So let me get this right.. New Ma law..

[seanc]

Am I right in my reading of the (proposed) new Mass. law?
If this goes through, In order for me to take a friend out to shoot any of my FA goodies, they would have to have a green card?

I would presume no exception? Shooting MY gun, I am licensed, on private property etc?

Hypothetically, I would have file the forms, take the gun out of state, where he would then be able to legally shoot it?

 

[Len-2A Training]

Nothing new.

GCAB and EOPS take a legal position that "whatever isn't SPECIFICALLY ALLOWED in MGLs is thus forbidden/illegal". Using that approach they have reviewed MGLs on the mg permit and the law allowing unlicensed people to shoot and claim that since nowhere does it specifically allow an unlicensed person to TOUCH a mg, it is therefore illegal.

Chief Ron Glidden, GCAB and EOPS have all gone on the public record with this position.

 

[securityboy]

Am I right in my reading of the (proposed) new Mass. law? If this goes through, In order for me to take a friend out to shoot any of my FA goodies, they would have to have a green card? I would presume no exception? Shooting MY gun, I am licensed, on private property etc? Hypothetically, I would have file the forms, take the gun out of state, where he would then be able to legally shoot it?

Yes you are reading it correctly, if that law passes you would be specificly forbidden from even handling an MG without a "green card" (or I beleive with some sort of "official gov/leo" exemption).

Nothing new. GCAB and EOPS take a legal position that "whatever isn't SPECIFICALLY ALLOWED in MGLs is thus forbidden/illegal". Using that approach they have reviewed MGLs on the mg permit and the law allowing unlicensed people to shoot and claim that since nowhere does it specifically allow an unlicensed person to TOUCH a mg, it is therefore illegal. Chief Ron Glidden, GCAB and EOPS have all gone on the public record with this position.

I will partially disagree with you (LenS) here...this law if passed is certainly something "new". You are correct that Chief Ron Glidden, GCAB and EOPS take a legal position that "whatever isn't SPECIFICALLY ALLOWED in MGLs is thus forbidden/illegal". However that is truthfully nothing more than thier collective opinion, there is currently nothing in the laws expressly prohibitting a non green card holder from shooting someone else's MG, nor is there Mass case law to back up there opinion. I am not advocating anyone run out advertising to be the test case, but certainly under the current laws one has possible arguments to use as a defense, where as if the new law is passed, there is no question/opinion, it is specificly prohibitted...

 

[Rob Boudrie]

there is currently nothing in the laws expressly prohibitting a non green card holder from shooting someone else's MG, nor is there Mass case law to back up there opinion.

MGL prohibits the possession of a machine gun without a MG license (green card). The Glidden/GCAB/EOPS argument is based on their conclusion that the handling or firing of a MG, even in the presence of the owner who holds a MG license meets the legal definition of possession. It is not a matter of arguing that "all not permitted is prohibited", but of asserting that a non-licensee handling a mg falls under an existing prohibition.

I believe that some machine gun shoots in MA have gone so far as to have the licensee hold on to the gun while the visitor fires it to avoid a transfer of possession.

As you mentioned, case law on this appears to be weak - but that does not mean there is not some logic to the argument.

 

[securityboy]

MGL prohibits the possession of a machine gun without a MG license (green card). The Glidden/GCAB/EOPS argument is based on their conclusion that the handling or firing of a MG, even in the presence of the owner who holds a MG license meets the legal definition of possession. It is not a matter of arguing that "all not permitted is prohibited", but of asserting that a non-licensee handling a mg falls under an existing prohibition.

I believe that some machine gun shoots in MA have gone so far as to have the licensee hold on to the gun while the visitor fires it to avoid a transfer of possession.

As you mentioned, case law on this appears to be weak - but that does not mean there is not some logic to the argument.

Sorry maybe I said too much and confused things a bit. Basicly my point is right now there is ambiguety as to what constitutes "possession" (with "wiggle room" on both sides due to lack of case law) the new law would remove any such ambiguety.

 

[Len-2A Training]

I will partially disagree with you (LenS) here...this law if passed is certainly something "new". You are correct that Chief Ron Glidden, GCAB and EOPS take a legal position that "whatever isn't SPECIFICALLY ALLOWED in MGLs is thus forbidden/illegal". However that is truthfully nothing more than their collective opinion, there is currently nothing in the laws expressly prohibitting a non green card holder from shooting someone else's MG, nor is there Mass case law to back up there opinion. I am not advocating anyone run out advertising to be the test case, but certainly under the current laws one has possible arguments to use as a defense, where as if the new law is passed, there is no question/opinion, it is specificly prohibitted...

You aren't really disagreeing with me here at all.

Their collective opinion is actually based on the MGL that SPECIFICALLY ALLOWS non-licensed people to shoot handguns/long guns under a licensee supervision. They then go on to point out that similar wording is NOT in the mg statute . . . and conclude that THEREFORE it was "intentionally" left out and makes anyone touching a mg an illegal act unless properly licensed.

My reading of their position is that I (no green card) can not legally hold one in a gun shop or even touch it.

Silly, stupid . . . yes.

But I am also certain that their position (testimony from EOPS attorneys, probably Asst AG, etc.) WILL hold more weight in court than your testimony or mine!

MGL prohibits the possession of a machine gun without a MG license (green card). The Glidden/GCAB/EOPS argument is based on their conclusion that the handling or firing of a MG, even in the presence of the owner who holds a MG license meets the legal definition of possession. It is not a matter of arguing that "all not permitted is prohibited", but of asserting that a non-licensee handling a mg falls under an existing prohibition.

I believe that some machine gun shoots in MA have gone so far as to have the licensee hold on to the gun while the visitor fires it to avoid a transfer of possession.

As you mentioned, case law on this appears to be weak - but that does not mean there is not some logic to the argument.

Rob, there is more to the collective belief that ANY TOUCHING of a mg is illegal by a non-green-card-holder. They contend that what Hansen did (hold onto the gun at all times) did NOT make the action legal. I've had that discussion . . . I disagree with their conclusion, but I know exactly where they are coming from.

 

[securityboy]

... They contend that what Hansen did (hold onto the gun at all times) did NOT make the action legal. I've had that discussion . . . I disagree with their conclusion, but I know exactly where they are coming from.

This is one of the most bizaar flip flops of EOPS over this issue in the past few years. Without getting overly specific, EOPS and "Hanson" had numerous discussions several years ago, in which this issue came up. The "opinion" at that time was that if a licensee maintained possative control of the gun while another party fired the firearm, there was no transfer of possession. Subsiquently Hanson (and other MA clubs) proceeded with thier shoots under those new "guidelines" and were not "bothered" by EOPS, etc. That is until quite recently when MG shoots came back into the spot light, and suddenly this "no touch" opinion came out...

Again obviously I, like you (LenS), disagree with thier current oppinion (as well, honestly I disagree with the whole if its isn't written it must be illegal) but with alot on the line, who wants to be a test case...