Assault Style Firearm Update – March 27, 2025

[chris_1001]

Also, when does the statute of limitations start running out on possession of ASF?, 6 years after 2016 press conference?

Interesting take.

But if I had a kilo of cocaine that was 100+ years old (not sure when it was banned off hand) I’m sure I’ll be going to prison despite a 6-7 year statute of limitations.

Anyone have any pre ban coke or opium? Asking for a friend.

 

[drgrant]

Looks like the late comers who bought $300 Anderson lowers on 8/1 at The Mill are stuck with useless paperweights.

How so? did you ever stop to think for even a single moment that some people don't give a flying f*** about what some government agency thinks about their guns forks spoons or knives in their house?

2016 is now the law of the land folks.

It depends on who you believe.

I don't believe in the retard fear machine.

Over in adult land this announcement is basically much ado about nothing.

 

[aeromarine]

So, when considering all of the ambiguous information cited above, can a legally "registered" (via a form FA-10) AR in Massachusetts prior to 20 July 2016 now be transferred to another legally licensed individual in Massachusetts in a private transfer via the MIRCS system, or is the owner of that AR restricted to keeping that rifle for his/her own personal use? If its the latter, then it would appear the only option would be to sell it out of state through an FFL.

 

[chris_1001]

So, when considering all of the ambiguous information cited above, can a legally "registered" (via a form FA-10) AR in Massachusetts prior to 20 July 2016 now be transferred to another legally licensed individual in Massachusetts in a private transfer via the MIRCS system, or is the owner of that AR restricted to keeping that rifle for his/her own personal use? If its the atter, then it would appear the only option would be to sell it out of state through an FFL.

Really????

 

[Shoals]

So, when considering all of the ambiguous information cited above, can a legally "registered" (via a form FA-10) AR in Massachusetts prior to 20 July 2016 now be transferred to another legally licensed individual in Massachusetts in a private transfer via the MIRCS system, or is the owner of that AR restricted to keeping that rifle for his/her own personal use? If its the latter, then it would appear the only option would be to sell it out of state through an FFL.

MIRCS is still accepting EFA10 transfer records of post 7/20/2016 items to go through as recently as last week. things like receivers bought after 7/20/16 but prior to 8/1/24 and built into pistols after the new laws came into effect making it easier to do( ie no more 50oz rule). I know because I transferred a few of these items to another person able to lawfully possess them. MIRCS validates our licenses are active and we are legal to do the transfer and records the info we put down.

 

[DW357]

post 7/20/2016 items to go through as recently as last week. things like receivers bought after 7/20/16 but prior to 8/1/24

I don’t gave a shit about this bullshit. But this 7/20/16-8/1/24 window doesn’t make sense to me.
The new law says it’s legal if possessed on 8/1 but that’s post 2016 so…

 

[Shoals]

I don’t gave a shit about this bullshit. But this 7/20/16-8/1/24 window doesn’t make sense to me.
The new law says it’s legal if possessed on 8/1 but that’s post 2016 so…

Agreed. IDGAF about opinion, updates or interpretations, the law is the law. Their piss poor attempt to circumvent this process is laughable. Fear mongering and scare tactics designed to confuse and gridlock the industry within the state.

 

[Picton]

They could but in my uneducated opinion IF the state is going to enforce it, they’d use the new registration system. You said you have it, let’s go see. Chasing 4473s is a ton of effort for guns people may no longer have.

Remember, they appropriated zero dollars for enforcement. They're not hiring new worker-bees.

Whoever sorts through those thousands of 4473s is a Statie detective taking time off from real work. Meaning, crimes that can be prosecuted and show up on stats. These cannot, and everyone knows it. This law has no potential to be a feather in any LEO's cap and plenty of potential to blow back and get the whole house of cards to fall down.

