Speculatory 2016 AWB Case?

CrackPot said:
www.northeastshooters.com

WTB - Have you been naughty? Help is available NOW!

Is the shame and guilt eating you up inside and keeping you up at night? • Are you afraid that Mother Maura will find the evil black rifles you have hidden under your bed? • Are you panicking because @CrackPot explained that Mass does not have gun registration and your guns are not...
www.northeastshooters.com www.northeastshooters.com
Click to expand...
Ok I get it haha that made me laugh was just trying to get some answers
 
colesylvester97 said:
but what happens come 10/23?if there instructing police that under the new law post 2016 ar’s aren’t grandfathered that’s gonna jam a lot of people up
Click to expand...
Only way that's going to happen, if at all, would be an add on charge to something else. What do people think is going to happen, cops patrolling gun ranges looking for AR's and asking for your papers.
 
BigLouieBat said:
7/20/16 wasn't a law, letter to FFLs with how AG viewed it/Interpreted. Pin/Weld keeps it outside the 1994 definition. If/When it's law, it would have to be starting from that date (8/1 or so?) They can't back date law. Letter isn't the same.
Click to expand...
There is a date in the law now.
It's not effective until 10/23 but the state can "interpret" what they wrote.
This brings up a problem though.
They would only be able to prosecute for possession after 10/23 and would fast track a takings clause along side a 2a issue.

The state doesn't want to go down that road but they do want people to be paralyzed by the fear, uncertainty and doubt induced by the ambiguous meaning of the C&D exemption date.

So bottom line is don't worry too much in the long run and if you're (un)lucky you might be memorialized alongside Miller, Heller, McDonald, and Caetano
 
colesylvester97 said:
but what happens come 10/23?if there instructing police that under the new law post 2016 ar’s aren’t grandfathered that’s gonna jam a lot of people up
Click to expand...
And if they start jamming people up with firearms that comply with the letter of the law then the state is going to step on its member hard.

They are likely training police about the 2016 officially and unofficially letting them know not to screw it up.
 
pastera said:
I'm not certain if it was a primary charge or added on
Also do we know that the firearm was truly compliant.
Click to expand...

www.northeastshooters.com

The Conference Committee has sent official language out - h.4885

So say one has an 80% lower that is still at %80 should they register that before 8/1? For when the time comes it’s good to go? But you can't bc the registration and serial number systems don't exist yet.
www.northeastshooters.com www.northeastshooters.com

Seemed like it was a dealer based on this. A bit unclear whether they charged the person with the suspended license or who he got it from.
 
Hombiez said:
www.northeastshooters.com

The Conference Committee has sent official language out - h.4885

So say one has an 80% lower that is still at %80 should they register that before 8/1? For when the time comes it’s good to go? But you can't bc the registration and serial number systems don't exist yet.
www.northeastshooters.com www.northeastshooters.com

Seemed like it was a dealer based on this. A bit unclear whether they charged the person with the suspended license or who he got it from.
Click to expand...
Guy's license is suspended so it's a secondary charge to start
We don't know if it was sold as a lower and never reported after assembly
We don't know if it wasn't properly made compliant.
And ww don't know if the charge was added to induce a plea on other charges (cop to the domestic and we won't pursue the assault weapons charge with a big jail time)
 
pastera said:
Guy's license is suspended so it's a secondary charge to start
We don't know if it was sold as a lower and never reported after assembly
We don't know if it wasn't properly made compliant.
And ww don't know if the charge was added to induce a plea on other charges (cop to the domestic and we won't pursue the assault weapons charge with a big jail time)
Click to expand...

That's assuming the charge is against the suspended license.

The way I read this is the assault weapon was discovered through the license suspension, but the dealer is the one who is ultimately getting charged.

If that is the case, I find this to be pretty concerning. IMO The only reason to prosecute the dealer would be to solidify what was legal on August 1st, 2024.

The enforcement notice had a cooling effect, but was risky for the AG to prosecute, and if it was unsuccessfully prosecuted under the old law, would have thrown the doors wide open to ARs at even the most conservative FFLs. AG had every reason not to prosecute because the cooling effect did work to an extent.

