FN Scar and Tavor - are they banned in MA

[Cossack1911]

Hey folks, this may be a dumb question before I ask it. I live in RI but I'm trying to help someone in MA buy a rifle.

Are the FN SCAR and TAVOR banned under the AG ban?

Thanks so much.

 

[Sawicki1991]

As long as the scar doesn't have a flash hider or a folding stock it's fine same goes for the tavor

 

[Cuz]

As long as the scar doesn't have a flash hider or a folding stock it's fine same goes for the tavor

This is correct, but there are still a bunch of stores in MA that won't sell a Scar because they are afraid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[1776]

It would have to be modified (pinned & welded, stock pinned) which is now not allowed post 6/16

 

[not new guy]

It would have to be modified (pinned & welded, stock pinned) which is now not allowed post 6/16

Huh?

 

[Frizzle Fry]

It would have to be modified (pinned & welded, stock pinned) which is now not allowed post 6/16

Citation?

I was under the impression the Tavor is A-OK (meets the law, and the AGs BS) and the SCAR is also OK but many won't touch it..?

 

[spt_1955]

I'm having a hard time understanding why an FN SCAR is not banned as an assault rifle post 7/20/16. Can somebody enlighten me?

 

[Queen Bee]

Both are not AR or AK, and especially the scar 17 has no parts in common with either of them.

the tavor and scar 16 can share mags with the AR but that is it . feel free to buy either

 

[1776]

I would buy one if I could. There are two compliant SCARS listed on NES

When you subtract the options, taxes, etc. for the two listed your down to out of state gunbroker prices

 

[Frizzle Fry]

I'm having a hard time understanding why an FN SCAR is not banned as an assault rifle post 7/20/16. Can somebody enlighten me?

Neither is an "enumerated" weapon in the '98 AWB.

Both are available without the right "evil" features in the '98 AWB.

Neither has two or more interchangeable parts (trigger assembly, bolt carrier/group, charging handle, extractor, magazine port) with an enumerated weapon per Healey's unlawful test. "Substantial similarity" (per Healey's unlawful test) clearly does not include the Tavor, and it's impossible to say on the SCAR because it's so vague, but arguably it's very different than a Colt AR15.

*digital SCAR operation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_skjZMzU7PI

 

[kontonChaos]

FN scar is expensive to Massify. It's stock needs to be double pinned to prevent it from folding and collapsing. The muzzle devise(FSC556) is legal but needs to be pinned and welded.

 

[not new guy]

An extra pin makes it expensive? How much is the rifle again?

 

[spt_1955]

FN scar is expensive to Massify. It's stock needs to be double pinned to prevent it from folding and collapsing. The muzzle devise(FSC556) is legal but needs to be pinned and welded.

There is no more "Massifying" assault rifles. It's a gas operated semi-automatic assault rifle. THe AG declared them illegal to sell in MA on 7/20/16. You can't pin/weld your way around the enforcement notice.

 

[not new guy]

And we're off!

 

[drgrant]

FN scar is expensive to Massify. It's stock needs to be double pinned to prevent it from folding and collapsing. The muzzle devise(FSC556) is legal but needs to be pinned and welded.

Not really, and frankly if you can afford a SCAR you won't care about the extra $50-100 bucks or whatever it is.

-Mike

 

[Frizzle Fry]

There is no more "Massifying" assault rifles. It's a gas operated semi-automatic assault rifle. THe AG declared them illegal to sell in MA on 7/20/16. You can't pin/weld your way around the enforcement notice.

I'm sorry, but it's not an "assault rifle" it's not select fire.

The '98 AWB concerns "assault weapons" and has both enumerated models, and a "features test" which determine whether a rifle/pistol is or isn't an AWB. Neither the Tavor or the SCAR are enumerated weapons (they are not mentioned by names) and both can be had without, or can be made lack the features which would disallow their sale.

