Restricted List and Beretta Factory Repair Bull $!@&

[dbhn]

Here's the situation I am in: Have a Beretta Tomcat that needed repair and ultimately had to go back to Beretta as a gunsmith could not fix it economically. They call today and say they can't fix it either and that it needs to be replaced. They are willing to replace it with a BRAND NEW Tomcat for FREE. They one I had was far from new and I am at least the second owner so not under warranty. So, this is a great deal right?

Wrong! Catch is that they cannot ship the Tomcat to MA due to it being on the restricted list. The rep was thinking things through as I was talking to her (obviously didn't do her homework before calling me). She started with shipping me a new one, then asking if there was someone in a neighboring state they could ship to, and then concluding they probably can't ship it to me at all and I may have to take a credit towards another Beretta gun they CAN ship to MA. The credit is generous but still not what I paid, or could sell the gun for. She is going to do some looking into it and we'll talk again next week.

This sucks for a few reasons, I only wanted to sell the Tomcat for what I paid for it as I have already replaced it with something else. Can't do that if I don't have it. Plus, a brand new MA legal Tomcat would sell nicely. And, there is not much in Beretta's line I can afford right now or really want for that matter.

So I have a few questions for you guys:

Is there anyway I can legally get the replacement Tomcat from Beretta? It doesn't seem so as my thinking makes me think they'd have to transfer the new gun/serial number to me. And that cannot happen as a MA res. Nor can they even ship a Tomcat to a MA FFL.

If I have to take the credit and get a Beretta what do you recommend? What would be most "saleable" in MA? I've got to do some research on retail costs (not Beretta's MSRPs) before I talk with them again.

3. Do I need to do anything about the older Tomcat if it is left with Beretta as unrepairable? What is the protocal for that? Seems like it should be transferred out of my name somehow, right?

Thanks.
-Derek

 

[dixidawg]

Ouch! That sweet little gun is broken beyond repair?


Could they make and then ship a new Tomcat with the same serial number? And if so would that be legal??

 

[icyclefar]

I would think that if Beretta considered the replacement to be in all respects equal to the original all they need to do is make you a new one with the serial of the broken one thereby solving both of your problems. They return to you a new gun, under a serial that is already registered to you, and they can then destroy the original.

Just a thought ..............

 

[JonJ]

So much for consumer protection. A big thank you to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

 

[LoginName]

Legally... they can ship any "non-MA approved" handgun to a MA FFL. The catch is that a MA FFL can't legally transfer it to a non-leo (they can sell it out of state). So, they're wrong about that.

I would think, that they could issue a new gun with the same serial number and send it directly to you. But, given the complexities of MA firearms laws... that's only a guess. I assume the gun is already registered/filed on an FA-10 with the CHRB, so that should clear up any question whether or not the gun was previously legally owned in the state.

The only thing I can suggest is to have them contact Chief Ron Glidden for an authoritative answer.

 

[jshooter]

Where is Lens? He'll know for sure but I think if you have a Glock that is beyond they will replace it with a new gun and reassign a new serial number to your old one somehow. I know that is explained poorly but its been a long day.

 

[bpm990d]

I think (I could be wrong) if a firearm is damaged, that the manufacturer can replace the serial numbered part with a new one that bears the same serial number. I believe that ATF has a form for that. I remember a discussion several years ago about that but I'm not entirely sure about the details. Anyone ever heard of that before?

Not sure if that runs afoul of Mass law since some of it talks about manufacturing dates.

Again, I could be wrong.

B

EDIT: LIN beat me to it. :^)

 

[dbhn]

Legally... they can ship any "non-MA approved" handgun to a MA FFL. The catch is that a MA FFL can't legally transfer it to a non-leo (they can sell it out of state). So, they're wrong about that.

I would think, that they could issue a new gun with the same serial number and send it directly to you. But, given the complexities of MA firearms laws... that's only a guess. I assume the gun is already registered/filed on an FA-10 with the CHRB, so that should clear up any question whether or not the gun was previously legally owned in the state.

The only thing I can suggest is to have them contact Chief Ron Glidden for an authoritative answer.

Not being able to ship to MA seemed like a Beretta policy more than the law. But, she really didn't know what she was talking about.

The serial number thing is a great thought. Hope it is right and somebody knows for sure so I can educate them.

