• 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.

Forced surrender of bump stocks in MA EOPSS letter, per GOAL

Asaltweapon said:
How do they plan on enforcing this?
Click to expand...
It will not be actively enforced, per se...

But if someone gets jammed for something else and bump-stock is found in his/her possession (through search warrant), then he/she is a full-blown criminal for mere possession.

Same as with post-ban mags and other non-registerable, illegal to possess stuff; I believe...
 
gusto411 said:
It will not be actively enforced, per se...

But if someone gets jammed for something else and bump-stock is found in his/her possession (through search warrant), then he/she is a full-blown criminal for mere possession.

Same as with post-ban mags and other non-registerable, illegal to possess stuff; I believe...
Click to expand...
And the headline will read "person in posession of an illegal machine gun".
 
you can be positive they will not be destroyed if you turn them in. they will end up as free gifts to whoever you turned them into. this state and the people on its payrole are as crooked as they come. at every turn corruption is taking place and covered up. why because they can with no one to answer to. it is sad to say this is the state that freedom began.
 
JSlayer said:
No, of course they don't know who has them and they don't need to waste time or money trying to track down purchase records. All they need to do is pass the law and wait for it to be broken. If you get pulled over with a bumpstock in your trunk, you get pinched. If they come to your house for a fire and find a bumpstock you get pinched. Some cop doing a "wellness" check during an emergency sees your bumpstock, you get pinched. If you get "Swatted" as a practical joke by some punk kid and they find your bumpstock, you get pinched. And 500 other scenarios I could dream up. The more BS laws they pass the more criminals in waiting there are, and that's the goal in MA. It only takes 1 OOPS to become a PP. My advice is, don't risk it, get some friends in NH or at the very least a storage unit.
Click to expand...

Great summary of the true situation. I've seen one of the above scenarios play out, with the end result being a decorated vet and successful business person with a squeaky clean record get pinched over a stupid Mass gun law that doesn't exist in any other state. And yes, one Mass oops and you're a PP throughout the country, despite the oops only existing in Mass. Weave the web and wait for the 'bugs' to fly into it. They will catch some, which will strike fear into many.
 
I'm sure we'll all sleep a whole lot better at night knowing these pieces of plastic and polymer are soon to be off our streets! /sarcasm

Yet another knee-jerk reaction that will, ultimately, just lead to new innovation and more sales down the road. These people really have themselves convinced
that if they "just" make enough laws curtailing our rights, that eventually we'll all give up.

Wrong.

Make something idiot proof and they build a better idiot. Every single time. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of bump-stocks but if there's a market for them, so be it.
At the end of the day it's about protecting our rights, which as we see with the issue at hand are being eroded little by little. Frog. Pot. Boiling Water...
 
So far as I know, possession of one is illegal and has penalties by statute. There is no requirement to turn in anything, and no penalty for having not turned anything in.

Just like in the olden days, the honus remains on law enforcement to catch bad guys, there is no bad guy requirement to turn one's self in... you know the risks. Keep it, move it out of state or destroy it, do not turn it in. They'd just love the precedent-

ETA: Lol, everything is illegal in Massachusetts, though it still isn't illegal to be Illegal...
 
Last edited:
According to the recorded number of licensed gun owners in Massachusetts as of January 2016, times the cost of a stamp, this will cost the state $167,884.78. Well done Maura.
 
Shawnyc said:
According to the recorded number of licensed gun owners in Massachusetts as of January 2016, times the cost of a stamp, this will cost the state $167,884.78. Well done Maura.
Click to expand...

More, actually, if they procrastinate until after the price of a stamp goes up a cent!
 
I hope this isn't a stepping stone. I can see the Beacon Hill stating that the bump stock ban was a failure and the firearms that could be used with bump stocks need to be seized to ensure the threat is neutralized.
 
Hold onto your pants, they're coming for your belt loops. At least you can proactively turn in your moonbat coworkers for owning a "device" that could be used as a "bump stock" whether they knew it or not. Bonus: they don't have a LTC so they must be hiding the gun somewhere!
 
Boris said:
that was initial understanding, but now GOAL says that MG lic won't be enough to be able to keep it.
Click to expand...
Do you have a cite for this? All I have seen is GOAL's repeating the state's letter asserting they're illegal for anyone to possess, and of course the state would never overstate their case.
 
Drix said:
...
SECTION 13. Said section 121 of said chapter 140, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting after the definition of “Assault weapon” the following definition: “Bump stock”, any device for a semiautomatic firearm that increases the rate of fire achievable with such firearm by using energy from the recoil of the firearm to generate a reciprocating action that facilitates repeated activation of the trigger.
...
So, it appears MA reclassified the bump stock as a machine gun, however, they also tag a bump stock on in part of the AWB. ...
Click to expand...
Not true. All this language does is insert the definition of "Bump stock" into the list of definitions after, not as part of, the (made-up) definition of "Assault weapon".
 
kevin9 said:
Do you have a cite for this? All I have seen is GOAL's repeating the state's letter asserting they're illegal for anyone to possess, and of course the state would never overstate their case.
Click to expand...

