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

Lxpony said:
So now the law makers have removed the ability to track gun sales transactions until a new system is set up. Shows how ignorant they are.
Click to expand...

That, and it also shows how low-priority the FA10 has always been.

If it was truly important, the FSB would have made sure to get it in there and/or they'd have lobbied for one of those cool exemption letters Maura has been writing lately. This shows you that that system has never mattered all that much.
 
808 said:
🤔
Click to expand...
No eFA10's for two years.

People will buy and sell guns for the next two years without "registering" (recording on FA10).

Does the state think all those transactions will magically retroactively be entered into the system two years from now???

I, of course will follow all the laws and will dutifully get in line to register but I don't own any guns.

However. I think this will be a free for all for the next two years.

People will be building up thousands of AR15's and not "registering".

THOUSANDS of AR's.

I know a guy who had a lower that was never built up. He just put an upper on it and said he doesn't need to FA10 it.

The state will never have a paper trail on that AR as the lower was purchased FTF without a FA10.

For every person who has a lower that was never built up - YOU ARE IN THE CLEAR!!!

This is delicious!!!

IANAL
 
Reptile said:
No eFA10's for two years.

People will buy and sell guns for the next two years without "registering" (recording on FA10).

Does the state think all those transactions will magically retroactively be entered into the system two years from now???

I, of course will follow all the laws and will dutifully get in line to register but I don't own any guns.

However. I think this will be a free for all for the next two years.

People will be building up thousands of AR15's and not "registering".

THOUSANDS of AR's.

I know a guy who had a lower that was never built up. He just put an upper on it and said he doesn't need to FA10 it.

The state will never have a paper trail on that AR as the lower was purchased FTF without a FA10.

For every person who has a lower that was never built up - YOU ARE IN THE CLEAR!!!

This is delicious!!!

IANAL
Click to expand...
That memo will probably come out next week. "Pweeze use efa10 even tho da law says its invalid " 🤣
 
drgrant said:
That memo will probably come out next week. "Pweeze use efa10 even tho da law says its invalid " 🤣
Click to expand...
Notices now should be treated like the liquid arm bread on a banana leaf.


DJBrad said:
Now this is just another nuance of the new law leaving total ambiguity.


The FA10 system was replaced by the EFA10 system during Cadillac Deval’s admin in 2011. That notice was pursuant to Ch.140 Sec.128A and 128B.


H.4885 strikes out in entirety 128A and replaces it with new language in SECTION 41 that is pursuant to 121B for the new ERFS to be designed and implemented by CJIS for registration.

So while 128A is now changed there is now no law to record a transaction for a system that doesn’t exist yet. This proves that the gun grabbers who signed this pos know the FA10 system was NEVER a registration system. It’s like a block chain by monkeys.
Click to expand...
 
drgrant said:
That memo will probably come out next week. "Pweeze use efa10 even tho da law says its invalid " 🤣
Click to expand...
Good Luck with that Marsha!

The good people of Massachusetts will follow the law as written.

She wanted the Healey Ban codified - she got it.

She made her bed and now she has to sleep in it.

Nobody will follow any more of her edicts.

Next session, make a NEW law then.

Maybe the people will follow that one.

But in the mean time the lawful AR lower owners are going APE SH*T and building up so many AR's - there will not be 100 times more than the military or police have.

When the people fear the government you have tyranny.

Now the people will have 100x the guns than the government and it's called Liberty!

I expect a MASSIVE influx of AR15 uppers flooding into the state.

For all the thousands of preppers out there who just hoarded AR15 stripped lowers - this is YOUR TIME. Your hoarding of Noveske Lowers and Poverty Ponies as $25 a pop has paid off.

YOU ARE IN YOUR GLORY NOW!

Go fourth and build them all up now!

NOTHING WILL STOP YOU FOR 2 MORE YEARS!

You really stepped on the snek Marsha!

See what you did???

You should have left things alone.

Your law has created unintentional consequences.

Your d*ck got so big that you stepped on it and tripped.

DAM I am so excited!!!

Wait till word gets out.

Those folks buying Anderson stripped lowers for $300 a piece from The Mill are laughing their way to the bank!!!
 
drgrant said:
@Reptile Many don't care about her BS anymore law or otherwise. People will just do what they believe is right for them.
Click to expand...
Right for them???

Not "registering" can now be right for EVERYONE!!!

NOBODY HAS TO REGISTER NOW!!!

Lots of folks were on the fence waiting to see how this will shake out.

This "law" could be the biggest boom for the Second Amendment in Massachusetts.

We all thought it was a death knell.

Now it's paying off for people who hoarded and bought stripped lowers.

Even frames are legal now.

The gun shops are saved.

They can now sell as many frames as they want and with 100,000 stripped lowers already in state - the gun shops will now need to import 100,000 complete upper receivers for all those folks.

Our prayers have been answered!

Thank You Marsha and Day!

You are the guns salesmen of the Century!!!
 

Attachments

  • 1728322140901.png
    1728322140901.png
    66.3 KB · Views: 66
Any idea how long it takes for the actually MGLs on malegislature.gov will be updated with the language from this bill?
 
APFSDS said:
Wonderful, basically "things have changed but we can't and won't try to make sense of it all, so good luck!" How the hell can they enforce it if they can't articulate what the law is on their website? God I can't want to get out of here.
Click to expand...
But the new law was such a MAJOR EMERGENCY that Maura had to put it into effect 3 weeks early or else. :oops: What a joke!!! :mad:
 
Last edited:
Not sure which thread to put this in, so I'll put it here.

