Sam H
Member
Posts: 1,099
|
Post by Sam H on Aug 26, 2011 23:53:55 GMT
I have just read something about MA's laws regarding restricted firearms. I could be wrong - and it would be wise to consult your DA's office regarding the laws around guns - but according to MA's gun laws if you had a Class A or Class B firearms license and were to purchase an AR-15 that had a fixed stock, minimum of 18" barrel, did not have a bayonet lug, permanently mounted muzzle brake or had no threading on the barrel, was not fitted with a high capacity mag (no more than 5 rounds max) you would not be in violation of the law. If that were the case you might want to consider something like that but instead of getting one chambered in 5.56NATO get one chambered in something like a .450 Bushmaster, .50 Beowulf or maybe the new .30 RAR. Then a standard 20rd. mag would only fit about 4 or 5 rounds and so long as you don't have any other violating items on your rifle its all legal! Any of the three calibers mentioned above would be quite sufficient for hunting (albeit the .50 Beowulf might be a bit much for deer... ok the .450 Bushmaster might be too lol!) and still effective for medium range defensive use. Might want to check into it - I'll post some links for you to start with. www.goal.org/Documents/law_faq_pdfs/awtimeline.pdfwww.lawlib.state.ma.us/subject/about/weapons.html
|
|
|
Post by Miekka on Aug 29, 2011 5:42:21 GMT
Larry,
Leave it to legislators and lobbying fools who have never so much as held a gun to put flash suppressors as an "evil" feature for the assault weapons ban. I am willing to bet that they automatically outlawed it because they were either A) paranoid about snipers or B) they thought that a sound and flash suppressor were the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by Onimusha on Aug 29, 2011 7:18:54 GMT
Amen, Miekka. All they know about guns is that they don't want you to have them. Let me throw a couple things at you. In almost every other country that allows firearms, supressors (commonly and incorrectly called silencers) are considered to be the same as the muffler on your car, good manners. Some hunting preserves even require them so as not to disturb tourists. Here, in the good ol' USA, silencers are class III goods requiring special background checks and a $75 tax stamp. Even then, some states don't allow them for any hunting. If I take the muffler off my car, I get a ticket. If I want to put one on my gun so I don't disturb my neighbors, I have to jump through hoops. All because they watch too many movies. Another thing, the ballstic knife. If I make one that uses a spring to launch the blade, I go to jail for a long time. If I use a powder charge to launch it, it's an AOW. I can register it and I'm ok.
|
|
|
Post by ShooterMike on Aug 29, 2011 11:11:19 GMT
Good points (except it's a$200 tax stamp). I like the Finnish thoughts on this. In Finland, a sound suppressor is required for use on government-owned firearms used for game control. It is a requirement by their equivalent of the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) for preserving workplace health by protecting the hearing of government employees. And any hunter who can own a rifle can buy an inexpensive and effective suppressor for it. A smart and imminently practical attitude. Here in the U.S., where emotion and dogma overrule common sense, especially when it comes to gun laws, "silencers" for firearms are seen as evil and thus must be forbidden.
|
|
|
Post by Onimusha on Aug 29, 2011 20:48:46 GMT
Is it a $200 stamp now? I knew it was $200 on full-auto weapons.
|
|
|
Post by ShooterMike on Aug 30, 2011 20:09:39 GMT
Yeah, and it's really a damned good deal compared to what was intended. The stamps were set at $200 for a machinegun, suppressor, short barreled rifle and shotgun, and other "destructive devices" (hand grenades etc) back in 1934 when the act was passed. They also provided a category of "Any Other Weapon (AOW)" that includes factory-built shotguns with short barrels and very short overall lengths. The tax stamp on an AOW was/is $5. The legislative intent was to make it so expensive that no one but companies and super-wealthy individuals could afford them. In 1934, at the height of the Great Depression, $200 was an exhorbitant sum. Hardly anyone really started registering MGs until after WWII. Then in the 1970s and early 80's more folks got in on the deal. In 1984, the ban on manufacturing new MGs for transfer to individuals went into effect. Since then, MGs have skyrocketted in price. But that ban doesn't affect suppressors. Today is the heyday of the American suppressor market. They will get around to banning manufacture of new ones eventually. Then the prices on existing ones will skyrocket, just like MGs. But until then, suppressors are a damned smart buy. At lest I think so.
|
|