• 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.

Is SIG abandoning MA?

ScottS said:
If that's true, then you are not expressing the idea well. You said, "I don't have an issue with licensing," which is a whole lot different than saying, "One thing at a time." When you say, "I don't have an issue with licensing," it sounds like you don't have an issue with licensing.
Click to expand...

Let me clarify then, in light of what will be acceptable in MA, I don't have an issue with licensing. Trying to pick my fights here. Is that better?
 
SecondAmdFirst said:
Well, what would you recommend? I'm open to other points of view.
Click to expand...

Here's a radical idea: NOT whip up yet another frenzy for yet another legislative "solution" to a non-existent problem.

Unless, of course, you're prepared to provide us with statistics showing an epidemic of injuries caused by guns with defective designs, assembly or manuals.

Injuries caused by user stupidity DO NOT qualify.

Hey - why don't you ask the AG for the statistics used when imposing "consumer safety" standards by fiat. The two AAG's who suggested the AG be given authority to approve guns for the Target Roster (in violation of the very law in question) did not provide any. Maybe they can cobble some up for you now, having had two and a half additional years to do so.
 
Last edited:
SecondAmdFirst said:
Do you think anyone, regardless of criminal past, should be able to buy and CCW a handgun???
Click to expand...
Yes.

Carrying a handgun, openly or concealed, harms no one per se.

We already have laws punishing hamful conduct with a firearm (shooting others unjustifiably, armed robbery, carjacking, etc.)

It is painfully evident to all but you that laws that impose prior restraint do not work.
 
SecondAmdFirst said:
No, actually I love the XD. Unfortunately Springfield won't pay the dirty money to MA, so they're illegal here.
Click to expand...

Really. Do you have any knowledge of this "dirty money" (or anything else)?

If not, we'll treat your assertion as yet another example of your ignorance of the subject being exceeded only by the the arrogance of your pontifications on it.
 
Then please take a minute from your insults and educate me. My understanding is that the Deparment of Public Safety requires a certification process. Is that correct? However, I've heard the amount of money and hoops to jump through is rediculous and puts off many gun manufacturers. Is that correct? Rather than being insulting, why don't you clear the air?
 
SecondAmdFirst said:
Then please take a minute from your insults and educate me. My understanding is that the Deparment of Public Safety requires a certification process. Is that correct? However, I've heard the amount of money and hoops to jump through is rediculous and puts off many gun manufacturers. Is that correct? Rather than being insulting, why don't you clear the air?
Click to expand...

Rather than clog the forum with your posts, try actually researching and reading. This has been covered in detail.
 
See, all you can do is cast insults. I asked you to clear the air and answer the questions, but you decide to continue with your same small attitude. Did your mommy not give you enough love? Are you a short little man who needs to compensate? Most other people on this forum present information and help those who are less informed. It's called a constructive process. When you made a recommendation earlier to read a particular book, THAT was a good point. Now you are just being petty.
 
SecondAmdFirst said:
Pretty much all guns are now made with different safeties, including drop safeties. MY POINT was that the certification is a stupid and corrupt process. A company submits a letter certifying that they have said safeties and that should be good enough. If they lie, they are liable just like a car company. Also, they need to ditch the load indicator, if you want to know it is loaded then open the slide.
Click to expand...

Ummm... not to be disagreeable... but I happen to like the "ma**h***" on Sig pistols. I can with a very quick peek see if there is one in the chamber. I use it often and is way more convenient that pulling back the slide.

Having said that, Mike is right about why these rules exist. Submitting firearms for safety evaluations is nothing more than a cover for limiting our rights. Nothing more, nothing less. I don't see how anyone could argue that a firearm that is readily sold in 48 other states as produced by the manufacturer really requires any state level testing. It is a ruse for gun control... period.
 
richc said:
Ummm... not to be disagreeable... but I happen to like the "ma**h***" on Sig pistols. I can with a very quick peek see if there is one in the chamber. I use it often and is way more convenient that pulling back the slide.

Having said that, Mike is right about why these rules exist. Submitting firearms for safety evaluations is nothing more than a cover for limiting our rights. Nothing more, nothing less. I don't see how anyone could argue that a firearm that is readily sold in 48 other states as produced by the manufacturer really requires any state level testing. It is a ruse for gun control... period.
Click to expand...

Oh, I definitely agree that is the motivation. The liberals are attacking guns slowly and surely on multiple fronts. First they want a permit....then no guns from out of state (unless FFL transfer).....then no shipping of ammo from out of state.....then the AG list.....then you need a letter from your employer....now you need letters from people who are in state and not relatives..etc....etc. There are certain requirements I don't have an issue with in and of themselves. The problem is that those basic things are part of a larger agenda.
 
Last edited:
eisenhow said:
He's pissed he can't get an M&P Pro or 9L. [rolleyes]
Click to expand...

