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

[Amputee Marksman]

The bottom line is we are in this specific situation, whole 7/16 debacle, because of Charlie Baker. He was a two faced liar and Simp to the Dems. He could have slapped this down in 2016 and instead he did nothing, even worse he tacitly approved of everything by his inaction.

 

[Joeldiaz]

The bottom line is we are in this specific situation, whole 7/16 debacle, because of Charlie Baker. He was a two faced liar and Simp to the Dems. He could have slapped this down in 2016 and instead he did nothing, even worse he tacitly approved of everything by his inaction.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Baker was not a republican, he stopped pretending to be one years ago

 

[fred6052000]

Massachusetts will become similar to California.

 

[LakeTrout]

It isn't me saying 'grand fathering makes the bill OK'. It's that without it, we will all become prohibited persons while we wait for SCOTUS to look at the case, if they look at the case.

The first Americans were prohibited too. Eventually the current generation of a free republic gets put in that position. Most choose to comply. Sometimes that ends up in a slow decay to disparity and civil unrest. Sometimes you end up eating the leather on your shoes in a few short years because the totalitarian thugs who raped the country of all opportunity and freedom are now the only ones with guns and there’s nothing you can do about it.

 

[Coda]

Massachusetts will become similar to California.

It already has, MA likes to pattern itself after CA.

Sometimes I think our lawmakers just sit around and say "lets just wait and see what CA does".

 

[fred6052000]

It already has, MA likes to pattern itself after CA.

Sometimes I think our lawmakers just sit around and say "lets just wait and see what CA does".

That is true. I don't know when, but in the near future, they will likely ban owning firearms. They are doing it slowly but efficiently.

 

[pastera]

I don't think that is true...

Below is information that states they are legal to transfer. There is no felony in doing so.
Links included under the text.

"If a weapon is a copy or duplicate of one of the models enumerated in the law, it is an Assault Weapon. The Enforcement notice will not be applied to possession, ownership or transfer by an individual gun owner of weapons obtained on or before July 20, 2016."

Frequently Asked Questions about the Assault Weapons Ban Enforcement Notice

www.mass.gov

The Infamous 7/20/2016 Enforcement Notice

On July 20, 2016 the office of the MA attorney general released an enforcement notice declaring that the ban-compliant rifles sold in MA since 1994 were now "copycat" weapons, and in violation of the AWB. Since that date, dealers have been prohibited from transferring these rifles to LTC holders, but private sales are still allowed.

The table below shows which assault weapons can be transferred, and how.

The "Assault Weapons" Ban Explained - MassGunOwnership.com

This post explains the Asaault Weapons Ban in Massachusetts.

massgunownership.com

The language you quoted protects the person who owned the weapon on July 20, 2016.
The person owning it will not be prosecuted for "possession, ownership or transfer" but it doesn't clearly exclude prosecution of those receiving that illegal weapon after 7/20/2016.

And bullshit that there is no felony in doing so - the interpretation is that that is no way to make an enumerated weapon compliant post federal AWB enactment - the illegal act, possession, has already been documented in the registration process. The magic unicorn dust is that the state promised not to prosecute anyone who was in possession of a registered AW on 7/20/2016. The Enforcement notice didn't say that prosecution could not happen only that the state didn't plan on prosecution of those that in good faith believed it was possible to un-AW an AW.
Once the Enforcement notice was published everyone would be considered informed that enumerated weapons were and are AW regardless of the deletion of AW features. Therfore any future owner knows the gun is an AW and is accepting possible prosecution for possession.

 

[pastera]

The bottom line is we are in this specific situation, whole 7/16 debacle, because of Charlie Baker. He was a two faced liar and Simp to the Dems. He could have slapped this down in 2016 and instead he did nothing, even worse he tacitly approved of everything by his inaction.

Add Romney to that list

 

[HARRYM]

Anybody who thought Baker had any real power in MA doesn't understand the dynamics of politics as it stands in MA.

 

[pastera]

You guys realize that "the middle class" was never something that was in the cards for this country prior to WW2 right? It was always lower class and elite prior to WW2 and the only reason the middle class ever materialized was because the US was the last man standing after WW2 with intact industry and infrastructure and it allowed the common man to make a good living, gain assets and save for the future. The ruling elite have been fighting tooth and nail to get rid of it ever since. The last thing the elites want is competition from who they feel are a bunch of plebs with disposable income creeping up on them in economic status. They want us back to being plebs.

