Trials and Tribulations of a Massachusetts Handgun Owner

Status
Not open for further replies.

EddieCoyle

Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2005
Messages
1,231
Location
Massachusetts
RANT WARNING !!!!!!

And this is goin' to be a long one.

The ridiculous California gun laws are well known, but perhaps less widely known is the crap that us handgun owners have to deal with here in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

As a handgun owner in The Commonwealth, your options are very limited. This is the state that bills itself as one of the birthplaces of Liberty, and in years past was the "Silicon Valley" of gun manufacturing.

Some background:

Starting in 1998, our state Attorney General, Mr. Tom Reilly, used a loophole in the consumer protection laws to prevent Massachusetts residents from purchasing "unsafe" handguns. Here's the problem: EVERY handgun was considered unsafe until proven otherwise. In order to make it onto the Approved Firearms Roster, a gun manufacturer has to submit every model that they want to sell in Mass to a testing lab and subject it to a battery of tests. If it passes, and a "board" gives it the OK, it goes on the list.

Here's the list if you want to read it (It's a Word document).

If the gun is not on that list, we can't buy it. We can't buy it out of state either. Massachusetts FFL holders can't transfer a gun that's not on the list.

Many manufacturers have chosen not to deal with the bulls**t. I see a lot of people on this board recommending guns from Taurus and CZ. Taurus? CZ? Sorry, we can't buy 'em. Even the manufacturers that submit guns for approval do not do it for all of their models. I want a Para Wart Hog. Sorry, it's not on the list so I can't buy it. You can buy a Sigarms P232 in stainless, but not blued because they didn't submit the blued model for certification.

Now, there are exceptions to the rule. A dealer can sell a used gun if he can prove (with a sales receipt, etc) that it was in the Commonwealth before 1998. This has created a crazy market for desirable used guns. I went to my local shop today and they had just placed on display a USED Beretta Tomcat that was MA compliant (because it was here in 1998 - the Tomcat is not on "The List"). This is a gun that I've coveted for a while so I was going to buy it until I saw the price. They wanted (and will get) $500 for it. I just checked the Beretta website; the MSRP on a new Tomcat is $370! Because it has a pre-1998 Massachusetts pedigree, my local dealer will get $130 more than the price of a new one! (Just for the record, he's a good guy. He's not gouging. He had to pay a premium to get it).

Here's another story:
My uncle passed away recently and my Aunt - not being a gun person - wanted to get rid of his guns. Before talking to me she went to a gun shop and unloaded most of his long guns. My uncle also had a German Luger that he brought back with him from WWII. The a**hat shop owner told my aunt that since she did not have a receipt for the gun, it would be illegal sell it (that part's true), but he'd give her $200 for it because he felt bad for her and wanted it for his personal collection. The fact that he said the word "illegal" scared her off (fortunately) and she took the Luger home with her and called me. I'm in the process now of buying it from her for a fair price - and I hope that unscrupulous shop-owner gets his just rewards for cheating a widow on the long guns too (Before you shop owners flame me, the guy gave her $50 for a mint engraved Citori because it was so old).

That's another thing about the 1998 rules. "The List" doesn't apply to private sales. I can take any non-fully auto handgun and sell it to any Massachusetts resident with a wad of cash and the proper license. Unfortunately, most Massachusetts handgun owners know about this and mark-up their non-roster handguns accordingly. Trading is the best way to go. Too bad this is a blue state - there aren't enough gun owners here.

Buying ammo through the mail or online is another story. I drool at the prices for ammo from links that I see posted here on this site. Contact any of them and ask if they'll ship to Massachusetts and the answer is a resounding, "No."

The reason for this is that the Massachusetts AG (the aforementioned Mr. Reilly) went after several online sellers for "illegally" selling ammo to residents of the Commonwealth. It was not illegal, but many (all?) online retailers decided to stop selling to Massachusetts residents rather than deal with the buls**t. It's ridiculous! I can't even buy bullets (I don't mean loaded cartridges, I mean chunks of jacketed lead) online.

Fortunately, my GF lives in NH and she can get it for me. Is that pathetic or what?

"Sweetheart, will you buy 1000 rounds of 7.62x39 for me? I'll give you the money."

"Sure Honey. As soon as you change my oil give me a foot massage."


Anyway. For all of you residents of the Commonwealth (and I know there's a few of you out there), here's a recommendation:

Get a C & R. That's a Curios and Relics Federal Firearms License (Type 03 FFL). This allows you to get any Curio and Relic firearm (any gun made more than 50 years ago - handguns included) shipped from out of state directly to you. You can't get every modern gun you want but you can get a CZ52 or P38 (as well as many others). The cost for a C&R is $30 for 3 years.