Yes, it has been FA10'd in MA.

-Derek

 

[Len-2A Training]

Derek,

NOTHING in MGLs prohibits them from doing any of the following:

- Return your broken gun to you directly,

- Replacing the gun with the exact same model gun, with same OR DIFFERENT S/N, shipped DIRECTLY TO YOU!

There is NO "Restricted List" in MA, none at all.

You are being fed a line of BS by Beretta . . . either out of ignorance or fear!

See a lot more about this posted by me wrt Glock's refusal to ship replacement frames into MA. They took this position due to ignorance of the law and fear of reprisals (NOT based on any law) by the AG. Both confirmed to me by the man at Glock who made the decision.

Convincing Beretta that they can do it is a very steep uphill battle and I don't give you great odds.

 

[Len-2A Training]

So much for consumer protection. A big thank you to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Sorry, this isn't the State's fault. Its strictly ignorance by the mfrs and fear. They aren't willing to actually read the law and try to understand it.

 

[Admin]

You are being fed a line of BS by Beretta . . . either out of ignorance or fear!

+1 If people that live in this state with nothing to lose won't wear a pro 2nd Amendment t-shirt, right or wrong why would Beretta with nothing to gain deal with the MASSACHUSETTS AG's office?

It sucks but can you blame them? And isn't this what MA wants?

 

[Len-2A Training]

Legally... they can ship any "non-MA approved" handgun to a MA FFL. The catch is that a MA FFL can't legally transfer it to a non-leo (they can sell it out of state). So, they're wrong about that.

Sorry, wrong here. LEO status is irrelevant. LEOs in MA can't buy any new gun that's not on the EOPS List either.

 

[Admin]

Sorry, this isn't the State's fault. Its strictly ignorance by the mfrs and fear. They aren't willing to actually read the law and try to understand it.

It's not the states fault???????????? Ignorance has nothing to do with it. If a state is going to make you lick your own a**h*** why they hell would you bother dealing with it?

 

[Admin]

Len you've been here too long if you don't think it's the states fault for stuff like this...

 

[stinx]

Beretta is messed up. MY agency carries a Beretta thats not on the EOPS list. Beretta gave us a hard time about sending a weapon in for repair!!!.We got our current guns well prior to these foolish lkaws were enacted

 

[dbhn]

Len, how do you handle the transfer/registering of the new gun with a different serial number?

Wouldn't have to be FA10'd as a transfer and hence be non-MA compliant?

I don't know all the nuances of the laws as some do, just trying to figure out how to explain it to them. And so far, I don't yet understand it.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Derek,

Ignorance of the law is BERETTA'S FAULT.

Fear of the AG when there is NO REASON for such fear, is BERETTA'S FAULT!

Can't blame the AG/State for their anal position!

 

[Len-2A Training]

There is NO "transfer".

You simply register the gun when you get it back (assuming a different S/N) on FA-10. Info on gun and your info. NO "Seller" info at all. Very simple, just like bringing in the gun you own at your FL house.

There is no such thing as a "non-MA compliant" transfer unless it involves a MA DEALER.

You also never "un-register" your prior S/N Tomcat. AFAIK, there is no mechanism for doing that.

You do NOT have to "explain" anything to the state, just fill out a new Registration form and you're good to go.

All this said, I doubt that Beretta will change their position. It's easier for them to remain ignorant than to have a competent attorney review the law and talk with Ron.

 

[Admin]

Can't blame the AG/State for their anal position!

Okay...

Well you can't... I don't think you can speak for others on here.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Derek, then who do you blame for Sportsman's Guide refusing to ship an empty plastic Glock-marked case to a MA resident? They also refused to sell other things that were NOT-gun parts, but marked with gun mfr's names.

Sorry, responsibility must go "round" and fall on the "policy makers" when no law requires it.

That's my position and I'm sticking to it.

Obviously, YMMV

 

[Admin]

Derek,

Ignorance of the law is BERETTA'S FAULT.

If you ran a business where only 4% of your revenue came from one state before they passed some laws that required you to change your production process for a handful of sales. You and the other operating officers decided to write that state off as a loss because changing the production process required too much overhead knowing that the law or tests could change with zero warning.

Why would you bother paying an attorney to decipher laws and deal with an overbearing state government that would love to jump at the chance to take you down?