Now that the new law is being rolled out, they have nothing to lose in prosecuting a case to see whether they can set a precedent that the 2016 enforcement notice did mean something. If they lose, its status quo, but if they win the government can legitimately claim that all copies and duplicates post July 19, 2016 are illegal.
 
pastera said:
I'm not certain if it was a primary charge or added on
Also do we know that the firearm was truly compliant.
Click to expand...
It's worth noting that "someone was charged" is meaningless without context. When @Cross-X was still around (rip) he told me about a client he had with an LTC-B who got charged with possession of a large cap firearm for having a Walther P22. 🤣 Obviously it was bullshit, but it didn't stop the charge from being applied at the beginning. The cops claim was because it held an 11th round in the chamber it was a large capacity firearm..... 🤣
 
drgrant said:
It's worth noting that "someone was charged" is meaningless without context. When @Cross-X was still around (rip) he told me about a client he had with an LTC-B who got charged with possession of a large cap firearm for having a Walther P22. 🤣 Obviously it was bullshit, but it didn't stop the charge from being applied at the beginning. The cops claim was because it held an 11th round in the chamber it was a large capacity firearm..... 🤣
Click to expand...
He told me about the same case.
 
Hombiez said:
That's assuming the charge is against the suspended license.

The way I read this is the assault weapon was discovered through the license suspension, but the dealer is the one who is ultimately getting charged.

If that is the case, I find this to be pretty concerning. IMO The only reason to prosecute the dealer would be to solidify what was legal on August 1st, 2024.

The enforcement notice had a cooling effect, but was risky for the AG to prosecute, and if it was unsuccessfully prosecuted under the old law, would have thrown the doors wide open to ARs at even the most conservative FFLs. AG had every reason not to prosecute because the cooling effect did work to an extent.

Now that the new law is being rolled out, they have nothing to lose in prosecuting a case to see whether they can set a precedent that the 2016 enforcement notice did mean something. If they lose, its status quo, but if they win the government can legitimately claim that all copies and duplicates post July 19, 2016 are illegal.
Click to expand...

I don’t see it going anywhere. Remember when there were initial lawsuits against Healey’s declaration and the courts threw one out because there wasn’t any risk of being prosecuted? And that’s on top of the 18 years of state precedent and a further 4 years of federal precedent on which the state law was copied. The MA legislature knew exactly how copies&duplicates was interpreted when they copied and pasted it from the federal AWB. They knew because it had been around for four years, and then they decided to not adjust the language for the MA version.

Hopefully he has a good lawyer, perhaps it is @nstassel
 
colesylvester97 said:
Neil tassel was the lawyer and I’m not trying to scare anyone was just trying to see if other people had gotten the same info
Click to expand...
Wow it's like that I guess.

What I told you was that I was told that Glidden is planning to instruct LEO that post 2016 rifles are not lawfully possessed thereby creating three distinct grandfathering dates. Whether police or prosecutors agree to enforce the law in that manner is up for grabs and everyone has to decide what they want to do based on their circumstances and that I was waiting and seeing how it played out particularly since I can not envision a total ban on modern semi automatic rifles surviving.
 
nstassel said:
Wow it's like that I guess.

What I told you was that I was told that Glidden is planning to instruct LEO that post 2016 rifles are not lawfully possessed thereby creating three distinct grandfathering dates. Whether police or prosecutors agree to enforce the law in that manner is up for grabs and everyone has to decide what they want to do based on their circumstances and that I was waiting and seeing how it played out particularly since I can not envision a total ban on modern semi automatic rifles surviving.
Click to expand...
I was not trying to throw you under the bus that’s not how I meant for that to come off so Im sorry for that
 
Spartan65 said:
This dude justifying not selling lowers after 2016 enforcement notice because he knew this would happen. Essentially groveling.

Sounds like he’s remorseful that he complied and now is going to lose his business anyways.
Click to expand...

His shop, and the other big shops, are not going to go out of business. They will adapt and sell whatever they legally can just like they always have. When they could no longer sell ARs, they starting selling more Ruger mini-14s. When they briefly could sell Glocks, they sold them until they couldn't. Now they sell P365s and Shields. If most semiautos are prohibited to transfer from dealers then they will sell more levers.

People in the Commiewealth want to enjoy shooting. They may not get exactly what they want but when they see the landscape they will buy what is legal at the time. And they will sell ammo, and holsters, etc. etc. Only the small shops will struggle because they won't be able to compete on price.

All this assumes the inadvertent roster requirement for rifles and shotguns will be resolved before 10/23. Because it will be and then the marketplace will function as I am describing.
 
colesylvester97 said:
I hope so but why would he say it then
Click to expand...

Um. So that people would post about it and drive traffic to his little podcasty thingie.

colesylvester97 said:
but what happens come 10/23?if there instructing police that under the new law post 2016 ar’s aren’t grandfathered that’s gonna jam a lot of people up
Click to expand...

