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

[drgrant]

Retroactive - yes. Ex post facto has a specific legal definition and, if that definition is used, it does not meet the criteria. It's still dirty pool and an underhanded shot.

The real goal was to do as much as they could to take down high cap magazines and AWs without triggering confiscation. When I talked to Linskey (encounterd him on a sidewalk - he didn't have a protective detail so at least he was "walking the walk" of being personally unarmed) he told me the big issue for the conference committee was "how to deal with high cap magazines".

This creates a pricing quandry for dealers - raise prices because of last minute buying, or lower them to clear out inventory while they can.

Lol given reality and no realistic way to regulate sales, that ban is completely unenforceable.

 

[drgrant]

Yeah because if they can’t sell them later on…. They’re going to be worth pennies to free staters.

You think the chain of commerce magically stops because the state doesn't like it? Free staters will sell those in person to ma**h***s on their soil and there's nothing maura can do about that.

 

[Nosoupforyou]

Thank God they banned the Glock 7, the streets of the Commonwealth are much safer now

 

[PMPSHOT]

Anyone who though this would not pass the legislature in Mass is delusional. I called and wrote to my state rep and senator throughout this struggle despite knowing what the ultimate outcome would be.

Rob Boudrie posts the most logical and straightforward explanations on this topic and the message board.

 

[drgrant]

I thought storage places did not allow (yes, you don't need to be allowed, big boy rules and all) gun storage?

The only thing I would watch out for with storage is a couple of things like for example if your stuff gets destroyed or stolen you're SOL because they can claim you breached the contract. Pick your facility wisely. Id be looking for a 2nd layer of security, fire sprinklers, etc.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Already did, and I have a cell mate picked out already



I thought storage places did not allow (yes, you don't need to be allowed, big boy rules and all) gun storage?

That would be a violation of a civil contract, not criminal law.

 

[chris_1001]

Thank God they banned the Glock 7, the streets of the Commonwealth are much safer now

That costs more than I make in a month!!!!

 

[M125X]

F this commie state. So disappointing this is where freedom started, this is where freedom ends.

 

[Tarsook]

What if all the gun grabbing bills arent to actually grab the guns, but are to turn all the gun guys in the state into mindless forum posters who use terms like "ex post facto" and keep them posting non stop 24 hours a day arguing minute things that have no clarification whatsoever? Makes you think.

Also, shout out Bruce Tarr. Hes always been the man, but 1 of the 5 nay voters in the Senate. Good for him

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I must have missed it. Is there a list of the YES and NO votes on here or anywhere?

GOAL has it posted, and it is a most depressing site.

I think a lot of legislators who GOAL considered friends voted against us, but I have not done a detail tally.

 

[fred6052000]

I am trying to understand this registering chaos.
What would happen if we don't register our firearms as mandated? Would they arrest us? How would authorities even determine who owns firearms? It seems someone would need to commit a crime to trigger a warrant for a premises search to find out if firearms are present. So, whether or not firearms are registered, if one commits a crime, they'll be detained, and their firearms and LTC seized.

 

[EA_Man]

Never try to apply common sense to Mass gun laws

Or try to apply the Constitution to them.

 

[not new guy]

Anyone who though this would not pass the legislature in Mass is delusional. I called and wrote to my state rep and senator throughout this struggle despite knowing what the ultimate outcome would be.

So why did you waste your time calling and writing to them?

 

[allen-1]

Depends on the facility. Also if you want to get technical separate the lower from the upper and store in 2 different locked containers and you have "parts". Heck, store the lower and keep the upper at home if you feel better that way. I agree with you on this, put on your big boy pants and do what you think is right for you.

What is not in question is storage of ammo is forbidden. If you read the terms and agreements for any of the storage places, storage of flammable stuff is prohibited. They specifically mention things like solvents, fertilizer, ammo, oil based paints, etc.

Correct.

I had a storage unit in Connecticut for about 8 years while I had a camper up there. I quietly brought in a gunsafe, stored my guns, ammo and everything that couldn't survive a CT winter in there. Each summer I'd come up, un-winterize the camper and load it with stuff from the storage unit.

I chose a unit that had to be accessed from inside the building, was climate controlled, had cameras and lights on the premises - and I was careful to never open the door while anyone else was around.

Lots of stuff in that unit that wasn't supposed to be there - including paint, ammo, solvents, yadda yadda.

Big boy rules. You get caught, you take the consequences.

