MA Handgun Compliance Q+A Thread (new)

[drgrant]

Ok i may be retarded guys but im relatively new to guns so please bear with me. That list says glocks are approved. When I took the firearm safety class the instructor said that they were not approved and could only be bought via private transfer if they were pre-ban. So can we buy new glocks now?

If you read the faq (at the beginning of this thread) you would know the answer to that. The EOPS roster has nothing to do with CMR940 (the AG's bullshit). Just because a gun is listed on the roster does not mean that a dealer can sell/transfer it without exposing themselves to risk.

-Mike

 

[wtfmansloth]

If you read the faq (at the beginning of this thread) you would know the answer to that. The EOPS roster has nothing to do with CMR940 (the AG's bullshit). Just because a gun is listed on the roster does not mean that a dealer can sell/transfer it without exposing themselves to risk.

-Mike

lol i read that right after i made that post. my bad.

 

[spcantwell]

To many pages to go through them all, but stupid quick question...
Revolvers still need to be 'approved' and on the various lists correct?
Had a gun shop employee (I know, I know, but it's possible I'm the idiot here) insist that all revolvers are 'mass complaint' or that being a revolver emempted them from being complaint. Am I nuts....

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[drgrant]

To many pages to go through them all, but stupid quick question...
Revolvers still need to be 'approved' and on the various lists correct?
Had a gun shop employee (I know, I know, but it's possible I'm the idiot here) insist that all revolvers are 'mass complaint' or that being a revolver emempted them from being complaint. Am I nuts....

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Yes, they have to be compliant too. About the only thing wheelies get a "pass" on in CMR940 is they dont have to have an LCI because you can just look at the side of the gun to see if its loaded or not. (supposedlly- I say this caveat because this CMR940 bullshit is whatever the AGs office wants it to be at any given time).

That gun shop employee was "talkin ragtime".

-Mike

 

[spcantwell]

Yes, they have to be compliant too. About the only thing wheelies get a "pass" on in CMR940 is they dont have to have an LCI because you can just look at the side of the gun to see if its loaded or not. (supposedlly- I say this caveat because this CMR940 bullshit is whatever the AGs office wants it to be at any given time).

That gun shop employee was "talkin ragtime".

-Mike

Thanks. Figured he was just your average gun shop law expert.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[spt_1955]

Ok i may be retarded guys but im relatively new to guns so please bear with me. That list says glocks are approved. When I took the firearm safety class the instructor said that they were not approved and could only be bought via private transfer if they were pre-ban. So can we buy new glocks now?

With all due respect if that is actually what the instructor told you then he has no business being a MA BFS certified instructor. If your class (and the required MA Law section) did not explain the difference between the law (MGL Ch 140) and the regulations (940 CMR 16) then you got short changed.

Plus any instructor who put limitations on private sales and ownership beyond "assault weapons" and NFA items must have been an FFL

 

[ManBearPig617]

So can anyone explain to me how hk vp9 is mass compliant but new glocks aren't? Someone at a gun shop said it's cause glock doesn't want to pay Mass to run them through tests to see if it's safe enough to get approved. Can anyone confirm? Any vp9 I've seen on shelves(only 3 of them) had no manual safety on their frames.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[browncoat]

So can anyone explain to me how hk vp9 is mass compliant but new glocks aren't? Someone at a gun shop said it's cause glock doesn't want to pay Mass to run them through tests to see if it's safe enough to get approved. Can anyone confirm? Any vp9 I've seen on shelves(only 3 of them) had no manual safety on their frames.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The AG office wants glocks to be banned so they are. Superficially the issue is the LCI, but really they want to make a statement and glocks do that.

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk

 

[drgrant]

So can anyone explain to me how hk vp9 is mass compliant but new glocks aren't? Someone at a gun shop said it's cause glock doesn't want to pay Mass to run them through tests to see if it's safe enough to get approved. Can anyone confirm? Any vp9 I've seen on shelves(only 3 of them) had no manual safety on their frames.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The AG's office has had a murderboner for Glock going back through 4 different AGs now. Glocks will never be CMR940 compliant. Best thing to do is just work around the law and get whatever you want anyways.

It has nothing to do with EOPS testing; Glock pays for that shit to get their guns on the roster pretty much every time they release a new gun, it's all about CMR940 and the douchebag AGs we get (and will keep getting).

The AG office wants glocks to be banned so they are. Superficially the issue is the LCI, but really they want to make a statement and glocks do that.

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk

They say that but I would bet anything that even if Glock had a chamber hood relief like Sig or a pride flag LCI like the ruger SR series, the AG would still figure out a way to complain about the guns.

-Mike

 

[ManBearPig617]

The AG's office has had a murderboner for Glock going back through 4 different AGs now. Glocks will never be CMR940 compliant. Best thing to do is just work around the law and get whatever you want anyways.

It has nothing to do with EOPS testing; Glock pays for that shit to get their guns on the roster pretty much every time they release a new gun, it's all about CMR940 and the douchebag AGs we get (and will keep getting).



