NES'ers, once again I need your help!

CDSUSA

Dealer
NES Member
Rating - 100%
35   0   0
Joined
Oct 19, 2010
Messages
187
Likes
117
Location
Russiachusetts
My tale of woe goes a little something like this:
I paid for a Rifle Dynamics AK-47 build class in Laredo TX back on 4-6-16. This is one of those classes where you build a gun and it's yours at the end of class. Once the class was complete the gun was sent back to their shop in Las Vegas for "Massification" and Moly coating. When all the work was finally done they called me and told me it was shipping out that day. Can you guess which day??? YUP 7-20-16!!!!!! I called the FFL which had originally agreed to do the transfer and they told me, "don't ship it here or we'll have to ship it back".
Since that day I've read many different interpretations that lead me to believe that anything that was purchased before 7-20-16 can still be transferred, but trying to find an FFL that is willing to do this transfer has been.......challenging.

Does anyone know an FFL that will make this transfer on the grounds that the gun was paid for on 4-6-16? Please don't respond with a random list of FFL's, I know plenty, what I need is an FFL that understands my specific situation and is willing to do the transfer.
Thanks in advance for any help you can offer.
Best Regards,
Jason Clarke
 

snax

NES Member
Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
4,648
Likes
3,805
Location
LA - lowell area
Find one in NH that will do it. Then you are responsible for the in state transfer w an FA10. I think you can do it that way. Ive purchased almost all my long guns in NH. Only had 1 (sports authority) that wouldnt sell me a remington AR10. Because of compliance. Ill bet the further north you go the lesstrouble you'll have.

Edit: i dont own anything that isnt mass compliant anyway.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
3,213
Likes
2,219
Location
Merrimack Valley
You owned the firearm before the selected date, but it wasn't transferred to you. I'd contact comm2a but my personal opinion of non-legal standing would be to transfer it to NH, take possession, and then bring it back in state.

The Guidance will not be applied to possession, ownership or transfer of an Assault weapon obtained prior to July 20, 2016.
 

4runner1443

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
533
Likes
270
Location
Metrowest
If he owned it already in April why does it even need to go through a FFL at all. If you own a gun, then ship it to the manufacturer to have some work done I thought the manufacturer can ship it directly to you and you sign for it at the FedEx or ups warehouse.
 

snax

NES Member
Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
4,648
Likes
3,805
Location
LA - lowell area
If he owned it already in April why does it even need to go through a FFL at all. If you own a gun, then ship it to the manufacturer to have some work done I thought the manufacturer can ship it directly to you and you sign for it at the FedEx or ups warehouse.
My thoughts too. Ive shipped stuff to smiths before w/o ffl
 

sgeary

NES Member
Rating - 100%
37   0   0
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
2,559
Likes
637
You could always.....Drive down to Texas for anther vacation and pick up your rifle
 

headednorth

NES Member
Rating - 100%
17   0   0
Joined
Apr 9, 2012
Messages
12,296
Likes
10,706
You owned the firearm before the selected date, but it wasn't transferred to you. I'd contact comm2a but my personal opinion of non-legal standing would be to transfer it to NH, take possession, and then bring it back in state.
May not be that simple. To do a lon g gun transfer in another state, it has to be legal in the state the transfer is happening in (NH, so far so good) but also the state youre living in, which seems to be up in the air at the moment. AG says any post 7/20 transfer is illegal.

Sounds like its your gun, theyre just doing work on it. Fly out to Vegas, pick up rifle and fly back with it. No MA transfer that way, as long as RD is cool about releasing it to you.
 

Len-2A Training

Instructor
Instructor
NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 98.3%
59   1   0
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
51,959
Likes
9,928
Location
Escaping to NH
If he owned it already in April why does it even need to go through a FFL at all. If you own a gun, then ship it to the manufacturer to have some work done I thought the manufacturer can ship it directly to you and you sign for it at the FedEx or ups warehouse.
Excellent point. If he BOUGHT it on a 4473/NICS in TX in April, they (ANY FFL/mfr/gunsmith) can ship it DIRECT to him (OP) after they did the work on it. He already owns the gun and the only obligation is to eFA-10 as Registration when it arrives here in MA.

NO other FFL is legally required, have them check their BATFE Regs.
 
Rating - 100%
21   0   0
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
9,014
Likes
1,389
Location
in a building
If he owned it already in April why does it even need to go through a FFL at all. If you own a gun, then ship it to the manufacturer to have some work done I thought the manufacturer can ship it directly to you and you sign for it at the FedEx or ups warehouse.
This. You built the gun, you should be able to have it shipped directly to you.

- - - Updated - - -

Excellent point. If he BOUGHT it on a 4473/NICS in TX in April, they (ANY FFL/mfr/gunsmith) can ship it DIRECT to him (OP) after they did the work on it. He already owns the gun and the only obligation is to eFA-10 as Registration when it arrives here in MA.