The middle class existed pre-WW2.
Ot was the merchants and tradesmen
Yes, the capitalism and culture in the US allowed the middle class to explode post war but the middle class existed long before.

 

[Grendizer138]

I can’t believe 7/20 was almost 8 years ago. Can we start the statute of limitations discussion yet? Asking for a friend.

 

[Amputee Marksman]

Add Romney to that list

I'd probably blame Cellucci more than Romney. He was responsible for the 1998 Gun Laws. Regardless there is no doubt so called "Republicans" in MA have done just as much damage as Dems, or more, to 2A rights in MA.

 

[bigred460]

I can’t believe 7/20 was almost 8 years ago. Can we start the statute of limitations discussion yet? Asking for a friend.

8 years and 1000's upon 1000's of firearms later. Predicting a surge in boating accidents this summer.

 

[Reptile]

The language you quoted protects the person who owned the weapon on July 20, 2016.
The person owning it will not be prosecuted for "possession, ownership or transfer" but it doesn't clearly exclude prosecution of those receiving that illegal weapon after 7/20/2016.

It doesn’t include a person for prosecution either.

That’s not how laws work.

Laws tell you what you can’t do. Not tell you what you can do.

 

[LakeTrout]

Anybody who thought Baker had any real power in MA doesn't understand the dynamics of politics as it stands in MA.

He has a lot of power. He’s helped the leftists accomplish a great deal.

 

[pastera]

It doesn’t include a person for prosecution either.

That’s not how laws work.

Laws tell you what you can’t do. Not tell you what you can do.

The states interpretation of its AWB laws says that an enumerated weapon cannot be made to not be an Assault Weapon and therefore is illegal to possess.
That's what that law says - its a felony to possess a certain class of arms.
The state also has prosecutorial discretion to pursue or fail to pursue a case against a person for breaking a law.
The AG stated that discretion would be used to not prosecute those gun owners that prior to the clarification in the notice possessed an illegal, per the state, enumerated weapon believing that the prohibitions in the law could be healed by deleting the features that would make a non-enumerated weapon an Assault Weapon.
That discretion was only clearly extended to those in possession at the time of the declaration - it doesn't clearly, or otherwise, extend the discretion to those who own, possess, or transfer an enumerated weapon after the notice since those people would be aware that the state considers the gun to be an illegal AW.

I'm not saying the state will prosecute, I'm saying they could and the courts would accept it without considering it an ex post facto punishment.

 

[pastera]

I can’t believe 7/20 was almost 8 years ago. Can we start the statute of limitations discussion yet? Asking for a friend.

Might be fine for a transfer but possession is an everyday thing so if you currently have an effected gun the clock starts the day you get rid of it.

 

[Reptile]

The states interpretation of its AWB laws says that an enumerated weapon cannot be made to not be an Assault Weapon and therefore is illegal to possess.
That's what that law says - its a felony to possess a certain class of arms.
The state also has prosecutorial discretion to pursue or fail to pursue a case against a person for breaking a law.
The AG stated that discretion would be used to not prosecute those gun owners that prior to the clarification in the notice possessed an illegal, per the state, enumerated weapon believing that the prohibitions in the law could be healed by deleting the features that would make a non-enumerated weapon an Assault Weapon.
That discretion was only clearly extended to those in possession at the time of the declaration - it doesn't clearly, or otherwise, extend the discretion to those who own, possess, or transfer an enumerated weapon after the notice since those people would be aware that the state considers the gun to be an illegal AW.

I'm not saying the state will prosecute, I'm saying they could and the courts would accept it without considering it an ex post facto punishment.

It doesn’t matter if it an enumerated weapon.

It’s the date that counts.

"If a weapon is a copy or duplicate of one of the models enumerated in the law, it is an Assault Weapon. The Enforcement notice will not be applied to possession, ownership or transfer by an individual gun owner of weapons obtained on or before July 20, 2016."

 

[Amputee Marksman]

"If a weapon is a copy or duplicate of one of the models enumerated in the law, it is an Assault Weapon. The Enforcement notice will not be applied to possession, ownership or transfer by an individual gun owner of weapons obtained on or before July 20, 2016."

The problem is you believe this.