Doesn't seem like good business practice to me.

 

[Chris]

You get the gun as a repair, if the gun is a new serial number, you send in an FA-10 as a registration.

The "Lists" are for MA licensed DEALERS ONLY, nobody else.

Nothing illegal to shipping a gun to the owner after gunsmithing or repair.

You need to call Beretta and explain this. Get connected to their legal department and explain that this is an interstate transaction, not intrastate. Therefore MA laws DO NOT apply, and only the federal laws do. Surely they can ship guns back to customers in other states.

As for who's fault this is, it is clearly a combination. MA is at fault for crafting laws that are IMPOSSIBLE for the average person to understand (in America such laws would be unconstitutional) and it's Beretta's fault for their legal department not creating a simple punch list of what is and isn't allowed.

Now, Derek and Len, you two kiss and make up. (no tongue)

For the original poster, I'd insist on talking to Beretta's legal department and have them cite why an interstate transfer back to a customer somehow falls under the State laws seeing as how Congress seems to enjoy their monopoly defined in the Constitution regarding interstate commerce. I think you'll find your issues clear up ASAP.

 

[Admin]

Derek, then who do you blame for Sportsman's Guide refusing to ship an empty plastic Glock-marked case to a MA resident? They also refused to sell other things that were NOT-gun parts, but marked with gun mfr's names.

Sorry, responsibility must go "round" and fall on the "policy makers" when no law requires it.

That's my position and I'm sticking to it.

Obviously, YMMV

Like I've said before in this forum. All it takes is one bad incident with a situation and your position will drastically change.

You and I both know the AG's office in Massachusetts is not far from mandating shin high boots and the goose steping for it's employees...

 

[Admin]

As for who's fault this is, it is clearly a combination. MA is at fault for crafting laws that are IMPOSSIBLE for the average person to understand (in America such laws would be unconstitutional) and it's Beretta's fault for their legal department not creating a simple punch list of what is and isn't allowed.

That's my point Chris. We have thousands of MA gun owning residents who can't decipher the damn laws.....

If a state is going to require some b.s. testing that usually requires seperate production, I would tell that state to FU.

Much like Barrett told CA the same...

 

[Executive]

 

[Len-2A Training]

Derek, we aren't talking about changes in production. In those cases, we both agree.

The issue here is a lot clearer than that, as Chris stated.

Lawyers decipher laws, most (in any state) aren't written so the common person can read and comprehend them. This is not unique to MA.

I will admit that I was unsure wrt to "returning to sender" when the mfr changed a gun for a new S/N frame, but it was the Glock Chief Counsel who advised me that it was perfectly legal to ship direct to the owner, no FFL required (this is on a repair/replacement only). I know how contradictory this is going to sound . . . he was the same person who made the Glock-USA decision to NOT replace frames for MA Residents!

 

[dwarven1]

Derek, when I had to ship my ParaOrd P10 to them for repair, they replaced the RECEIVER (read: everything on the gun but the slide). They then shipped the whole gun directly to me with some paperwork explaining that the new serial number was for a repair. No problems.

 

[stinx]

Beretta refuses to sell G version of there guns and would not even submit the elite versions for compliance. I called Beretta and asked why they would not sell the ELite versions? THey staed the legal Dept at Beretta claimed it was illegal to sell a gun in MA that did not have a safety lever. I then asked how come New Sigs could be purchased within Ma? THey then back peddled around the issue. I cant really blame them its not like they make alot of money from this state

 

[pdm]

Beretta refuses to sell G version of there guns and would not even submit the elite versions for compliance. I called Beretta and asked why they would not sell the ELite versions? THey staed the legal Dept at Beretta claimed it was illegal to sell a gun in MA that did not have a safety lever. I then asked how come New Sigs could be purchased within Ma? THey then back peddled around the issue. I cant really blame them its not like they make alot of money from this state

Well they certainly won't if they don't offer their newer models to MA FFLs!

 

[drgrant]

The problem lies in the fact that most manufacturers will not ship
a new frame directly back to someone, despite the fact that it is
legal to do so.... they always want to go through an FFL.

An obvious solution to the OP's problem is to try to find an MA
FFL that doesn't give 2 rats about what the AG thinks... and there
still are a few of them around. (but might just be impossible to
find.... )

-Mike