• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

FPC Challenge to MA Handgun Roster

greencobra

NES Member
Rating - 100%
28   0   0
Joined
Jul 2, 2011
Messages
21,870
Likes
17,002
now 20 plus years later 3/4 of the approved list are cheap poorly made guns and guns that are long out of production , you can buy yourself a $200 Ruger but not a $1500 Dan Wesson
that's not rugers fault, they do the work, submit guns to the lab. if you can't buy a certain gun in massachusetts it's usually because the manufacturer chooses not to submit test guns and pony up the fees. i relate it to those manufacturers giving the massachusetts gun buyers the finger. by nes logic, we should be boycotting those manufacturers. [thinking]

back to topic, yeah, this is something to pin some hope on...good on fpc!
 

drgrant

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
61   0   0
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
77,350
Likes
53,511
that's not rugers fault, they do the work, submit guns to the lab. if you can't buy a certain gun in massachusetts it's usually because the manufacturer chooses not to submit test guns and pony up the fees. i relate it to those manufacturers giving the massachusetts gun buyers the finger. by nes logic, we should be boycotting those manufacturers. [thinking]

back to topic, yeah, this is something to pin some hope on...good on fpc!

DW doesn't want to:

A: ruin their guns by adding faggy stuff like LCI

B: destroy like 4000 bucks worth of handguns. It would cost DW like 10 grand to test 1 gun.

Rugers are throwaways and they probably get guns tested in bulk. Plus their guns usually already have the LCI pride flags etc already on them...

I don't blame any manufacturers not wishing to waste money to test guns to get them on the list. Especially not with CMR940 looming in the background with dimples the tyrant having full control over that.
 

sschevy

Instructor
Dealer
NES Member
Rating - 100%
59   0   0
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
855
Likes
604
Location
north shore Massachusetts
that's not rugers fault, they do the work, submit guns to the lab. if you can't buy a certain gun in massachusetts it's usually because the manufacturer chooses not to submit test guns and pony up the fees. i relate it to those manufacturers giving the massachusetts gun buyers the finger. by nes logic, we should be boycotting those manufacturers. [thinking]

back to topic, yeah, this is something to pin some hope on...good on fpc!
Never said it was anyone fault , I’m quite aware that manufactures only cherry pick what they want to submit

My point is , the state created a list of requirements with a end result in mind and that end result blew up in their face , once again proof that people writing legislation on firearms don’t have a clue about firearms
 

bigbravehog

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Messages
551
Likes
683
dropped NRA years ago and put my money into FPC. They are one of the few that are actually doing something. Yeah I know they donate money to Comm2A and GOAL, but we need organizations that actually initiate lawsuits
 
Last edited:

KMM696

NES Member
Rating - 100%
24   0   0
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
3,649
Likes
1,747
Location
Western PRofMA
What about the super secret double secret, AG list?

Do you think that gets brought up? Personally, I would think, any competent judge hears that there are approved firearms on the list, yet the AG still bans them via a AG approved list that no one has ever seen.......it is just a solid indicator of the true purpose of the list and those who wield it as a weapon against individual rights, or at the very least how list lacks any true merit.

The FPC complaint does address both - FPC Complaint

Look for any reference to 940 CMR 16 for the AG list inclusion. Paragraph 29 & 30, for instance.
 

greencobra

NES Member
Rating - 100%
28   0   0
Joined
Jul 2, 2011
Messages
21,870
Likes
17,002
B: destroy like 4000 bucks worth of handguns. It would cost DW like 10 grand to test 1 gun.
i can't believe this isn't a mosquito bite for them. these companies can't write this off? i can't answer that, don't know for sure. by the way some of the people here revere dw i would think it would be a good business decision for them to open the wallet and submit. or maybe dw knows at first it's a matter of people want what they're told they can't have and/or maybe market research tells them the market for high end pistols is soft in massachusetts.

has dw ever hinted at why they won't submit? with people and companies we like, we give them the benefit of all doubts. be interesting to hear the company line.
 
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
39,547
Likes
18,848
State doesn't get that money, and its more like 5 grand per gun or some shit. It goes to the private testing lab. @Rob Boudrie probably knows the specifics.
There is no fee to the state in MA.

The MA cost is the independent testing lab fee, plus the gun that the testing lab abuses by doing things like dropping it cement. CA is somewhat different - not sure what if any fee CA requires, but I think that they require one gun be forfeited to the crown.
 

drgrant

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
61   0   0
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
77,350
Likes
53,511
i can't believe this isn't a mosquito bite for them. these companies can't write this off? i can't answer that, don't know for sure. by the way some of the people here revere dw i would think it would be a good business decision for them to open the wallet and submit. or maybe dw knows at first it's a matter of people want what they're told they can't have and/or maybe market research tells them the market for high end pistols is soft in massachusetts.

has dw ever hinted at why they won't submit? with people and companies we like, we give them the benefit of all doubts. be interesting to hear the company line.
Have you looked at any DW 1911? they usually don't have LCI in them. Getting the guns on the roster is pointless if they can't pass CMR 940. I don’t blame them. I don't expect a company to ruin their gun to meet the regs. Nor would i want that ruined product. I refuse to buy any handgun that's been intentionally f***** up to cater to the mass compliance bullshit. I had a few "M" sigs at one point and they disgusted me enough that I sold them all. No thanks.