Here's another recommendation:

Join GOAL - The Gun Owners' Action League. These people are fighting the good fight and winning (or at least keeping some of the wolves at bay).

As a final note, let me preempt anybody that's tempted to post something like:

"Well, that's what you get. Why don't you move someplace that's more gun-friendly."

To him I say:

I'd rather stay and fight for my rights than turn tail and run.
 
Last edited:
O.K. - But sometimes it's better to withdraw if you're hopelessly outnumbered.

Yes, I feel for ya' but nobody could pay me enough money to live where you do under the conditions there. Same with N.J. and California.
 
Sadly, you have given a pretty accurate assessment of the situation. :fire:

Just thought I'd add that Reilly is running for Governor in MA. :barf:
 
O.K. - But sometimes it's better to withdraw if you're hopelessly outnumbered.

No. Not in this case. I appreciate your sympathy but what will you do when they do it to Arizona - holding California, Massachusetts, and New Jersey up as paradigms of virtue? In spite of what many people think of those states, some loud-mouth will uncover some statistic that supports his/her view of gun control and will hold it up as a shining light for other states to follow.

It can happen anywhere if if happens anyplace.
 
Last edited:
The crappy thing is, these AG's are voted into office by John Q Taxpayer. What does that say about the majority in Mass. or CA.. :what:
 
EddieCoyle:

>> I appreciate your sympathy but what will you do when they do it to Arizona <<

They won't, at least in my lifetime. When Arizona's present Governor (a liberal Democrat by the way) was Attorney General she led the fight against our CCW law. Even headed up an organization called, "For The Children." But now, as Governor she's looked at the election demographics and generally supports pro-gun legislation.

Arizona, as well as many other southern, southwestern, rocky mountain, and central-northwestern states are populated with people that detest Democrat/Socialism and gun control.

In Arizona, I don't have to limit my purchases to something on an Attorney General's list. I can buy any commercially offered handgun, rifle, shotgun, and even with federal restrictions - a machine gun. I do not have to put up with purchase permits, registration (registration has been outlawed by a state law by the way, and is prohibited), waiting periods, and restrictions or controls on face-to-face transactions so long as both parties are residents. It will stay that way because a majority of the people who live here like it that way.

Looking across the country, I don't see "red states" following the lead of the left-wing "blue" ones, in anything. In fact, the “reds” seem to be gaining over the “blues” in flyover country. The idea that everyone follows California or Mass. trends is a myth.

The greatest threat to us would be federal legislation, and that could happen. However I don't see it in the foreseeable future.

People have a right to live anywhere they want, for whatever reasons they want; and there are things in life besides guns. But to be frank, I don't think that gun owners living in the Northeast, or West Coast have the numbers to change anything. What you're doing is tilting with windmills while life goes by.

I wish you luck, and will always support your efforts, but sometimes its better to switch then fight. I plan to live forever :D but I doubt I'll make it. In the meantime I'm going to enjoy living in a free country rather then a Socialist paradise.
 
I am not intending to start a flame war here.

But I agree that most of the folks who constantly say that "As California and Mass go, so goes the country" are usually from California or Mass, and greatly overestimate the influence of their states.

I've posted this on another thread.

I've heard all the cries that what happens in Cali or Mass will happen here.

My "here" is Arkansas.

You know what? It ain't happening here. I've been waiting for about 20 years for it to start happening here, and it's not even showing any signs of beginning to happen here.

And it ain't gonna happen in my lifetime, and probably not in my children's lifetimes, if I ever get around to having any, that is.

If anything, gun owning is getting stronger in Arkansas.

hillbilly
 
The sad thing is, New York, Massachussetts, DC and New Jersey represent the "East coast" to many people. When I was out at the National Matchs in Ohio, my teammates and I were approached by a gent from Indiana, who asked us, "Is it even legal to own those things on the East coast?" We replied, "We're from New Hampshire, and until the Massh..es outnumber us in our own state, we're keeping all of our guns!" Vermont isn't bad either, as far as I can tell.

The biggest problem I have with Massachussetts is that all of them are moving into New Hampshire! Between them and the New Yorkers I think we natives are done for!