 

[EA_Man]

F this commie state. So disappointing this is where freedom started, this is where freedom ends.

Massachusetts, The Cradle AND Grave of Liberty.

 

[Picton]

I am trying to understand this registering chaos.
What would happen if we don't register our firearms as mandated? Would they arrest us? How would authorities even determine who owns firearms? It seems someone would need to commit a crime to trigger a warrant for a premises search to find out if firearms are present. So, whether or not firearms are registered, if one commits a crime, they'll be detained, and their firearms and LTC seized.

Lol.

They're counting on people obeying the law because they know we think of ourselves as "law-abiding gun owners." They are probably 99% correct, sadly.

The other 1% is not going to be something they worry about, even the smallest amount. Sure. If they catch you committing a Real Crime, they'll probably tack on some bullshit based on this new law. But otherwise? They're not losing any sleep over you, at all. The very last thing they'll do is send some cop to arrest you. They know full well that could bring the entire thing crashing down.

 

[PMPSHOT]

What if all the gun grabbing bills arent to actually grab the guns, but are to turn all the gun guys in the state into mindless forum posters who use terms like "ex post facto" and keep them posting non stop 24 hours a day arguing minute things that have no clarification whatsoever? Makes you think.

Also, shout out Bruce Tarr. Hes always been the man, but 1 of the 5 nay voters in the Senate. Good for him

5 nay sayers in the Senate............................look at the final result.

 

[MAJoe]

That’s not how it’s written.

The term “assault weapon” is getting completely struck and replaced with “assault style weapon”.

In the description of an assault style weapon, it clearly states the same pre-1994 language as it appeared previously that exempted pre-1994 Colt AR-15s and their “copies or duplicates” from being considered a banned weapon.

View attachment 898351

Yes it is. I’ve said this multiple times now. Open Appendix A. This is the list. These are not assault weapons:

https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2016/08/vw/appendix-a-guns-list.pdf

That’s not what makes pre-94 rifles legal in MA. What makes them legal is the current section 131M which says:

Section 131M. No person shall sell, offer for sale, transfer or possess an assault weapon or a large capacity feeding device that was not otherwise lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994.

That in the new law is now 8/1. Mags are still 1994:

Section 131M. (a) No person shall possess, own, offer for sale, sell or otherwise transfer in the commonwealth or import into the commonwealth an assault-style firearm, or a large capacity feeding device.
(b) Subsection (a) shall not apply to an assault-style firearm lawfully possessed within the commonwealth on August 1, 2024, by an owner in possession of a license to carry issued under section 131 or by a holder of a license to sell under section 122; provided, that the assault-style firearm shall be registered in accordance with section 121B and serialized in accordance with section 121C.

 

[MAJoe]

You think the chain of commerce magically stops because the state doesn't like it? Free staters will sell those in person to ma**h***s on their soil and there's nothing maura can do about that.

No, I mean why would someone in NH pay $100 for some shit ass cracked 30 year old Glock mag.

 

[fred6052000]

Lol.

They're counting on people obeying the law because they know we think of ourselves as "law-abiding gun owners." They are probably 99% correct, sadly.

The other 1% is not going to be something they worry about, even the smallest amount. Sure. If they catch you committing a Real Crime, they'll probably tack on some bullshit based on this new law. But otherwise? They're not losing any sleep over you, at all. The very last thing they'll do is send some cop to arrest you. They know full well that could bring the entire thing crashing down.

The law abiding citizens? Only for gun owners?!!!

 

[MAJoe]

FWIW, I don’t think there’s going to be as big of an issue with pre-ban mags.

Current:

Section 131M. No person shall sell, offer for sale, transfer or possess an assault weapon or a large capacity feeding device that was not otherwise lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994.

New language:

Section 131M. (a) No person shall possess, own, offer for sale, sell or otherwise transfer in the commonwealth or import into the commonwealth an assault-style firearm, or a large capacity feeding device.

(c) Subsection (a) shall not apply to large capacity feeding devices lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994 only if such possession is: (i) on private property owned or legally controlled by the person in possession of the large capacity feeding device; (ii) on private property that is not open to the public with the express permission of the property owner or the property owner’s authorized agent; (iii) while on the premises of a licensed firearms dealer or gunsmith for the purpose of lawful repair; (iv) at a licensed firing range or sports shooting competition venue; or (v) while traveling to and from these locations; provided, that the large capacity feeding device is stored unloaded and secured in a locked container in accordance with sections 131C and 131L. A person authorized under this subsection to possess a large capacity feeding device may only transfer the device to an heir or devisee, a person residing outside the commonwealth, or a licensed dealer.

