-
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/MFS June Giveaway ***Keltec SUB2000***
OK, so shall I EF10 my stripped lowers or not? Clear opinion please, lets not turn
- Thread starter sbi
- Start date
- Status
mikelawtown
NES Member
so I just read about a NH dealer that still has Mass Compliant AR's and said you can still Register them till wed??????????
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
goodzilla
NES Member
I wish I had the luxury to consider eFA10'ing my stripped lowers. That mental midget gave what, 2 days notice?!? I was out of town for work and couldn't have complied if I even wanted to, I didn't have access to the serial numbers.
Dead of night...apparently I'm a felon even if I didn't want to be one.
Dead of night...apparently I'm a felon even if I didn't want to be one.
I filed after midnight. I have receipts and the actual transfer to prove they were in my possession prior to the deadline.
The problem right now is acquiring parts.
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2015
- Messages
- 429
- Likes
- 82
I've heard of BCM and PSA not shipping parts to mass, is this confirmed that it's to be expected that companies won't ship and parts or accessories to Mass?
I actually talked some crap about PSA putting a hold on a parts kit that I ordered before the new "guidance" and how I would never order from them again.
Well I just logged in to see if it was canceled and it was not. Package is en route. Still wont order from them again, but at least they honored the order.
Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk
Well I just logged in to see if it was canceled and it was not. Package is en route. Still wont order from them again, but at least they honored the order.
Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk
It doesn't seem like it should be. What if you want to replace a failed part, or upgrade an older part? But...that seems to be how some places are treating it.
It's another huge gray area in this ill-conceived plan.
This is getting repetitive, but do you understand that you proved to the state that you owned an illegal assault weapon? And that the AG has no power to give you immunity from your local DA prosecuting you?
Thanks, I have read the zillions of posts from people who share your opinion and I did not need to have it repeated for me again. There are numerous people on here who went the same route as me and filed. It's a risk assessment, and people came to different conclusions in the limited time they had to decide. It is what it is.
My lowers already had paperwork on them when they were sent to my FFL and transferred to me so it is really a moot point. There are also countless people who have rifles with full paperwork on them that was filed well before this is a thing which are now retroactively illegal.
What I don't understand is people getting on NES and mouthing off about not filing. We *know* that's an issue from a legal perspective. Filing the FA-10 and talking about one's confusion publicly establishes a consistent narrative that you are doing everything you can to remain compliant. Implying that one owns things with no paperwork - were I to be in that situation (I am not) I wouldn't come anywhere near a thread like this.
How could the state know that someone owns a lower? As far as I can tell they would have to subpoena every potential retailer you might have bought them from. They have no authority to physically enter an FFL and inspect their 4473 paper forms. That's ATF territory.
inerlogic
NES Member
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
up your posts per page count, i only see 6 pages....
click "settings" top right then "General Settings" from the list at left and then look under "Thread Display Options"
bump it to 40....
up your posts per page count, i only see 6 pages....
click "settings" top right then "General Settings" from the list at left and then look under "Thread Display Options"
bump it to 40....
Last edited:
mikelawtown
NES Member
I say don't sweat it, She say's NOTHING on Registrations. She may go after Dealers that sell after the 20th but if you register a Lower you Obtained before the 20th then IMOP Your GTG. None of us 100% know what the outcome will be.
Well that ****ing sucks. Went to buy a BCG and charging handle from BCM after reading this and there is no option for shipping to MA. I kinda had a feeling this would happen so I ordered the 20" upper I have been eying from them on the 20th which I just received today, guess I got in just in time.
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2010
- Messages
- 1,034
- Likes
- 1,006
If you bought them from a shop, they are listed in the FFL's bound book, and that proves when they were purchased.
If you got them face-to-face/no paperwork, then they might have come into your possession at any point after the original buyer's transaction.
Easy to say with no skin in the game..
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2013
- Messages
- 548
- Likes
- 65
This. I evaluated my options heavily and came to the same conclusion.
