MA Gun Grab 2024: H.4885 - Passed legislature, headed to the governor

Status
Not open for further replies.
556USER said:
What does non compliance really gain for you if you are a gun enthusiast? Sure if I don't comply and leave it locked up in my safe there's a good chance that nothing will happen. Just take it to the range and some idiot dimes you out and off to jail you go. I can think of a specific trap shooter on here who I'd bet on to do that. Never being able to use it is not freedom.
Click to expand...
No need for mental gymnastics. How many times have you been at the range and had someone call the cops on you because they think whatever you are shooting is not legal?

I will guess never. So that is the end of that fantasy.
 
Last edited:
Broc said:
No need for mental gymnastics. How many times have you been at the range and had someone call the cops on you becuase they think whatever you are shooting is not legal?

I will guess never. So that is the end of that fantasy.
Click to expand...
You ever been at the range and thought “man I’m the only one who cares about gun laws”?

Because I have
 
VTski4x4 said:
Wow! They sat down with some turncoat that gave away all the secrets. Built a gun? Can't sell it. Everything is an assault weapon. If you already own unserialized receivers, they're illegal, huge 1st amendment issues with 3d printer files. Holy f***ing shit.
Click to expand...
It really isn't that hard when you have retarded apes on NES posting about it and bragging about it everywhere they go.

It would take someone with an IQ of 70 a full 20min of hard research to figure it out.
 
Roadglide said:
How many of them quit over a vaccine. How many will quit and surrender their pension for refusing to enforce this. I know we're a long stretch from that but if that does become a reality I see exactly zero taking a stand over their paycheck.
Click to expand...

Oh, I don't think they'll quit over this, at all. They won't take a principled stance.

Instead, they'll just ignore it because it's so much work. And here's the thing: nobody will lean on them to actually enforce this. Because it's in the interests of TPTB to NOT take this to court.
 
Picton said:
Oh, I don't think they'll quit over this, at all. They won't take a principled stance.

Instead, they'll just ignore it because it's so much work. And here's the thing: nobody will lean on them to actually enforce this. Because it's in the interests of TPTB to NOT take this to court.
Click to expand...
I hope you’re right. As I’ve said before. I work closely with some of them and believe me they have a hard on for this type of shit.
 
Roadglide said:
I hope you’re right. As I’ve said before. I work closely with some of them and believe me they have a hard on for this type of shit.
Click to expand...

Oh, there's no doubt some of them will want to get into the weeds.

But if your desk sergeant puts you on traffic duty and expects a certain amount of revenue in between calls to look into busted taillights and calls about people locked out of their houses... how much time and energy would eager-beaver young JBTs have to sweep the streets for muzzle devices that might be Unlawfully Possessed?
 
CrackPot said:
AWB conjecture

Ok, this is not fully baked but I think the general logic is sound.

The Senate bill has no grandfathering of post 94 assault weapons. So you can have a gun that was purchased legally that suddenly becomes illegal with the passage of S2572.

The House similarly had the same issue with their first version of the bill. Leadership there was concerned that this would fail constitutionally and as a result they could lose the entire AWB (discussed later)

The Senate may or may not amend S2572 to address this. If they do not, it seems likely that in conference with the house it will have to get added given that the house leadership understands the need.

Why is no grandfathering a problem for the gun grabbers? You can decide whether the 4th, 5th or 14th amendment applies. Making lawfully acquired property unlawful with the passing of a law without proper compensation (independent of this being about guns) tends to land one in hot water. If/when a federal court decides this is unconstitutional, what can they do? They cannot roll back the law to a previous version. They cannot rewrite the law themselves or otherwise modify it. What they do is strike it down (maybe enjoining it first from enforcement while the parties argue it out). So what are they striking down? MGL 140 131M, the part of MGL that makes it a felony to possess an assault weapon. There goes the entire AWB. Gone. All because they failed to grandfather what we already have.

If I could predict the future, I would have already won Powerball for $1.5B and not still be living in MA. But I do think we will see a grandfather clause before this gets enacted, whether put in by the Senate, the House or when they reconcile.
Click to expand...

Other possibility is they know it's all toast anyways, so they're doing this whole thing as a virtue signaling temper tantrum, in a vain attempt to get one last groin kick in.. against dealers and gun owners before a court ends them with a legal headshot.
 
Spartan65 said:
You ever been at the range and thought “man I’m the only one who cares about gun laws”?
Click to expand...
Broc said:
No need for mental gymnastics. How many times have you been at the range and had someone call the cops on you becuase they think whatever you are shooting is not legal?

