I wasn’t aware we were originally talking about Sigs. Yes, the fire control unit is the actual “firearm” under the new law since it is the serialized part. I have a P250 fcu with 9mm and 45 barrels, frames, and mags.
-
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.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/Pioneer Valley Arms February Giveaway ***Smith & Wesson SD9VE 9MM***
Practical Implications of H4885 for Purchasing and Possessing
- Thread starter CrackPot
- Start date
Any new ideas or insights about the pre 8/2 ASFs or possible configurations one can build up since we’ve started on this mental flossing last month?
chris_1001
NES Member
Seems like if you owned it pre or on 8/1 free state rules apply.
Have fun and enjoy!
Take that mura!!
Unintended consequences!
Yea that’s been hashed out since early August but I’m wondering about anything more nuanced.
chris_1001
NES Member
Nothing new. I’ve been following it all.
It’s a nit, but I’m going to pick it:
It’s not “pre 8/2” it’s just “8/1” or “ON 8/1”
7/31 is meaningless. 1993 is meaningless.
The only date that matters is 8/1. Period.
The fact that there’s nearly 100% overlap between “on 8/1” and “before 8/2” is a coincidence.
But to your question: after 10/22, you can do anything you want to anything that was lawfully possessed ON 8/1.
pastera
NES Member
What nuance is needed?
If you are worried about post 7/20/16 copies and duplicates not being exempt then it doesn't matter if you have zero or all the features.
If it's not a copy or duplicate, or it's pre 7/20/16 then it's exempt so features don't matter.
No matter what position you take on the exact language of the law, it the firearm was lawfully possessed on 8/1/24 then it is exempt regardless of features.
Wut, me worry? That is all very clear as we’ve discussed this quite a bit since the beginning of this thread. It’s all good
Would an out-of-state instructor have to register his guns if he's coming to MA to teach a class?
Last edited:
boilermaker
NES Member
So is there an issue to purchase something now from a dealer? On the dealers books pre 8/1 but purchase post 8/1
My interest is an MP5 specifically that will be SBR'd through a trust
My interest is an MP5 specifically that will be SBR'd through a trust
No issue whether in the possession of a Dealer or LTC holder in Ma ON 8/1.
As long as “now” means “before 10/23, AND it was in the dealer’s inventory on 8/1", it’s fine.
Dealers will not be able to transfer any rifles or shotguns of any type after 10/22, regardless of when they put it in inventory.
Last edited:
“Petition signing to DEFEAT h4885
here at BG Sporting in Westfield on Sunday September 22nd 10-3. Their signatures mattered so does yours. Representative from civil rights group will be here to collect your signatures.”
here at BG Sporting in Westfield on Sunday September 22nd 10-3. Their signatures mattered so does yours. Representative from civil rights group will be here to collect your signatures.”
AR pistols will be on the menu for anybody who didn’t build their lowers into rifles first.
CrackPot
NES Member
Please leave this misguided shit out of this thread.
pastera
NES Member
No, the firearm need only have been legally possessed by a license holder, either dealer or LTC, on 8/1 for exemption.
CrackPot
NES Member
It’s not relevant anytime soon. Compliance with 121B, registration, is likely over two years away. They have a year to implement and we have a year to register guns to get into compliance. Ask again in two years. Registration is in direct violation of federal law so by that point they might have lost in federal court.
I did not know that Still possible to buy a semiauto rifle in ma,price must be at an insane lv by now
The actual question was about the registration requirement on non residents bringing their guns in when they’re here for more than seven days.
I have read that many times before, but I can’t find a source for it. I found something that says the feds can’t implement or require registration (other than NFA items), but nothing saying the states are prohibited from doing so.
Don’t several state require registration? DC? NY? (At least for handguns), HI? NJ? Why haven’t those states’ requirement been challenged and thrown out?
HorizontalHunter
NES Member
The Brady bill is one. There is another but I don’t recall it off hand.
I thought that only prevents the feds from creating a registry. Does it apply to the states too?
HorizontalHunter
NES Member
IIRC it was a prohibition on retention of the 4473’s and that they had to be destroyed after a short time if the transaction was lawful. It’s been awhile though so I am going totally from memory.
HorizontalHunter
NES Member
I’m not sure. It is also somewhere else in the law but I don’t remember where.
CrackPot
NES Member
Beretta92FS
NES Member
I can’t believe nobody has been taken to court over this yet.
