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

[drgrant]

Town meeting in my town, and in many others, it held in a school auditorium.

I get that, and its a 26910J thing, but lets say they used a meeting room at a library instead. So now a location that someone didnt realize was prohibited, is now prohibited.. because you have people inside that building "administering government" etc.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I get that, and its a 26910J thing, but lets say they used a meeting room at a library instead. So now a location that someone didnt realize was prohibited, is now prohibited.. because you have people inside that building "administering government" etc.

Library is interestingly questionable, and could take a court case to determine.

 

[Picton]

In what way is a police station used for the administration of government? That's a serious question.

At my police station, that's where you go to get the compost stickers to use the town transfer station.

So there ya go.

I'm sure it could be successfully argued that the LTC application, interview, and issuance process is also part of the administration of government.

 

[MAJoe]

Have we determined if fixed mag ar-15s are okay?

No. They are a copy/duplicate after this passes.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Ironic, transfers used to take place at/inside police stations.

Cities and town have the option to remove any building they wish (except schools) from the carry ban.

It will be interesting to see the response from a town asked to remove the restriction to transfers can happen safely on PD property. The danger is real, as the "buyer" could be a disqualified person looking to boost a gun.

 

[xero2099]

Also

SECTION 37

There is a big miss in your summary. (o) is the requirements for guns to get on the roster. It is the drop test and melting temperature and other stuff that must be done by a lab before getting on a roster. This applies to "firearms" which means ALL GUNS under the new law. So not only are handguns subject to the roster, so are stun guns, rifles, shotguns, machine guns.

This is either a massive FCK YOU by the legislature or a huge oops. The day this goes into effect, no dealer can lawfully sell or transfer ANYTHING that does not pass these tests which means just on roster handguns.

My money is always on Fuc$ you

 

[JD09]

Just like a press conference doesn't make law, a clicky option on a website doesn't make law. The existence of "register a firearm" clicky box does not mean anything. It's just bad language on the part of the state.

The current Mass. "registration" doesn't meet any of the criteria of what the word means in any other context. There's only superficial overlap, in that the state can infer some stuff based on partial data.

Trying to pretend that the FA10 system is a registry in any legal sense is nuts. (despite what the new law says, and what they want us to believe)

Until they come up with a new system that is actually a registry and allow us to verify and correct mistakes, there isn't a registry that means anything.

This is the way I am seeing it presented and what I am trying to figure out...everyone saying eFA10 is the gun registry the bill is talking about? If so then why the need to put this in section 121b referring to registration?



Why is it future tense the Dept of Criminal Justice "SHALL develop and maintain"? This implies that the system to register firearms per this bill does not currently exist and needs to be developed/created. But it does exist?

 

[drgrant]

My money is always on Fuc$ you

I think its a mixture of both. Let's call it "malicious incompetence".

Like a bunch of legislators regard us as weeds. At first, who gives a shit. weeds grow anywhere. Now they are making shit up saying weeds cause cancer.

So basically what this bill is like some retarded guy hopped up on meth simultaneously making a lot of random noises and prancing around with a sprayer blowing around
clouds of roundup/glyphosate everywhere, cause HES SO MAD AT THE WEEEDS!!!! (gun owners) but while hes out prancing around like a jack russel f***ing terrier bouncing with that sprayer, he now has a cloud of glyphosate in the air and it lands on a bunch of things he didnt want to kill, and hes inhaling it. f*** em.

And the rest of us are just sitting around watching it all unfold.

MA legislature drafting anti gun bills:

View: https://youtu.be/YersIyzsOpc?t=17




The rest of us trying to read all this bullshit they just produced: (honestly this song makes more sense than this pile of garbage they just shat out)



View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4C2wat_8VyI

 

[T-Unit]

Could somebody give me the most up to date bulletpoints from this thread of what this law affects or is this thing so fukked up and nonsensical that it's impossible to interpret and is basically going to end up being stayed by SCOTUS until the 1st Circus gets around to ruling on it in 2034?

 

[Reptile]

This is untrue. It is like the movie scene where Ghandi is confronted in the first class car of a train and told "there are no Indians in first class". He responsed with "This is first class, and I am an Indian, and I am here, so your statement is untrue".

Many dealers registered stripped lowers via MIRCS at the time of sale. This is a fact, not a speculation.