 

[MAJoe]

MIRCS is still accepting EFA10 transfer records of post 7/20/2016 items to go through as recently as last week. things like receivers bought after 7/20/16 but prior to 8/1/24 and built into pistols after the new laws came into effect making it easier to do( ie no more 50oz rule). I know because I transferred a few of these items to another person able to lawfully possess them. MIRCS validates our licenses are active and we are legal to do the transfer and records the info we put down.

Why would the state ever prevent you from documenting a crime? Not saying it is, but the portal isn’t “smart”. License = valid means you can document transferring a post 86 machine gun and it wouldn’t “stop you”.

 

[MAJoe]

So, when considering all of the ambiguous information cited above, can a legally "registered" (via a form FA-10) AR in Massachusetts prior to 20 July 2016 now be transferred to another legally licensed individual in Massachusetts in a private transfer via the MIRCS system, or is the owner of that AR restricted to keeping that rifle for his/her own personal use? If its the latter, then it would appear the only option would be to sell it out of state through an FFL.

Of all grey area opinions, this is the most solidly black and white fine.

 

[MAJoe]

Also, when does the statute of limitations start running out on possession of ASF?, 6 years after 2016 press conference?

Timer starts from when you stopped possessing it, not the 4473 date.

 

[Otter C]

Pants shitters. If a dealer was legal, you’re legal. Everything would have been shut down 9 years ago. They can’t arbitrarily go back and change. 8/1 is what matters

 

[not new guy]

If a dealer was legal, you’re legal.

Are you saying if a dealer sold it to you you’re legal?

 

[Mark from ?]

Pants shitters. If a dealer was legal, you’re legal. Everything would have been shut down 9 years ago. They can’t arbitrarily go back and change. 8/1 is what matters

My feeling is they will use the 9 year window verbage to just get people to try and sell shit out of state or turn it in.

Pantshitters will do it, free men won't and if you start reading about people being charged (I really doubt this) then you will know for real or is it just smokescreen.

Reality is if you didn't FA10 register you probably have zero to worry about. I really doubt they would go AFT route at all especially since this whole thing is fuzzy and unconstitutional as hell.

Make no mistake their 8/1 date was a ploy to get everyone to register.......and many people not only got sucked into that, they went on a buying spree for now techncally banned shit. This was literally entrapment for christ sake.

Some people will be fully comfortable living with banned materials, some will crap their drawers and jettison the shit. This is the whole jist of this going back to 2016 bs.

 

[drgrant]

My feeling is they will use the 9 year window verbage to just get people to try and sell shit out of state or turn it in.

Pantshitters will do it, free men won't and if you start reading about people being charged (I really doubt this) then you will know for real or is it just smokescreen.

Reality is if you didn't FA10 register you probably have zero to worry about. I really doubt they would go AFT route at all especially since this whole thing is fuzzy and unconstitutional as hell.

Make no mistake their 8/1 date was a ploy to get everyone to register.......and many people not only got sucked into that, they went on a buying spree for now techncally banned shit. This was literally entrapment for christ sake.

Some people will be fully comfortable living with banned materials, some will crap their drawers and jettison the shit. This is the whole jist of this going back to 2016 bs.

Most gun owners in mass won't be aware of any of this.

 

[Mark from ?]

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.

And here is my question....if this was the case....why were people rushing out to buy lowers until 8/1? When they knew damn well that lowers going poof and becoming a firearm after that.

And why wasn't everyone up in arms about no grandfathering in the window period and why is this all coming about NOW AFTER the law has been passed?

 

[Mark from ?]

Most gun owners in mass won't be aware of any of this.

Im very sure they will all get letters.....some will care, some will wipe their ass with it....

 

[drgrant]

Im very sure they will all get letters.....some will care, some will wipe their ass with it....

I'm predicting the only letter they will get will be once the registration portal goes active. Most will ignore it thinking FS or whoever sold them their shit already registered it for them.

 

[fencer]

They can’t arbitrarily go back and change. 8/1 is what matters

Sure they can. Enforcement is an entirely different matter.

They can say whatever they want. They can say that 1978 lime green Ford Pintos are banned and a felony to posses.
Good luck enforcing it.

