GOAL Statement on Current Litigation v. AG Healey

[firestorm]

I noticed this:
"Any .17 or .22 caliber rimfire rifle; "

... and there are these:

F17 Series | Gas Piston AR | Rimfire Rifle | .17 WSM

The F17 series is the world's first gas piston AR rimrifle. Our firearm F17 of semi-automatic rimfire rifles were designed with safety and efficiency in mind. .17 WSM

franklinarmory.com

Is there anything preventing someone from coming up with a bigger .17 rimfire caliber, or a corresponding .22 caliber rimfire; and the rifles to accept them?

Or simply go to a shop, buy yourself a stripped lower, order an upper of your choice or parts to build same, and make yourself whatever you want? If you want to be real paranoid have a .22lr upper laying around and register it as a .22lr before putting whatever the hell you want on it. Stay within the bounds of actual law (Not too many evil features, no pistols over 50 oz. etc.) and live your life, random pronouncements from idiot bureaucrats are not law.

 

[TLB]

Just out of curiosity, does this new clarification at all damage the chances of the GOAL lawsuit succeeding?
What's to effectively stop the court from saying something along the lines of "Well its not like you don't have other options. The AG has clearly laid out other viable alternatives that are still legal to purchase and own, and denying this single class/design of firearms isn't a burden enough to violate your constitutional rights as such"
I almost wonder if that's the new gameplan, to make the lawsuit that is the actual threat to her seem completely trivial and not worth the SC's time.




AFAIK Sheriffs in MA basically have no real power like their southern counterparts do, and instead effectively serve the role of "Jailers" rather than actual LE who would enforce said laws.

Comm2a is suing over the AWB in general. I think GOAL is involved with that, but I'm not sure.

 

[mac1911]

In VA there are sheriffs that are going to deputize the populace if their gun control measures get passed. Why can’t we have some LEO’s step up like that in MA?!

HahHahHah, really

 

[JJ4]

Are there examples or categories of weapons that are not copies or duplicates of Assault Weapons?
Any Ruger Mini 14 or substantially similar model weapon;
Any Springfield Armory M1A or substantially similar model weapon

The use of the word "Any" opens interesting possibilities. It would include, based on the provided guidance and similarity test, a totally tacticool gun with the same trigger group as one of these, regardless of it having otherwise banned features. "Any" is a very special word.

Are she using the real definition of "similar" or the re-defined usage of "similar" in her enforcement notice?

 

[rsj]

That's what the Fed law said but that's not what Maura says.

The case was too narrowly defined, she got away with leaving lots of questions but just addressing a few specific firearms.

The Mass AWB is a carbon-copy of the (now sun-setted) Federal AWB. Mitt Romney kept it in place when the Federal one wasn't renewed.

She does get away with an awful lot which testifies to how sloppy she and the judges are in forcing their agendas through the courts.

 

[Spartan65]

Or simply go to a shop, buy yourself a stripped lower, order an upper of your choice or parts to build same, and make yourself whatever you want? If you want to be real paranoid have a .22lr upper laying around and register it as a .22lr before putting whatever the hell you want on it. Stay within the bounds of actual law (Not too many evil features, no pistols over 50 oz. etc.) and live your life, random pronouncements from idiot bureaucrats are not law.

Every FFL I’ve ever spoken to wont sell you a receiver (other than the FMK poly lower that’s a POS). Maybe its just me everyone thinks I’m a LEO it seems.

 

[TLB]

Every FFL I’ve ever spoken to wont sell you a receiver (other than the FMK poly lower that’s a POS). Maybe its just me everyone thinks I’m a LEO it seems.

MFS has them right on their website for $49.

 

[firestorm]

Every FFL I’ve ever spoken to wont sell you a receiver (other than the FMK poly lower that’s a POS). Maybe its just me everyone thinks I’m a LEO it seems.

MFS had anderson stripped lowers in stock a couple weeks ago, they just require you to sign a thing saying they informed you that the AG says you can only build it into a .22 or .17 rifle. I don't know who else does, but make some more phone calls they are out in the open about this.

 

[Mass-diver]

MFS has them right on their website for $49.

Link? I don’t see any.

Makes sense though as they could be for .22 builds

 

[Spartan65]

Link? I don’t see any.

Makes sense though as they could be for .22 builds

They were the patriot Poly FMK lowers until Maura posted her “clarification” and then they were removed.

 

[DJBrad]

Wait wait..... did she just pull a fast one and limit my Ar pistol to a fixed mag with only 5 rounds now?!?

• Any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than five rounds of ammunition;

 

[firestorm]

They were the patriot Poly FMK lowers until Maura posted her “clarification” and then they were removed.

