FFL Transfer non-Mass compliant QUESTION

[Carguy]

Can I purchase a gun (I'm not sure is mass compliant- P-64) on a site lke Gunbroker and have it shipped to an FFL dealer and receive it from that dealer without breaking the law? If he receives it in MA is he simply aiding me in a transfer or is he actually part of the sale and therefore MA compliance laws apply??? Since these haven't been manufactured since the 70's but many are sold as, used:like new in box:never issued, are they subject to MA compliance laws?

Simply put is a purchase from and out of state FFL a purchase for him then a transfer to & from the in-state FFL dealer to me?

Thanks

 

[Scrivener]

It is illegal for a Mass. FFL to transfer a non-compliant gun to a Mass. resident unless it is documented that the gun was IN Mass. prior to 10/98.

This has been discussed here many, many times, as you would have found if you'd bothered to look.....

 

[Carguy]

I did try to look...I searched FFL sales/FFL transfers/ Non-Compliant FFL Traansfers. I was unsuccessful in finding anything that spelled it out for me. I've never done this before and wanted to insure I did it right.

But thanks for your assistance.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

It is illegal for a Mass. FFL to transfer a non-compliant gun to a Mass. resident unless it is documented that the gun was IN Mass. prior to 10/98.

Not quite technically true. The law the Scriv talks about is a prohibition on what a "purveyor of of firearms" may sell. The statute defines a purveyor as someone who holds a "Massachusetts License to Sell Firearms", but makes no reference to an "FFL holder".

For all practical purposes an "FFL Holder" and holder of a "MA license to sell firearms" are one and the same in MA since the law limits one to selling 4 firearms, rifles or shotguns on a non-dealer transfer via the FA-10 form.

There probably aren't any people out there who maintain an FFL and the MA required non-resident business address just to transfer 9-4 guns a year without the need for a MA License to Sell Firearms. If there are any such very low volume FFL holders in MA, you would indeed be fortunate to find one willing to use up 25% of their annual limit for your transfer.

All this really means in practice is that you have to look in Mass General Law for the prohibition, and that it will not make any reference to the "FFL" in the statute.

 

[Scrivener]

T

There probably aren't any people out there who maintain an FFL and the MA required non-resident business address just to transfer 9 [sic - 1] -4 guns a year without the need for a MA License to Sell Firearms.

I've yet to meet one of this elusive species. Given that Mass law - enforced by BATFE policy - requires a storefront operation in the appropriate zoning district, the likelihood of someone holding an FFL w/o the Mass license strikes me as slim.

Not impossible, mind you; just extremely slim.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

T

I've yet to meet one of this elusive species. Given that Mass law - enforced by BATFE policy - requires a storefront operation in the appropriate zoning district, the likelihood of someone holding an FFL w/o the Mass license strikes me as slim.

Not impossible, mind you; just extremely slim.

100% agreed. It might be easier to find an ivory billed woodpecker in Massachusetts than the non-state licensed FFL, which made my comments more of a exercise in theory than anything with practical relevance.

 

[Scrivener]

100% agreed. It might be easier to find an ivory billed woodpecker in Massachusetts than the non-state licensed FFL, which made my comments more of a exercise in theory than anything with practical relevance.

But always an interesting discussion.

 

[NFD9]

T

I've yet to meet one of this elusive species. Given that Mass law - enforced by BATFE policy - requires a storefront operation in the appropriate zoning district, the likelihood of someone holding an FFL w/o the Mass license strikes me as slim.

Not impossible, mind you; just extremely slim.

They're around
There's an FFL that I use who works out of his house in the Natick area.
And a great guy to boot.

 

[NFD9]

Can I purchase a gun (I'm not sure is mass compliant- P-64) on a site lke Gunbroker and have it shipped to an FFL dealer and receive it from that dealer without breaking the law? If he receives it in MA is he simply aiding me in a transfer or is he actually part of the sale and therefore MA compliance laws apply??? Since these haven't been manufactured since the 70's but many are sold as, used:like new in box:never issued, are they subject to MA compliance laws?

Simply put is a purchase from and out of state FFL a purchase for him then a transfer to & from the in-state FFL dealer to me?

Thanks

Carguy,
Here are some links.
http://www.ago.state.ma.us/sp.cfm?pageid=1579
http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=eopstop...istration+&+Laws&L2=Firearms+Support+Services

Here's how it was explained to me.
Hope this helps.

MGL says that if a gun is on the EOPS List it can be sold in the state . . . but the AG's Regs says that it must meet his/her regs TOO . . . EXCEPT if it was MADE PRE-1998! AG Regs EXEMPT ANY GUN MADE BEFORE THAT DATE, NO MATTER WHERE THE GUN RESIDED.

Therefore:

- On EOPS List + Mfr certifies that it meets AG Regs = Good to go!
- On EOPS List + NOT certified to meet AG Regs = Can't be sold to non-LEOs (AG has LE exemption) by MA Dealer if made post 1998 cut-off date, OR if made pre-1998 cut-off date it CAN be sold to anyone.
- NOT on EOPS List = Can't be sold by MA Dealer to anyone in MA, UNLESS it was in possession of a MA Dealer/Resident/PD on 10/21/98.

 

[Scrivener]

There's an FFL that use who works out of his house in the Natick area.

Huh? I'm not sure what "use who works" means (USED to work?), but home FFLs have been history since Chapter 180 went into effect.

That's 100 months ago.

 

[NFD9]

Huh? I'm not sure what "use who works" means (USED to work?), but home FFLs have been history since Chapter 180 went into effect.

That's 100 months ago.

No, Not (used to work).
Just what I said, "I use who works"
oops, forgot the I

 

[Scrivener]

No, Not (used to work).
Just what I said, "use who works"

What you wrote makes no sense as written.

Not, apparently, that it matters........