Pre-94 mags are legal to possess, buy, and import, you just can’t sell them to anyone in state except a heir and dealer.

Also this will take at least 90 days to go into effect, maybe longer if there’s a set date later on (I haven’t looked in detail).

 

[EMTDAD]

So.. just curious.. you see your Sen/Rep at the next (town event, county fair, parade, etc).. what do you say to him/her?

 

[EJFudd]

The real goal was to do as much as they could to take down high cap magazines and AWs without triggering confiscation. When I talked to Linskey (encountered him on a sidewalk - he didn't have a protective detail so at least he was "walking the walk" of being personally unarmed) he told me the big issue for the conference committee was "how to deal with high cap magazines".

This creates a pricing quandary for dealers - raise prices because of last minute buying, or lower them to clear out inventory while they can.

Yeah because if they can’t sell them later on…. They’re going to be worth pennies to free staters.

Not really - unused new stock will find a ready market from dealers in other states if the MA dealer stuck with inventory offers the produce for 10% under dealer wholesale.

Nobody out there in free America wants our hideously old & worn pre-ban >10 round magazines unless they happen to be scarce, discontinued and/or with collector interest.

Brand new post-ban >10 round magazines? How many MA dealers have a very large stock of new post-ban >10 round magazines?

 

[LakeTrout]

Nobody out there in free America wants our hideously old & worn pre-ban >10 round magazines unless they happen to be scarce, discontinued and/or with collector interest.

This is true. Free staters can buy good normal cap AR mags 10-12 bucks a pop, shipped to your door. Why would anyone want to pay more than 10 bucks for stuff that’s 30 years old? I’ll do 5 bucks a magazine if any ma**h*** wants to sell me their pre-ban mags. Anyone? 6 if you don’t make me drive far to get them.

 

[pro]

This is true. Free staters can buy good normal cap AR mags 10-12 bucks a pop, shipped to your door. Why would anyone want to pay more than 10 bucks for stuff that’s 30 years old? I’ll do 5 bucks a magazine if any ma**h*** wants to sell me their pre-ban mags. Anyone? 6 if you don’t make me drive far to get them.

Why are you hating on MA gun owners? This is where we live and this is where we have our lives and guns. If you run away like a coward, then soon you will not have any places to flee.

 

[Len-2A Training]

So.. just curious.. you see your Sen/Rep at the next (town event, county fair, parade, etc).. what do you say to him/her?

It won't matter to most of them. Most run unopposed time after time, so they know that they will still be employed after the next election.

 

[VitalDude]

Yes it is. I’ve said this multiple times now. Open Appendix A. This is the list. These are not assault weapons:

https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2016/08/vw/appendix-a-guns-list.pdf

That’s not what makes pre-94 rifles legal in MA. What makes them legal is the current section 131M which says:


That in the new law is now 8/1. Mags are still 1994:

I understand, and this is another spot where they contradict themselves.

You cannot sell, offer for sale, possess, et al an assault weapon (or assault style firearm) unless lawfully possessed on September 13th 1994, however the way the law is written is that a pre ban firearm is not classified as an “assault style weapon”. They’re as excluded as bolt actions, pump actions, movie props, etc.

We may be misunderstanding each other (it’s been a long week), but it’s reading to me that you need to be in possession of an “assault style firearm” by 7/20/2016 (for copies and duplicates of post 1994 enumerated weapons) and 8/1/2024 (for everything else that fits the description).

Pre ban firearms are not considered assault style firearms.

Feel free to correct me, I have no ego.

 

[pastera]

So.. just curious.. you see your Sen/Rep at the next (town event, county fair, parade, etc).. what do you say to him/her?

FU commie bitch
But then they get to hit you with a restraining order.

 

[DarthRevan]

Why are you hating on MA gun owners? This is where we live and this is where we have our lives and guns. If you run away like a coward, then soon you will not have any places to flee.

You call it running, I call it being able to buy shit before they capsize and ban it here too.

 

[LakeTrout]

Why are you hating on MA gun owners? This is where we live and this is where we have our lives and guns. If you run away like a coward, then soon you will not have any places to flee.

I’m not hating on MA gun owners. Where did you get that from?

And you’re not a coward if you want to live in a place that suits your lifestyle better. Life is short. If MA isn’t for you, there isn’t anything wrong with leaving.