We'll find out on 10/24.
 
nstassel said:
I'm joking it's fine but as I indicated that is supposedly Glidden's point of view. As we know, his interpretation is often faulty.
Click to expand...
You have to be joking. Glidden wrote the bible on MA gun laws. There is no way he could ever be faulty.

He now gets to do a new revision of his book and sell lots more copies. He must be one happy camper right now.
 
Last edited:
67ray said:
All this assumes the inadvertent roster requirement for rifles and shotguns will be resolved before 10/23. Because it will be and then the marketplace will function as I am describing.
Click to expand...

I don't think that assumption is going to bear fruit, I think theres going to be a lockout and pain there, unless some legal action
occurs to stay it. Either that or dealers are just going to ignore it and take their chances. Certainly not the boxy mc boxington stores though. Regardless they will
suffer too, as a huge # of long guns will be completely unavailable to sell if they obey it on its face.

Then again we dont even know what the testing regimen is and assumes its the same as the one that exists for handguns? wtf.
 
drgrant said:
I don't think that assumption is going to bear fruit, I think theres going to be a lockout and pain there, unless some legal action
occurs to stay it. Either that or dealers are just going to ignore it and take their chances. Certainly not the boxy mc boxington stores though. Regardless they will
suffer too, as a huge # of long guns will be completely unavailable to sell if they obey it on its face.

Then again we dont even know what the testing regimen is and assumes its the same as the one that exists for handguns? wtf.
Click to expand...
Lets start drop testing rifles and shotguns. I would like the authors of the bill present in the room when we drop test shotguns please.
 
67ray said:
His shop, and the other big shops, are not going to go out of business. They will adapt and sell whatever they legally can just like they always have. When they could no longer sell ARs, they starting selling more Ruger mini-14s. When they briefly could sell Glocks, they sold them until they couldn't. Now they sell P365s and Shields. If most semiautos are prohibited to transfer from dealers then they will sell more levers.
Click to expand...
Correct. Even if they sold nothing but ammo, roster handguns and training, the indoor range memberships & fees should sustain them. I'm talking CGW, MFS, GP and Guns, Inc./Hot Brass. Four Seasons will also survive. Nothing short of a 100% ban on everything is going to shut down Carl. [laugh]
67ray said:
People in the Commiewealth want to enjoy shooting. They may not get exactly what they want but when they see the landscape they will buy what is legal at the time. And they will sell ammo, and holsters, etc. etc. Only the small shops will struggle because they won't be able to compete on price.
Click to expand...
Correct again. People will eventually adjust to Communism (or move out) if SCOTUS doesn't save us from this Monstrosity anti-2A bill. Sad, but true.
67ray said:
All this assumes the inadvertent roster requirement for rifles and shotguns will be resolved before 10/23. Because it will be and then the marketplace will function as I am describing.
Click to expand...
I don't know how the state will fix this without passing another law to correct the present law, but one way or another, this requirement will not survive.
 
nstassel said:
What I told you was that I was told that Glidden is planning to instruct LEO that post 2016 rifles are not lawfully possessed thereby creating three distinct grandfathering dates. Whether police or prosecutors agree to enforce the law in that manner is up for grabs and everyone has to decide what they want to do based on their circumstances and that I was waiting and seeing how it played out particularly since I can not envision a total ban on modern semi automatic rifles surviving.
Click to expand...
I doubt that Glidden has been teaching anything about the new law . . . yet. He, like GOAL and everyone else is probably still trying to sort out all the changes and totally re-write his book and course. That all takes time, lots of time due to all the uncertainties involved.
CrackPot said:
You have to be joking. Glidden wrote the bible on MA gun laws. There is no way he could ever be faulty.

He now gets to do a new revision of his book and sell lots more copies. He must be one happy camper right now.
Click to expand...
Maybe but doing a complete re-write takes time and energy. Not something that he can do in a week or three.
CrackPot said:
Lets start drop testing rifles and shotguns. I would like the authors of the bill present in the room when we drop test shotguns please.
Click to expand...
Preferably with live ammo!! [devil]
 

Similar threads

Pre 2016 lowers
Replies
10
Views
539
Lowbird
Lowbird
Need help locating some case law.
Replies
6
Views
310
doxdsgn
doxdsgn
Are the M&P 15-22 and Sig Spear LT (bought pre-8/1 but post-2016) legal under new bill?
Replies
3
Views
572
BroncoAZ
B
  • Locked
According to new law even the pre 2016 (and post 94) Assault rifles wont be able to be privately transferred?
Replies
12
Views
1K
drgrant
drgrant
Donnell case was appealed by the state
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
lutstribe
L
Back
Top Bottom