went to a firearms lawyer Q&A at my local range. He said straight up that NJ has handgun registration. He said that when you get pulled over and they run your plates their screen tells them how many and what type of handguns you own.

      1. avatar Adam says:

        I’m speechless…no idea how to even respond to that.

        Next thing you know, to renew your drivers license you’ll need 4 proofs of residence, 2 forms of photo ID, a valid…..oh, what’s that?…..nevermind.

        But if you’d like to vote, just show up with at least one article of clothing within arms reach…nothing else required. Transportation will be provided if you cannot get to the poll on your own.

      2. avatar GS650G says:

        NJ will have an easier time organizing the gun raids by SWAT teams, that’s for sure. Hide the dogs.

        1. avatar Ivy Mike says:

          Killing dogs has become a no-penalty outlet for the de facto Standing Army of militarized police to get their domination jollies in the Open-Air Stanford Prison Experiment that America has become.

  31. avatar Gabriel says:

    7 is the new 10 rounds. Anyone who thinks the anti-gunners will always remain happy with a 10-round limit needs to think again.

    1. avatar Seth says:

      well if some people in Connecticut have their way, 1 round will be the new 10 round. http://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/TOB/S/2013SB-00122-R00-SB.htm

    2. avatar Jesus says:

      Ah, Florida.

      Land of Flowers, citrus, and standard size magazines.

      You’re all more than welcome down here.

      We’ve got a bit of the North, a bit of the South, and if you go to Miami, we’ve got some Cuba too.

      1. avatar Outlaw says:

        Just don’t vote in the same kind of a-holes down here, please.

      2. avatar duke nukem says:

        yup, isnt florida paradise compared to other states? i live in sfl

  32. avatar ensitu says:

    How much longer before a “Bounty” is paid for “public safety information” about Residences that contain firearms?

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      They are reading the East German Police manuals now for recommendations on implementing that phase.

      1. avatar Jim D says:

        I thought I heard goose steppers in the distance, won’t be long now.

  33. avatar Adam says:

    “7 Round Magazine Limit”

    I’m in the clear if I ever move to MA. All of my magazines are more of a rectangular shape. Having 1 Round Magazine is dumb enough. Who would actually have 7 of them?

    They also need to define “magazine” but I think I’m still in the clear since my other magazines are made of paper and are also rectangular shaped.

    1. avatar ChainsawWieldingManiac says:

      Sorry, man, but they define what a detachable magazine is in the law.

      1. avatar Adam says:

        Ah…I figured most of them didn’t read it so I didn’t bother. Besides, it really depends on what the definition of “is” is, doesn’t it? I heard that somewhere.

  34. avatar BeninMA says:

    The Governor is scheduled to be on talk radio tonight at 8:00 pm. Listen at 1030 AM, or online: http://boston.cbslocal.com/show/nightside-with-dan-rea/

    On this show, he always takes at least a few calls. Unfortunately, his new budget is getting most of the attention.

  35. avatar BobtheGrape says:

    I was born in MA brought up in RI but I would never go back there. The folks up there have gotten really weird.

  36. avatar Second Amendment says:

    What’s Massachusetts’s state motto? Oh, yeah, “By the sword we seek peace, but peace only under liberty.” Ah, irony, thy name is Massachusetts.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      New Hampshire’s motto: Live Free or Die.

      Massachusetts’ state motto: F^ck You and Die.

  37. avatar CarlosT says:

    All of this shows the very idea of “compromise” is complete and utter BS. They want it all. Ten was the magic number once, now it’s seven. When that does nothing, it’ll go down to four.

    1. At least know we have an example to demonstrate the slippery slope concept, which we’re called paranoid when we preach the idea.

    2. avatar Bill F says:

      At least it’ll get some of those nerf guns off the streets. I wonder if the one I bought for my 5 year old nephew will be grandfathered in.

