AR manufacturers that are sold in MA

[dukefan70]

AR manufacturers that are sold in MA

Doin research on buying an AR. Somebody will accuse me of not searching for this topic being covered already, but I did so here goes. Went through a bunch of brands and want to know which ones are sold in MA out of my list. Not asking for brand comparisons right now, just which ones are sold in MA. Some are obvious like S&W, but here are all the manufacturers I've looked at:

Charles Daly Defense
Smith and Wesson
Double Star Arms
DPMS
CMMG
Bushmaster
Armalite

Again, just which ones are sold and you can own in MA and which aren't. Thanks.

 

[bhmax16]

Doesn't Mass only have a banned handgun list? Also do you want to know what you can OWN in MA or simply what's manufactured in MA? If it's just what you can own, I'm pretty sure you can own ANY of the brands listed above, though, if a post-ban weapon, it obviously can't have all the "evil features." Somebody who knows the laws better will chime in I'm sure...I'm very up to date on the handgun laws but very iffy when it comes to long arms

 

[dukefan70]

I do mean which ones you can own...I've edited the original post.

 

[PaulD]

You can own any brand of AR (or other rifle) as long as it doesn't have too many evil features. Usually that means no collapsible/folding stock and no flash hider.

 

[oneswithfunes]

Doesn't Mass only have a banned handgun list? Also do you want to know what you can OWN in MA or simply what's manufactured in MA? If it's just what you can own, I'm pretty sure you can own ANY of the brands listed above, though, if a post-ban weapon, it obviously can't have all the "evil features." Somebody who knows the laws better will chime in I'm sure...I'm very up to date on the handgun laws but very iffy when it comes to long arms

Can you point me to this banned list for MA?

 

[bhmax16]

Can you point me to this banned list for MA?

It's the list the AG puts out for non-compliant handguns...it's in a sticky somewhere. Only way you can own any of the non-compliant guns is if they were already registered in MA prior to the list being put out, and you obtain it through a private transfer

 

[Coyote33]

OK, let me try to add to or change the focus of this thread. What AR or AR parts manufacturers are located in MA?

 

[oneswithfunes]

It's the list the AG puts out for non-compliant handguns...it's in a sticky somewhere. Only way you can own any of the non-compliant guns is if they were already registered in MA prior to the list being put out, and you obtain it through a private transfer

So they are not really banned just not legal for ffl transfer at this time.

Yankee hill Machine in Florence.

 

[oneswithfunes]

Aww come on. I love reading about peoples ideas of reality.

 

[60 buckscash]

Remsport is a Ma company.

 

[punx45]

I think what OP is trying to ask is what manufacturers have a readily available supply of post-ban, and thus MA available, configurations in stores. I got a Stag Arms in MA.

Im sure someone will tell you to just build your own, which is another option

 

[kiver]

Another vote for Remsport.....I am going to quote Massmark here...."John is an evil black rifle genius"

 

[atilla]

don't forget S&W, they are here in MA.

 

[drgrant]

Doesn't Mass only have a banned handgun list?

There is no "Banned" list. There is a list of handguns that pass one of two tiers of handgun compliance which can (potentially) be transferred by a dealer. Yes, there is a difference... see here:

http://www.northeastshooters.com/vb.../37553-MA-Handgun-Compliance-Q-A-Thread-(new)

Please confine all handgun compliance BS to the thread above. That horse has been beaten to death and I really
don't think it needs to contaminate every 3rd thread on NES.


-Mike

 

[SecondAmdFirst]

Mike, can I just ask one clarifying quesiton? I know everyone calls it the AG approved list, but I think Scrivener pointed out it falls under consumer protection though. Is it still the AG that sets that list?

 

[vellnueve]

There is NO AG APPROVED LIST.

Is that clear enough?

 

[PaulD]

Mike, can I just ask one clarifying quesiton? I know everyone calls it the AG approved list, but I think Scrivener pointed out it falls under consumer protection though. Is it still the AG that sets that list?