This is taken from the EOPSS letter if that's the cite you're looking for..

There are no exceptions to this prohibition for licensed firearm owners: an FID card, a License to Carry, or even a license
to possess a machine gun will not authorize possession of a bump stock or a trigger crank.
Click to expand...
http://blog.goal.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Bump-Stock-Letter-LICENSEES.pdf


Shawnyc said:
According to the recorded number of licensed gun owners in Massachusetts as of January 2016, times the cost of a stamp, this will cost the state $167,884.78. Well done Maura.
Click to expand...

And that's not including paper/printing costs, envelopes, labor costs, etc
 
Well, I've developed a method to increase my rate of fire using a piece of meat. So I will be shipping them this. But I may wait until the weather warms up a bit.
8090266_001_lt.jpg
 
LoginName said:
This is taken from the EOPSS letter if that's the cite you're looking for..
http://blog.goal.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Bump-Stock-Letter-LICENSEES.pdf
here are no exceptions to this prohibition for licensed firearm owners: an FID card, a License to Carry, or even a license
to possess a machine gun will not authorize possession of a bump stock or a trigger crank.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
That is not a valid cite, because it's simply a letter from EOPSS, not the actual law, or even a statement of the law.
And as I said before, we know the EOPSS never overstates their case. :rolleyes:
 
firestorm said:
The fact that they wrote a letter stating it does not make it reality. The law does not seem to support their version of this. just because the state says a thing is illegal, does not make the law say something it does not say.
Click to expand...
Be that as it may, are ANY of our advocacy organizations filing for an emergency injunction of something so egregiously flying in the face of the takings clause?
 
Has any competent legal counsel reviewed the letter against the current version of the relevant MGL? It sounds like the letter is describing what they wanted to happen, but doesn't align with what was actually passed as law? The letter seems correct except for the MG allowance and other legal means to no longer have the device in state.

Guess we'll have to sit tight and wait for someone with a valid MG license and bump stock to get jammed up.
 
I have a MG license but sadly no longer have a bump stock. I had one briefly but sold it off once the novelty wore off. Kinda wish I hadn't now.
 
I must have a reading comprehension problem.. if they reclassified them as machine guns, and spelled out in the law that possession of one is not a valid reason for a green card to get issued...

You would think logic dictates that clearly if you already have a license to possess a machine gun and bumpstock are now machine guns, that you would win in court...

I guess its a good thing i didnt do my MA bumpfire tribute jan. 1 ,buy attaching a bumpstock to my M16, just to see what happens.

I sure hope this goes court, injunction should have been filed like with CA magazine confiscation..its has to be the lowest risk test case for someone with a MG license and a bumpstock.. but just like all gun control laws they were never ment to be enforced.

While its seems silly to go to court over something that effects so few people and will cost so much. It has to be done... the right of the minority is possible more important(or telling about our society) than the rights of the many.
 
kevin9 said:
That is not a valid cite, because it's simply a letter from EOPSS, not the actual law, or even a statement of the law.
And as I said before, we know the EOPSS never overstates their case. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

firestorm said:
The fact that they wrote a letter stating it does not make it reality. The law does not seem to support their version of this. just because the state says a thing is illegal, does not make the law say something it does not say.
Click to expand...

I realize that, just try and get them to realize it too.
 
slipknot said:
Where do I sign up for the class action lawsuit against my own state legislators? This exposfacto slippery slope needs to be nipped in the bud
Click to expand...

Sign me up. I have donated a lot in the past and will do so again. I don't own one (but I guess I would say that either way at this point) but if she gets away with this, there is only one logical outcome.
 
MGnoob said:
While its seems silly to go to court over something that effects so few people and will cost so much. It has to be done... the right of the minority is possible more important(or telling about our society) than the rights of the many.
Click to expand...

More to the point: not to challenge it would be to allow VERY, VERY bad precedent to be set.
 

Similar threads

Personal transfer of pre-Healy MA compliant AR and/or lowers
Replies
4
Views
261
Mesatchornug
Mesatchornug
Is the HK USP .45 legal in MA?
Replies
16
Views
426
drgrant
drgrant
eFA-10 For Shotgun Purchased Out of State, What Do I Put In The Dealer Info Area?
Replies
3
Views
157
Rick O'Shea
Rick O'Shea
New to MA
2 3
Replies
69
Views
2K
HooVooLoo
HooVooLoo
I open carried in Boston today
3 4 5
Replies
148
Views
3K
fencer
fencer
Back
Top Bottom