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.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Innovation in ways to screw over citizens and consumers... yeah that is what we need... WTF.
Maybe thats because, as Healey and her predecessors have demonstrated, whenever there is an opportunity to control it will be contorted to serve political agendas rather than to actually help consumers.
Glock said the sale of their firearms to the public is prohibited in Massachusetts. Only law enforcement are able to purchase the company’s handguns. In a counter filing, Healey said the investigation “is not motivated, as Glock complains, by animus toward Glock or more broadly, by animus toward guns” and the fact that Glock doesn’t sell firearms in the state doesn’t matter because their firearms are available from third parties on the second-hand market.
The attorney general said that even if consumers are purchasing their Glocks illegally, the state still has a responsibility to protect these potentially criminal consumers from faulty firearms. “Irrespective of whether the sales were made legally or not, there are a large number of Glock guns in the hands of Massachusetts consumers,” Healey’s filing said.
Laughable and double laughable. She is totally out of her mind. Delusional in the extreme.More from the Washington Beacon, claiming that anyone buying a Glock in Mass from a "third-party" i.e. not a dealer is buying illegally
Glock said the sale of their firearms to the public is prohibited in Massachusetts. Only law enforcement are able to purchase the company’s handguns. In a counter filing, Healey said the investigation “is not motivated, as Glock complains, by animus toward Glock or more broadly, by animus toward guns” and the fact that Glock doesn’t sell firearms in the state doesn’t matter because their firearms are available from third parties on the second-hand market.
The attorney general said that even if consumers are purchasing their Glocks illegally, the state still has a responsibility to protect these potentially criminal consumers from faulty firearms. “Irrespective of whether the sales were made legally or not, there are a large number of Glock guns in the hands of Massachusetts consumers,” Healey’s filing said.
I just can't see how she makes this argument outside of a corrupt Ma. court.
If the firearm is truly defective (As in an unsafe in design or manufactured improperly) then why would LE be allowed to carry them ?
No amount of training would overcome a defective machine.
Both the EOPS list and AG list place the onus on the purveyor, not the consumer.potentially criminal consumers from faulty firearms.
The attorney general said that even if consumers are purchasing their Glocks illegally, the state still has a responsibility to protect these potentially criminal consumers from faulty firearms. “Irrespective of whether the sales were made legally or not, there are a large number of Glock guns in the hands of Massachusetts consumers,” Healey’s filing said.
More from the Washington Beacon, claiming that anyone buying a Glock in Mass from a "third-party" i.e. not a dealer is buying illegally
Glock said the sale of their firearms to the public is prohibited in Massachusetts. Only law enforcement are able to purchase the company’s handguns. In a counter filing, Healey said the investigation “is not motivated, as Glock complains, by animus toward Glock or more broadly, by animus toward guns” and the fact that Glock doesn’t sell firearms in the state doesn’t matter because their firearms are available from third parties on the second-hand market.
The attorney general said that even if consumers are purchasing their Glocks illegally, the state still has a responsibility to protect these potentially criminal consumers from faulty firearms. “Irrespective of whether the sales were made legally or not, there are a large number of Glock guns in the hands of Massachusetts consumers,” Healey’s filing said.
POWER GRAB FOR POLITICAL GAIN.
These gun regulations the AG is coming up with must look really f-ing stupid to people in free America.
I welcome the attention she's getting, though. The more she talks the more she exposes her bullshit.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It really is well beyond stupid... the BS that she is trying to sell in that lawsuit. Think about it! She wants dearly to protect us "potentially criminal consumers" from those evil, faulty, illegal Glock firearms... the very ones most in demand and used by the cops in MA, some of whom guard her sorry pathetic ass from us "potentially criminal consumers" in the first place. WTF???These gun regulations the AG is coming up with must look really f-ing stupid to people in free America.
I welcome the attention she's getting, though. The more she talks the more she exposes her bullshit.
The federal court took the position "Yup, right here in the Glock manual, shows the loaded chamber is ineffective just as she says, no need to hear testimony from the opposition's experts. Summary judgement for the AG".I just can't see how she makes this argument outside of a corrupt Ma. court.
If the firearm is truly defective (As in an unsafe in design or manufactured improperly) then why would LE be allowed to carry them ?
No amount of training would overcome a defective machine.
She is doubly wrong:"potentially criminal consumers" in the first place.WTF???
Yes- they do - Just took a class today at Sig Academy in NH - people from all over new England in my class are laughing at MA laws even more than before.
The federal court took the position "Yup, right here in the Glock manual, shows the loaded chamber is ineffective just as she says, no need to hear testimony from the opposition's experts. Summary judgement for the AG".
She is doubly wrong:
1. Under the CMR the selling of a gun disapproved by the AG is a civil violation, not a crime.
2. The offense is committed by the purveyor (holder of a MA dealer's license). The consumer is a victim of an "unfair and deceptive trade practice", not a "criminal".[/QUOTE}
True, but by her statement, how can we be victims of "unfair and deceptive trade practices" when she needs to ask Glock for records from all over the country? How many unfair and deceptive trade practice complaints has the MA AG's office received for a defective Glock in the past 25 years?
She's just making up more and more dumb statements as she tries to wiggle out of this. Apparently, not many or any, if she needs to search the country for complaints.
Might want to remind them that our AG is laying the groundwork for other AGs across the country and nationally. We need their help to shut down this disease before it spreads to their state.... and it will.
Let me take a wild ass guess. How about... ZERO!True, but by her statement, how can we be victims of "unfair and deceptive trade practices" when she needs to ask Glock for records from all over the country? How many unfair and deceptive trade practice complaints has the MA AG's office received for a defective Glock in the past 25 years?
We now know that her idea of the best self-promoting political mischief (after she runs out of tranny bathroom and other pressing LGBT issues) is making as much noise and trouble as possible for gunowners, gun dealers and gun manufacturers. I smell BloomingTurd's dirty money and influence all over this despicable tyrant.She's just making up more and more dumb statements as she tries to wiggle out of this. Apparently, not many or any, if she needs to search the country for complaints.
She is just crazy and weird enough that you might be right.If I didn't know any better I'd say she was behind the removal of the revolver emoji on iOS 10.
Quite possibly this could all
Come tumbling down
My comment/question is , "Doesn't the Ag's office have a budget ".
I mean if the state is on the verge of bankruptcy, would she get some flack from her superiors
about all the money being spent on these lawsuit'/
Maybe she shoudl be worried about "going over budget?
ggboy
If you mean for her, then yes I believe it might all come tumbling down.
But not before MA taxpayers pay a boat-load of money defending Healey's exploits -- those same taxpayers all the while blissfully unaware that this is all political conniving motivate by Healey's epic hubris.
She will lose in court, but she will not care as the taxpayers of the Commonwealth are merely stepping stones on her political path -- yeah, she's public servant [bs1]