I really hope they try so that this can be settled in court.

 

[Shoals]

Why would the state ever prevent you from documenting a crime? Not saying it is, but the portal isn’t “smart”. License = valid means you can document transferring a post 86 machine gun and it wouldn’t “stop you”.

agreed. It was used as a way to document the transfer at the buyers request. For me it validated he was legal to possess it, I was offering just a BOS and to check the license via the portal.

I will discontinue my thread drift however

 

[Reptile]

And here is my question....if this was the case....why were people rushing out to buy lowers until 8/1? When they knew damn well that lowers going poof and becoming a firearm after that.

And why wasn't everyone up in arms about no grandfathering in the window period and why is this all coming about NOW AFTER the law has been passed?

Those people were evidently mistaken.

The expurts on NES interpreted the law for us with wishful thinking about grandfathering.

First Jason Guida said it.

Then GOAL said it.

Now, the AG said it.

Post 2016 and you have a problem.

I’ll believe the last 3 before any NES armchair lawyer expurt.

 

[Picton]

They can say that 1978 lime green Ford Pintos are banned and a felony to posses.
Good luck enforcing it.

Don't give them any ideas. Look how sweeeeeeet this thing is:

 

[center442]

Can they? They technically shouldn’t have those? Right?

Wouldn’t each serial number have to be submitted for a trace check?

Law enforcement would contact the manufacturer, then the gun shop that has the 4473, then the original purchaser, etc. until they get to you.

I don’t know if this is exactly correct……..

Also, when does the statute of limitations start running out on possession of ASF?, 6 years after 2016 press conference?

Or do you have to out yourself first?

I was under the impression that sales records from dealers, held by the Feds, were purged after a certain amount of time.

IIRC, there was a lot of complaints by people because they didn't want a gun registration list, so the answer was to approve or deny a dealer transaction and the transaction would be removed after a certain amount of time had passed. A temporary registration database.... supposedly.

 

[Lxpony]

I don't give a shit about any of this...

 

[MAJoe]

Those people were evidently mistaken.

The expurts on NES interpreted the law for us with wishful thinking about grandfathering.

First Jason Guida said it.

Then GOAL said it.

Now, the AG said it.

Post 2016 and you have a problem.

I’ll believe the last 3 before any NES armchair lawyer expurt.

The AG has not said anything RE the new law. This is only the new advisory board of which Guida is a member.

 

[drgrant]

And here is my question....if this was the case....why were people rushing out to buy lowers until 8/1? When they knew damn well that lowers going poof and becoming a firearm after that.

Umm- it's because they knew dealers wouldn't be selling them indefinitely. If you like in MA and aren't a dualie it's difficult to source a lower otherwise. It's was a practical issue not a legal one.

 

[Mark from ?]

I don't give a shit about any of this...

This is the correct answer......nobody should really give a shit....if you do your a pantshitter.

Except Rapetile who buried all of them and forgot where they are........

 

[Reptile]

The AG has not said anything RE the new law. This is only the new advisory board of which Guida is a member.

Doesn’t the board take orders from the AG?

She is who came up the 2016.

I don’t think GOAL or any 2 A group will be coming to your defense since the law is written in stone at this point.

 

[EJFudd]

... and why is this all coming about NOW AFTER the law has been passed?

Because Chapter 135 is ambiguous, poorly-worded and somewhat open-ended in regard to certain provisions... and the FCAB was assigned by the legislation to handle those issues going forward.

Think of it this way: It's similar to how the 1998 legislation empowered the AG to develop CMRs to implement certain aspects of that legislation.

 

[Mark from ?]

Umm- it's because they knew dealers wouldn't be selling them indefinitely. If you like in MA and aren't a dualie it's difficult to source a lower otherwise. It's was a practical issue not a legal one.

It was kind of a rhetorical question...like who the fxck cares they aren't going to prosecute all these people that bought before 8/1 so stop the pantshitting.