This article from wwlp news reports that a suit has been filed against the new gun law. I have been waiting for news about lawsuits since the emergency preamble, and I have not seen much so far. I have not seen this suit mentioned elsewhere.


From the article:

Gino Recchia and the Bellingham gun shop he owns, Mass Armament, filed a complaint in federal court Friday, alleging that sections of the new law updating the definition of assault-style firearms run afoul of Second Amendment protections.
Click to expand...

The article does not have much info, so my first question is, what organization, if any, is involved with this suit? It is well known that bad cases make bad law, so I am hoping that this suit is well planned and part of a coordinated effort.
 
APFSDS said:
Wonderful, basically "things have changed but we can't and won't try to make sense of it all, so good luck!" How the hell can they enforce it if they can't articulate what the law is on their website? God I can't want to get out of here.
Click to expand...
Mass Wildlife diverts a few hundred phone calls a week to the FRB. I was talking with a person there who said this today. They said to go back to Mass Wildlife so they can field those questions. FRB seems pissed by this. Even the ones who enforce hunting laws and registration have idea about this law or its effects. Amazing.
 
DJBrad said:

Mass Wildfire with an update to reflect the new law.
Click to expand...
From that link:
"You cannot possess or discharge a loaded rifle or shotgun within 500 feet of a building or dwelling in use without the owner or occupant’s permission. "

I knew about the discharge requirement, but don't recall ever hearing anything about possessing a loaded rifle within 500 feet without the owner's permission. Is that something new, or have I just been ignorant about that part of it before now?
 
DJBrad said:
Mass Wildfire with an update to reflect the new law.
Click to expand...
Does that include .22's?


Toast said:
From that link:
"You cannot possess or discharge a loaded rifle or shotgun within 500 feet of a building or dwelling in use without the owner or occupant’s permission. "

I knew about the discharge requirement, but don't recall ever hearing anything about possessing a loaded rifle within 500 feet without the owner's permission. Is that something new, or have I just been ignorant about that part of it before now?
Click to expand...
Good question.
 
Toast said:
From that link:
"You cannot possess or discharge a loaded rifle or shotgun within 500 feet of a building or dwelling in use without the owner or occupant’s permission. "

I knew about the discharge requirement, but don't recall ever hearing anything about possessing a loaded rifle within 500 feet without the owner's permission. Is that something new, or have I just been ignorant about that part of it before now?
Click to expand...

Only in Massachusetts... You can't make this up. Thanks for pointing this out. Another gray area.. Sort of... Maybe...
 
Toast said:
From that link:
"You cannot possess or discharge a loaded rifle or shotgun within 500 feet of a building or dwelling in use without the owner or occupant’s permission. "

I knew about the discharge requirement, but don't recall ever hearing anything about possessing a loaded rifle within 500 feet without the owner's permission. Is that something new, or have I just been ignorant about that part of it before now?
Click to expand...
so would this mean having a loaded shotgun or rifle IN YOUR OWN HOME would be illegal if your neighbors house is less than 500ft away?
 
Toast said:
From that link:
"You cannot possess or discharge a loaded rifle or shotgun within 500 feet of a building or dwelling in use without the owner or occupant’s permission. "

I knew about the discharge requirement, but don't recall ever hearing anything about possessing a loaded rifle within 500 feet without the owner's permission. Is that something new, or have I just been ignorant about that part of it before now?
Click to expand...
Hunting regs on that setback law haven’t changed. When you are hunting you must unload your firearm within the setback. Does anyone actually do that though? That’s been taught in basic for many years.
 
DJBrad said:
Hunting regs on that setback law haven’t changed. When you are hunting you must unload your firearm within the setback. Does anyone actually do that though? That’s been taught in basic for many years.
Click to expand...
Yes this has been the law for a while at least. I actually walk into the woods with action open and mag empty until I’m well enough from the road and houses. I’m sure there are plenty EPO’s who go for low-hanging fruit like that
 
DJBrad said:

Mass Wildfire with an update to reflect the new law.
Click to expand...

Huh?

So can I or can’t I????

Can I carry a firearm on a public way while hunting?

  • You can carry a loaded or unloaded rifle or shotgun upon or across a public way if you are lawfully engaged in hunting and hold a valid hunting license. You do not need a trigger lock on the rifle or shotgun if you are engaged in hunting and have a valid hunting license.
How close can I be to a road or building while hunting with a firearm?

  • You cannot possess or discharge a loaded rifle or shotgun within 500 feet of a building or dwelling in use without the owner or occupant’s permission. Also, you cannot discharge a rifle or shotgun upon or across any state or hard surfaced highway or within 150 feet of a highway.
 

Similar threads

Check out TSUSA @ the Great American Outdoor Show
Replies
0
Views
34
TargetSportsUSA
TargetSportsUSA
Overheard at the airport
4 5 6
Replies
154
Views
3K
dcmdon
dcmdon
Post in the correct forums
2 3 4
Replies
96
Views
2K
StevieP
StevieP
The H&K P7 M13 is Coming Back? The P7 Pro at SHOT Show 2025!
2
Replies
59
Views
582
Tartakovsky
Tartakovsky
H&K suppressor sights
Replies
0
Views
37
Sam P
S
Back
Top Bottom