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

Status
Not open for further replies.
f*** that
Yeah the next shop I went to the owner pulled a box of actual pre ban AR mags out of the back and let me go to town
He felt bad I couldn’t buy Pmags and sent me off with a pile of pre ban dated mags and mag bodies for $20.
Same gun store antics, different state
 
Yeah the next shop I went to the owner pulled a box of actual pre ban AR mags out of the back and let me go to town
He felt bad I couldn’t buy Pmags and sent me off with a pile of pre ban dated mags and mag bodies for $20.
Same gun store antics, different state

You're in a foreign state and you actually tell them you're from mass? Why? 🤣
 
wont be able to use anywhere other than range or competition [puke]

Have you ever fired a VP70? "competition" isn't really its forte.

My point is that you can't sell one in MA, because the buyer couldn't ever find 10 round magazines, at all, which means it can't be shot.
 
Yeah, that's basically the lone exception. Every other shop, it's just a box with a spring.
Meh stores can have policy
We defend certain bakers who won’t bake a cake but when we’re on the butt end we take offense

Anyway ID no ID it’s semantics to the point that you can get whatever you want with some effort
 
Meh stores can have policy
We defend certain bakers who won’t bake a cake but when we’re on the butt end we take offense

Anyway ID no ID it’s semantics to the point that you can get whatever you want with some effort

Sure, except stores usually don't have "policies" constructed around unregulated items. 🤣 That's not a "thing" outside of shithole states except for odd corner cases.
 
Sure, except stores usually don't have "policies" constructed around unregulated items. 🤣 That's not a "thing" outside of shithole states except for odd corner cases.
Ok sure but your hung up that I got asked for ID when buying a mag, who cares
To be honest I was probably buying ammo too I don’t remember every transaction like I’m on the witness stand. If I swing by a shop on vacation and they have what I want who cares if he wants to see my ID?

Now logging it in the computer or scanning it is another story

Anyway point has been made for as long as I’ve been a gun Owner, gun laws only stop lawful people from owning guns

Unjust laws are meant to be broken
 
I looked and this part of the bill is already in the current statute.

“Whoever not being licensed, as hereinbefore provided, sells ammunition within the commonwealth shall be punished by a fine of not less than five hundred nor more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not less than six months nor more than two years.”

 
Meh stores can have policy
We defend certain bakers who won’t bake a cake but when we’re on the butt end we take offense

Anyway ID no ID it’s semantics to the point that you can get whatever you want with some effort

Yes, stores can have policies and I can choose not to do business with these stores.

ID, no ID is far more than semantics. It is question of what will you do. Each time someone acquiesces to these policies it is one more example of our rights being slowly taken away one small piece at a time.

Look, I have nothing against you and don't care what you do. If you want to pop out your license when not required that is up to you. I myself will do my best to avoid it if possible.
 
Sean OBrien the head of the teamsters Union. The right is officially dead.

IK,R? I mean, why can't everyone just agree with me on every point? If America was filled with people that all thought the same. . . . . well, I'd leave.

Seems if some guy in the Teamsters is leaning R, for the first time in 120 years, that's a good thing. Resign yourself that you're not going to get every single point on your checklist. The good news? Neither is anyone else. That's how it works.
 
The more I read this the more it seems inevitable that there will be a flat (single) re-setting of the "pre-ban" concept to 8/1/24, obviating the previous (1994, 2016,) regulations/edicts. It also does indeed seem to negate the evil features regulations on pre 8/1/24 rifles as a result. I want to believe this is the case, but the defeatist in my just can't see it rolling out that way.
 
IK,R? I mean, why can't everyone just agree with me on every point? If America was filled with people that all thought the same. . . . . well, I'd leave.

Seems if some guy in the Teamsters is leaning R, for the first time in 120 years, that's a good thing. Resign yourself that you're not going to get every single point on your checklist. The good news? Neither is anyone else. That's how it works.
This
The enemy of good is perfection

We need to accept small moves instead of insisting on major wins
 
Have you ever fired a VP70? "competition" isn't really its forte.

My point is that you can't sell one in MA, because the buyer couldn't ever find 10 round magazines, at all, which means it can't be shot.
Technically you could neuter the mag. Or or or just forget the mag with the gun. The buyer probably just got the preban in anticipation years ago.
 
Sure, except stores usually don't have "policies" constructed around unregulated items. 🤣 That's not a "thing" outside of shithole states except for odd corner cases.
Suppose the store said "We feel the risk of persecution by the MA AG is too great. We will sell to you if you sign this indemnification contract agreeing to reimburse all legal fees we incur if the MA AG takes action against us for this legal sale". Would you sign?

MA sued Town Faire Tire in NH because they knowingly installed tires on cars with MA license plates, with MA DOR claiming it was a conspiracy to cheat MA out of taxes. Town Faire won, but at significant co$t.
 
Last edited:
I looked and this part of the bill is already in the current statute.

“Whoever not being licensed, as hereinbefore provided, sells ammunition within the commonwealth shall be punished by a fine of not less than five hundred nor more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not less than six months nor more than two years.”


I believe that this is what is new:

(k) No licensee shall fill an order for any firearm or ammunition received by mail, facsimile, telephone, internet or other telecommunication unless such transaction includes the in-person presentation of the required license, permit or documentation as required herein prior to any sale, delivery or any form of transfer or possession. Transactions between federally licensed dealers shall be exempt from this subsection.

I don’t know how it applies to out of state vendors.
 
Suppose the store said "We feel the risk of persecution by the MA AG is too great. We will sell to you if you sign this indemnification contract agreeing to reimburse all legal fees we incur if the MA AG takes action against us for this legal sale". Would you sign?

That's cute, and sure a shop has a right to do that, but it's still not normal. Neither is chasing people down the street that just bought ammo from you (PSA) because you have the wrong license plate on your car.
 
That's cute, and sure a shop has a right to do that, but it's still not normal. Neither is chasing people down the street that just bought ammo from you (PSA) because you have the wrong license plate on your car.
Correct, defintely not normal. I do know one dealer who told me he made the offer (on a different issue) and no customer has ever taken him up on it.

The common claim by the buyer is "there is no risk, it is legal". I am just asking if the buyers who claim this are willing to take the non-existent risk themselves, or if the risk is non-existant only when someone else it taking it.
 
Could somebody who has read and understands this explain how someone in MA is supposed to sell a semi pistol or rifle once this bill passes? Person to person transfers still OK? If Ate One is the new preban date, will dealers have more flexibility in what they can take in and re-sell intrastate, or are their hands being tied on that?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom