Do out of state firearms have to be shipped from FFL?

[andy t]

I am looking to buy a handgun out of state. I understand that it has to be shipped to MA FFL. However, does the shipper have to use FFL as well? I was at a gunstore today, and was told that if the shipper is not FFL, the store will "notify ATF". Is this true?

Thanks,

Andrew.

 

[dreppucci007]

Andy,

There's nothing that says it HAS to be shipped from an FFL, it only has to go TO an FFL. You may consider asking the receiving FFL beforehand though, as some may be picky and not want to accept a package that wasn't sent from an FFL.

I've sold a few guns out of state, and have brought them to UPS and shipped them myself.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Fed Law ONLY requires an FFL at the receiving end. However, many dealers won't accept guns from mere civilians (non-FFLs) . . . their business and their right to exceed the Fed and State requirements.

As for the threat to notify ATF, let them! ATF would just tell them it's legal and don't bother us with this BS!

 

[wheelgun]

Andy,

There's nothing that says it HAS to be shipped from an FFL, it only has to go TO an FFL. You may consider asking the receiving FFL beforehand though, as some may be picky and not want to accept a package that wasn't sent from an FFL.

So I'm having a hard time finding a new Glock 26. Just want to be sure I understand correctly before I go down this path - you're saying I could order one from out of state and have it shipped to my local FFL?

But I thought I read that both the buyer and seller must reside in Mass? Would the "seller" in this case be viewed as my local FFL even though I paid an out of state FFL for the firearm? Or is it a false statement that both must reside in Mass?

Thanks.

 

[andy t]

wheelgun,

These are two different scenarios.
According to federal law, if both buyer and seller reside in the same state, they can bypass FFL completely and do a face to face transaction.
However, if buyer and seller are in different states, an FFL must be involved in transferring the firearm to the buyer.
(note: I think the above is only in relation to handguns. Longguns may be exempt - I am not too sure).
However, if you have a brand new Glock shipped to MA, I doubt an FFL would transfer it to you because the AG finds them "non compliant". The only way around is that the Glock must have been manufcatured before 10/1998.
My suggestion: wanted message boards on Glocktalk .

Andrew.

 

[wheelgun]

Thanks Andy. I knew that Glock had a some kind of problem 6 months ago, but I thought it had been resolved because they are listed on the "approved firearms roster" currently. Is this just another example of the State's incompetency - did they forget to take them off the list?

 

[andy t]

wheelgun,

Welcome to the f***ed up state of firearms in MA.
You are quite correct that Glocks and a bunch of other handguns the you are I can't buy are on the state approved roster. However, the current douche bag of an AG overstepped his authority and managed to pass his own illegal regulations, citing consumer protection. Now, unless a gun is both on the approved list and passes his bogus tests it can not be sold in MA. For some reason, I don't remember the exact wording, he did not like Glock's compliance methods, and he sent them a ceist and deceist letter.

Andrew.

 

[wheelgun]

wheelgun,

Welcome to the f***ed up state of firearms in MA.
You are quite correct that Glocks and a bunch of other handguns the you are I can't buy are on the state approved roster. However, the current douche bag of an AG overstepped his authority and managed to pass his own illegal regulations, citing consumer protection. Now, unless a gun is both on the approved list and passes his bogus tests it can not be sold in MA. For some reason, I don't remember the exact wording, he did not like Glock's compliance methods, and he sent them a ceist and deceist letter.

Andrew.

Great. So where the hell does one go to find out what's really legal ? I mean, if I were to place an out of state order tomorrow for a Glock, and a friend of mine who's an FFL was not aware of this, I'd take the State to court if they tried to prosecute us. I feel anything on the State's web site should be legally binding. What a bunch of crap.

Anybody know of any other "errors" on the list of approved firearms?

 

[Len-2A Training]

Wheelgun, please set User CP to show ALL THREADS, then look for a recent thread (in this Gun Laws forum) on the difference between EOPS List (Glock is on that) and AG Regs (Glock has been told they are non-compliant). Glock gave up on MA, but there are business reasons (LE) that make it advantageous to remain on the EOPS List.

Lots of info here, latest was within past week or so.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Please read here and study up on the laws.

- Two separate sets of requirements that MUST be met. EOPS List is based on MGL. AG Regs based on what Harshbarger and Reilly pulled out of their asses. Courts have already ruled that the AG has the power to do as he has been doing (killing legal firearms business in MA).

