Healey "closing the loophole" letter to gun dealers

[EJFudd]

First rifles then pistols and lastly shotguns.

Don't worry they fully support the second amendment though. Or at least they will say they do.

And they won't be taking away anyone's guns. You will be handing them over to them..LOL

Registration=confiscation!

Now the criminals, they will have anything they want! Because they will never follow the law!

Remember... According to Queen Maura and her supporters, we gun owners of Massachusetts are all criminals now... felons to be exact. Think and act accordingly.

And yes, how twisted and ironic it is that they will be telling us how much they support the Second Amendment as they take away our guns. Only a DemocRAT can spew lies and BS like that and think you will actually believe it.

 

[ColdDeadHands]

Remember... According to Queen Maura and her supporters, we gun owners of Massachusetts are all criminals now... felons to be exact. Think and act accordingly.

And yes, how twisted and ironic it is that they will be telling us how much they support the Second Amendment as they take away our guns. Only a DemocRAT can spew lies and BS like that and think you will actually believe it.

Let's be real. Both parties spew lies. We just prefer the republican lies.

 

[Greschner 4]

If you are legal, bought them legal, and treat ownership legally, all the rest is a steaming pile of shit.

 

[namedpipes]

What do you suppose they will do once all firearms are illegal and confiscated, yet the occasional mass murder still happens and the homicide rate skyrockets?

I have yet to read a completely comforting analysis that indicates i can bequeath any of my firearms that would be in question, to my heirs.

 

[Dadstoys]

What do you suppose they will do once all firearms are illegal and confiscated, yet the occasional mass murder still happens and the homicide rate skyrockets?

The same thing they do in the other countries that ban firearms, die like sheep while the elites are surrounded by armed security.
Then double down and arrest you for hate speech if you hurt the feels of the people doing the killing.

 

[193rdsoldier]

The same thing they do in the other countries that ban firearms, die like sheep while the elites are surrounded by armed security.
Then double down and arrest you for hate speech if you hurt the feels of the people doing the killing.

Let that sh*t sink in.........

 

[MAD Geary]

It's too bad someone can't find a statistic showing an increase in crime since the 7/20 ban.

 

[babygorilla]

Crime stats, just like the rest of .gov, are usually years behind....

 

[swagelin]

Apparently the AG office is telling people to reach out to a lawyer since they do not 'give advice'.

I reached out to an attorney who specializes in firearms today to see if even the local attorneys have an opinion / idea of what's going on. He told me not to bother them and to just contact GOAL.

 

[Serapis]

Wait so the lawyers don't want to touch it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Greschner 4]

Wait so the lawyers don't want to touch it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, they want to get paid before they talk (or think).

 

[swagelin]

My question was asking if the attorneys in MA (him or someone else) can offer any guidance or assistance with understanding of the AGs actions. He told me to call GOAL.

Wait so the lawyers don't want to touch it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

- - - Updated - - -

I don't disagree but I've spoken to him before. He did not say "pay me and we can talk". He wasn't rude or anything, just my experience when asking about it.

No, they want to get paid before they talk (or think).

 

[42!]

Well there are plenty of lawyers on NES.

What is it? Do you want to get paid before providing a determination (understandable since its what you do for a living), or do you not want to say even if you were paid?

 

[cb1]

No, they want to get paid before they talk (or think).

Well there are plenty of lawyers on NES.

What is it? Do you want to get paid before providing a determination (understandable since its what you do for a living), or do you not want to say even if you were paid?

I routinely give out free consultations. Not all of us demand a fee just for you to get in the door.

Although I'm not a firearms lawyer (yet, anyway), I could easily see an attorney passing on giving advice with respect to the AG's enforcement notice. Whether or not something is "legal" is a loaded question and depends on an individual's specific situation. For example, the issue of a manufacturer replacing a defective rifle (bought pre-7/20) with a different rifle (and different serial #) has already been raised with the AG. There are probably hundreds of different scenarios that could come up that would result in an attorney giving you different answers for each.

Unless and until someone actually faces charges under this enforcement notice, we're going to be looking at a very large grey area.

IMO, any attorney that claims to be able to give you definitive answers on matters such as these is probably not a very good attorney.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

A bar card is not a crystal ball.