  38. avatar Rob says:

    “Owners of so-called “pre-ban” Mass mags (magazines with more than 10-rounds which were allowable under existing law) have one year to ditch them”

    How in the name of hell are these ex post facto laws going to pass judicial review?

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      They’ll pass judicial scrutiny because the cases will be heard by courts in Massachusetts. The judges here are complicit in everything.

  39. avatar ST says:

    7 rounds is the new “10”.

    After the next tragic shooting, 5 will become the new “7”.

    After that, its buyback time.

    1. avatar Jacob says:

      How can they “buy back” something they never had ownership of in the first place?

  40. avatar Armchair Command'oh says:

    On a positive note, when the SAF brings a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of this law, the appeal will be in the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, which is a little less liberal than the 2nd Circuit, where NY is located.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      That’s like saying that El Salvador is safer than Honduras. It is, but they both suck.

  41. avatar ensitu says:

    A year in jail for a Nerf Gun

    1. avatar Bill F says:

      A nerf gun beef won’t buy a lot of street cred in the joint.

  42. avatar JSIII says:

    This is coordinated guys, LCAV , the Brady Bunch and pals must have been working behind the scenes with NE states for a while on this. Expect to see this in NJ, MA, MD etc.

    The good news is when the SCOTUS strikes down one law in a year or so it will strike them all down.

    1. avatar scottlac says:

      Between now and then, I pray for the health and safety of those 5 Justices. I wouldn’t want anything bad (or Chicago-ish) to happen to any of them.

      1. avatar JSIII says:

        Want to hear something frightening? By the time Obamas second term is up two of the five will be 80. The others will all be in their 60’s and 70’s.

  43. avatar ALH says:

    Wow, just wow. So should this be passed in current form, any college student who lives on campus and plays airsoft and/or paintball would no longer be able to keep them on campus? Bummer for them. When I was in college I knew several guys who had airsoft and/or paintball gear in their dorms so they could go out on the weeks and play.

  44. avatar Pascal says:

    One upped by NY and now MA, the pressure will be on CT to piss higher up the tree than the other jackasses.

    1. avatar Bill F says:

      Cuomo must be livid. He bragged he would have the toughest laws in the nation. By the time Ca, NJ, Md and Ct weigh in, Cuomo will look like a gun nut. No way will he not have the last word on this. Bloomberg makes the state’s snowballs and Andy has the authority to throw them.

  45. avatar Lance says:

    So they try to beat NY in the area of Fascist madness dumb New Englanders!!!!

    1. avatar Free Stater says:

      People aren’t dumb in all of New England. New Hampshire is the freest state in the country.

  46. avatar Gerry Nance says:

    Those too quick to hijack the period of emotions immediately following or within a month of a tragedy, are quickly advancing our free people along the trail towards tyranny. Before we get around to hanging the tyrants they will have outlawed rope.

  47. avatar Gerry Nance says:

    How long will it be until the 7-round magazine is cut to 3-rounds?
    These are unconstitutional infringements on our rights, for the 2nd Amendment provides for the armed citizens of the unorganized militia to respond to the call of the organized militia and everyone else who wishes to volunteer in service of a sovereign State.

  48. avatar Steve in MA says:

    you’ve got to be FVCKING kidding me. Deval should go jump off a freaking bridge

  49. avatar Paul says:

    Jesus! I live in the Fascist Republic of Massachusetts and I still can’t believe this!

    1. avatar Free Stater says:

      Believe it. The people of Mass hate liberty. Most of the people will not rest until all liberty is gone. There is an alternative to the north, though. Live Free or Die!

  50. avatar Doug says:

    Does this affect 8 round revolvers?

  51. avatar rangered says:

    I saw elsewhere that grandfathered in “assault” weapons must be kept at gun clubs or ranges, not at home. Discuss amongst yourselves.

  52. avatar Fred says:

    The anti-gun crowd always talks about guns existing in the hands of civilians as “the wild west”, now they’re trying to pass laws to send us back to wild west technology. Get your six-shooters while you can.