There is room, of course, to discuss the appropriateness or even legality of a dealer doing so, but it is an incontrovertible fact that it happened. In fact, I know of a case from when the BATFE was enforcing the Healy Edict on Form 1 applications (another fact, not speculation) where they accepted a pre-healy MIRCS registration printout of a stripped AR lower as proof the aspiring SBR was ""pre Heliban".

Just like a press conference doesn't make law, a clicky option on a website doesn't make law. The existence of "register a firearm" clicky box does not mean anything. It's just bad language on the part of the state.

The current Mass. "registration" doesn't meet any of the criteria of what the word means in any other context. There's only superficial overlap, in that the state can infer some stuff based on partial data.

Trying to pretend that the FA10 system is a registry in any legal sense is nuts. (despite what the new law says, and what they want us to believe)

Until they come up with a new system that is actually a registry and allow us to verify and correct mistakes, there isn't a registry that means anything.

Lol, what difference does it make? Most people are going to just lie and type in 16" or 18" or whatever in the box if it wont let you set it to zero and blow smoke directly up the state's ass if they really want to get into playing games. Of coursse at that point if I ever felt compelled to do that id be like "well, this is a clear indication that I shouldn't be filling it out at all. "

Keep in mind that the registration records will be open to the public. Minus identifying information. We all heard that before.

People will easily figure out who is who though.

People with lots of nice guns will be targeted for theft and will be robbed.

Is it better to register and get robbed and harassed or not comply and wait for the courts to fix this in a few years?

 

[PappyM3]

Could somebody give me the most up to date bulletpoints from this thread of what this law affects or is this thing so fukked up and nonsensical that it's impossible to interpret and is basically going to end up being stayed by SCOTUS until the 1st Circus gets around to ruling on it in 2034?

It’s got way too much going on to cover it all briefly. Go to Goal.org and look over both their summary and the actual bill text. I’m still parsing through the 116 pages of the bill

 

[milktree]

This is the way I am seeing it presented and what I am trying to figure out...everyone saying eFA10 is the gun registry the bill is talking about? If so then why the need to put this in section 121b referring to registration?

View attachment 898460

Why is it future tense the Dept of Criminal Justice "SHALL develop and maintain"? This implies that the system to register firearms per this bill does not currently exist and needs to be developed/created. But it does exist?

"shall" is used to mean "now" and "in the future" in Mass legal wording. It's bullshit not-common-English usage that is lousy in MGL.

Also, "develop" can mean "make better, improve, grow". It doesn't need to mean "create where there isn't"

 

[Garys]

I would also say that all aspects of criminal investigtion are part of the administration of government functions.

It's pretty common in the south for all police and sheriff stations to ban guns. The city hall in my city is also the municipal court building, so it's a gun prohibited zone as well. Court house annexes, where they do a lot of administrative and civil processes are considered court houses for gun prohibition purposes.

Not that I like that, but I don't particularly want to get arrested either.

I also noticed that part of the law finally sets a specific limit for Carrying While Intoxicated. That was included in the 2013/14 bill but was removed from the final bill. As it was, there was no limit giving the police and DA total discretion in what they would consider intoxicated.

Of course it's buried in a turd of an anti Constitutional gun control law. Of course the law will be upheld at the federal district and circuit levels, en banc review will be denied, and about the turn of the century this will be granted cert. by SCOTUS.

I don't want any of you to think that I'm unsympathetic now that I'm out of Mass. You have a high hill to climb and it's not helped by the fact that many gun owners are clueless about this law and others are just apathetic because they don't own "assault style rifles" and think that's all this law applies to.

Jim Wallace being on the NRA BOD might help get some more funding for litigation, but it's still going to be a battle.

Issuing licenses and processing prisoners are government administration functions.

 

[milktree]

Who can tell me what this means, and why they seemed to say the same thing twice?

Persons lawfully possessing a firearm identification card or license to carry firearms on August 1, 2024, shall be exempt from this section upon expiration of such card or license and when applying for renewal of such licensure as required under this chapter; provided, however, that persons possessing a firearms identification card or license to carry firearms prior to the implementation of live firearms trainings as required in this section shall be exempt from such requirement.

§131P(a)
Persons lawfully possessing a firearm identification card or license to carry firearms on August 1, 2024, shall be exempt from this section upon expiration of such card or license and when applying for renewal of such licensure as required under this chapter; provided, however, that persons possessing a firearms identification card or license to carry firearms prior to the implementation of live firearms trainings as required in this section shall be exempt from such requirement.

