• 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.

What's the current consensus on in-state transfers of pre-Healy "copies" or "duplicates"?

Joined
Jun 18, 2007
Messages
201
Likes
16
Feedback: 21 / 0 / 0
If you go to the AG's page
Assault Weapons Ban Enforcement

and click the "Questions & Answers" tab and scroll down to Question no. 12 it states:

Q: What if I already own a gun that is a copy or duplicate?
  • If a weapon is a copy or duplicate of one of the models enumerated in the law, it is an Assault Weapon. 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.
My reading of this is that I am able to transfer a pre-July 20, 2016 "copy" or "duplicate" gun. The only thing that's not clear is whether or not the transfer language explicitly pertains to in-state transfers, out-of-state transfers, or both.

I've heard different opinions about this and am hoping for a consensus opinion.

Thanks,
Mack
 
Thanks Len. I've been "off line" for about 6 months and am just catching up. Could you please point me to your sub-forum sticky?
Best,
Mack
 
Thanks Len. I've been "off line" for about 6 months and am just catching up. Could you please point me to your sub-forum sticky?
Best,
Mack
Look in the Training Forum for a sub-forum called Len-2A Training. There are some stickies there and the title will make it obvious.
 
Since possession, ownership, or transport are all in the same sentence, separated only by commas. They are all equally legal or illegal.

Based on this, I would not hesitate to buy or sell a lower provided there is some documentation that it existed in MA prior to 7/20/16
 
Since possession, ownership, or transport are all in the same sentence, separated only by commas. They are all equally legal or illegal.

Based on this, I would not hesitate to buy or sell a lower provided there is some documentation that it existed in MA prior to 7/20/16

4473 FFL sale to a MA resident. that's about as good as you're going to get, unless someone FA10'd a lower. (like 4S used to make you do)
 
That's nice. But there are other perfectly reasonable ways to establish something was in MA.

Remember, its not your responsibility to prove it was in by the date. Its their responsibility to prove it wasn't.
Don
 
That's nice. But there are other perfectly reasonable ways to establish something was in MA.

Remember, its not your responsibility to prove it was in by the date. Its their responsibility to prove it wasn't.
Don
The DAs and police will be happy to give you or I the chance to prove it was, believe me the law may state that the responsibility is theirs, but I guarantee you that they will put that burden on us in a heartbeat and after you pay $10-20K to get off, who really won? The ride IS the punishment in this state.
 
I agree. But the reality is that you won't ever even be asked about ownership unless you are picked up for something else.

So if you are planning to knock over a liquor store with an AR, best to have a 4473 in hand. (which by the way, dealers generally don't/won't give you.)

But if you are just a normal old law abiding gun owner, chances are that you will never be asked.

There is no right answer here. Until there is specific case law, we're all just speculating on what shade of grey something is.

Right off the bat, I'd be comfortable with the following alternate documentation.
1) a copy of the FFL's bound book entry
2) A statement from the previous owner warranting that the receiver was in-state by 7/16. Combine this with some due diligence using the serial number to confirm that the receiver was made a reasonable time before 7/16.
 
I have an email from the AGO Senior Counsel stating private transfer of an "AW" is OK as long as it was obtained prior to 7/20/16.
 
Back
Top Bottom