I will guess never. So that is the end of that fantasy.
Click to expand...

I had a Fudd who I later realized was a board member, come over and ask me about rapid fire (I was doing short, 2-round double taps, 5 seconds apart with a SBR AR15. Initially "Rapid Fire" was why his panties were in a twist, but he followed up by launching into a tirade about how my AR was illegal. He was pretty animated but he didn't call the cops, or, frankly, threaten to. He did tell me I couldn't bring the gun to that range anymore and I have better things to do than fight it out with them so I joined another club where I am more welcome.

I have also had the experience of watching a parade of felonious accessories make me wonder if I am paying too much attention to the law. Perhaps my risk tolerance is too low nowadays?
 
Picton said:
No matter what their public position may be, there will be almost no enthusiasm from local CoPs to enforce any of this. This just lards them with more and more stuff to enforce, with the awareness that it's all going to be found unconstitutional sooner or later.

They can have their cake and eat it too by "supporting" the legislation and then ignoring its enforcement.
Click to expand...
I wish I had your optimism.
 
Mesatchornug said:
Can't speak to IL, but CT did. Still, their compliance was in the single digit percent range.
Click to expand...
On paper yes, but I'd bet that the remaining double digit percentage of people are just holding onto their things at home rather than training with them and bringing them out into public. It essentially has the same effect if people are scared to use them. Just like most FFLs became scared of ARs post 2016
 
Reptile said:
Some dealers don’t care and sell complete Glocks, anyway.

Will THOSE folks stop selling Glocks all together?
Click to expand...

This bill doesnt seem to address Glock sales specifically beyond the obvious frame transfer issues. I imagine folks unaffected will continue to use their discretion as they see fit.
 
If one has a private range….gtg


waehrik said:
On paper yes, but I'd bet that the remaining double digit percentage of people are just holding onto their things at home rather than training with them and bringing them out into public. It essentially has the same effect if people are scared to use them. Just like most FFLs became scared of ARs post 2016
Click to expand...
 
Harry Christopher said:
While reading this:

View attachment 843366
View attachment 843365

It would appear that the past purchase of ammunition and/or rentals of firearms would now be aggregated in with the general category of potential "disqualifying conditions" during the course of the LTC licensing process. I may be mistaken but having gone thru said licensing process since 1976 I do not specifically recall my historical record of rentals or ammunition purchases as part and parcel of the overall determination process as to whether or not I was a "suitable" individual to be issued an LTC.

Since the purchase of ammunition is not presently tracked at point of sale here in the Republic........ as far as I am aware........ one wonders where the licensing authorities will obtain the records of an LTC candidate's retail buying history in the field of sporting goods?

Will the Powers That Be contact all companies that ship ammo to the Republic and subpoena their sales records to see if a candidate has purchased ammunition from them?

Will they contact all the FFLs in the surrounding states to inquire if the candidate made ammo or long gun purchases from them?

Where will they be able to collect this information from to fulfill this new legislative edict?

One could be forgiven for arriving at the conclusion that Boston is saying .........we are not trying to take your guns and violate your Constitutional civil rights........you can keep your guns but you just can not own the ammunition required to actually shoot them.

The only remaining question now is how far the governmental fist will be inserted in one's stern quarters.........just up to the wrist......... or all the way up to the elbow...........
Click to expand...
It looks like this is already part of the current law

“The licensing authority may also make inquiries concerning the applicant to: (i) the commissioner of the department of criminal justice information services relative to any disqualifying condition and records of purchases, sales, rentals, leases and transfers of weapons or ammunition concerning the applicant; (ii) the commissioner of probation relative to any record contained within the department of probation or the statewide domestic violence record keeping system concerning the applicant; and (iii)”

General Law - Part I, Title XX, Chapter 140, Section 131

malegislature.gov malegislature.gov
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Poll Poll
Which gun to shoot for complete gun n00b?
2
Replies
56
Views
745
Cuz
Cuz
Gunsmithing Apprenticeship (MA)
Replies
24
Views
498
ARedJuul
ARedJuul
Dealing with the gen z.......I swear some days I just want to say f*** it and head to the woods and be a hermit.
7 8 9
Replies
265
Views
6K
Reptile
Reptile
MA Liberals on Reddit Need Firearms and 2A To Defend Against Mean Tweets
2 3
Replies
83
Views
2K
MaverickNH
MaverickNH
Atf head
Replies
9
Views
393
bigbravehog
bigbravehog
Back
Top Bottom