It reads like the green and blue bits say the same thing.

The only thing I can think is that the blue part exempts people who get their LTC/FID after August 1, 2024 but before the state police have promulgated the requirements for live fire (and everything else in §131P) are also exempted.

If that's the case, why bother with the green part at all? Isn't the blue part a superset that includes all of the green part?

 

[CrackPot]

I wonder how many liberal "trap on sundays" fudds are going to be "shocked" when they discover that they can no longer buy a new O/U or other bird gun.

"It will be fun, they said. "

They had a scheme of editing cases where it said firearm, rifle or shotgun and removing the ",rifle or shotgun". They had a method of replacing instances of "weapon" with "firearm". This was a case where it already said "firearm" and they did not change it to something else. So since firearm was defined as almost all guns (I leave as an exercise to the reader what fell through the cracks), they all need to be on the roster by passing all the necessary handgun testing.

Its an immediate challenge for banning sale of ALL rifles and shotguns. I wonder what reason the federal district of MA will give for not granting a temporary injunction at a minimum. The harm is off the charts, especially to gun shops.

 

[CrackPot]

No. They are a copy/duplicate after this passes.

the definition explicitly says that a copy or duplicate must be semi auto and manufactured or modified to accept a detachable magazine. An AR manufactured to be fixed mag does NOT meet the definition of copy or duplicate and does not fail the feature test. It is in fact lawful under the new law.

Cant buy one from a dealer since it is not on the approved roster but that is a different issue.

 

[mothybee]

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

Then, it was said, we'll all hang together or separately. How about now?

 

[MAJoe]

the definition explicitly says that a copy or duplicate must be semi auto and manufactured or modified to accept a detachable magazine. An AR manufactured to be fixed mag does NOT meet the definition of copy or duplicate and does not fail the feature test. It is in fact lawful under the new law.

Cant buy one from a dealer since it is not on the approved roster but that is a different issue.

No shit. I missed that, thanks.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

It's pretty common in the south for all police and sheriff stations to ban guns.

The culture in the south has long been "ordinary people carry guns".

Here in the north is has historically (at least in MA and NY) been "only people the police approve of can carry"

So the perceived need to limit the ordinary, unconnected and unimportant person has long been stronger in those locations with a tradtion of "ordinaries" carrying.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Its an immediate challenge for banning sale of ALL rifles and shotguns. I wonder what reason the federal district of MA will give for not granting a temporary injunction at a minimum. The harm is off the charts, especially to gun shops.

The state will argue that allowing people to buy extra killy guns before the issue is fought out in court willl cause irreprable damage to the state.

The concept of a preliminary injunction is to prevent "irreperable harm", and both sides can make that claim. The court will weigh the harm to the subjects of allowing a ban to remain in place while the issue is decided, vs the harm to the state of allowing people to buy guns they will keep even if the stats wins. One side is indeed more "permanent" than the other, so we are likely to see any injunction stayed pending appeal. It is common for judges who issue injunctions to concurrently issue a stay of the injunction pending appeal.

An example of where a preliminary injunction is where the court orders a company to disclose what it considers confidential information (like where and how a ticket reseller gets its inventory). If the company is ordered to disclose, and later wins an appeal of that order, there is "irreperable harm" if the info was disclosed while awaiting the appeal - hence the appropriateness of a preliminary injunction.

 

[AJK129]

Here in the north is has historically (at least in MA and NY) been "only people the police approve of can carry"

Except for the time the MA started a war to keep their guns. Seems like an important fact to skip over there

 

[mothybee]

I think its a mixture of both. Let's call it "malicious incompetence".

Like a bunch of legislators regard us as weeds. At first, who gives a shit. weeds grow anywhere. Now they are making shit up saying weeds cause cancer.

So basically what this bill is like some retarded guy hopped up on meth simultaneously making a lot of random noises and prancing around with a sprayer blowing around
clouds of roundup/glyphosate everywhere, cause HES SO MAD AT THE WEEEDS!!!! (gun owners) but while hes out prancing around like a jack russel f***ing terrier bouncing with that sprayer, he now has a cloud of glyphosate in the air and it lands on a bunch of things he didnt want to kill, and hes inhaling it. f*** em.