My gawd, this people. If you haven't done it already and you spend any measurable time on this board, you are wasting time reloading pages.
MetalgodZ
NES Member
Disclaimer: This is not legal advice. I am not asking for anything less than a full repeal, removal of her authority to regulate, or removal of the "named and copies" list. Quotes are as direct as I can remember them, and are not my opinion.
I was in communication with my senator, two reps, and lawyer immediately upon hearing news of this on Wednesday, as I had completed assembly of 5 long-owned stripped lowers on Tuesday. All three gov't officials are signed on to the letter to Healey, all three have personally responded to me, and two of three contacted the AG's office with an explanation of the situation and a list of my concerns.
I registered yesterday, after waiting for some sort of response and receiving nothing.
I received a call today from the AG's office from a man who had been directed to respond to me specifically because of the calls from the reps. We spoke for about 10 minutes. (Yup. One day after the last day to register.) He gave me some info, and I pressed him on prosecutions by people other than the AG, and potential for license non-renewal based upon her new interpretation. I spoke as neutrally as possible regarding her ridiculous "reinterpretation" for the entire call.
According to the guy who called (I didn't have a pen or paper to get a name):
- "The attorney general is not prioritizing prosecutions of individuals who legally possessed these weapons prior to Wednesday of last week, or who registered in compliance with the law, as you did."
- "The attorney general is focusing on prosecuting dealers and shops that have failed to stop selling these banned weapons."
- "We do not expect that there will be any state or local authority seizures of legally possessed (![[thinking]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/010.gif "Thinking [thinking]")
), I'm sorry, banned items (![[angry]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/008.gif "Angry [angry]")
) possessed prior to the Wednesday date and registered within a week of acquisition."
- "Your actions indicate that no criminal intent, and in fact demonstrate your best attempts to follow the law."
- "So long as you continue to comply with existing firearms law, as you've demonstrated is your intent via registration, we do not expect that possession of these types of rifles will affect license renewals."
Don't make me write another disclaimer. I realize how f****ed this whole thing is.
I was in communication with my senator, two reps, and lawyer immediately upon hearing news of this on Wednesday, as I had completed assembly of 5 long-owned stripped lowers on Tuesday. All three gov't officials are signed on to the letter to Healey, all three have personally responded to me, and two of three contacted the AG's office with an explanation of the situation and a list of my concerns.
I registered yesterday, after waiting for some sort of response and receiving nothing.
I received a call today from the AG's office from a man who had been directed to respond to me specifically because of the calls from the reps. We spoke for about 10 minutes. (Yup. One day after the last day to register.) He gave me some info, and I pressed him on prosecutions by people other than the AG, and potential for license non-renewal based upon her new interpretation. I spoke as neutrally as possible regarding her ridiculous "reinterpretation" for the entire call.
According to the guy who called (I didn't have a pen or paper to get a name):
- "The attorney general is not prioritizing prosecutions of individuals who legally possessed these weapons prior to Wednesday of last week, or who registered in compliance with the law, as you did."
- "The attorney general is focusing on prosecuting dealers and shops that have failed to stop selling these banned weapons."
- "We do not expect that there will be any state or local authority seizures of legally possessed (
), I'm sorry, banned items () possessed prior to the Wednesday date and registered within a week of acquisition."- "Your actions indicate that no criminal intent, and in fact demonstrate your best attempts to follow the law."
- "So long as you continue to comply with existing firearms law, as you've demonstrated is your intent via registration, we do not expect that possession of these types of rifles will affect license renewals."
Don't make me write another disclaimer. I realize how f****ed this whole thing is.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2010
- Messages
- 1,034
- Likes
- 1,006
Disclaimer: This is not legal advice. I am not asking for anything less than a full repeal, removal of her authority to regulate, or removal of the "named and copies" list. Quotes are as direct as I can remember them, and are not my opinion.
I was in communication with my senator, two reps, and lawyer immediately upon hearing news of this on Wednesday, as I had completed assembly of 5 long-owned stripped lowers on Tuesday. All three gov't officials are signed on to the letter to Healey, all three have personally responded to me, and two of three contacted the AG's office with an explanation of the situation and a list of my concerns.