I can tell you that the AG's assertions appear to go beyond the law, and that (a) it is impossible to tell exactly what the AG declares to be the case in all situations, and (b) it is impossible to tell if the courts will uphold the law as written or will instead engage in contorted legal reasoning like "all legislatures who voted for this obviously wanted to cast a very wide net, so the court will do that as well". You can also go to an attorney and hear the same thing. What you will not year from a competent attorney is "Doing A is definitely, positively safe" or "Doing B will definitely be found unlawful by a court supporting the AG".

 

[MA_Shooter]

The same thing they do in the other countries that ban firearms, die like sheep while the elites are surrounded by armed security.
Then double down and arrest you for hate speech if you hurt the feels of the people doing the killing.

The Liberals will claim they simply haven't done enough, spent enough, passed enough gun laws. Progressives always double down on stupid.

 

[crazymjb]

A few things. First of all, I wouldn't fault any attorney for wanting money before giving legal advice (full disclosure, I'm in law school). It's a job and a skill they invested in, do you all expect other services for free? That said, I would expect "guidance" overseen by lawyers or by lawyers to exist in some public forums as it relates to many topics. Also, all types of attorneys provide services and advice in many different manners.

As it relates to this issue specifically, its a massive ****ing mess. There is a "safe" legal answer out there I am sure, but I guarantee it would be more restrictive than any of you would like. As far as pushing the boundaries of what she is able to do... nobody really knows until it gets played out in the courts.

Mike

 

[drgrant]

A bar card is not a crystal ball.

I can tell you that the AG's assertions appear to go beyond the law, and that (a) it is impossible to tell exactly what the AG declares to be the case in all situations, and (b) it is impossible to tell if the courts will uphold the law as written or will instead engage in contorted legal reasoning like "all legislatures who voted for this obviously wanted to cast a very wide net, so the court will do that as well". You can also go to an attorney and hear the same thing. What you will not year from a competent attorney is "Doing A is definitely, positively safe" or "Doing B will definitely be found unlawful by a court supporting the AG".

Well, there's also the other MA legal reasoning we've seen so often which is something along the lines of "cuz it involves guns, and guns are icky, we're going to allow the state to get away with doing heinous bullshit. . Cuz guns. It's for the children."

-Mike

 

[42!]

Well there are plenty of lawyers on NES.

What is it? Do you want to get paid before providing a determination (understandable since its what you do for a living), or do you not want to say even if you were paid?

To be clear, I'm NOT criticizing lawyers for not giving answers, they are in no position to do so. I just figured it would be better explained by one of them.

 

[n1bsbri]

As a result of all this, the AG has gotten exactly what she wanted. The rules are intentionally vague, therefore most rational people will take the most conservative path in order to stay out of trouble. There's a reason she doesn't want to be too specific.

 

[swagelin]

Definitely appreciate an answer like this. That's why my original question was very generic - Can you or any other attorneys that you know offer any advice related to the recent actions by the AG? It's funny because the AG office is telling people to talk to lawyers and now the lawyers are not able to provide any additional information.

Once again, this was just an informational call trying to see if anyone in that community could help shed some light or offer their consultation.

I routinely give out free consultations. Not all of us demand a fee just for you to get in the door.

Although I'm not a firearms lawyer (yet, anyway), I could easily see an attorney passing on giving advice with respect to the AG's enforcement notice. Whether or not something is "legal" is a loaded question and depends on an individual's specific situation. For example, the issue of a manufacturer replacing a defective rifle (bought pre-7/20) with a different rifle (and different serial #) has already been raised with the AG. There are probably hundreds of different scenarios that could come up that would result in an attorney giving you different answers for each.

Unless and until someone actually faces charges under this enforcement notice, we're going to be looking at a very large grey area.

IMO, any attorney that claims to be able to give you definitive answers on matters such as these is probably not a very good attorney.

 

[crazymjb]

Definitely appreciate an answer like this. That's why my original question was very generic - Can you or any other attorneys that you know offer any advice related to the recent actions by the AG? It's funny because the AG office is telling people to talk to lawyers and now the lawyers are not able to provide any additional information.

Once again, this was just an informational call trying to see if anyone in that community could help shed some light or offer their consultation.

My guess is actual legal advice will be on the super-conservative side (IE stick to the statutorily protected pre 94, or true "pre-ban" guns). IANAL, but you read the AGs interpretation of the law and it's incredibly vague and incredibly broad. I wouldn't expect a good attorney to give you advice that pushes the envelope.