- MGL and AG Regs ONLY penalize the MA Dealer for selling what he shouldn't have! NOT illegal for you to purchase, illegal for him to sell.

- None of this are "errors" in their List. It's all calculated to kill the business. Courts approve of what they are doing.

Only solution is elect a new AG that supports 2-A (Larry Frisoli)!

 

[wheelgun]

Please read here and study up on the laws.


- MGL and AG Regs ONLY penalize the MA Dealer for selling what he shouldn't have! NOT illegal for you to purchase, illegal for him to sell.

Len, thanks for the pointers. I set to "ALL THREADS" and now see more stuff.

But one stupid question I have to ask - you state above "<it's> illegal for him to sell". But if it's a transfer from out of state the local FFL dealer is not really the "seller" - he's just processing the transfer. So is such a transfer legal in the case of things like Glocks today?

 

[drgrant]

Len, thanks for the pointers. I set to "ALL THREADS" and now see more stuff.

But one stupid question I have to ask - you state above "<it's> illegal for him to sell". But if it's a transfer from out of state the local FFL dealer is not really the "seller" - he's just processing the transfer. So is such a transfer legal in the case of things like Glocks today?

No, because the AG is a douche and doesn't consider a dealer
based transfer to be exempt from the requirements. I think the law
may also be worded that way "If a dealer sells or otherwise transfers"
or something like that.

It's -very- important to remember what Len said though. If a dealer DOES
transfer you a handgun, that isn't "compliant" or exempt, there are no
legal flies on you for recieving the handgun. It's not your responsibility as
the "consumer" to deal with compliance in that respect. It's hard to
get a handle on, but the basic deal is that the "handgun compliance" BS
only applies to and is enforceable against the dealers. The state, for instance,
cannot come asking for you to surrender the gun, or the like, because it is not
compliant.

-Mike

 

[Len-2A Training]

Len, thanks for the pointers. I set to "ALL THREADS" and now see more stuff.

But one stupid question I have to ask - you state above "<it's> illegal for him to sell". But if it's a transfer from out of state the local FFL dealer is not really the "seller" - he's just processing the transfer. So is such a transfer legal in the case of things like Glocks today?

Sorry, not being a lawyer, I (and many of us) use one word to mean another. I tend to interchangeably use the word "transfer" and "sell". As far as MGL and the AG Regs go, every transfer (whether money passes hands or not) falls under their laws/regs. Ergo, the MA Dealer can not "transfer" it to you legally.

HTH clarify my poor use of terminology.

 

[wheelgun]

No, because the AG is a douche and doesn't consider a dealer
based transfer to be exempt from the requirements. I think the law
may also be worded that way "If a dealer sells or otherwise transfers"
or something like that.

It's -very- important to remember what Len said though. If a dealer DOES
transfer you a handgun, that isn't "compliant" or exempt, there are no
legal flies on you for recieving the handgun. It's not your responsibility as
the "consumer" to deal with compliance in that respect. It's hard to
get a handle on, but the basic deal is that the "handgun compliance" BS
only applies to and is enforceable against the dealers. The state, for instance,
cannot come asking for you to surrender the gun, or the like, because it is not
compliant.

-Mike

Thanks Mike. Seems like every corner I turn I run into yet another restriction I didn't know about. There's no way to win. No matter how hard you try to obey these draconian laws, there's no point if the AG can just edit them on the fly.

 

[Cross-X]

Thanks Mike. Seems like every corner I turn I run into yet another restriction I didn't know about. There's no way to win. No matter how hard you try to obey these draconian laws, there's no point if the AG can just edit them on the fly.

Do your best to find a way to mentally get past all the self-pitying moaning and groaning that otherwise sensible MA gun owners often engage in.

There are lots of neat guns that you can lawfully own in MA, whether it means buying "off-list" guns via private sales from folks who bought them when they were living out of state, or snaggin' yourself a new gun meeting all MA requirements from your local gun shop.

My point is this: too much complaining often gets in the way of many happy times on the range. Why wallow in the darkness when you can have great trigger times at your favorite shootin' range?

Darius

 

[wheelgun]

Do your best to find a way to mentally get past all the self-pitying moaning and groaning that otherwise sensible MA gun owners often engage in.

There are lots of neat guns that you can lawfully own in MA, whether it means buying "off-list" guns via private sales from folks who bought them when they were living out of state, or snaggin' yourself a new gun meeting all MA requirements from your local gun shop.

My point is this: too much complaining often gets in the way of many happy times on the range. Why wallow in the darkness when you can have great trigger times at your favorite shootin' range?