They say that but I would bet anything that even if Glock had a chamber hood relief like Sig or a pride flag LCI like the ruger SR series, the AG would still figure out a way to complain about the guns.

-Mike

gotcha. Also, this could be wrong place for this but how are people getting gen 4 glocks in Mass? Idk if I would buy one when they're around 700-750 but just curious of any loopholes that people go around.

 

[Len-2A Training]

gotcha. Also, this could be wrong place for this but how are people getting gen 4 glocks in Mass? Idk if I would buy one when they're around 700-750 but just curious of any loopholes that people go around.

You are right, this is indeed the wrong place to ask. AG has moles reading NES to shut them down.

 

[ManBearPig617]

You are right, this is indeed the wrong place to ask. AG has moles reading NES to shut them down.

Ok, so if I "justifiably" shoot someone and I have a gen4 glock could I potentially get in trouble for it? Might be wrong thread for this question since it's more legal issue.

 

[drgrant]

Ok, so if I "justifiably" shoot someone and I have a gen4 glock could I potentially get in trouble for it? Might be wrong thread for this question since it's more legal issue.

No, there's nothing that regulates posesssion of typical non-compliant handguns, unless you're violating the AWB or something in the process (illegal mags, etc, which is totally separate from "handgun compliance").

-Mike

 

[drgrant]

gotcha. Also, this could be wrong place for this but how are people getting gen 4 glocks in Mass? Idk if I would buy one when they're around 700-750 but just curious of any loopholes that people go around.

We don't talk about that in public for obvious reasons, but there's no reason to drop over 7 bills for one, ill just leave it at that.

 

[Valkyrie3]

OPSEC...I love it

 

[42!]

gotcha. Also, this could be wrong place for this but how are people getting gen 4 glocks in Mass? Idk if I would buy one when they're around 700-750 but just curious of any loopholes that people go around.

Hi Maura

Ok, so if I "justifiably" shoot someone and I have a gen4 glock could I potentially get in trouble for it? Might be wrong thread for this question since it's more legal issue.

IANAL
Your problem would be that you defended yourself, that's not encouraged in the PRM. The fact that it was a Glock will only get you a bigger headline and be used as a reason to ban possession of Glocks.

 

[ManBearPig617]

Whats the deal with pistol 80% lowers. Would I need to fill out an efa-10 once the frame is completed and a slide is added to it? The frames don't have serial numbers so would I need to create my own?

 

[sigfanboy13]

Whats the deal with pistol 80% lowers. Would I need to fill out an efa-10 once the frame is completed and a slide is added to it? The frames don't have serial numbers so would I need to create my own?

One of the vets please correct me. But once you build it, then you need it efa-10 it once its operational. As for serialization that's only if you sell it/transfer to another person. Its it stays with you you are good to go. I sure wouldn't want that gun in a self defense situation though.

 

[firestorm]

Whats the deal with pistol 80% lowers. Would I need to fill out an efa-10 once the frame is completed and a slide is added to it? The frames don't have serial numbers so would I need to create my own?

Not sure about Serial number but you have to FA-10 any build once it is capable of firing a shot. At that point it is a firearm, and you have to fa-10 "register" it.

 

[spcantwell]

Whats the deal with pistol 80% lowers. Would I need to fill out an efa-10 once the frame is completed and a slide is added to it? The frames don't have serial numbers so would I need to create my own?

Same as 80% ar lowers. No sn is needed to fa-10 it.... though I hear that not 100% of people who make their own fully registar them with the state. So I've heard anyway....

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[boscru]

Same as 80% ar lowers. No sn is needed to fa-10 it.... though I hear that not 100% of people who make their own fully registar them with the state. So I've heard anyway....

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[nwin]

So, just to make sure I'm understanding the EOPS thing right, and everything that goes along with it.

I see a Smith and Wesson Model 15-2 made in the 1960's on gunbroker I want to buy. The roster only has the 15-10 on the approved list. Because the roster doesn't list the previous models (only lists 15-10), I can *not* buy the 15-2 and have an FFL transfer it in (assuming the FFL and I are interpreting the law correctly)?

 

[drgrant]

So, just to make sure I'm understanding the EOPS thing right, and everything that goes along with it.

I see a Smith and Wesson Model 15-2 made in the 1960's on gunbroker I want to buy. The roster only has the 15-10 on the approved list. Because the roster doesn't list the previous models (only lists 15-10), I can *not* buy the 15-2 and have an FFL transfer it in (assuming the FFL and I are interpreting the law correctly)?

Yes, on paper, a dealer ordinarily wouldn't transfer that in because it doesn't match
the list.

In practice, however, absolutely none of the list shit matters, legally, to you as the buyer.

What the MA dealer is actually willing to transfer in is the only thing that matters. I know several dealers that would probably balk at that, and I know at least a few that probably wouldn't blink an eye because "its a smith, and it was made in MA, blah blah blah".

Just make sure you clear it with the inbounding dealer before you do it, lest you get hung up "in process". Tell them exactly what it is and ask them if they will
transfer that model number or not. Don't get into effluvials/bs/discussion about "compliance". I wouldn't even say that word. Just be direct. Never assume, always check with that specific dealer before transferring anything in.