True. I have been trying to get a 9L and see no reason why they can't get it certified, the only difference between it and an MA compliant M&P 9 is 3/4 in of slide and barrel. The Pro is another story. Perhaps I am asking too much, but I think a MA based gun maker should treat us a little better.
 
I wonder if there is a business model for some group of individuals to set up a standard, for profit, business that could standardize all the test requirements and perform them as a service to the gun manufacturers for a fee but less than each could do alone. Like Underwriters Labs.
Click to expand...
You mean like the folks at www.hpwhite.com have done?

Or, perhaps the Mythbusters could branch out into this market segment.


No, actually I love the XD. Unfortunately Springfield won't pay the dirty money to MA,
Click to expand...

There is no fee due to the state of MA at any point in the lab testing or target certification process, so your statement is inaccurate. The lack of ability to understand the AG's regulations, and the fact that a vendor cannot conclusively determine if a gun complies without selling it and waiting to see if the dealer is charged with consumer fraud, no doubt play a much bigger role in Springfield's decision not to engage on this front.
 
Last edited:
Well, what about a standard test that every state must accept? Gammon's suggestion is a good one. If some company could independently test models and every state must accept it, then you wouldn't have the problem where gun manufacturers don't want to certify in MA because of the volume. Now, I'd rather that there was no certification process at all, but I'm not sure that one will go away. It really is stupid though....do car manufacturers need to certify their cars in every state? Do they need to submit the car to MA to ensure it meets the specs? How many more people die in this state from negligent drivers? Not just accidents or people being a little careless. I'm talking about absolute flagrant negligence or intentional disregard.
 
Jason, I'm grasping at straws here. This current system is broken and I would be happy for anything better. In a perfect world all this certification crap would go bye bye. Like I said, do they certify cars in MA? How about baby cribs? It's all just a big steaming pile of crap. Much like our elections, we just have to pick the pile that seems like it won't be as bad.
 
SecondAmdFirst said:
Jason, I'm grasping at straws here. This current system is broken and I would be happy for anything better. In a perfect world all this certification crap would go bye bye. Like I said, do they certify cars in MA? How about baby cribs? It's all just a big steaming pile of crap. Much like our elections, we just have to pick the pile that seems like it won't be as bad.
Click to expand...

It's broken because of the bad laws. Replacing these bad laws with more bad (federal!?!) laws is not the answer. Working to get the bad laws repealed is the answer.

For what it's worth I think your heart is in the right place, I just don't think your logic is quite there yet. Attempting to legislate from the heart is a very dangerous thing. With respect I think you need to work on the logic part a bit more.
 
trainwreck.jpg
 
Rob Boudrie said:
You mean like the folks at www.hpwhite.com have done?

Or, perhaps the Mythbusters could branch out into this market segment.




There is no fee due to the state of MA at any point in the lab testing or target certification process, so your statement is inaccurate. The lack of ability to understand the AG's regulations, and the fact that a vendor cannot conclusively determine if a gun complies without selling it and waiting to see if the dealer is charged with consumer fraud, no doubt play a much bigger role in Springfield's decision not to engage on this front.
Click to expand...

Testing is not free, it does cost money. But I agree, the AG side of it is what is really keeping people out.
 
Jose and Jason, like I said, I would love for it to be completely free. But the only way to move things forward in this state is to be moderate. We all agree it sucks, but going for all out unrestriction will never work. Many Sheeples in this state believe all guns are bad an unecessary. How do we go from there to all out unrestriction. I get it, our state is messed up, but trying to move the government from one extreme to the other will NEVER work.
 
SecondAmdFirst said:
Jose and Jason, like I said, I would love for it to be completely free. But the only way to move things forward in this state is to be moderate. We all agree it sucks, but going for all out unrestriction will never work. Many Sheeples in this state believe all guns are bad an unecessary. How do we go from there to all out unrestriction. I get it, our state is messed up, but trying to move the government from one extreme to the other will NEVER work.
Click to expand...

Just when I thought that you were learning. [sad2]
 
What I am missing Jason? If you have a better idea to reasonably get our rights back in MA I am all ears. If I could wake up tomorrow and have completely freedom under the Constitution in the Communistwealth, I would be in hog heaven. I'm no genius, so if someone has a better idea I would love to hear it.
 

Similar threads

Is there a reason.......
2 3
Replies
66
Views
2K
CMEBoston
CMEBoston
Study Confirms 10+ Firearm Magazine Capacity Is 'Standard'
Replies
1
Views
44
1sern
1
Groton is next in line
2
Replies
37
Views
1K
Asaltweapon
Asaltweapon
MA compliant uppers - in Mil or shipped to MA
2
Replies
30
Views
868
Lxpony
Lxpony
Facebook is insane.
2
Replies
43
Views
964
HARRYM
H
Back
Top Bottom