Mike

 

[mpd61]

I don't think many rank and file police officers would jam you up for taking an AR to the range. They could care less and have better things to do.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

As a senior patrolman for life.........I would have to agree with that 100% Please, enjoy your lawfully owned firearms. We're gonna need them when Maura declares sharia law!

 

[strangenh]

Agreed. Unless an attorney has a high-powered appellate practice with activist clients and a bankroll for that, "So, you want to be a test case," is generally discouraged - the "oh boy!" version is not an approach a responsible attorney takes absent the foregoing.

(And simple initial consultations are generally not something an attorney charges for.)

I routinely give out free consultations. Not all of us demand a fee just for you to get in the door.

Although I'm not a firearms lawyer (yet, anyway), I could easily see an attorney passing on giving advice with respect to the AG's enforcement notice. Whether or not something is "legal" is a loaded question and depends on an individual's specific situation. For example, the issue of a manufacturer replacing a defective rifle (bought pre-7/20) with a different rifle (and different serial #) has already been raised with the AG. There are probably hundreds of different scenarios that could come up that would result in an attorney giving you different answers for each.

Unless and until someone actually faces charges under this enforcement notice, we're going to be looking at a very large grey area.

IMO, any attorney that claims to be able to give you definitive answers on matters such as these is probably not a very good attorney.

 

[drgrant]

As a result of all this, the AG has gotten exactly what she wanted. The rules are intentionally vague, therefore most rational people will take the most conservative path in order to stay out of trouble. There's a reason she doesn't want to be too specific.

I hope she actually believes that because there's a large contingent of gun owners in MA who think her entire edict is bullshit.

The biggest victims here are the dealers, by far. The enthusiast owners have ways around all this BS and don't care when the dust settles.

The pant shitter/arm flappers, I feel bad for them, too, because being paralyzed with their own internally generated fear is no way to go through life.

-Mike

 

[larueminati]

Made FoxNews again...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...lt-weapons-crackdown-by-massachusetts-ag.html

 

[crazymjb]

I assume people have seen this ****ery (someone shared it on the "thinking firearms" fb page)

http://www.mass.gov/ago/public-safety/guns-that-are-not-assault-weapons.html

Guns That Are Not Assault Weapons

Q: Are there examples or categories of weapons that are not assault weapons?

Yes. Many rifles, shotguns, and pistols are not assault weapons, and therefore are not “copies or duplicates” of enumerated assault weapons. For example, the following are not assault weapons under G.L. c. 140, § 121:

Any handgun on the current version of the state’s Approved Firearms Roster, available here links to PDF file;
Any .22 caliber rifle;
Any Ruger Mini 14 or substantially-similar model weapon;
Any of the hundreds of rifles and shotguns listed on this list links to PDF file —Appendix A to 18 U.S.C. § 922, as appearing on September 13, 1994;
Any weapon that is operated by manual bolt, pump, lever, or slide action;
Any weapon that is an antique, relic, or theatrical prop;
Any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than five rounds of ammunition;
Any semiautomatic shotgun that cannot hold more than five rounds of ammunition in a fixed or detachable magazine.
This list is not exhaustive; it is meant for illustrative purposes only. Many other weapons are not assault weapons or “copies or duplicates” of assault weapons.

Q: Are any .22 caliber rifles affected by the Enforcement Notice?

No. However, a weapon that is manufactured as an Assault Weapon cannot be made legal by alterations that allow it to discharge .22-caliber ammunition.

Q: Does this Enforcement Notice change which semi-automatic pistols may be sold in Massachusetts?

No. The Enforcement Notice makes no change to the list of handguns, including semi-automatic pistols, approved for sale in Massachusetts. The most recent list (August 2016) is available here links to PDF file. The Massachusetts Assault Weapons Ban does prohibit the sale of five semi-automatic pistols, the INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and the Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil. Only these weapons and copies or duplicates of these specific pistols are prohibited under the ban, and none appear on the approved list.

For more information, please visit the Assault Weapon Ban Enforcement page.

Mike

 

[soam]

Wow, now she's definitely making shit up. The AWB has no 22 exemption.

 

[W.E.C]

How the hell is the average licensed person supposed to keep up with this shit, changing on a daily basis?

 

[fshalor]

Opening new loopholes? Wtf

Sent from my LG-K371 using Tapatalk