Latest police interpretation of MA Firearms transfer laws/regulations

[neum69]

 

[slap shot]

On the PPD they call em 9MM short .

42...43...whatever it takes.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

You can buy as many Glocks you want in Massachusetts, Just not from a dealer. But then again cops know the laws the best just ask them!

And, if you have been sold a new Glock from a dealer, you are not in violation but are a victim of an unfair and deceptive trade practice.

 

[spt_1955]

What about a dealer that will sell you one.

MESSAGE TO "LURKERS" ... THere is no LAW against a dealer selling GLocks in MA just a consumer regulation (940 CMR 16) You cannot arrest a dealer for selling Glocks you can just have the AG petition a court to levy a $10,000 fine for every Glock they sell.

THIS IS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!

 

[MachineHead]

And, if you have been sold a new Glock from a dealer, you are not in violation but are a victim of an unfair and deceptive trade practice.

OMG!! I feel soooooo victimized! If only out of staters knew the dangers lurking within every Glock they've sold me. Thank goodness the CMRs protected my ass from this scourge plaguing the other 49 states!

 

[soapgirl]

I've called the AG office for clarification and I get a answer to the effect of, it is up to the LGS to decide what is allowed to be sold through their shop not the AG office.

- - - Updated - - -

I've called the AG office for clarification and I get a answer to the effect of, it is up to the LGS to decide what is allowed to be sold through their shop not the AG office.

 

[jtnf]

And these are the people charged with enforcing actual laws. This is why the amount of tax payer money spent for lawsuits and settlements is measured in the tens of billions of dollars.

Correction... This is why SCOTUS has extended prosecutorial immunity to cover PoPo ignorant of the law.

 

[pj150]

Please.... most of the post 98 Glocks in MA are blue labels and cops making a few bucks by selling their stuff when they are upgrading or just plain trading for cash.

Pay no attention to the falsehood.

 

[slap shot]

OP needs new friends...not that they seem like friends...

 

[neum69]

Correction... This is why SCOTUS has extended prosecutorial immunity to cover PoPo ignorant of the law.

Ah, so ignorance of the law is no excuse...unless you're a police officer?

 

[Len-2A Training]

This is one of those.... "cite source or pound sand" moments.

^^^^^ This x 1000

You can buy as many Glocks you want in Massachusetts, Just not from a dealer. But then again cops know the laws the best just ask them!

Read 940 CMR 16 for yourself and see where it says buyers/possessors (victims) can be fined. Good luck finding that in the CMR!

 

[drgrant]

Earlier, I was talking with a number of LEOs, when one mentioned he had mistakenly bought a Glock 42 instead of the intended Glock 43, and was wondering what he'd have to do to sell it back to the shop. The Sgt explained that even though it was unfired, the officer would likely only get 60% of book value. Naturally, I offered to buy it off him for his costs.
Apparently, according to the Sgt, that would be highly illegal as Glocks made past 1998 are only legal for LEOs to possess/own. He said that they slipped into the MA AGs regs that on top of dealers not being able to sell new Glocks without the danger of a $5000 fine, "civilians" face a $1000 fine per firearm for post 1998 Glocks, and that the AG's office is cracking down and sending out notices.
I by no means consider myself an expert on the law, but I do try to keep current so as to avoid expensive legal troubles. As expected, I got the cop-out "look it up" response when asked for a cite on the law, so as to make sure I'm in compliance and to further inform friends and family. I've looked through the applicable MGLs and CMRs, finding nothing (as expected)stating the illegality of possessing current model Glocks. Is there a section I'm missing, or is this yet another case of LEOs misinterpreting the law?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's more bullshit from uninformed people, is what it is.

-Mike

 

[drgrant]

I have learned that there is no decent, indexed and easily retrievable guidance on glock ownership, anywhere.

It's rather simple, there's no law against it. Why write a faq for something that isn't regulated by law? As long as you have an LTC-A you can lawfully possess or purchase any semiautomatic glock pistol ever manufactured.

The dealer regs are another ballgame and have been discussed ad nauseam in the compliance faq I posted in the law forum.

-Mike

 

[garandman]

Not hard to figure out which PD you are referring to, so big f**king deal, the Peabody police lurk on NES. If they actually lurked though, they would know that they are full of $hit with regard to what you were told!

So if I mention the unmarked car that parks on Jubilee Rd so the driver can take a nap, they'll take action?

Cool.

 

[Glockster30]

So if I mention the unmarked car that parks on Jubilee Rd so the driver can take a nap, they'll take action?

Cool.

Not sure what this means, but go for it.

 

[bandaid bandit]

So if I mention the unmarked car that parks on Jubilee Rd so the driver can take a nap, they'll take action?

Cool.

If by action, you mean telling him to move to a more secluded spot, then yes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lank]

It's rather simple, there's no law against it. Why write a faq for something that isn't regulated by law? As long as you have an LTC-A you can lawfully possess or purchase any semiautomatic glock pistol ever manufactured.

The dealer regs are another ballgame and have been discussed ad nauseam in the compliance faq I posted in the law forum.

-Mike

Wasn't a dig at you mate. I was being sarcastic. I have read the FAQ sticky and it is great. what I will never understand is what drives the progressive libtards in this state to make such a fuss over this.

 

[pupchow]

And, if you have been sold a new Glock from a dealer, you are not in violation but are a victim of an unfair and deceptive trade practice.

What if....

WRT sales, what if a customer agreed to an indemnity clause of sorts, as a condition of a sale? An acknowledgment of risks, which could preclude CMR 940? Possible?

 

[Mr. Brownstone]

What if.... WRT sales, what if a customer agreed to an indemnity clause of sorts, as a condition of a sale? An acknowledgment of risks, which could preclude CMR 940? Possible?