I registered yesterday, after waiting for some sort of response and receiving nothing.
I received a call today from the AG's office from a man who had been directed to respond to me specifically because of the calls from the reps. We spoke for about 10 minutes. (Yup. One day after the last day to register.) He gave me some info, and I pressed him on prosecutions by people other than the AG, and potential for license non-renewal based upon her new interpretation. I spoke as neutrally as possible regarding her ridiculous "reinterpretation" for the entire call.
According to the guy who called (I didn't have a pen or paper to get a name):
- "The attorney general is not prioritizing prosecutions of individuals who legally possessed these weapons prior to Wednesday of last week, or who registered in compliance with the law, as you did."
- "The attorney general is focusing on prosecuting dealers and shops that have failed to stop selling these banned weapons."
- "We do not expect that there will be any state or local authority seizures of legally possessed (
- "Your actions indicate that no criminal intent, and in fact demonstrate your best attempts to follow the law."
- "So long as you continue to comply with existing firearms law, as you've demonstrated is your intent via registration, we do not expect that possession of these types of rifles will affect license renewals."
Don't make me write another disclaimer. I realize how f****ed this whole thing is.
Thank you for relaying this information.
Last edited:
Disclaimer: This is not legal advice. I am not asking for anything less than a full repeal, removal of her authority to regulate, or removal of the "named and copies" list. Quotes are as direct as I can remember them, and are not my opinion.
I was in communication with my senator, two reps, and lawyer immediately upon hearing news of this on Wednesday, as I had completed assembly of 5 long-owned stripped lowers on Tuesday. All three gov't officials are signed on to the letter to Healey, all three have personally responded to me, and two of three contacted the AG's office with an explanation of the situation and a list of my concerns.
I registered yesterday, after waiting for some sort of response and receiving nothing.
I received a call today from the AG's office from a man who had been directed to respond to me specifically because of the calls from the reps. We spoke for about 10 minutes. (Yup. One day after the last day to register.) He gave me some info, and I pressed him on prosecutions by people other than the AG, and potential for license non-renewal based upon her new interpretation. I spoke as neutrally as possible regarding her ridiculous "reinterpretation" for the entire call.
According to the guy who called (I didn't have a pen or paper to get a name):
- "The attorney general is not prioritizing prosecutions of individuals who legally possessed these weapons prior to Wednesday of last week, or who registered in compliance with the law, as you did."
- "The attorney general is focusing on prosecuting dealers and shops that have failed to stop selling these banned weapons."
- "We do not expect that there will be any state or local authority seizures of legally possessed (
- "Your actions indicate that no criminal intent, and in fact demonstrate your best attempts to follow the law."
- "So long as you continue to comply with existing firearms law, as you've demonstrated is your intent via registration, we do not expect that possession of these types of rifles will affect license renewals."
Don't make me write another disclaimer. I realize how f****ed this whole thing is.
Appreciate the post, FWIW.
Goliathan
NES Member
This doesn't help with stripped lowers that are not built out. I have a lower that isn't built and which, according to MA law isn't a firearm at all. What does this "help" from her office mean for me? Who knows. Registering within a week was never a thing for stripped lowers, only for completed firearms. I don't have a complete firearm.
Are they saying I should fraudulently register a build that is in fact not completed in order to make it under their 7 day limit after the decree (too late now), or am I forever barred from legally building out the lower I bought legally before her decree?
Are they saying I should fraudulently register a build that is in fact not completed in order to make it under their 7 day limit after the decree (too late now), or am I forever barred from legally building out the lower I bought legally before her decree?
MetalgodZ
NES Member
Sorry, I know it's not helpful except for maybe providing some clarity.
Bolded. My personal interpretation is no more assembly of lowers. This is on the basis of what we've always understood the registration law and definition of a firearm (in MA - capable of firing a shot or readily in that state), and the phone call I got.
YMMV. You do you.
- Status