This was an "enforcement" notice that re-interpreted years of written law and court presidents. The "enforcement" notice contradicted the established interpretation by the MA court system of the written laws. The enforcement notice was never "tested" in a court so no one knows the legality of the notice or how a court would interpret it. We all have a pretty good idea what might have happened if it was tested in the MA judicial system however it never was and most likely never will be.

Endless discussions on what might be in the actual new legislation is kind of a moot point until the legislation is released to the public. A lot of the discussion is based on the premise that they will somewhat adhere to the "enforcement" notice but no one can really know. At this point in time I believe it is safe to say no matter what happens short of full Grandfathering a lot of previously legal firearm owners will become felons. Partial Grandfathering and/or date based Grandfathering and/or strict enforcement of "once an AW always an AW" will make legal firearm owners felons. It is just a matter of how many and who will it be. Will you or I or the guy we shoot with every weekend be on the list.

 

[DarthRevan]

There’s a reason I don’t read all the posts anymore. It’s impossible to not get a headache discussing what ifs when we know it’s all going to be a massive porking.

 

[Picton]

It already has, MA likes to pattern itself after CA.

Sometimes I think our lawmakers just sit around and say "lets just wait and see what CA does".

Nah. California's had that daft pistol-grip thingie for how long? You know, this thing:



That's been law out there for a decade maybe? In all that time, nobody's seriously suggested that here.

 

[HorizontalHunter]

Nah. California's had that daft pistol-grip thingie for how long? You know, this thing:

View attachment 863265

That's been law out there for a decade maybe? In all that time, nobody's seriously suggested that here.

Abomination is the word you’re looking for….and delete it before they add it to the bill.

 

[Picton]

Abomination is the word you’re looking for….and delete it before they add it to the bill.

I would, but I know for a fact they already know about it.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

And bullshit that there is no felony in doing so - the interpretation is that that is no way to make an enumerated weapon compliant post federal AWB enactment - the illegal act, possession, has already been documented in the registration process.

Not necessarily. Lawfully assembling a stripped lower into a MA compliant gun does not require that the item in question be in a MA Banned configuration at any time in the process.

 

[pastera]

It doesn’t matter if it an enumerated weapon.

It’s the date that counts.

"If a weapon is a copy or duplicate of one of the models enumerated in the law, it is an Assault Weapon. The Enforcement notice will not be applied to possession, ownership or transfer by an individual gun owner of weapons obtained on or before July 20, 2016."

You just don't get it do you?
That statement protects the SINGLE individual who owned the gun on or before 7/20/16.
THAT SINGLE person can own, possess, or transfer the gun without being prosecuted.
The own or possess are easy to understand - if you keep it, your good.
Now let's look at transfer - the owner might, a big f'ing might, be left alone for transferring an illegal AW under the states public execution of discretion per the notice but it says nothing about extending that discretion to the next owner.

You can try to read what you want into the notice but I am taking a reading that aligns with what was contained in the proposed bills.
You own a bunch of lowers, I get it.
You are fine to keep them
You are fine to transfer them
It is far from clear that the next person to obtain that item is exempt since the notice speaks to the PERSON not the object.

 

[pastera]

Not necessarily. Lawfully assembling a stripped lower into a MA compliant gun does not require that the item in question be in a MA Banned configuration at any time in the process.

But as a copy or duplicate of an enumerated weapon the features dont matter.

 

[not new guy]

So have we identified The Mill's replacement yet? It seems like a good time to be thinking about getting an FFL.

 

[fred6052000]

You just don't get it do you?
That statement protects the SINGLE individual who owned the gun on or before 7/20/16.
THAT SINGLE person can own, possess, or transfer the gun without being prosecuted.
The own or possess are easy to understand - if you keep it, your good.
Now let's look at transfer - the owner might, a big f'ing might, be left alone for transferring an illegal AW under the states public execution of discretion per the notice but it says nothing about extending that discretion to the next owner.

You can try to read what you want into the notice but I am taking a reading that aligns with what was contained in the proposed bills.
You own a bunch of lowers, I get it.
You are fine to keep them
You are fine to transfer them
It is far from clear that the next person to obtain that item is exempt since the notice speaks to the PERSON not the object.

So he’s going to be the first and the last owner of those lowers.

 

[pastera]

So he’s going to be the first and the last owner of those lowers.

Hopefully not but also not at the price he's asking

 

[fred6052000]

Hopefully not but also not at the price he's asking

Well he’s not the only supplier. The buyer decide the price.