NO other FFL is legally required, have them check their BATFE Regs.
If he built it (including the receiver) it would have never needed a 4473.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 24, 2015
Messages
19
Likes
5
I was kind of in the same boat. I bought an Ar15 on 7/20 paid for it got a receipt but the store owner couldn't transfer me it because I didn't have my pin on me. He said to wait it out and he will hold on to it but everyone told me I was screwed so I got my money back a week later.
 
Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Joined
May 26, 2007
Messages
9,468
Likes
655
Location
Lost in the MGLs
If he built it (including the receiver) it would have never needed a 4473.
Yes it would. You cannot obtain a gun in any way out of state and then bring it back into your state of residence, due to 18 USC 922(a)(3). Although there are a few exceptions in the statute, the only applicable one here would be transferring through a dealer on a 4473.

But that's somewhat irreverent, as ATF Rul. 2015-1 states that a gun made in a class like this is still considered to be manufactured by the FFL, and not the class participant. So a 4473 transfer would still have to take place in this instance even if making a firearm wasn't considered the same as "obtaining" it.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
1,466
Likes
537
Location
Cape Cod, DPRM
I say have it shipped to an out of state FFL and have a friend do the transfer. Then let your friend hold onto it (with visitation, of course) until you move out of MA. Your other option would be to have the receiver removed and have the remaining parts shipped directly to you as a demilled parts kit. Sorry, man there is no way you are going to legally own that gun here. The part about the pre-7-20 exemption only applies to guns which were possessed IN MA prior to 7-20.
 
Last edited:

CDSUSA

Dealer
NES Member
Rating - 100%
35   0   0
Joined
Oct 19, 2010
Messages
187
Likes
117
Location
Russiachusetts
ATF Rul. 2015-1 states that a gun made in a class like this is still considered to be manufactured by the FFL, and not the class participant. So a 4473 transfer would still have to take place in this instance even if making a firearm wasn't considered the same as "obtaining" it.
Spot on. The instructor mentioned that the law classifies the FFL as the manufacturer of the firearm. So it needs to be transferred from the FFL in Las Vegas to an FFL in MA. The rifle was paid for, with proof of purchase dated 4-6-16, but no transfer took place at that time because they still needed to do work to it. The only exchange of money for this rifle took place on 4-6-16. How does this not fall under the exemption of purchasing it before 7-20-16? I feel like I'm gettin boned here! [angry]
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
3,213
Likes
2,219
Location
Merrimack Valley
Purchase =/= Ownership =/= Possession =/= Transfer

These are all different things. You purchased an item, held ownership of an item, but did not take possession and did not transfer into the state. Because you did not transfer it into the state should not void any of the prior.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
1,466
Likes
537
Location
Cape Cod, DPRM
The only exchange of money for this rifle took place on 4-6-16. How does this not fall under the exemption of purchasing it before 7-20-16? I feel like I'm gettin boned here! [angry]
Because, while money may have changed hands, the state does not consider the transaction complete until all applicable transfer paperwork has been filed. And yeah, you are getting boned. You can thank god-emperor healey for that noise. None of this is exactly set in stone or clarified, nor will it ever be, but even if you find an ffl to transfer it for you, good luck arguing your case when you get a visit from some FRB goons for FA10ing an AK after 7/20.
 
Last edited:

Len-2A Training

Instructor
Instructor
NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 98.3%
59   1   0
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
51,959
Likes
9,928
Location
Escaping to NH
Spot on. The instructor mentioned that the law classifies the FFL as the manufacturer of the firearm. So it needs to be transferred from the FFL in Las Vegas to an FFL in MA. The rifle was paid for, with proof of purchase dated 4-6-16, but no transfer took place at that time because they still needed to do work to it. The only exchange of money for this rifle took place on 4-6-16. How does this not fall under the exemption of purchasing it before 7-20-16? I feel like I'm gettin boned here! [angry]
Please show me in any law where a long gun MUST be transferred from an FFL where you bought it to a MA FFL to transfer it to you when you were physically present to purchase it in TX in April?

You can buy a rifle in any state, assuming said rifle is legal to possess where you live before you take it home with you, they should have done the 4473/NICS when it was built per the ATF regs JD pointed out, then modified it and shipped it directly to you, the owner. Since you didn't do the 4473/NICS in TX, you either must find a very daring FFL in MA to accept it from them or go back to TX and attempt to do it there (my bet is that the AG stuff is such that they will refuse). Sorry but the way I see it you unintentionally screwed yourself by not doing the paperwork in TX in April, due to the AG's BS. There is so much gray here that it is ridiculous and as stated above the AG will never clarify anything to help.