The AG has a list of criteria (10lb trigger being one of the worst) that handguns must meet to be sold or transferred by an FFL in MA. The manufacturers must make their best attempt at meeting those regulations and then they ship them. Once the gun is being sold in the state, the AG then decides whether or not the gun actually meets the criteria and the decision, as near as I can tell, is heavily influenced by the exact battery level in Martha Coakley's personal devices that morning.

 

[drgrant]

Mike, can I just ask one clarifying quesiton? I know everyone calls it the AG approved list, but I think Scrivener pointed out it falls under consumer protection though. Is it still the AG that sets that list?

For the love of god, read the Q+A already! It's posted in the link above. This will answer anyone's questions about handgun compliance. There is NO list published by the AG's office.... whatsoever, only the EOPS roster, which deals with the first tier of compliance. The 2nd tier (The AG's CMR 940 crap) is arbitrary. (as is discussed in the Q+A).

-Mike

 

[SecondAmdFirst]

For the love of god, read the Q+A already! It's posted in the link above. This will answer anyone's questions about handgun compliance. There is NO list published by the AG's office.... whatsoever, only the EOPS roster, which deals with the first tier of compliance. The 2nd tier (The AG's CMR 940 crap) is arbitrary. (as is discussed in the Q+A).

-Mike

My question is who sets that list, or the laws that require any gun sold by an FFL after the specified date to be on the list? I am aware it is not an "AG list", but acknowledged that when someone says the AG list, they are probably referring to the EOPS. If I understand correctly, the AG approval only pertains to trigger pull and the loaded round indicator. The point I'm trying to get at is whether or not a new AG could pull the EOPS, or was that actually passed by the legislature.

 

[drgrant]

My question is who sets that list,

EOPS adds guns to the roster after they pass the testing by a third party lab, which is paid for by the gun manuf or whoever submits the (3 usually) guns for testing. I believe the EOPS list is updated quarterly. The guns are also destroyed during testing. (much of the testing is destructive. )

or the laws that require any gun sold by an FFL after the specified date to be on the list?

Basically any transfer after 10/21/98 must comply with both the EOPS roster and the AG's regs, with the exclusion that guns listed on the roster manufed before 10/21/98 are AG reg exempt. "Fully papered 10/21/98 in the state" guns are exempt from both sets of regulations- grandfathered for transfer, essentially. Most handguns in circulation, however, are not papered as such. Transfers to qualifying LEOs are also AG reg exempt. This is all laid out in the faq.

There also is a target roster but there are few guns listed on it. These guns are also exempt from the AGs regs, but IIRC, SVI is the only one with a brain big enough to bother putting guns on it.

I am aware it is not an "AG list", but acknowledged that when someone says the AG list, they are probably referring to the EOPS.

They might not be. Some individuals keep wanting to refer to an imaginary list of "fully approved" handguns which exist, that supposedly passes both tiers of certification. It doesn't exist. (Well, you could send a FOIA request to the AG's office

If I understand correctly, the AG approval only pertains to trigger pull and the loaded round indicator. The point I'm trying to get at is whether or not a new AG could pull the EOPS, or was that actually passed by the legislature.

There is no AG approval. There is only "AG denial". The manufacturer fires of a letter to the AGs office saying they're going to "Start selling XYZ handgun and that they believe it meets the regulations set out in CMR 940". There is no response or "approval" from the AG's office. Then the manuf starts selling the handgun, crosses their fingers, and hopes the AG doesn't whine about it. (CMR940 is subjective and there are no testing metrics for it, only a bunch of bloviation speciified in the law which "kinda" spells out what is or is not compliant. CMR940 is not very specific. )

Now we return to our regularly scheduled thread derailment. If I see another question about handgun compliance, I will change someone's avatar into a container of pablum. j/k




-Mike

 

[SecondAmdFirst]

EOPS adds guns to the roster after they pass the testing by a third party lab, which is paid for by the gun manuf or whoever submits the (3 usually) guns for testing. I believe the EOPS list is updated quarterly. The guns are also destroyed during testing. (much of the testing is destructive. )



Basically any transfer after 10/21/98 must comply with both the EOPS roster and the AG's regs, with the exclusion that guns listed on the roster manufed before 10/21/98 are AG reg exempt. "Fully papered 10/21/98 in the state" guns are exempt from both sets of regulations- grandfathered for transfer, essentially. Most handguns in circulation, however, are not papered as such. Transfers to qualifying LEOs are also AG reg exempt. This is all laid out in the faq.