Call them, they had normal lowers available a couple weeks ago. I'm sure they are not the only ones you could find with a few phone calls.

 

[TLB]

Link? I don’t see any.

Makes sense though as they could be for .22 builds

Maybe they sold out... Yes for 22LR or .17 builds.

 

[Coyote33]

Is that .17 RIMFIRE ONLY?

 

[TJRaccoon]

I seen different posts about AR-10 (five ARs safer) are they acceptable? Probably not, since trigger groups can be switched. What about Steyr Aug and FALs. Where do we stand on those models?

Dug into MGL. Nope from Chapter 140 section 121
''Assault weapon'', shall have the same meaning as a semiautomatic assault weapon as defined in the federal Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(30) as appearing in such section on September 13, 1994, and shall include, but not be limited to, any of the weapons, or copies or duplicates of the weapons, of any caliber, known as: (i) Avtomat Kalashnikov (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; (vi) 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, such as, or similar to, the Street Sweeper and Striker 12; provided, however, that the term assault weapon shall not include: (i) any of the weapons, or replicas or duplicates of such weapons, specified in appendix A to 18 U.S.C. section 922 as appearing in such appendix on September 13, 1994, as such weapons were manufactured on October 1, 1993

 

[DJBrad]

What exactly did change in the clarifications?

You can only have fixed mag Ar’s with 5 rounds not 10.

 

[Clippyclip]

You can only have fixed mag Ar’s with 5 rounds not 10.

Not quite.
"Any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than five rounds of ammunition; "

 

[CatSnoutSoup]

This stuff still isn't the law, none of it.

 

[DJBrad]

Not quite.
"Any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than five rounds of ammunition; "

What semiauto would fit that description? Is there even a model that only makes 5 rounds mags?

 

[Waher]

What semiauto would fit that description? Is there even a model that only makes 5 rounds mags?

Some Browning or Remington Fudd thing

 

[42!]

I seen different posts about AR-10 (five ARs safer) are they acceptable? Probably not, since trigger groups can be switched. What about Steyr Aug and FALs. Where do we stand on those models?

Dug into MGL. Nope from Chapter 140 section 121
''Assault weapon'', shall have the same meaning as a semiautomatic assault weapon as defined in the federal Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(30) as appearing in such section on September 13, 1994, and shall include, but not be limited to, any of the weapons, or copies or duplicates of the weapons, of any caliber, known as: (i) Avtomat Kalashnikov (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; (vi) 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, such as, or similar to, the Street Sweeper and Striker 12; provided, however, that the term assault weapon shall not include: (i) any of the weapons, or replicas or duplicates of such weapons, specified in appendix A to 18 U.S.C. section 922 as appearing in such appendix on September 13, 1994, as such weapons were manufactured on October 1, 1993

Can a copy or duplicate design pre-date the original? I say no, so an AR-10 can't be a copy or duplicate of an AR-15....But no one agrees with me.

 

[Clippyclip]

The "Any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than five rounds of ammunition; " line has always been there. It's an example of a feature of a rifle that excludes it from being an "assault weapon", hence "cannot" in the statement. Nothing has changed there. Fixed mag ARs can still have 10 rounds and have all the evil features.

Frequently Asked Questions about the Assault Weapons Ban Enforcement Notice (WayBackMachine snapshot of the mass.gov AWB FAQ page from Feb 13th, 2019, which has the same line, unaltered)

 

[Clippyclip]

Forgot to mention: by "assault weapon" I mean what the AG states are copies or duplicates of what is claimed to be banned weapons (AR, AK, AUG, uzi pistol, etc). On the page the AG says you CAN own detachable mag AR15s and AKs (and so on) that can only take 5 round magazines (if it shoots ammo other than .17 or .22 caliber rimfire). Just like how the AG also says you can only own .17 and .22 caliber rimfire ARs (and so on) if you want one that can take a 6+ round mag.

(According to the AG, you can own an AR that takes ANY kind of .17 or .22 caliber rimfire ammo, not just .17hm2 or .22lr, as the AG never clarified which type .17 or .22 rimfire ammo (at least on that page))

 

[rsj]

This stuff still isn't the law, none of it.

Yes, but as long as everyone keeps asking questions about the AG's hocus pocus we can forget about all that.

 

[Gunrunner]

The NSSF statement has no effect on GOAL litigation v AG Healey.

Yesterday, the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) announced that they were no longer pursuing their court case against AG Healey regarding her 2016 Enforcement Notice. The case known as Pullman Arms et al. v. Attorney General Healey has concluded.

We want to send notice that the NSSF’s decision in no way affects our continued litigation (Worman v. Baker)currently awaiting certification from the United States Supreme Court.