-Mike

 

[cptmax]

with respect to this point:
the answer is. they're not "MA compliant" by either the AG''s or EOPS regs, or only by EOPS and not the AG's regs... but it should be noted that "MA compliance" is an issue of dealer transfers and has nothing to do with individual possession or private sale. EG- mere possession of a noncompliant handgun, is NOT a criminal offense. This can't be stated enough, as many in MA improperly use terms like "illegal in MA" or "banned in MA" to describe a handgun which a dealer cannot sell or transfer.

Is there a section of the law I can be steered towards so i can read this for myself, or is it a matter of the law is silent with respect to person to person transfers of non-list handguns? Also, are there any cases where someone was charged with posession of a non-compliant handgun? I'm trying to understand what is a rather confusing regulatory system (similar to Mass landlord tenant law!)

 

[MuzzleDiscipline]

with respect to this point:
the answer is. they're not "MA compliant" by either the AG''s or EOPS regs, or only by EOPS and not the AG's regs... but it should be noted that "MA compliance" is an issue of dealer transfers and has nothing to do with individual possession or private sale. EG- mere possession of a noncompliant handgun, is NOT a criminal offense. This can't be stated enough, as many in MA improperly use terms like "illegal in MA" or "banned in MA" to describe a handgun which a dealer cannot sell or transfer.

Is there a section of the law I can be steered towards so i can read this for myself, or is it a matter of the law is silent with respect to person to person transfers of non-list handguns? Also, are there any cases where someone was charged with posession of a non-compliant handgun? I'm trying to understand what is a rather confusing regulatory system (similar to Mass landlord tenant law!)

Seriously schedule a seminar with Len. It is six hours which will get you up to speed on a topic which if you attempt to learn on your own will frustrate you without end. Ma gun law and regulations are something the vast majority of attorneys and even judges in this state don't understand.

2A Training

2/10/2019 - Sunday - 9AM - MA Gun Law Seminar (Mansfield F&G)
2/23/2019 - Saturday - 9AM - MA Gun Law Seminar (Mansfield F&G)
3/2/2019 - Saturday - 9AM - MA Gun Law Seminar (Mansfield F&G)
3/10/2019 - Sunday - 9AM - MA Gun Law Seminar (Mansfield F&G)

 

[drgrant]

Is there a section of the law I can be steered towards so i can read this for myself, or is it a matter of the law is silent with respect to person to person transfers of non-list handguns? Also, are there any cases where someone was charged with posession of a non-compliant handgun? I'm trying to understand what is a rather confusing regulatory system (similar to Mass landlord tenant law!)

It's a basic concept in law that anything that isn't explicitly prohibited by law is legal. There is nothing under MGL that legally prevents a person from buying, possessing, or otherwise obtaining a non compliant handgun. Even for those selling, a person who sells or transfers less than 5 handguns a year directly, is not a "handgun purveyor" as described under the law and exempt from the BS.

You can go look for cases but have fun with that, because they don't exist. The only stuff you'll ever find, if at all, is a string of legal minutae where dealers
got bagged for this, mostly on the AG civil BS side not so much the criminal/EOPS side.

-Mike

 

[adcs7955]

Has anyone ever successfully convinced a manufacturer to submit a specific SKU for approval to get on the EOPS roster? Nothing specific in mind, but for example, Sig often has several SKU's within one model, but maybe one is supposedly MA approved.

 

[drgrant]

Has anyone ever successfully convinced a manufacturer to submit a specific SKU for approval to get on the EOPS roster? Nothing specific in mind, but for example, Sig often has several SKU's within one model, but maybe one is supposedly MA approved.

"Substantially Similar" clause covers this stuff, but a lot of manufacturers not willing to stretch their legs on that.... not worth caring about, honestly it's a waste of time, unless you're a manufacturer....

-Mike

 

[Waher]

Has anyone ever successfully convinced a manufacturer to submit a specific SKU for approval to get on the EOPS roster? Nothing specific in mind, but for example, Sig often has several SKU's within one model, but maybe one is supposedly MA approved.

High volume dealers like Four Seasons on occasion have been able to convince a distributor or a corporate sales representative directly to submit models for testing if they think there's enough of a market to make the investment.

Springfield Armory used to be a, "No f***ing way are we getting MA approval" company until they were convinced otherwise. Most other companies with smaller offerings in MA like Remington or Rock Island Armory picked the models with the best return on investment for approval.

It's all about what they think they'll more than recoup assuming IF the manufacturer has already decided to put with with the AG's games.

Taurus sat down with the AG years ago trying to figure out what the AG thought "compliance" meant and decided they didn't want the risk of arbitrary bullshit dumping on their investment to pay for testing. As what happened with Glock paying for certification in MA and getting shafted out non-LEO sales for no reason other than a personal Jihad from the AG.

 

[adcs7955]

Thanks for the insight guys. Any idea what the cost to submit is? I can't imagine they'd need to sell that many guns for it to be profitable.