-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/Pioneer Valley Arms February Giveaway ***Smith & Wesson SD9VE 9MM***
MA Gun Grab 2024: H.4885 - Passed legislature, headed to the governor
- Thread starter GOAL
- Start date
- Status
Some of you guys are too worried about your own individual rifles to realize the big picture here.
I am noting you.
I am noting you.
Yep. My foxhole will NOT be shared with those who don't grasp what's happening.
Pretty sure that’s just how the hyperlink shows up when pasted here?
Bill passed, monolithic Democrats, plus Tarr.
Horatio Alger Jr
NES Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2023
- Messages
- 1,898
- Likes
- 6,051
I understand where he is coming from. I am new to our constitutional rights and it is terrifying if you do not understand the laws (which I still do not)
@dukeofsoul , read the laws, search this site, talk to some FFLs. Ask questions. Do what you feel comfortable with.
2/1Marine
NES Member
Now we wait while the powers that be try to cram together two steaming piles of shit into a sandwich and force it down our throats. Freedom will be compromised one bite at a time.
Tallahassee
NES Member
MainelyFree
NES Member
Creem actually made the statement, while pitching her amendment, that “…it will only codify what has been the LAW since 2016.”
This is a tip of the hat to Kim Jong-Healey so she can save face regarding her BS press conference.
Nightshift
NES Member
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2020
- Messages
- 753
- Likes
- 1,912
Tarr voted yes?
VTski4x4
NES Member
Maybe some folks want to understand what exactly is happening, minute by minute? Everyone here knows this is absolute unconstitutional buttf***ery and we are watching in real time as they push us one step closer to disarmament and the gulag (jokes we fight first). I'm probably one of the loudest anti-state wack jobs on here, but I still want to know exactly all ways I'm a felon in the making - that whole know your enemy and their strategy thing. If you think I'm pants shitting over BuT mY RiFlE - you're mistaken.
2ndArmament
NES Member
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2023
- Messages
- 182
- Likes
- 131
If they enforce retroactively, I’m f***ed anyways so might as well double down.
Now BUYING all POST 2016 ARs, 200-500$ cash in hand. FtF all laws fol… shit. Forget the last part
Now BUYING all POST 2016 ARs, 200-500$ cash in hand. FtF all laws fol… shit. Forget the last part
From my read 11/11.1 say: “any weapon lawfully possessed in the Commonwealth prior to the passage of this act;”
69 says that certain weapons are not considered copies or duplicates.
11 sounds like anything lawful is fine until signing, not retroactively banning anything.
69 says that certain weapons are not considered copies or duplicates.
11 sounds like anything lawful is fine until signing, not retroactively banning anything.
2/1Marine
NES Member
Really my dude?
Jsfitzgerald85
NES Member
FPC, my guess is they file the injuction the moment Healey signs any bill into law.
Lots of bravado bullshit on this forum
Horatio Alger Jr
NES Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2023
- Messages
- 1,898
- Likes
- 6,051
So why are they going through this whole process if all you need to do is "interpret" something as law?
Me too, that flag hangs in our gym.
I want post 2016 ARs to be legal too.
I’m looking at the big picture not just a few pre Healey Noveskes.
I want answers.
Yes or No.
Are pre 2024 AR lowers legal?
Dumb it down for me.
I’m looking at the big picture not just a few pre Healey Noveskes.
I want answers.
Yes or No.
Are pre 2024 AR lowers legal?
Dumb it down for me.
71montess
NES Member
Unless SCOTUS tosses the whole thing, our state stomped on our kids ability to own guns.
@Jsfitzgerald85 is spitting nothing but the truth tonight.
Simply put; no
Jsfitzgerald85
NES Member
cant have a state full of people who think for themselves. Need total reliance on the government, you know because being completely dependent on someone else is "freedom"
Hell yeah...when everything is illegal, all is legal by proxy
dukeofsoul
NES Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2024
- Messages
- 115
- Likes
- 125
Thanks man. I'm just trying to figure out what is what. I'm not trying to fight the gov't, just want to protect my home. And something that should be as easy as just walking in and getting what you want and shouldn't be a big deal is being overcomplicated and dictated by the state. It's insane I've been waiting for my ltc for like three months. It's insane I have to check and see if I can simply purchase the firearm I want.
Tallahassee
NES Member
No need to overthink. If you love your country, have strong beliefs, and own firearms, you're a felon.
Leaving my original post here, but I believe I am wrong upon further review. The original text of amendment 11 appears to have been stricken in 11.1, which means only the 2016 language made it in.
Maybe a dumb take, but I'm not sure this actually makes everything post 2016 illegal. Seems to just make it super 110% legal for anyone that owned a pre July 20th 2016.
In the definition of assault weapons it enumerates the exceptions and we've now added "any weapon lawfully possessed in the Commonwealth prior to the passage of this act" - so if you lawfully owned it prior to this act, you're good right?
The other part just describes an exception to the copies and duplicates test that I think is basically meaningless based on the above.
In other words if you were tried on this they would need to prove that you unlawfully owned your post 2016 rifle PRIOR to the passage of this act, and the only way to do that is to apply the old law. Basically to me this comes down to whether the enforcement notice is currently a valid interpretation.
Again, this might be a super dumb take, but I don't think this necessarily moves the grandfather back to 2016.
Maybe a dumb take, but I'm not sure this actually makes everything post 2016 illegal. Seems to just make it super 110% legal for anyone that owned a pre July 20th 2016.
In the definition of assault weapons it enumerates the exceptions and we've now added "any weapon lawfully possessed in the Commonwealth prior to the passage of this act" - so if you lawfully owned it prior to this act, you're good right?
The other part just describes an exception to the copies and duplicates test that I think is basically meaningless based on the above.
In other words if you were tried on this they would need to prove that you unlawfully owned your post 2016 rifle PRIOR to the passage of this act, and the only way to do that is to apply the old law. Basically to me this comes down to whether the enforcement notice is currently a valid interpretation.
Again, this might be a super dumb take, but I don't think this necessarily moves the grandfather back to 2016.
Last edited:
Tallahassee
NES Member
Sorry, I can't dumb it down for you.
- Status