There also is a target roster but there are few guns listed on it. These guns are also exempt from the AGs regs, but IIRC, SVI is the only one with a brain big enough to bother putting guns on it.



They might not be. Some individuals keep wanting to refer to an imaginary list of "fully approved" handguns which exist, that supposedly passes both tiers of certification. It doesn't exist. (Well, you could send a FOIA request to the AG's office



There is no AG approval. There is only "AG denial". The manufacturer fires of a letter to the AGs office saying they're going to "Start selling XYZ handgun and that they believe it meets the regulations set out in CMR 940". There is no response or "approval" from the AG's office. Then the manuf starts selling the handgun, crosses their fingers, and hopes the AG doesn't whine about it. (CMR940 is subjective and there are no testing metrics for it, only a bunch of bloviation speciified in the law which "kinda" spells out what is or is not compliant. CMR940 is not very specific. )

-Mike

Thanks for the clarification Mike. The one thing I didn't see was regarding who set the list in motion? Some believe that if we get a pro-2a AG that they can get rid of the EOPS list. Yes, I know that additions are done through the certification process. But who has the power to just do away with this nonsense? Was this the AG equivalent of an "executive order"? I know the AG can meddle quite a bit with consumer protection stuff. Or was this actually passed by the legislature and we would need to get a bill passed that would void the EOPS?

 

[drgrant]

Thanks for the clarification Mike. The one thing I didn't see was regarding who set the list in motion? Some believe that if we get a pro-2a AG that they can get rid of the EOPS list.

Not happening. -That- list and how it works is codified into law...(MGL) and is not at the whim of the AG at all. Hell, the AG doesn't even have anything to do with the EOPS roster... it's controlled by EOPS and there is controlling law which specifies how it works. ) but honestly, the list isn't the real problem, the AG is. Even if you did away with the roster you'd still have the CMR940 crap. Get rid of CMR940 and the EOPS roster will easily double in size inside of a year. The problem is that manufacturers don't want to make a several thousand dollar gamble (on each model gun approved!) that is entirely dependent on the whims of the AG's office. As far as "how the AG gets their power" I believe there's probably some enabling legslation/CMR somewhere that enables the AG to regulate handguns via the CMRs.

-Mike

 

[PaulD]

Get rid of CMR940 and the EOPS roster will easily double in size inside of a year. The problem is that manufacturers don't want to make a several thousand dollar gamble (on each model gun approved!) that is entirely dependent on the whims of the AG's office. As far as "how the AG gets their power" I believe there's probably some enabling legslation/CMR somewhere that enables the AG to regulate handguns via the CMRs.

-Mike

*ding*

The EOPS list sucks as a concept but on a practical basis, the AG regulations are by far the bigger problem.

On the AG's power, a big part of the problem is it didn't get successfully challenged in the first place and now everyone seems to work off the assumption that their power is valid.

 

[SecondAmdFirst]

*ding*

The EOPS list sucks as a concept but on a practical basis, the AG regulations are by far the bigger problem.

On the AG's power, a big part of the problem is it didn't get successfully challenged in the first place and now everyone seems to work off the assumption that their power is valid.

Well, the AG regulation only applies to trigger pull and the load indicator, plus Mike pointed out it is just an "AG denial". So where is the AG causing more damange than CMR 940? I'm trying to learn more to see if we can actually DO something about it, rather than just bitching on NES. With the whole Scott Brown thing, I realized that I just vent, try to change a few opinions, donate here and there, but I never actually work at the issue.

