State letter grades - RyanM style

Status
Not open for further replies.
I live in Illinois, and the no-carry crap sucks, but otherwise it ain't all that bad. We have no "assault weapons" ban, no .50 cal ban, no purchase limits, a 3-day max waiting period, no training requirement, no magazine limits, no gun "safety" tests by the state
Yet you need a FOID, which is one of the most intrusive requirements in the country. You have to get a special ID just to purchase a firearm, any firearm. You must posses that ID, and it is subject to renewal and state bureaucracy, meaning your continued lawful use and possession of arms is tightly controlled.


MA is surprisingly good about CCWs. Everyone I know who has applied has gotten one without any fanfare. It is $100 for 6 years. Plus, we have some of the least restrictive CCW rules as far as where you can carry. It's pretty much just schools and federal buildings. Not that that changes your rating any, because it's still a "may issue" state.

Perhaps that is because by the time someone actualy gets a firearm they have dealt with more BS, scrutiny, backgrounds checks, and discretionary permission than the CCW requirements of many places? You must also renew your license just to continue to legaly posses a firearm. Combined with extremely restrictive transport and storage laws, and one of the worst jury selections if you ever actualy do need to defend yourself and I would not call MA friendly by any means.
Guns are classified into catagories and even a standard pump or semi shotgun with 6-10 round capacity is a "large capacity" firearm in MA requiring a class A license (as opposed to the class B which is still more trouble than a CCW in some states). The same firearm in CA could be purchased by someone with no license whatsoever walking into a store, purchasing it and picking it up 10 days later.
You even have to notify 3 seperate government entities if you move because you are an evil firearm owner that must be tracked.
Anyone that would call MA decent in reference to guns is crazy. It is definately in the top 4 of most restrictive states in the US, if not higher.


CA has very CCW friendly laws, too bad it is a may issue state.
That is because it is still a relic leftover from when CCW was only granted to Peace Officers or retired Peace Officers and a select few elite citizens ( the practice still continued in most well populated counties).
New laws make exemptions for officers on many things so they no longer need a CCW. If the state ever became may issue, or issuing became more common then the rules would be revised I imagine. The ability to get a CCW in a hardly populated eastern rural county and then excercise it while traveling through an extremely anti gun location like San Francisco (which does not even like locked up guns in the home and has actualy voted to ban handguns entirely, and is only kept in this world because it must still exist within the state...) would vanish.
Like I said the current form of CCW is a relic, existing before the time when normal citizens were granted CCWs anywhere, even rural places. If it became may issue, or even more common, I imagine they would suddenly be restricted to the county they were issued in and not valid statewide.
 
Last edited:
Oh I agree 100%, I was just speaking on the aspects of CCW when I said it was "decent". Some states are very lenient but don't let you CCW almost anywhere. It's kinda backwards here. Keep in mind that I've lived in MA all my life so my perspective on what is "decent" is warped, given what I'm used to.

Just FYI, not to nitpick but a 6-10 round capacity shotgun is still a Class B license (Class A only adds large capacity handguns). Still ridiculous regardless.

Dope
 
Just FYI, not to nitpick but a 6-10 round capacity shotgun is still a Class B license (Class A only adds large capacity handguns). Still ridiculous regardless.


Here is MA definition of large capacity: http://www.mass.gov/dfwele/dfw/education/hed/hed_gun_laws.htm
"A weapon is large capacity if it is a semi-automatic handgun or rifle that is capable of accepting (or readily modifiable to accept) any detachable large capacity feeding device that holds more than ten rounds, OR if it is a shotgun capable of accepting more than five shotgun shells, OR if it is an assault weapon."

So a common pump or semi shotgun with a 6+ round capacity as a large capacity weapon.
In fact if one wanted to nitpick since the wording says "capable of accepting...shotgun shells" it could be stretched to include the one in the chamber under the law in regards to shotguns, even though it generaly is not interpreted that way. That is because in reference to the handguns and rifles it refers to the detachable magazine capacity and does not include the chamber, but in reference to the shotgun speaks of the shotgun's overall capacity.

However you are right in that they make a distinction that it is a large capacity shotgun, without requiring a different license. I guess defining as "large capacity" is to trigger other restrictions and laws...
 
Last edited:
Yeah, MA gun laws are pretty boggling. I swear they are written in a way to be intentionally confusing just to try to scare people away from ownership.

Dope
 
The cost of CCW is not a big issue to me. I moved to KY because of the Brady F rating. This is heaven compared to Illinois.
 
Yeah, MA gun laws are pretty boggling. I swear they are written in a way to be intentionally confusing just to try to scare people away from ownership.
Ah I got it. I was thinking class b was the minimum, but actualy the FID itself is. One must have not just a license which expires which they must purchase and register for (FID) but an additional class B to have the same exact shotgun 6-10 round cap which anyone would a clean record could walk in and buy in CA with no requirements whatsoever. That was my intended point :neener:

Any state where your right to even possess or transport is dependent on renewal of a license is very far from a free state.
So whether it is a FID, FOID, FLID, FUGGLE, FOODLE, or FLABBLE, the right to mere ownership is tetering on the brink in such a state.
 
I live in Illinois, and the no-carry crap sucks, but otherwise it ain't all that bad. We have no "assault weapons" ban, no .50 cal ban, no purchase limits, a 3-day max waiting period, no training requirement, no magazine limits, no gun "safety" tests by the state

Yet you need a FOID, which is one of the most intrusive requirements in the country. You have to get a special ID just to purchase a firearm, any firearm. You must posses that ID, and it is subject to renewal and state bureaucracy, meaning your continued lawful use and possession of arms is tightly controlled.

What, as if I am not aware of this? The fact though is that the vast majority of the time, they get back to you in about 3 weeks with the card. The FOID is easier to obtain than a driver's license. No test is required. Any gunshop is happy to help you send in the simple one-page form because they know they are getting a new customer. I stand by the other lack of restrictions that I mentioned. IL isn't great, but it is far better than CA, HI, MD, NJ, MA, and probably a few other states that put out a maze of restrictions on firearms and magazines that you may not possess and may be a felony if you do.

In Illinois, I can transport my AR-15s with their 30/100 round magazines and my "junk" gun and my .50 cal rifle while on my way to buy 10 handguns at once, without any fear that I am doing something wrong, as long as they are unloaded and in a case (and I have that nasty FOID card).
 
I, of course, wish to argue for and defend my state, Indiana. Let us remember the fee for the carry lic. is good for, I think, 6 years and we have the only LIFETIME permit in the Nation.

As to the NFA stuff, why do we get a C. there is nothing you can not own and no State paperwork for class III items. machine guns, sub-guns, crew served weapons, canon, etc. all welcome!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top