And the rest of us are just sitting around watching it all unfold.

MA legislature drafting anti gun bills:

View: https://youtu.be/YersIyzsOpc?t=17




The rest of us trying to read all this bullshit they just produced: (honestly this song makes more sense than this pile of garbage they just shat out)



View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4C2wat_8VyI

Oh that brings back memories...................Brother took the last beer.

 

[pastera]

Right, but I think we’re focusing on strictly pre ban firearms, such as a late 80’s Colt Sporter, etc.

It is perfectly lawful to go into Four Seasons today and shell out $2800 for a salty DPMS that was mfg prior to 1994. That would still be considered “lawfully possessed” after the passage of this bill.

I might be sperging out over something I misread but I thought I read someone state that if you didn’t own a pre ban prior to 7/20/2016, you’re a felon.

No, a small faction of sheeple pants shitters are focusing on preban

If you have a true preban that is "registered" in the transaction portal, it will remain a legal
If you have a "compliant" copy or duplicate that was registered in the transaction portal prior to 7/20/2016, it becomes a full preban (can remove compliance modifications) as of 8/1/2024 (or when the bill is signed whichever is later.
The question is with copies and duplicates from 7/20/2016 forward - they MIGHT become preban but the strict legal interpretation of the bill would say that they will be banned and no amount of compliance modification can make them legal.

 

[pastera]

The problem is it's shaping up to be "basically everything is banned after 8/1, don't bother " wtf.

We as a group are much better off treating the situation like that - but most here will continue to poke their head up from out of the sand and inquire if their benevolent masters still allow them to keep their special toys.

 

[CrackPot]

I have been open and crazy busy all day so if this got signed I did not hear. The state website still says on the governors desk for what that is worth...

Default is 90 days to become effective. Emergency order can make it sooner.

I think the only logical effective date is 8/1/24 at midnight (as it becomes 8/2/24). Why?

Because of the grandfather language for ASWs. The language says lawfully owned on 8/1/24.

If they make this effective BEFORE 8/1/24 then most existing semi auto rifles become illegal before 8/1/24 and are therefore not grandfathered.

If they make this effective AFTER 8/1/24 then people can lawfully buy guns that will become illegal after the law is effective and they will not be grandfathered since they were purchased after 8/1/24.

So we won't know until it is signed but logic dictates end of day 8/1/24. Any other choice causes the state legal risk in the shorter term.

 

[pastera]

One must act fast then buying what they need. I’ve read through this entire thread and keep refreshing to see what to do. it’s crazy. Crazy by design though.

I get it. But whatever it is or isn’t, I’m pretty sure we have to use it.

You only have to use it if you agree with and comply with tyranny

 

[Hardwired]

No. They are a copy/duplicate after this passes.

But fixed mag is good to go prior to 8/1 right?

 

[VTski4x4]

I have been open and crazy busy all day so if this got signed I did not hear. The state website still says on the governors desk for what that is worth...

Default is 90 days to become effective. Emergency order can make it sooner.

I think the only logical effective date is 8/1/24 at midnight (as it becomes 8/2/24). Why?

Because of the grandfather language for ASWs. The language says lawfully owned on 8/1/24.

If they make this effective BEFORE 8/1/24 then most existing semi auto rifles become illegal before 8/1/24 and are therefore not grandfathered.

If they make this effective AFTER 8/1/24 then people can lawfully buy guns that will become illegal after the law is effective and they will not be grandfathered since they were purchased after 8/1/24.

So we won't know until it is signed but logic dictates end of day 8/1/24. Any other choice causes the state legal risk in the shorter term.

Damn, I would have come today. Oh well, tomorrow it is.

 

[pastera]

But fixed mag is good to go prior to 8/1 right?

or after

why punch oneself in the dick with a fixed mag - this is only the first in a series until they are stomped by the Supreme Court

Become ungovernable.

 

[milktree]

The state will argue that allowing people to buy extra killy guns before the issue is fought out in court willl cause irreprable damage to the state.

Even a 10 year old could tell that this argument is ... lacking. People have been buying and owning those guns since... 1900? At least 1960. It's not like another year of injunction is going to do irreparable harm. If you combine that with all the stats that murder and crime in Mass has been going DOWN, their argument is even more stupid.

But, yea, I know, facts don't matter with things like this.