Because, while money may have changed hands, the state does not consider the transaction complete until all applicable transfer paperwork has been filed. And yeah, you are getting boned. You can thank god-emperor healey for that noise. None of this is exactly set in stone or clarified, nor will it ever be, but even if you find an ffl to transfer it for you, good luck arguing your case when you get a visit from some FRB goons for FA10ing an AK after 7/20.
If he did the Fed paperwork in TX, ownership would be solid before 7/20 and he'd have a leg to stand on. Now it is dark gray at best.

FRB has no "goons", they are a database operation with no LEOs and no LE authority at all. So if anyone is going to come knocking, it would be local police and they are confused as well, so I don't see that happening.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
1,466
Likes
537
Location
Cape Cod, DPRM
If he did the Fed paperwork in TX, ownership would be solid before 7/20 and he'd have a leg to stand on. Now it is dark gray at best.

FRB has no "goons", they are a database operation with no LEOs and no LE authority at all. So if anyone is going to come knocking, it would be local police and they are confused as well, so I don't see that happening.
Yeah. He probably should have just done the 4473 in TX and taken the gun home with him back in april, FA10d it and had a local shop massify it for him.

I didn't realize FRB didn't have any sort of policing unit behind it. I suppose they could send some sort of illegal transfer report to the staties though. I agree that most non-insane local PDs would probably ignore such a report.
 
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Apr 21, 2016
Messages
1,013
Likes
100
Location
Chicopee
No matter what way you spin it this is just crap for you. Your best bet might be to Have the FFL Reimburse you for the class which is doubtful or have them sell it for you. Unless you find an out of state ffl willing to take the transfer for you. Do you have friends in other states willing to take ownership until this gets settled
 

TLB

Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
5,220
Likes
2,972
Location
Heading for greener pastures
Take up secondary residence in NH by moving in with a friend temporarily. Have it shipped to NH. Decide whether/how exactly to break MA gun laws later or just reinterpret them yourself, it worked for AG Healy.
 

Rat187

NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Feb 25, 2016
Messages
1,797
Likes
1,754
Location
Feminist Caliphate of Massachusetts.
Just my .02, Your naturally proud of the rifle you built and you want to take possession in your home state, but you can't legally, so it seems. Why not have them disassemble it, ship every part of the rifle to Mass, except the receiver.

I bet there's a bunch of legal AK receivers you could buy in Mass, then your free reassemble your rifle at your leisure. You could sell the Texas AK receiver to recoup costs.
 

drgrant

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
59   0   0
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
70,238
Likes
30,437
Just my .02, Your naturally proud of the rifle you built and you want to take possession in your home state, but you can't legally, so it seems. Why not have them disassemble it, ship every part of the rifle to Mass, except the receiver.

I bet there's a bunch of legal AK receivers you could buy in Mass, then your free reassemble your rifle at your leisure. You could sell the Texas AK receiver to recoup costs.
This isn't like an AR, rebuilding an AK like that is like rebuilding a motor, its a pain in the sack. Even taking an AK apart like that is a pain in the sack.

-Mike
 
Rating - 100%
55   0   0
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
10,999
Likes
1,231
I say have it shipped to an out of state FFL and have a friend do the transfer. Then let your friend hold onto it (with visitation, of course) until you move out of MA. Your other option would be to have the receiver removed and have the remaining parts shipped directly to you as a demilled parts kit. Sorry, man there is no way you are going to legally own that gun here. The part about the pre-7-20 exemption only applies to guns which were possessed IN MA prior to 7-20.
where does the enforcement notice say "in MA"?
 

Evadd

NES Member
Rating - 100%
48   0   0
Joined
Oct 26, 2010
Messages
5,930
Likes
5,566
Location
Metrowest MA
I say have it shipped to an out of state FFL and have a friend do the transfer. Then let your friend hold onto it (with visitation, of course) until you move out of MA. Your other option would be to have the receiver removed and have the remaining parts shipped directly to you as a demilled parts kit. Sorry, man there is no way you are going to legally own that gun here. The part about the pre-7-20 exemption only applies to guns which were possessed IN MA prior to 7-20.
You're interpreting it incorrectly.

The Guidance will not be applied to possession, ownership or transfer of an Assault weapon obtained prior to July 20, 2016.
It clearly says "or", not "and". If any one of those conditions applies, it holds up. ie, the OP owned the rifle prior to 7/20 (even without possession), so he should be able to legally do this. I say "legally", but legally this is all horseshit and Healey is really the only one breaking the law.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 3, 2015
Messages
10
Likes
2
Location
Mass
You're interpreting it incorrectly.



It clearly says "or", not "and". If any one of those conditions applies, it holds up. ie, the OP owned the rifle prior to 7/20 (even without possession), so he should be able to legally do this. I say "legally", but legally this is all horseshit and Healey is really the only one breaking the law.

The key word here are not what you have highlighted. The key phrase here is "obtained by". That being said, it seems like he obtained it after the class then gave it to them to be modified... am I correct?
 
Top Bottom