Assault Style Firearm Update – March 27, 2025

The state is taking the position that Healey guidance was law. All post 2016 ARs are illegal. You cannot modify your legal, grandfathered AR.

None of their positions are consistent with the actual written law and they don't care.

And they think registration existed prior to the current law (and still doesnt until they implement a EFRS). All just proving they don't know or care what the law was. They don't know or care what the law they just passed actually says.

Exactly what it seems. Her f***ing opinion is taken as law even though it flew in the face of how the pol's described the law at the time which was a copy of the fed law, in which AR's were ok as long as they didn't have more than one "evil feature".

f*** that corrupt state and its POS corrupt courts that will back it up.
 
Assault Style Firearm Update – March 27, 2025

State Interpretations – “You have to know what was, in order to understand what is.”

FCAB Draft Roster Explanation

Ever since the passage of Chapter 135, among a long list of other things, GOAL has been trying to give concise advice on the “Assault Style Firearms” (ASF) laws. The combination of the definitions in Chapter 140, Section 121 together with Chapter 140, Section 131M create a “Devil’s Snare”. The harder one tries to figure it out, the more confusing it gets.

In reviewing drafts from the Firearm Control Advisory Board (FCAB) and hearing what law enforcement is being taught by the “Municipal Police Training Committee”, it is clear that the State is only adding to the confusion. One of the main points of that confusion for the 2A community has been the so-called grandfathering dates. Within the actual letter of the current law there are only two dates referenced regarding actual firearms: July 20, 2016 & August 1, 2024.

The September 13, 1994 date itself no longer appears in the law other than restrictions on magazines, but the State is still using it in discussions about features restrictions. The significance of this date stretches back to the 1994 federal assault weapons ban and the Massachusetts 1998 Gun Control Act wherein any firearms purchased prior to that date are exempt from the so-called “features” test. Meaning that the government’s logic is that we must know what the law used to be in order to determine what firearms could be exempt from certain parts of the law prior to August 1, 2024.

To complicate any effort of reasonable interpretation, the July 20, 2016, date in the law uses the language: “… shall not be considered a copy or duplicate” in its discussion of the enumerated list of banned guns. A commonsense reading of that passage to most people, that reference is meaningless. However, to the state, they are codifying the Attorney General’s 2016 Enforcement Notice. As such, Any ASF that is a copy or duplicate of one of the enumerated firearms, will not be considered a copy or duplicate if it was lawfully possessed in Massachusetts, registered and serialized prior to July 20, 2016, and has less than two “features.” (These were commonly called “Mass Compliant.”)

Further, the draft explanation refers to the July 20, 2016 Attorney General’s Enforcement Notice on Prohibited Assault Weapons. This is problematic as that guidance concerns laws that no longer exist, or, at least, are very different.

There is currently no clarity on how frames or receivers are being treated either. The same is true for building from lowers, unfinished or otherwise. For instance, if we can legally build a firearm from a lawfully possessed AR lower, what can we actually build? Do the feature tests apply? For what date?

In an effort to pare these regulations down to as simple a form as possible; the following convoluted bullet points do not necessarily reflect the opinion of GOAL and at this point our interpretation will not protect anyone moving forward. These are what the state is pushing and we will likely have to challenge.

  • ANY ASF of ANY category (Section 121) must have been lawfully possessed in Massachusetts, registered, and serialized on or before August 1, 2024 – likely including unfinished frames and receivers purchased prior to that date.
  • The September 13, 1994 list of enumerated ASFs is being strictly enforced. Firearms in this category must have been lawfully possessed in Massachusetts, registered, and serialized on or before that date.
  • Any ASF that is a copy or duplicate of one of the enumerated firearms, will not be considered a copy or duplicate if it was lawfully possessed in Massachusetts, registered and serialized prior to July 20, 2016, and has less than two “features.” (These were commonly called “Mass Compliant.”)
  • Possession of any firearms on the enumerated list, or copies and duplicates thereof, that were acquired on, or after, July 20, 2016 (the day of the AG’s press conference) are banned.
  • Possession of any ASF that could be deemed a copy or duplicate of one of the enumerated firearms is banned.
  • Any previously lawfully possessed semi-automatic handgun, rifle (centerfire), or shotgun that has been altered by adding parts after acquisition that would make the firearm not compliant with the “features” test, would be illegal to possess.
  • Any possessed semi-automatic handgun, rifle (centerfire), or shotgun (not an enumerated firearm or copy or duplicate of them) that has two or more “features” that was not lawfully possessed in Massachusetts, registered, and serialized on or before August 1, 2024, are banned.