You are not capable of making that decision. You are a lowly unwashed citezen. You need to be protected from yourself. If you had proper law enforcement training, you would be able to understand the complicated mechanisms that make up a Glock pistol. It comes with the territory of having the worlds most hazardous occupation.

 

[one-eyed Jack]

I have a headache. Jack.

 

[drgrant]

Wasn't a dig at you mate. I was being sarcastic. I have read the FAQ sticky and it is great. what I will never understand is what drives the progressive libtards in this state to make such a fuss over this.

Because it makes noobish gun owners panic, not get licensed etc. This thread is evidence of why the AGs office does this crap. CMR 940 deters noobs at various levels. Hell when i first read about it back after it got put in by Harshbarger, it almost deterred me from getting licensed. Fortunately while i didn't fully understand the situation at the time i was still able to see that crap for what it was and ignore it.

 

[szaino]

That says a lot right there.

Exactly, do you really need to read any further...

 

[atilla]

OP's goin' 'ta jail.

 

[not new guy]

It's more bullshit from uninformed people, is what it is.

-Mike

Your autocorrect changed "uniformed" to "uninformed." Just FYI.

 

[sbi]

It's more bullshit from uninformed people, is what it is.

-Mike

Speaking of uninformed people, went to KTP on the weekend to look for a single-stack for EDC. First question the sales person asked me which state am I living in, I said MA. He immediately started to sweat. "Well, it has to be MA compliant, blah blah blah". I said "that's fine".
We got to G43, I asked if it was MA compliant, he said he didn't know , need to check in the computer.
I then told him "I actually have a G19". His eyes opened like a sinkhole, said "I live in MA, you can't really get G19 in MA. Gen 2?"...I said "Nope, Gen 4"

The guy took a step back (literally), raised his hands up in the air and said "that's it, I don't want to hear any more, I don't want to have anything to do with it", sweat even more, got really, really nervous, continued to show me what I asked but it was very clear that he was trying to get rid of me and I swear I could hear a sigh of relieve when I said "Thank you" and left.

In retrospect, I am mad at myself for not confronting him with the "facts" and probably demand to speak to someone else, but in hindsight it wouldn't really benefit me in any way other than some enjoyment. Screw him and KTP, there are other places to shop around.

 

[Parker Duofold]

Glocks are too dangerous for regular citizens to use.

 

[not new guy]

I then told him "I actually have a G19". His eyes opened like a sinkhole, said "I live in MA, you can't really get G19 in MA. Gen 2?"...I said "Nope, Gen 4"

The guy took a step back (literally), raised his hands up in the air and said "that's it, I don't want to hear any more, I don't want to have anything to do with it", sweat even more, got really, really nervous, continued to show me what I asked but it was very clear that he was trying to get rid of me and I swear I could hear a sigh of relieve when I said "Thank you" and left.

You should have made him swear not to tell anybody and acted really shady about the whole thing.

 

[GPP]

Is it $1000 per Glock that Ive purchased and then sold to a non LEO? Shit, I owe like $6k!!!

 

[drgrant]

Speaking of uninformed people, went to KTP on the weekend to look for a single-stack for EDC. First question the sales person asked me which state am I living in, I said MA. He immediately started to sweat. "Well, it has to be MA compliant, blah blah blah". I said "that's fine".
We got to G43, I asked if it was MA compliant, he said he didn't know , need to check in the computer.
I then told him "I actually have a G19". His eyes opened like a sinkhole, said "I live in MA, you can't really get G19 in MA. Gen 2?"...I said "Nope, Gen 4"

The guy took a step back (literally), raised his hands up in the air and said "that's it, I don't want to hear any more, I don't want to have anything to do with it", sweat even more, got really, really nervous, continued to show me what I asked but it was very clear that he was trying to get rid of me and I swear I could hear a sigh of relieve when I said "Thank you" and left.

In retrospect, I am mad at myself for not confronting him with the "facts" and probably demand to speak to someone else, but in hindsight it wouldn't really benefit me in any way other than some enjoyment. Screw him and KTP, there are other places to shop around.

I really wish these places would just say "You can look at stuff but by store policy we don't send any handguns into MA because it's too much of a pain in the ass, sorry about that." Rather than invent effluvial crap and song and dance interpretations about laws they clearly know nothing about. The spraying of verbal fecal matter only makes the problems worse because then then noobs run around parroting it like gospel.

Correcting these people is an exercise in futility. I'd rather they just say "I don't know the laws in MA and I don't really want to know". I can respect someone for not wanting to occupy their brain with that bullshit, I can respect it 110%. It's a total waste of time for anyone that doesn't live there. But spraying out fear and misinformation is crap.

-Mike

 

[M1911]

Earlier, I was talking with a number of LEOs, when one mentioned he had mistakenly bought a Glock 42 instead of the intended Glock 43, and was wondering what he'd have to do to sell it back to the shop. The Sgt explained that even though it was unfired, the officer would likely only get 60% of book value. Naturally, I offered to buy it off him for his costs.
Apparently, according to the Sgt, that would be highly illegal as Glocks made past 1998 are only legal for LEOs to possess/own. He said that they slipped into the MA AGs regs that on top of dealers not being able to sell new Glocks without the danger of a $5000 fine, "civilians" face a $1000 fine per firearm for post 1998 Glocks, and that the AG's office is cracking down and sending out notices.
I by no means consider myself an expert on the law, but I do try to keep current so as to avoid expensive legal troubles. As expected, I got the cop-out "look it up" response when asked for a cite on the law, so as to make sure I'm in compliance and to further inform friends and family. I've looked through the applicable MGLs and CMRs, finding nothing (as expected)stating the illegality of possessing current model Glocks. Is there a section I'm missing, or is this yet another case of LEOs misinterpreting the law?

That LEO is a moron.