Darius

Sorry, but you're off base here. I'm not "moaning and groaning" out of self pity. I'm actively involved in trying to find a new carry gun. As such, I have very limited choices from the start, which I only recently discovered (thanks to all in this forum) the AG has narrowed down even further. This discussion has nothing to do with fun on the range.

Yes, there a lot of neat guns I can (and do) own. But I don't buy a carry gun because it's "neat". Also, I don't buy a carry gun casually - it has to be VERY reliable. Buying a used pistol you never know what you're going to get. I might have to go through 2-3 used ones before I find something I can count on. I've been down that road before.... no thanks.

 

[Scrivener]

Sorry, but you're off base here. I'm not "moaning and groaning" out of self pity. I'm actively involved in trying to find a new carry gun. As such, I have very limited choices from the start, which I only recently discovered (thanks to all in this forum) the AG has narrowed down even further.

Well, that is a matter of interpretation and impression.

However, how is it that one who declares "Yes, there a lot of neat guns I can (and do) own" has only "recently discovered" restrictions that have been in place for over half a decade?

Hardly indicative of an active shooter and/or defender of firearms rights..........

 

[Len-2A Training]

I can only speak from personal experience of being a gun owner for 30 years.

I have only bought a mere handful of NIB handguns. Almost all have been bought used.

Ironically, three of the four handguns that gave me trouble were bought brand new! In all cases, including the used 1911, the manufacturer made good on the problems. Only one wasn't returned to the factory and I polished the feed-ramp and sold it here. The buyer was told the situation and later reported no problems with FTF (P22), so the polished feed-ramp probably solved that problem.

On a few occasions I sought expert advice about a gun's condition (gunsmith-friend). But if the gun hasn't been beaten up, has a good reputation as a reliable piece (check reports of others on the Net), it has been a good and reliable carry piece.

Glocks that are factory refurb are hardly a "pig in a poke" purchases, for example. If you choose a used S&W or Sig you can bring it to their shop and have them go over it thoroughly if you are even the least bit antsy about it.

YMMV

 

[KMaurer]

Don't worry about the EOPS list or the AG's regulations. It's really simple from the gun owner's perspective. If you can find a dealer who will do the transfer or sell you a gun, it's legal for you to transfer/purchase it (assault weapons excepted). If you can't, then then it really doesn't matter what the rules say. See? It isn't that hard after all.

Ken

 

[drgrant]

Do your best to find a way to mentally get past all the self-pitying moaning and groaning that otherwise sensible MA gun owners often engage in.

There are lots of neat guns that you can lawfully own in MA, whether it means buying "off-list" guns via private sales from folks who bought them when they were living out of state, or snaggin' yourself a new gun meeting all MA requirements from your local gun shop.

My point is this: too much complaining often gets in the way of many happy times on the range. Why wallow in the darkness when you can have great trigger times at your favorite shootin' range?

Darius

+1, Darius. The reason I said what I said to the OP was kinda leaning
in that direction... Yes, the regs suck, but they're not an absolute
dealbreaker. At least 2/3rds of the handguns I own are "off
list". Today, when I went to a bowling pin shoot, there wasnt one
gun in the range bag that was "on the list". 2 of the guns in the bag I got
at what I'd consider a fair price, as well. The third was just expensive
because there arent many around in MA. The situation is not complete
doom and gloom. I take great joy in defying the AG's intentions by
owning handguns that he doesn't want me to have.


-Mike

 

[wheelgun]

Well, that is a matter of interpretation and impression.

However, how is it that one who declares "Yes, there a lot of neat guns I can (and do) own" has only "recently discovered" restrictions that have been in place for over half a decade?

Hardly indicative of an active shooter and/or defender of firearms rights..........

Boy, you sure have strange logic:

- The "restriction I recently discovered" was with regard to Glocks only. I'm well aware of the EOPS "approved firearms roster" and have been for years. But as far as I know (correct me if I'm still ignorant here) Glocks are currently the only exception to the EOPS list. If there are other manufacturers or specific models on the EOPS list which are banned by the AG, I'm not aware of them and haven't been able to find a list of them.

- The Glock restriction began around May 2004, not "half a decade ago".

- Just because I'm not aware of a Glock specific issue, how does that in any way reflect on my defense of firearms rights? I've never owned a Glock before, never studied them much or considered them. I'm well aware of the extra requirements Mass. mandates in order to make the roster list because that's documented on the EOPS web site. But unless you're aware the AG put further restricitions on Glocks, it's unlikely you'd stumble on it in a general search of firearm law. To quote someone I think you might know...