 

[PaulD]

Well, the AG regulation only applies to trigger pull and the load indicator, plus Mike pointed out it is just an "AG denial". So where is the AG causing more damange than CMR 940? I'm trying to learn more to see if we can actually DO something about it, rather than just bitching on NES. With the whole Scott Brown thing, I realized that I just vent, try to change a few opinions, donate here and there, but I never actually work at the issue.

It also applies to safeties. Obviously it's more than trigger pull or no 1911s would qualify. Also, Mike pointed out that the process itself is what prevents manufacturers from even trying. The process is purposefully vague and the manufacturers know they'd have to jump through the AG hoop after getting on the EOPS list, so they don't even bother. Plus, the EOPS list would be pretty much a given for many because the same tests required by CA for their list would qualify a gun for the EOPS list.

 

[drgrant]

Well, the AG regulation only applies to trigger pull and the load indicator, plus Mike pointed out it is just an "AG denial". So where is the AG causing more damange than CMR 940?
.

You don't get it. CMR940-16 are the AG's regulations.

The reason the AG's regulations are worse is because there are literally no metrics for approval. On the CMR940 side there are no "tests" and there is no written approval. (The AG never sends a response to "declarations of intent to sell" sent in by the manufacturers. ) With CMR940 the AG can basically ban sales of that handgun anytime she wants by just saying "it's non compliant". There are ambiguous terms in the AG's regs- like "Series of multiple motions" among other things. Whatever anti gun AG that is in power abuses these terms to their benefit- eg, "Loaded Chamber Indicator" can mean anything they
want it to mean. (putting paint on an extractor, or having a tactile LCI, might not be "enough" to please the AG's whims).

The above scares the crap out of every gun manufacturer that wants to sell guns in this state. The reason is there is no way to be 100% sure your gun will "pass" the AG's "sniff test". Even prior sales are no indication of "transfer legality". For example, when new Glocks were being sold here (with crippled 10+ pound triggers) for awhile in 04? they were sold for at least 2 MONTHS before the AG complained about them. There is also some serious hypocrisy with CMR940 compliance in the case of a few different handguns, but I'm not going to go into graphic detail over it because I don't want to give the AG's office any bright ideas. (The AG''s office has people that passively read this forum.... )

This differs greatly from the EOPS roster... where once you get a gun on it, it never gets removed from the roster. All guns which pass the testing regimen also get on the roster... there are no "subjective" tests- all the tests are DEFINED IN LAW. If your gun passes the tests as defined in law, it gets on the roster. On the contrary, there is no testing regimen for CMR940. Nor is there a list of guns which "pass" CMR940.

This is all covered in the Q+A I wrote. (in great detail, I might add. )

I'm trying to learn more to see if we can actually DO something about it, rather than just bitching on NES. With the whole Scott Brown thing, I realized that I just vent, try to change a few opinions, donate here and there, but I never actually work at the issue.

The best way to fix the problem is to elect an AG that isn't an anti. Then the regs will either get repealed, not enforced, or redefined.

-Mike

 

[calsdad]

You can own any manufacturer's AR you want in MA - as long as it doesn't have any of the features that make it an assault weapon.

That means:

No folding or adjustable stock
No bayonet lug
No flash hider

If you want a certain manufacturer's rifle - either put a fixed stock like an A2 on it - or pin the adjustable stock so that it no longer adjusts. Cut off the bayonet lug ( if it even has one) - and put a muzzle brake on it and pin it so that it is non-removable.

If nobody in the state sells the brand you are looking for - order one and get it sent to your FFL and have them convert it ( or find an FFL that will) , find a dealer in a contiguous state to MA that has the brand you want - and have them convert it, or order your lower separately - order the upper from the manufacturer you prefer - and have them ship it to you. Then take it to gunsmith and have the upper put into the proper MA config.

You can get an upper sent to your house - IN MA. I have ordered 3 non- MA compliant uppers (shipped to my house) - and then had them converted to MA compliant config after I received them by dropping them off at one of the FFL's I use to get them converted to MA compliance. When the rifle was actually assembled it was in MA compliant config and I then filed the FA-10 once the lower and upper were joined.

It's not as complicated as many people seem to think it is.