Tavor X95: Weapons that are not copies or duplicates of Assault Weapons

Reptile

NES Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
27,654
Likes
19,915
Feedback: 121 / 0 / 0
Are there examples or categories of weapons that are not copies or duplicates of Assault Weapons?
Yes. Many rifles, shotguns, and pistols are not copies or duplicates of enumerated Assault Weapons. For example, the following are not copies or duplicates under G.L. c. 140, § 121:

  • IWI Tavor or substantially similar model weapon;
Frequently Asked Questions about the Assault Weapons Ban Enforcement Notice

-------
I have come a across a couple gun shops that were afraid to carry the X95. They were concerned about the Healey ban and if it also covered the X95.

Now, the "IWI Tavor or substantially similar model weapon" is specifically stated on the Healey ban enforcement notice FAQ, that it is NOT a copy or duplicate of an Assault Weapon.

I do realize that many other shops sell the X95, but seeing this from Healey should be reassuring for any shops that have concerns.
 
CLEARLY, the ban is based on looks alone. I'm sure if you had one of those 22cal almost-looks-like-an-AR things from the 80s (70's?) it would be DA'BAN!!!!!!

I wonder if you had an AR in a different color if that would be OK?
 
So I don't need to pin the muzzle break because of this and that the X95 doesn't have a "pistol grip?";)
There's a distinction.
It's not a copy or duplicate of an enumerated assault weapon. That is a different category than being an assault weapon based on the features test.
 
There's a distinction.
It's not a copy or duplicate of an enumerated assault weapon. That is a different category than being an assault weapon based on the features test.

Yeah, I now hence the winky face. The FFL in MA that sold it to me said it is not a pistol grip and therefore didn't need to have it pinned. I did some research (much of it on here) and decided it's not his ass dealing with the popo if something goes wrong some day so I'd rather have it pinned to be sure. Plus then I can put the real pistol grip on it as well.
 
Yeah, I now hence the winky face. The FFL in MA that sold it to me said it is not a pistol grip and therefore didn't need to have it pinned. I did some research (much of it on here) and decided it's not his ass dealing with the popo if something goes wrong some day so I'd rather have it pinned to be sure. Plus then I can put the real pistol grip on it as well.
Reminds me of the discussions here about the Kriss Vector, how the grip is technically "forward" of the action, and the AWB says "conspicuously below the action" for pistol grips.
 
Yeah, I now hence the winky face. The FFL in MA that sold it to me said it is not a pistol grip and therefore didn't need to have it pinned. I did some research (much of it on here) and decided it's not his ass dealing with the popo if something goes wrong some day so I'd rather have it pinned to be sure. Plus then I can put the real pistol grip on it as well.

I'd still call the factory grip a pistol grip. Just one with a massive trigger guard that acts as a hand shield. I think anything you can wrap your thumb around to hold like a fist is a pistol grip regardless of a second point of attachment at the bottom, unless what you're holding is just the integrated stock itself like with a hunting rifle.

That being said, vague language in these laws is useful to those who interpret the meaning against you. They are poorly written by people who seemingly don't understand what they are even describing, and also do not consider natural progression of design and ergonomics (ie. not future-proof language). Hence this post's main topic: A gun that does the exact same thing with the exact same ammunition with the exact same potential for rate of fire and capacity is deemed OK by the legislators because it is lesser known and doesn't come with the buzz letters "AR". So why are new AR's banned again if a Tavor is OK? The catch-22 of this is that if we collectively press this point, someone will have an A-HA! moment and decide to ban the Tavors as well.
 
I didn't even know that site still got updated. Does this mean I need to check it regularly to be sure I'm not a felon because something was taken off the list on a whim?
 
I didn't even know that site still got updated. Does this mean I need to check it regularly to be sure I'm not a felon because something was taken off the list on a whim?
Ok, well - I NOT 100% sure it was updated - maybe I missed that Tavor note in the past.

When the edict was issued - there was questions if you can transfer a pre Healey AW.

Some dealers were worried about Tavors without legal reassurance.

Now it says this...

"The Enforcement notice will not be applied to possession, ownership or transfer by an individual gun owner of weapons obtained on or before July 20, 2016."

So, now there is no question that a pre Healey AR15 or AR15 lower (An AR lower is now considered an AW) can be transferred. For a while people were worried that they could not be sold to others. I have many backups of digital images of my receipts. They wont get lost and could be essential to prove a lower legal if I were to sell one.
 
Ok, well - I NOT 100% sure it was updated - maybe I missed that Tavor note in the past.

When the edict was issued - there was questions if you can transfer a pre Healey AW.

Some dealers were worried about Tavors without legal reassurance.

Now it says this...

"The Enforcement notice will not be applied to possession, ownership or transfer by an individual gun owner of weapons obtained on or before July 20, 2016."

So, now there is no question that a pre Healey AR15 or AR15 lower (An AR lower is now considered an AW) can be transferred. For a while people were worried that they could not be sold to others. I have many backups of digital images of my receipts. They wont get lost and could be essential to prove a lower legal if I were to sell one.

Who really cares just go by the serial number if it was made before 7/2016 how can they prove you didnt own it just because you don't have paper work that don't mean anything the burden of proof is on them innocent untill proven guilty.
 
Who really cares just go by the serial number if it was made before 7/2016 how can they prove you didnt own it just because you don't have paper work that don't mean anything the burden of proof is on them innocent untill proven guilty.
No owner has been called to task on the AG BS to date and tons of guns have been sold, built up and registered in that timeframe, so my IANAL crystal ball says that nobody will ever be called to task for this. No bets but maybe 5 yrs from now the courts may rule on this and I'm not betting which way they go because "gunzz"!
 
Back
Top Bottom