FWIW, I won't go down into Mass unless I can't avoid it, and I'm just a few minutes from the border.
 
eddiecoyle:
I've lived here all my life, joined GOAL in 1974, the year of its founding, and have a C&R FFL.
The gun laws here are indeed unpleasant, but there are a few (very few) bright spots.
The Bay State has no limit on the number of handguns you may purchase in any time period, and there has never been a waiting period here.
I have a licence to carry, something unavailable to people in Nebraska, Kansas, and a couple of other midwestern states where concealed carry is prohibited altogether (although these are otherwise gun friendly states, which Mass. is certainly not.)
I have friends who own machine guns, and some of our clubs hold machine gun shoots. In some states this is not possible.
As I said, very few bright spots.
JT
 
Here's the problem: EVERY handgun was considered unsafe until proven otherwise. In order to make it onto the Approved Firearms Roster, a gun manufacturer has to submit every model that they want to sell in Mass to a testing lab and subject it to a battery of tests. If it passes, and a "board" gives it the OK, it goes on the list.

Same crap we deal with here in California. I feel for you.
 
But I agree that most of the folks who constantly say that "As California and Mass go, so goes the country" are usually from California or Mass, and greatly overestimate the influence of their states.

Whoa there friend. I'm sorry if you took it that way but I did not mean to say, "As Mass goes so goes..." That would be arrogant. Although I'm arrogant, I'm not that arrogant. Fortunately, enough of the country is still Red (as in Red States).

What I was trying to say is that unless crime/suicide/murder/accidents do anything but skyrocket in Mass, NJ, and Cal, the gun-control Stalinists will have something to hang their hats on. Say for instance that firearms accidents drop by 20% in New Jersey. How long do you think it will take for some left-wing nut (at the Federal level) to say, "Gun control saves children and I have irrefutable statistical evidence to prove it." They'll come up with a "Save the Children" bill, march out a few grieving relatives and put it to a vote. If we end up with the wrong kind of people on Capitol Hill and/or the White House, it could pass.

I may be shoveling sand into the tide but I'll continue to write letters and support GOAL and the NRA. I think there's still hope for Massachusetts. :banghead: Thank God and the Founding Fathers for the 2nd Ammendment.

And it ain't gonna happen in my lifetime, and probably not in my children's lifetimes, if I ever get around to having any, that is.
They won't, at least in my lifetime.

Hillbilly and Fuff: I hope you guys are right and I hope you both live a long time. Your children too Hillbilly, if you ever get around to having them.
 
If the gun appreciative folks flee the "lost" states for gun loving ones, wouldn't that strengthen the gun loving states that much further toward pro-gun?

(Just asking- and also, had to knock out my 500th post here :D )
 
If the gun appreciative folks flee the "lost" states for gun loving ones, wouldn't that strengthen the gun loving states that much further toward pro-gun?
Only as much as it will weaken the ones they leave. Congrats on the 500th.

Besides, according to wanderinwalker, New Hampshire doesn't want us. :)
 
Yeah, bolster the embattled states that can still be held. NH would be one atleast I think. some times you have to give up some ground so you can hold other places.
 
/ VERY HEAVY sarcasm ON
Someone should assassinate these AG's with an good ol' Bow N' Arrow, perhaps they will outlaw all projectiles, period.
/sarcasm OFF

Ok maybe that was childish and un-called for............If it was, feel free to delete this reply.
 
O.K. - But sometimes it's better to withdraw if you're hopelessly outnumbered

That's right - it's called a tactical retreat. Voting with your feet is a time-honored tradition. Let's fortify the defensible positions of Penn, NH, ME, VT, etc., and thereby erode the tax base of NY, Conn, MA, RI, and NJ. Let them stay in their havens for criminals, while bettering the places where we're not hopelessly outnumbered and our votes thus DO count.
 
The approved list is a PITA but I don't think it prohibits me from being able to protect myself well which is my first and foremost concern relating to handguns.I got approval for my Class A LTC in 3 weeks and am able to carry anywhere barring schools and gov't buildings and can buy as many handguns as I want and walk out of the shop with them immediately,3 things that many people in more "gun friendly" states aren't able to do.Being able to legally carry in 100% of businesses and stores I have gone to in MA is more important for me than having to carry a SIG,Glock,Beretta,Walther or S&W instead of some of the other pistol brands that I would like to be able to buy.
 
Move to a state that respects your rights, but a whole a**load of guns and get ready to take back Mass. from the comunists. Once they run out of money from their socialist programming it'll be prime pickings for the rest of the country (look at the path Cali. is taking!)
 
1998 huh? And all this time I though CA pioneered the BS of the "safe handgun" Thanks MA. You screwed over CA. ;)
 
You see what those rat b@stard senators (Kennedy & Kerry, the M@ssholes) did to you guys!
 
Just heard this on the news, that the Brady Campaign is passing out flyers to Florida tourists warning them that *nervous* residents can shoot to kill as of Saturday. Now they're planning on buying advertising space in Boston newspapers to "warn" Massachusetts of this law and prevent us from having the same right to defend ourself if threatened with assault. :fire: As if we haven't got enough gun rights stripped away....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top