Earlier, I was talking with a number of LEOs, when one mentioned he had mistakenly bought a Glock 42 instead of the intended Glock 43, and was wondering what he'd have to do to sell it back to the shop. The Sgt explained that even though it was unfired, the officer would likely only get 60% of book value. Naturally, I offered to buy it off him for his costs.
Apparently, according to the Sgt, that would be highly illegal as Glocks made past 1998 are only legal for LEOs to possess/own. He said that they slipped into the MA AGs regs that on top of dealers not being able to sell new Glocks without the danger of a $5000 fine, "civilians" face a $1000 fine per firearm for post 1998 Glocks, and that the AG's office is cracking down and sending out notices.
I by no means consider myself an expert on the law, but I do try to keep current so as to avoid expensive legal troubles. As expected, I got the cop-out "look it up" response when asked for a cite on the law, so as to make sure I'm in compliance and to further inform friends and family. I've looked through the applicable MGLs and CMRs, finding nothing (as expected)stating the illegality of possessing current model Glocks. Is there a section I'm missing, or is this yet another case of LEOs misinterpreting the law?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Apparently, according to the Sgt, that would be highly illegal as Glocks made past 1998 are only legal for LEOs to possess/own. He said that they slipped into the MA AGs regs that on top of dealers not being able to sell new Glocks without the danger of a $5000 fine, "civilians" face a $1000 fine per firearm for post 1998 Glocks, and that the AG's office is cracking down and sending out notices.
I by no means consider myself an expert on the law, but I do try to keep current so as to avoid expensive legal troubles. As expected, I got the cop-out "look it up" response when asked for a cite on the law, so as to make sure I'm in compliance and to further inform friends and family. I've looked through the applicable MGLs and CMRs, finding nothing (as expected)stating the illegality of possessing current model Glocks. Is there a section I'm missing, or is this yet another case of LEOs misinterpreting the law?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk