-
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.
Mass approved firearms roster
- Thread starter Bankjob
- Start date
UNSUB
NES Member
Whats a "Mass approved firearms list"?
![[wink]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/002.gif "Wink [wink]")
iofneedle
NES Member
Whats a "Mass approved firearms list"?
It's probably like the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval...
E.Stoner
NES Member
This year it seems like once every two months. Probably 2nd or 3rd week of December.
However no one knows when the double secret no-no list will be released nor will anyone either confirm or deny its existence.
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
![[banghead]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/045.gif "Bang Head [banghead]")
Whats a "Mass approved firearms list"?
He probably means the EOPS "Approved Firearms Roster" which includes all of the pistols which have been 3rd party tested, and subsequently approved by the Gun Control Advisory Board. One of the reasons we can't get some of the niftier handguns which might otherwise meet the AG approval is that MFGs don't spend the exorbitant fees and forfeit firearms to have them tested. Of course, a handgun can be approved and then blocked by the AG regs...
Love this state.
MachineHead
NES Member
Would a bill taking away the AG's ability to regulate firearms be worthwhile in MA legislature? For example, letting the EOPSS list be the only list and federal and MGLs being the only actual law to be followed. This is just a thought.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,474
- Likes
- 33,463
Worthwhile but probably DOA.
I remember talking to Jim Wallace about non-citizen LTCs (before the Fletcher/Haas case). He told me GOAL would expend no effort on that as there was zero positive sentiment for it in the legislature at it would be doomed.
I suspect that "softening up on guns" would go over about as well as lowering the first offense OUI MA penalty from 2.5 years to 2 to make it not a misdafelony.
The bolded part is wrong and it is important to understand why.
The testing requirements for CA (huge market) and MA (EOPS List) are almost identical. MA requires one additional gun to be tested whereas CA requires one gun to be shipped to the gov't agency as a "sample" after testing is complete. CA charges an annual fee to continue on their list whereas MA does not charge the mfr anything and the gun stays on the list forever. Almost all the CA-approved test labs are the same as the MA-approved test labs. So the cost to comply with both instead of CA only is really very small if done at the same time. The AG non-list is the precise reason that they don't submit to MA and I've had that discussion with an executive of one gun mfr many years ago.
I completely agree with Rob. But if the AG were to lose the power over guns (via Comm2A Fed lawsuit), the floodgates would open and we'd have about 5x more gun models to choose from in the marketplace.
It will only happen via a Fed Lawsuit, it will never pass the legislature to make this change. So, donate HEAVILY and REGULARLY to Comm2A and let them do their work!
MachineHead
NES Member
Sounds good, thanks guys.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,474
- Likes
- 33,463
I had a different discussion at the Shot Show, same answer.
We lost the Draper case; would need something with a different complaint.
- - - Updated - - -
I had a different discussion at the Shot Show, same answer.
We lost the Draper case; would need something with a different complaint.
The only way to get removal ot the AG's list into law is adding that removal as a small footnote to a bill titled "An act to further restrict ......". Legislatures love that "Restrict" word, plus nobody worries about being on the target of a Globe attack for "further restricting" guns.
