"Not Mass Legal" compliant-built AK???

We just stumbled upon this thread and were shocked at the discontent expressed regarding the AK dealings. We thought that we had communicated clearly and honestly with our customer our concerns with the gun not only for our FFL, but for his LTC involving the transfer of the AK. We understand the frustration wrapped up in interpretation on the MA gun laws. It is our goal to facilitate the purchase and transfer of firearms for customers in a fluid and convenient manner that is consistent with MA gun laws. Please accept our apologies for any miscommunication or discontent.
 
goosehummock said:
We just stumbled upon this thread and were shocked at the discontent expressed regarding the AK dealings. We thought that we had communicated clearly and honestly with our customer our concerns with the gun not only for our FFL, but for his LTC involving the transfer of the AK. We understand the frustration wrapped up in interpretation on the MA gun laws. It is our goal to facilitate the purchase and transfer of firearms for customers in a fluid and convenient manner that is consistent with MA gun laws. Please accept our apologies for any miscommunication or discontent.
Click to expand...

A little late, don't you think? Hint: The original poster posted this in Febuary. When the ground was still frozen. [laugh]

Maybe it's me but I'd bet pretty much anything he's already administered the "black cross of never go back" on you guys......

-Mike
 
We understand the frustration wrapped up in interpretation on the MA gun laws.
Click to expand...

OK, while you might understand the frustration, you clearly do not understand the actual written laws. Seeing how long your shop has been in business, this makes your credibility quite questionable. I bought one of my first handguns from you guys over 10 years ago (when the gun room was still upstairs) and it was a pleasurable experience. However, many times over the years since then that I've come in, I've left thinking "Wow, customer service is apparently not something these guys strive for any longer." Yes, you certainly have somewhat of a monopoly down that part of the Cape, and might not give a f*ck about what a few random gun owners might say about you. But remember the Cape is a small place, and ODS Dan not far away in Yarmouth is 100 times more friendly and engaging than any one of your staff I've dealt with over the years. Tell you what, I'll come in there some time this summer and see if your customer service has improved at all. I'll be sure to report back my experience in the "GOOSE HUMMOCK - worst gun shop on Cape Cod" thread. [laugh]
 
This gun was not MA compliant. It is not our intention to debate the "evil features" of this particular gun but to make it known that customer feed back is of great importance to us. We look forward to working hand in hand with our customers, listening to what they have to say, and improving ourselves based on the reviews we hear. Your concerns of friendliness have bean heard and will certainly be addressed! Please let us know if we have improved based on any further dealings we have in the future.
 
Sounds to me like a cry baby didn't get his way and the best way he knows how to not feel so stupid is to trash the Goose Hummock. Grow up
 
the law:

Rifles:
(B) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of--
(i) a folding or telescoping stock;
(ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
(iii) a bayonet mount;
(iv) a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and
(v) a grenade launcher;
Click to expand...

OP
"So as such I instructed the gunsmith to weld the brake and grind off the bayonet lug so the only "evil features" it would have would be mag and pistol grip."
Click to expand...

good to go......

OP
"FFL is claiming that the welded brake, the de-eared bayo lug (probably should have had them grind the entire thing off?) and the foregrip are all illegal features."
Click to expand...

NEIN NEIN NEIN NEIN NEIN NEIN NEIN NEIN NEIN NEIN
foregrip is not on the list of evil features, it is a foregrip, not a pistol grip protruding beneath the action of the weapon

OP
"I confirmed with the builder that it was de-eared and a bead of weld put in. They seem to be telling me that any nub of metal on the underside of the barrel counts as a bayonet lug, that a welded brake is still illegal because it's a 'threaded muzzle device' and that the foregrip counts as a second evil pistol-grip."
Click to expand...

a de-eared and welded bayo lug is not a bayo lug... because bayo lugs hold bayos, and a de-eared lug with no ears and a drop of weld cannot hold a bayo....
also, WELDING a brake makes the brake part of the barrel, the barrel is no longer threaded.... and no, a fore grip is not a second pistol grip.....

if that rifle was built as described, and if those idiots at Goose Hummock said what is claimed by the OP..... then this thread needs to be made sticky so everyone on the forum knows to not deal with those guys and not give them one dime of our money..... i know i never will.....

then they "lost" the guy's 30 round magazine? yeh...... STICKY STICKY STICKY.....

ahh, and we're talking about
http://www.goose.com/
Goose Hummock
po box 57, Orleans, MA 02653
(508) 255-0455
(508) 255-2620

https://www.facebook.com/goosehummock

add some nice google friendly keywords just for good measure... get some more exposure.....
 
Last edited:
So that would mean that there are only two possible reasons for what happened based upon what you just posted.

1. the rifle was not actually as described.

2. you have become enlightened and now agree that you should have done the transfer.
 
Whitty...nice one but clearly you don't do math well. It's funny to read all these posts. It seams to me that there are many scenario why this gun may not have been transferred yet the only one talked about is that the Goose F'd up. Seems a bit narrow minded, no?
 
I think Goose should present their side of the story. It seems that there are only a few possible scenarios. (in no particular order)

1) The gun was not compliant in Goose's eyes and they still don't consider it to be compliant. In which case, it would be great if they explained why. There are 2 possible causes for this:
a. The OP is fibbing
b. Goose is either fibbing or they don't know the law.

2) Goose thought it was non compliant and now realizes it is compliant. - in which a mea culpa would be the sign of a stand-up guy.

Don
 

Similar threads

Mass compliant list Question
2
Replies
49
Views
1K
steven grammont
steven grammont
Mass Legal Combat Shotguns
2 3
Replies
62
Views
2K
dcmdon
dcmdon
C&R and Mass. FFL (but not Mass. dealer)
Replies
6
Views
239
milktree
milktree
Is the HK USP .45 legal in MA?
Replies
16
Views
566
drgrant
drgrant
Personal transfer of pre-Healy MA compliant AR and/or lowers
Replies
4
Views
306
Mesatchornug
Mesatchornug
Back
Top Bottom