On 7/20/16 the AG released an "enforcement notice" (or unlawful expansion of the law), with her own pair of "tests" to determine whether a rifle is a "copy" of an enumerated weapon, which according to the '98 AWB are not legal. One is a "similarity test" and the other an "interchangeability test". Here they are, word for word:

1. Similarity Test: A weapon is a Copy or Duplicate if its internal functional components are substantially similar in construction and configuration to those of an Enumerated Weapon. Under this test, a weapon is a Copy or Duplicate, for example, if the operating system and firing mechanism of the weapon are based on or otherwise substantially similar to one of the Enumerated Weapons.

2. Interchangeability Test: A weapon is a Copy or Duplicate if it has a receiver that is the same as or interchangeable with the receiver of an Enumerated Weapon. A receiver will be treated as the same as or interchangeable with the receiver on an Enumerated Weapon if it includes or accepts two or more operating components that are the same as or interchangeable with those of an Enumerated Weapon. Such operating components may include, but are not limited to: 1) the trigger assembly; 2) the bolt carrier or bolt carrier group; 3) the charging handle; 4) the extractor or extractor assembly; or 5) the magazine port.

If a weapon meets one of the above tests, it is a Copy or Duplicate (and therefore a prohibited Assault weapon), even if it is marketed as “state compliant” or “Massachusetts compliant.”

Per both the '98 AWB and the "Enforcement Notice", neither the Tavor nor the Scar are and enumerated weapon nor a "copy/duplicate" of an enumerated weapon. Provided they lack the features an "Assault Weapon" per the '98 AWB they are perfectly legal.

 

[spt_1955]

I'm sorry, but it's not an "assault rifle" it's not select fire.

The '98 AWB concerns "assault weapons" and has both enumerated models, and a "features test" which determine whether a rifle/pistol is or isn't an AWB. Neither the Tavor or the SCAR are enumerated weapons (they are not mentioned by names) and both can be had without, or can be made lack the features which would disallow their sale.

On 7/20/16 the AG released an "enforcement notice" (or unlawful expansion of the law), with her own pair of "tests" to determine whether a rifle is a "copy" of an enumerated weapon, which according to the '98 AWB are not legal. One is a "similarity test" and the other an "interchangeability test". Here they are, word for word:



Per both the '98 AWB and the "Enforcement Notice", neither the Tavor nor the Scar are and enumerated weapon nor a "copy/duplicate" of an enumerated weapon. Provided they lack the features an "Assault Weapon" per the '98 AWB they are perfectly legal.

Well put. ANd the SCAR qualifies as an "assault rifle" under item 1.

"1. Similarity Test: A weapon is a Copy or Duplicate if its internal functional components are substantially similar in construction and configuration to those of an Enumerated Weapon. Under this test, a weapon is a Copy or Duplicate, for example, if the operating system and firing mechanism of the weapon are based on or otherwise substantially similar to one of the Enumerated Weapons."

Please don't start the "not an assault rifle... selective fire" discussion. We lost that argument in 1994.

 

[Frizzle Fry]

Well put. ANd the SCAR qualifies as an "assault rifle" under item 1.

"1. Similarity Test: A weapon is a Copy or Duplicate if its internal functional components are substantially similar in construction and configuration to those of an Enumerated Weapon. Under this test, a weapon is a Copy or Duplicate, for example, if the operating system and firing mechanism of the weapon are based on or otherwise substantially similar to one of the Enumerated Weapons."

Please don't start the "not an assault rifle... selective fire" discussion. We lost that argument in 1994.

AR15:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSqYvWib1og

SCAR:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_skjZMzU7PI

I'll just leave this here.

 

[42!]

Well put. ANd the SCAR qualifies as an "assault rifle" under item 1.

"1. Similarity Test: A weapon is a Copy or Duplicate if its internal functional components are substantially similar in construction and configuration to those of an Enumerated Weapon. Under this test, a weapon is a Copy or Duplicate, for example, if the operating system and firing mechanism of the weapon are based on or otherwise substantially similar to one of the Enumerated Weapons."

Please don't start the "not an assault rifle... selective fire" discussion. We lost that argument in 1994.

Using this interpretation all semi-automatics would be banned. This is the possible reading that the NSSF refers to in their case against the AG. The AG's response says this reading isn't correct so all semi-automatics aren't banned. Seems like a win win. If you are charged it will confirm the NSSF's allegation, if you aren't then it discredits the AG guidance.