All this talk about some draft and 2016.

Is it in the law, yes or no? ... it IS NOT ... so lets move on.
 
The state is taking the position that Healey guidance was law. All post 2016 ARs are illegal. You cannot modify your legal, grandfathered AR.

None of their positions are consistent with the actual written law and they don't care.

And they think registration existed prior to the current law (and still doesnt until they implement a EFRS). All just proving they don't know or care what the law was. They don't know or care what the law they just passed actually says.
This. 100%.

What is the point of this thread?
 
The bigger question is: why do we have such shitty governors, "representatives", judges, DA's and AG's?
No. The bigger question is why do people keep talking about 2016.

It is simple; is it in the f***ing law, yes or no? ... if you can't point to it in the law, then it isn't.

Someone's interpretation doesn't mean sh*t.

Show me where it appears in the written law. NEW or OLD law.
 
This. 100%.

What is the point of this thread?
Not much, but with a very high probability what was presented here will become signed law.
Just be aware.

So far it doesn’t seem to be any opposition or possible obstacle to prevent that bs from signing.
 
Not much, but with a very high probability what was presented here will become signed law.
Just be aware.

So far it doesn’t seem to be any opposition or possible obstacle to prevent that bs from signing.
The law is already signed and in effect for the most part

This an advisory board …that were supposed to make a long gun roster (they decided not to)
 
Not much, but with a very high probability what was presented here will become signed law.
Just be aware.

So far it doesn’t seem to be any opposition or possible obstacle to prevent that bs from signing.

What BS from signing?

Is there a new bill we are not aware of?
 
So is the state also taking the position that if anyone unpinned a muzzle brake or added an adjustable stock to an otherwise "lawfully owned, MA compliant" rifle on 8/1, it is now illegal?

Trooper Call is correct, how in the hell do they expect the average police officer to properly enforce this?
 
So basically any rifle with a handguard, shroud, pistol grip, lowers, etc after 2016 they say is illegal? Am I understanding that correctly?
No, that would be simple. That’s only for the new stuff. What they’re saying is any copy or duplicate of the enumerated list, or anything from that list, post 2016 is illegal regardless of neutering.
 
Just for fun: anybody have a cite for the “enumerated list” ?

(e) Any of the following firearms, or copies or duplicates of these firearms, of any caliber, identified as: (i) Avtomat Kalashnikov, or AK, all models; (ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil; (iii) Beretta AR70 (SC-70); (iv) Colt AR-15; (v) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR and FNC; (v) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9 and M-12; (vi) Steyr AUG; (vii) INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and (viii) revolving cylinder shotguns
including, but not limited to, the Street Sweeper and Striker 12
 
Molly-Maguires-gallows-county-jail-Pennsylvania-Pottsville-1877.jpg
1743254718865.png
 
So for the rest of us retards that haven’t been paying attention (because I’m in NH), what does the law actually say about semi auto rifles in MA?
 
No. The bigger question is why do people keep talking about 2016.

It is simple; is it in the f***ing law, yes or no? ... if you can't point to it in the law, then it isn't.

Someone's interpretation doesn't mean sh*t.

Show me where it appears in the written law. NEW or OLD law.
Here is "The Law"...

As you probably know, there is a carve-out for previously owned firearms in the definition of "assault-style firearm" in Section 121 of Chapter 140 of the General Laws. However, that provision, located in subsection(f), reads, "the firearm shall not be considered a copy or duplicate of a firearm identified in clauses (d) and (e) if sold, owned and registered prior to July 20, 2016” (emphasis added). According to the plain language of the statute, an assault-style firearm must have been registered prior to July 20, 2016 to qualify.
 
Back
Top Bottom