Originally Posted by Scrivener
"Despite the propensity of those on this board to consistently ignore frequently-repeated facts, THERE IS NO AG LIST. Ergo, there is no "new list" for the AG to release. Grasp the concept."

So how the hell is the average guy supposed to know what the AG has banned? Random google searches?


- I support and defend firearms rights as much as the next guy. Your suggestion that I don't has no basis or validity, but is just a stupid knee jerk reaction from a fuzzy thinker. I just don't understand why the fact that I was unaware of a specific Glock issue prompts you to make a personal attack. Fortunately one doesn't run into too many unpleasant people like you in the NES forums.

 

[wheelgun]

If you choose a used S&W or Sig you can bring it to their shop and have them go over it thoroughly if you are even the least bit antsy about it.

YMMV

Funny you should pick that example Len. I had once a NEW S&W 4006. It had FTF's about once every other mag, usually the last round in the mag. Sent it back to S&W with the mags along with a thorough description of the problem. They worked it over but when I got it back the problem was still there. Ended up selling it. So while I don't doubt there are many quality used pistols out there, I have little faith that bad ones can be fixed. Maybe I'm too pessimistic, but that's been my experience.

 

[Len-2A Training]

I wonder if there was a "disconnect" between what you reported and what the tech who worked on it was told?

That's a piece of why I mentioned bringing it there. Maybe you can speak with the tech who will look at it and that could help make sure that the problem doesn't get overlooked.

 

[vellnueve]

So how the hell is the average guy supposed to know what the AG has banned? Random google searches?

That's the whole problem with the state and is why Tom Reilly is a flaming a**h***. He tries to confuse and mislead gun owners so that eventually they trip over some stupidly vague law.

That said, you can buy any handgun in this state that was in-state before the 98 cutoff. You can buy any handgun that a MA FFL will sell you (as it is their responsibilty to comply with the AG laws, not that of the buyer.)

 

[Scrivener]

- The "restriction I recently discovered" was with regard to Glocks only.

Really? Then how is it you could not grasp the fact that having a gun shipped in from out of state does NOT solve your supply problem?

Or that LenS had to direct you to answers to your other questions?

Or this bon mot:

Seems like every corner I turn I run into yet another restriction I didn't know about.

THAT'S why I questioned your supposed experience with Mass. gun laws and commitment to firearms rights. People who have been following the turds of what used to be our rights as they circle the bowl are already well aware of these problems.

I support and defend firearms rights as much as the next guy. Your suggestion that I don't has no basis or validity, but is just a stupid knee jerk reaction from a fuzzy thinker.

Your own posts prove otherwise.

 

[JonJ]

Here's the text of the AG's handgun regulations in case someone hasn't seen it:
http://www.ago.state.ma.us/sp.cfm?pageid=1170

 

[wheelgun]

Really? Then how is it you could not grasp the fact that having a gun shipped in from out of state does NOT solve your supply problem?

Or that LenS had to direct you to answers to your other questions?

Obviously you didn't bother to read the entire thread you buffoon

Read the first page of the thread. I stated I was having problems locating a Glock 26 locally. I asked about FFL to FFL transfers from out of state. At that point I had no idea it was considered non-compliant, since it's listed on the AFR.

Then AndyT responded, stating that I couldn't have one shipped from out of state because the AG had over-ridden the AFR. I had no knowledge of the AG's action on Glocks until Andy mentioned it.

You really should be more careful and think twice before you post. Less embarassing.

 

[vellnueve]

Scrivener is a lawyer, it's in their nature to say things bluntly.

The only guns that dealers can sell post 98 are pretty much some Paras, some SIGs, most S&Ws, and most Rugers. There are smaller manufacturers that are also compliant like Seecamp, but those are the only big names that can sell in this state.

 

[Scrivener]

I had no knowledge of the AG's action on Glocks until Andy mentioned it.

Res ipsa loquitor

You really should be more careful and think twice before you post. Less embarassing.

Good advice. Follow it.

 

[csharpdev]

This may help wheelgun, I've heard from a few people that a LEO can purchase a Glock leagally from a dealer and s/he can then sell it to anyone in a private sale and then it's leagal. (I'm not sure if this is 100% accurate maybe someone can confirm.) I've also heard from other people that a post 10/98 glock is illeagal to own period, no matter how you got it. After reading this thread it sounds as though the former is more accurate?