 

[firestorm]

Well put. ANd the SCAR qualifies as an "assault rifle" under item 1.

"1. Similarity Test: A weapon is a Copy or Duplicate if its internal functional components are substantially similar in construction and configuration to those of an Enumerated Weapon. Under this test, a weapon is a Copy or Duplicate, for example, if the operating system and firing mechanism of the weapon are based on or otherwise substantially similar to one of the Enumerated Weapons."

Please don't start the "not an assault rifle... selective fire" discussion. We lost that argument in 1994.

Assault rifle is a real term, it has a definition which is "Select fire rifle that fires an intermediate cartridge" A scar is not select fire. "Assault weapon" is the made up media BS term describing semi automatic rifles with certain cosmetic features not related to the function of the firearm. It was meant to be confusing so the general public uses them interchangeably, don't be that guy, they are not the same.

 

[JAD]

Huh?

The Attorney General stated that physically removing features (e.g. grinding off a bayonet lug), or making them non-functional (e.g. pinning a stock) does not remove them from the feature count.

 

[Frizzle Fry]

The Attorney General stated that physically removing features (e.g. grinding off a bayonet lug), or making them non-functional (e.g. pinning a stock) does not remove them from the feature count.

The fact that the SCAR is not based on the firing system of an enumerated weapon (similarity test) and does not have compatible parts (interchangeability test) means it's not subject to that standard for "removing features" as written in the AGs enforcement notice.

Per the AG:

If a weapon, as manufactured or originally assembled, is a Copy or Duplicate under one or both of the applicable tests, it remains a prohibited Assault weapon even if it is altered by the seller. Therefore, a Copy or Duplicate will be treated as an Assault weapon even if it is altered, for example, by pinning the folding or telescoping stock in a fixed position, by removing the pistol grip, by removing a bayonet mount or flash suppressor, or by preventing the weapon from accepting a detachable magazine.

Per Modern Firearms:

As it turned out, FNSCAR rifles are not based on any previous weapons but designed from the scratch. In all variants FN SCAR rifles feature gas operated, short stroke piston action with rotating bolt locking. Bolt system appears to be somewhat similar to that of FNMinimi / M249 SAW machine gun. This system apparently is less sensitive to fine sand, dust and any other fouling inside the receiver, than any system with M16-type multi-lug bolt and plunger-type ejector.

 

[firestorm]

There's also the fact that the SCAR is not based on the firing system of an enumerated weapon.

Right, both of those are fine if you can find an FFL to transfer them. I was more jumping on a huge mistake that some people make and by acting like they are the same word make it easier for the media to continue their attack on anything scary. These kinds of mistakes are how we have people going around saying something is "Fully Semi-automatic" like Semi is the new machine gun to be gotten rid of.

 

[Queen Bee]

IF someone gave me another 3K i would be buying another scar this week.

i love my 17s, now i just need a 16s

 

[Frizzle Fry]

Right, both of those are fine if you can find an FFL to transfer them. I was more jumping on a huge mistake that some people make and by acting like they are the same word make it easier for the media to continue their attack on anything scary. These kinds of mistakes are how we have people going around saying something is "Fully Semi-automatic" like Semi is the new machine gun to be gotten rid of.

Right. And as the AG enforcement notice reads a rifle that is not enumerated in the '98 AWB, or considered by her absurd Interchangeability and Similarity tests to be a "copy" can have evil features removed (pistol grip, bayonet lug, etc) or a stock pinned to make it a compliant weapon.

 

[1776]

IF someone gave me another 3K i would be buying another scar this week.

i love my 17s, now i just need a 16s

Where can you (now) get a compliant one in MA for 3k ?

https://www.northeastshooters.com/v...-16s-in-FDE-w-MI-Rail-and-ACOG?highlight=scar

 

[Queen Bee]

Look around , and you will find one

 

[Cuz]

They seem to be going for just about $3k now on gun broker. I'd expect them to be a bit more here in MA for the 17s. Worth every penny, and then some.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[spt_1955]

OK you've convinced me. I guess I'll go out and buy a SCAR. Anybody know where I can pick one up?

 

[Queen Bee]

Gunbroker is your friend. Bid and win