-
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.
Non-Mass compliant rifle?...it's the MSAR E4
- Thread starter Number 6
- Start date
![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
I have a MSAR and a lot of people/dealers won't go near it because it has "evil" features (flash suppressor, pistol grip, high-cap mags). I think Zero Hour Arms is the only dealer that dares to sell them.
DickWanner
Banned
That's because two "evil features" make it illegal to possess in MA. Way to throw a dealer under the bus also
![[thinking]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/010.gif "Thinking [thinking]")
That's because two "evil features" make it illegal to possess in MA. Way to throw a dealer under the bus also
ZAH likely wouldn't sell anything that's illegal. Either the gun has a brake or they swap it out, or because it's a bullpup, like the FS2000, it gets one extra feature. (because the pistol grip is somehow, not a pistol grip due to its shape or configuration).
-Mike
So, you're admitting to a felony?
All that needs to be done with that rifle is to pin and weld a brake, which I'm going to guess your rifle has.
With the FS2000, it's clear that it doesn't have a pistol grip. Not sure how effectively it could be argued with the MSAR.
FYI,
Zero Hour Arms does not sell guns that are not in compliance wit the assault weapons ban to civilians. We have many on display that have the evil features but they are neutered to be in compliant with the MA AWB before they leave the shop.
Zero Hour Arms does not sell guns that are not in compliance wit the assault weapons ban to civilians. We have many on display that have the evil features but they are neutered to be in compliant with the MA AWB before they leave the shop.
DickWanner
Banned
![[thumbsup]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/044.gif "Thumbs Up [thumbsup]")
That's because two "evil features" make it illegal to possess in MA. Way to throw a dealer under the bus also
If a highly visible dealer sold illegal items, it wouldn't be in existence. ZHA is known for selling harder to find goods, not illegal goods.
To clarify, the MSAR that I have was purchased and registered in MA (not from ZHA). In my earlier post, my point was that people don't want to deal with the MSAR because MA laws are confusing. However, it can be made MA compliant as MA owners no doubt have done. I believe if you're a LEO or ex-LEO, you don't have to worry about evil features. Not sure if the same applies to military personnel.
vellnueve said:
I think the FS2000 has a pistol grip. I haven't found any sources that state the contrary. As long as it resembles a pistol grip, it's a pistol grip, no matter how contorted it may appear. Yes this includes the FN P90. I hope that someone can prove otherwise.
Your belief is faulty. There is no exemption for LEOs owning a personal firearm that violates the AWB.
You're wrong. Neither one has a pistol grip. The pistol grip has to be a pistol grip, and it has to protrude conspiciously below the action of the firearm. Since both of the grips are actually level with the bottom of the firearm, they don't meet the definition.
flintoid
Banned
Retarded statements deserve retarded answers.
http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b163/flintoid/manbearpigisaf***ingretard.jpg
Last edited:
LEO and ex-LEO can possess weapons with adjustable stocks and flash suppressors. Source: http://www.goal.org/Documents/law_faq_pdfs/awtimeline.pdf
If what you say about the pistol grip is true, then the stock MSAR has only one evil feature: the flash hider. If an illegal weapon requires at least 2 evil features, then the stock MSAR should be fine without modifications. I re-read the previous posts and saw that a high-capacity mag capability isn't an evil feature. The grip on the MSAR isn't conspicuously low and it doesn't extend below the stock group nor any part of the rifle.
jdubois' post on page 1 sums it up. The stock MSAR should be MA compliant.
Wrong, and that GOAL fact sheet is oversimplified. LE can only possess them for duty use. They cannot own personal firearms that violate the AWB unless they use it for work.
The MSAR pistol grip does protrude conspicuously below the action and the fact that the AUG fell under the ban during the federal AWB and had to have the flash suppressor for the USR variant removed bears that out pretty well.
DickWanner
Banned
(Not ZHA but), I have seen many of what you called "highly visible dealers" do things that are either blatantly against MA law or in a gray area that you'd be better off avoiding. And I am completely aware of who and what ZHA is and does. All I am saying is that if you ever see anything 'questionable' at a dealer don't go blabbing your hole on the internet unless you want to see another MA FFL go under.
vellnueve said:
Do you know where I can find the M.G.L.s that address the pistol grip issue?
Went through Sections 121 through 131P. I did not find any laws addressing the pistol grip issue.
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
You won't- it's based on subjective interpretation of terms outlined in the law. Have fun swordfighting, guys.
-Mike
Technically, it is in there, since one of the sections refers to the AWB. With the MSAR, you already know that ATF considered the AUG's grip to be a pistol grip since the USR could only have one evil feature and Steyr decided to preserve the grip rather than the flash suppressor.
MGL Ch. 140 S. 121 Definition of "Assault Weapon" states that the actual definition is in 18 USC 921 (a) (30) as it existed on 9/13/1994. Chief Glidden spells out this exact definition in his notes on pg. 37 of the 14th Edition of his book. Item (B) (ii) "a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;"
Also, EOPS/FRB/GCAB legal opinion is that MGLs does NOT allow LEOs to possess any "AW's" unless they are specifically used (and authorized) in their LE duties. This is contrary to what a lot of LEOs have done over the years, but Ron has been making this extremely clear in his seminars and his books.
Also, EOPS/FRB/GCAB legal opinion is that MGLs does NOT allow LEOs to possess any "AW's" unless they are specifically used (and authorized) in their LE duties. This is contrary to what a lot of LEOs have done over the years, but Ron has been making this extremely clear in his seminars and his books.
LenS said:
Wow. MA gun laws are murky, murky stuff. A lot of gray areas that are left open to individual interpretation.
I visited the ATF website and downloaded the Federal Firearms Regulations Reference Guide, 2005. Pistol grips were mentioned several times. The most relevant mention is as follows:
But what exactly constitutes a conspicuous protrusion? 4 inches? 5 inches?
We know that the Federal ban already expired so I went to Mass.gov / State Police website to do further research. I specifically searched for the term "assault weapons ban" and got 13 results, none of which went into detail about anything. I checked the MA Firearms Records Bureau page and as expected, nothing. I tried Google Scholar but no cigar.
Does anyone know where one can find the actual documentation of the MA Assault Weapons Ban? So far my searches to find it in writing have been unfruitful. Is there another term that it's known by?
I think that the intent is for the DA and judge to make that determination!
