Blued SIG p232

They'd have to take on the expense of getting each version tested/approved and probably just wouldn't sell enough to bother. Perhaps they sell far more of the stainless version and decided to go with that one?
 
MA Executive Office of Public Safety:
501 CMR 7.04: Criteria for Placement on Approved Firearms Roster
Section (2) Functional Equivalent. A Firearm model shall be deemed to satisfy the testing requirements if another firearm model made by the same manufacturer is the functional design equivalent of a firearm model that has satisfactorily completed the required tests, provided that the approved independent testing laboratory certifies that the firearm model is the functional design equivalent of another model already tested, and provides a written explanation for its reasoning appended with all supporting documentation used to reach its conclusion to the Secretary and to the GCAB.


Does this mean that the 232 SL and the 232 (blued) are thus both approved, but only the SL is listed?

If not, I would think it's due to the frame difference... I understand the blued model has an alloy frame...if you were to look up under the laws the restrictions of testing, it's possible the frame or the slide is not made of strong enough materials for approval, or, the weapon had too many malfunctions during testing.
 
MA Executive Office of Public Safety:
501 CMR 7.04: Criteria for Placement on Approved Firearms Roster
Section (2) Functional Equivalent. A Firearm model shall be deemed to satisfy the testing requirements if another firearm model made by the same manufacturer is the functional design equivalent of a firearm model that has satisfactorily completed the required tests, provided that the approved independent testing laboratory certifies that the firearm model is the functional design equivalent of another model already tested, and provides a written explanation for its reasoning appended with all supporting documentation used to reach its conclusion to the Secretary and to the GCAB.


Does this mean that the 232 SL and the 232 (blued) are thus both approved, but only the SL is listed?

If not, I would think it's due to the frame difference... I understand the blued model has an alloy frame...if you were to look up under the laws the restrictions of testing, it's possible the frame or the slide is not made of strong enough materials for approval, or, the weapon had too many malfunctions during testing.

I don't know if this is the same for the SIG but there's a similar problem with the ISSC M22. They have 7 different versions but only 5 are listed on the EOPS list. This is what ISSC wrote to me when I asked them why the other 2 weren't listed on the EOPS list:
"It turns out that you are correct and also be advised that all the M22s are MA compliant because of a crazy quirk in the MA EOPS system in which they listed some of the guns but not all of them even though we sent them all the different model numbers."

I still have to talk to the gun shop and see if they'll be willing to accept the transfer.
 
Vagrant - Got off the phone with MA FRB today, the P232/Bersa/all other non-"Class 3" weaps are allowed for ownership. The EOPS list is in reference to transfer, FFL to FFL/manufacturer-to-FFL, for Sale purposes only (i.e. the Bersa, not on the list, cannot be brought in to be put on a store shelf). The woman I spoke to had informed me that all owners/LTC/FID owners are allowed up to 4 personal transfers per year, I believe in-state, with no pertinence to the EOPS list.
If you want to straighten it fully, call 1-617-660-4782. This is the MA Firearms Records Bureau, whom are in charge of all questions related to the Approved Roster/etc. They are located in Chelsea, MA. I don't remember the staffmember I spoke to, but service/response was FAST, and they were very informative!

Good Luck!
 
Back
Top Bottom