ETA: these days whenever I buy a handgun it not being compliant is a selling point. I think since 2008 I might have only bought like one handgun that was compliant and that was strictly by coincidence. (Ruger LCR).
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 5, 2020
Messages
1,669
Likes
3,433
i can't believe this isn't a mosquito bite for them. these companies can't write this off? i can't answer that, don't know for sure. by the way some of the people here revere dw i would think it would be a good business decision for them to open the wallet and submit. or maybe dw knows at first it's a matter of people want what they're told they can't have and/or maybe market research tells them the market for high end pistols is soft in massachusetts.

has dw ever hinted at why they won't submit? with people and companies we like, we give them the benefit of all doubts. be interesting to hear the company line.
I think they just write off MA as being run by communists and it isn’t worth the effort as ultimately it’s a cat and mouse game and eventually there won’t be anything on “the list” to buy at all anyway.

Plus, unlike CA, tiny market. Not worth aggravation.
 

DispositionMatrix

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jun 23, 2013
Messages
3,980
Likes
1,308
Location
SoNH
I think they just write off MA as being run by communists and it isn’t worth the effort as ultimately it’s a cat and mouse game and eventually there won’t be anything on “the list” to buy at all anyway.

Plus, unlike CA, tiny market. Not worth aggravation.
Makes sense from a manufacturing standpoint for a state in which for the vast majority of people hoplophobia is a badge of honor and even the average firearm owner shares the views of John Rosenthal and Mike Weisser or is otherwise a wretched fudd.
 
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
39,547
Likes
18,848
What about the super secret double secret, AG list?

Do you think that gets brought up? Personally, I would think, any competent judge hears that there are approved firearms on the list, yet the AG still bans them via a AG approved list that no one has ever seen.......it is just a solid indicator of the true purpose of the list and those who wield it as a weapon against individual rights, or at the very least how list lacks any true merit.
Comm2a litigated this based on the Glock actually having a loaded chamber indicator.

Judge Kennedy (in his post SCOTUS work) ruled that the AG's assertion and Glock instructions were sufficient proof that Glocks lack that feature, ruling that Comm2A was not allowed its day in court to present evidence to the contrary and granted summary judgment to the AG.
 

rommel

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Messages
1,375
Likes
1,114
DW doesn't want to:

A: ruin their guns by adding faggy stuff like LCI

B: destroy like 4000 bucks worth of handguns. It would cost DW like 10 grand to test 1 gun.

Rugers are throwaways and they probably get guns tested in bulk. Plus their guns usually already have the LCI pride flags etc already on them...

I don't blame any manufacturers not wishing to waste money to test guns to get them on the list. Especially not with CMR940 looming in the background with dimples the tyrant having full control over that.

I am no legal expert by any stretch, but I would think the manufacturer angle could have been added into the complaint. A 07FFL manufacturer can not assemble some parts into a whole and sell the completed gun even if all the requirements of the law are met. It is cost prohibitive to be a small time local 07 manufacturer.

iirc, some major arguments from the CA magazine ban case revolved around; whenever a constitutional right is involved then the least restrictive measures must be taken. Similarly to this case, LCI, trigger pull and magazine disconnects are restrictive as well as submitting to tests that are cost prohibitive when there is no effective increase in public safety. Not only that, the measures are moot because any so called safety features can be unmodified once possessed.
 

Cuz

NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
2,386
Likes
590
Location
MA
Let’s be realistic regarding a LCI. It’s nothing more than a hole drilled at the top rear of the chamber so you can look in. Am I missing something here?
 

Dennis in MA

NES Member
Rating - 100%
25   0   0
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
26,531
Likes
18,420
I don't think anyone can actually list something the NRA has done in this state besides ask for more money from us.

They help fund GOAL. I'm not sure how much, but they fund it. And keep GOAL in the loop a lot more than you or I are. Which I guess helps as well at times.

I thought we lost this case years ago already. What's different now so it can be brought again?
I think the last time was in STATE SC. They basically said, "UMGUNZ??? No. You can't have them!"


Not going to happen boys.....
View attachment 490782

Whole new court, chippy. It'll make arguing in MA state SC look like she was playing WNBA against the NBA all stars when she hits federal court. Even liberal judges are understanding that, constitutionally, gun rights are pretty plainly enumerated. Somehow between 1790 and 1830, we forgot about 2A. All sorts of local restrictions. That mistake lasted almost 200 years. Now the tide is turning in the courts. "Wait. It says SHALL NOT. Damn. That means shall and not. As much as I hate that, it's what it says."


I'm no lawyer and such, but I suspect that they'll hammer the "law" on being ambiguous and capricious. I mean, Glock COMPLIES with the regulations. "Sorry. No go."

THEN they'll hammer the Roster itself under the same arguments as CA. "Sorry. It's of common use. Your argument of safety is bullspit."

But stuffing Maura will be truly a pleasure. I long for teh days when my $2,000+ AR and my $80+ Glock mags and my "irregarl pistols" are comparatively worthless due to court rulings. Then I'll use the losses to go out and buy a Galil Ace pistol and 10 magazines for it. LOL
 

ReluctantDecoy

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Oct 17, 2017
Messages
4,475
Likes
5,023
Location
Cambridge, MA
Let’s be realistic regarding a LCI. It’s nothing more than a hole drilled at the top rear of the chamber so you can look in. Am I missing something here?

I think so. Some do this already. Here are a Para GI and a Ruger SR1911. Still, a shame to take a masterpiece and drill a hole into it for "safety". The real LCI is the person holding the gun.

DSC00100.jpg
expert_k_large-540x359.jpg
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
4,435
Likes
3,855
Location
Merrimack Valley
Thus, ordinary law-abiding citizens seeking to exercise their constitutional right to keep and bear arms with a handgun—“the quintessential self-defense weapon” in America, Heller, 554 U.S. at 629—are generally relegated a secondary market of inherently limited supply, and largely consisting of used handguns having no manufacturer’s warranty, with sellers who cannot reach of the regulations designed to protect consumers against unfair and deceptive practices, including the protections against the sale of defective or unsafe firearms.”


Thats an interesting angle I never thought about...
 
Top Bottom