  53. avatar Kevin N. says:

    Logic from the Left: Police operate with backup within groups, which is why they need larger capacity pistol magazines than do “civilians” who must face criminals alone and therefore need less ammunition.

  54. avatar Free Stater says:

    There is hope. New Hampshire is the freest state in the US. Plus, we have the Free State Project which means that 1,000s of liberty activists are going to move here. If you love liberty, join us by voting with your feet.

    1. avatar Bob from MA says:

      I would love to but nobody can get out of thier house they are not worth anything now.

  55. avatar gc says:

    It’s A Race. Which state can pass the dumbest, poorest written law and get it passed before someone starts thinking of all the ramifications.

  56. avatar Ben MASS says:

    Read the BPD ‘s police blog to see all the (illegal) shootings that happen in places like Dorchester… This 7 round mag this really pisses me off, it will do nothing except steal the guns away from the legit citizens per usual. And I think we are basically helpless to stop it, fk this state.

  57. avatar stanley stosz says:

    It is time that we impeach these people. (Oboma,Patrickand Coumo) Obviously they are trying to revoke our rights while doing nothing to stop criminals. If in fact the public was agreeing with these anti second amendment rights why do they have to have secret voting in the middle of the night. They are an exstream threat to the constitution and freedom. P.S. has any one seen Oboma’s birth certificate? Kenya is looking for their village idiot.

  58. avatar Bob from MA says:

    One step closer to walking away from my house and moving to NH not like I could sell it who would want to live in communist MA.

  59. avatar Seth says:

    Make the escape while you still can and come join liberty lovers who fight back against this kind of crap and WIN in NH. http://www.freestateproject.org/fsn4

  60. avatar KevinYK says:

    I’m sure with the new laws the crazies will ditch their 30 round magazines. Get real politicians. You have people’s blood on your hands with all those stupid feel good laws that does nothing to stop crime.

  61. avatar Dave K says:

    Just to be clear, If this were to go through would I still be allowed to own the ARs I purchased in MA over the past couple of years? I’d just be required to forfeit the high cap mags?

  62. avatar Jimmy says:

    Come to Tennessee,leave the commie Northeast behind.You can buy AKs,ARs with just your driver’s licence.I carry a Zastava M57 7.62X25 ( check Aimsurplus.com ) almost everyday.It’s LEGAL bullets will penetrate up to class 3A vests.No police state possible in Tennessee,the citizens outnumber cops thousands to one.No Boston Strong surrender to martial law down here.They’d need WARRENTS!

    1. avatar Penny says:

      I have a feeling that you don’t really know what a “commie” is. Here is a quick definition from the “Dummies” guide to political ideologies:

      http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/quick-definitions-of-political-ideologies-the-isms.html

      I live in Massachusetts and think that we probably, more accurately, fall somewhere on the democratic socialism spectrum. That’s similar to the last one on the list from the above link; its basic premise is this: “Socialists are motivated by the desire to improve quality of life for all members of society.”

      Even for gun-totin’, cop-fearin’ idiots like you, Jimmy! Oh, and BTW, you might want to look at how primary education in Tennessee stacks up against, let’s see… ANY state in the northeast. DOH!

  63. avatar Derek says:

    It’s not easy being a Liberal Gun Owner. Especially in Massachusetts.

    This law is BS. I’m seriously considering voting for a Conservative Governor in the next election. We’ll still have a Democratic State Senate and House, so the Governor couldn’t possibly be as crazy as National GOPers. And they’ll be able to strike this shit down (barring it isn’t voted in before then).

  64. avatar Paul Patriot says:

    Sad, this shit hole of a state was once the cradle of liberty.
    The liberal, progressive anti self defense air brains destroy everywhere they go.

    New England in general has kicked God out and trampled on the Bill Of Rights

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email