As of today, the Attorney General has posted new clarifications regarding the August 2016 Enforcement Notice. The information on the AG’s page shows that nothing has changed regarding owning and possessing AR and AK style rifles and magazines.

GOAL will continue to pursue our lawsuit until we have a positive outcome.

####

photo courtesy State House News Service
Support our efforts, including this lawsuit by donating here!
Click here to read the petition for writ of certiorari
Click here to view the SCOTUS web page with info about case
Click here for more information about GOAL’s legal team filing to be heard by the Supreme Court of the United States of America.

So does anyone know why they dropped their law suit????

I’ve never read a reason being given by GOAL as to why it was dropped?

 

[rsj]

So does anyone know why they dropped their law suit????

I’ve never read a reason being given by GOAL as to why it was dropped?

NSSF Welcomes Massachusetts AG’s ‘Enforcement Notice’ Clarification

The Attorney General’s agreement to clarify this notice effectively ends the legal challenge by NSSF, Pullman Arms of Worcester, Mass., along with three other Massachusetts firearms retailers.

www.nssf.org

NSSF and the stores had to file the case to challenge the Notice because it was too vague to apply. The complaint identified the difficulties in applying the Notice to listed firearms after the Attorney General’s office ignored multiple requests to clarify the Notice as to those firearms. The Office did not take steps to clarify the notice for two and a half years, and only recently notified the Plaintiffs that the listed firearms are not illegal “assault weapons.” The Office agreed to amend the Notice after NSSF prevailed against multiple motions designed to dismiss or stall the case. Because the Notice has been clarified, the goals for the case have been achieved, and there is nothing else to fight about in this action.

From what I understand this is not what actually happened, though?

 

[CatSnoutSoup]

NSSF Welcomes Massachusetts AG’s ‘Enforcement Notice’ Clarification

The Attorney General’s agreement to clarify this notice effectively ends the legal challenge by NSSF, Pullman Arms of Worcester, Mass., along with three other Massachusetts firearms retailers.

www.nssf.org

It would have been nice in that press release had the NSSF at least named all of the dealers involved. Seems the least they could have done after not having given them a paddle for this ride up shit creek if as it has been argued here the questions that were asked were never going to make them whole.

Thanks for the effort to Pullman Arms Inc. of Worcester; Guns and Gear, LLC of Agawam; Paper City Firearms of Holyoke; and Grrr Gear of Orange.

 

[ruebarb]

I seen different posts about AR-10 (five ARs safer) are they acceptable? Probably not, since trigger groups can be switched. What about Steyr Aug and FALs. Where do we stand on those models?

Dug into MGL. Nope from Chapter 140 section 121
''Assault weapon'', shall have the same meaning as a semiautomatic assault weapon as defined in the federal Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(30) as appearing in such section on September 13, 1994, and shall include, but not be limited to, any of the weapons, or copies or duplicates of the weapons, of any caliber, known as: (i) Avtomat Kalashnikov (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; (vi) 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, such as, or similar to, the Street Sweeper and Striker 12; provided, however, that the term assault weapon shall not include: (i) any of the weapons, or replicas or duplicates of such weapons, specified in appendix A to 18 U.S.C. section 922 as appearing in such appendix on September 13, 1994, as such weapons were manufactured on October 1, 1993

Technically the AR-10 trigger group is not the same as the AR-15 and therefore not compatiable. The AR-10 requires heavier springs.

 

[42!]

Technically the AR-10 trigger group is not the same as the AR-15 and therefore not compatiable. The AR-10 requires heavier springs.

Sure sounds to me like the AR10 doesn't fit the copy/duplicate or similarity tests, so it should just be the evil features test.

 

[dcmdon]

I am a dealer. May I re-stock my inventory of Assault Weapons for sales exclusively to law enforcement officers?
No. Because I hate you. 95% of dealers in the Commonwealth are men, and I hate men. However, you may take orders for sales of Assault Weapons to law enforcement officers,because they can be re-interpreted as "patrol rifles", and you may obtain those weapons from your distributor and possess them until you complete the transfer, but upon completion of every transfer, you must then call my hotline and pledge allegiance and address me as "Your Royal Highness" When you do so, you must retain information sufficient to verify that the transferee is a law enforcement officer, or a friend or relative of a law enforcement officer.

This is pure, 100% absolute total bullshit. While I don't like her reinterpretation, I have to admit, its pretty clever. I can see her point.

But this, well there is no grounding in law. The AWB has exemptions for dealers and manufacturers.

If what she says above is actually based in law, then S&W couldn't make ARs for sale out of state.