pastera
NES Member
Or store them out of state.
But none of that is going to help because registration and the requirement to turn over to the police as a first step in protective orders.
-
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.
The Conference Committee has sent official language out - h.4885
- Thread starter GOAL
- Start date
But none of that is going to help because registration and the requirement to turn over to the police as a first step in protective orders.
chris_1001
NES Member
If I store guns permanently out of state, then I should not need to register them, right? Only for what I possess instate?
pastera
NES Member
Correct - you only need to register firearms in your possession within Mass
Whutmeworry
NES Member
Don't gang bangers come in all colors?
headednorth
NES Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 28,827
- Likes
- 55,129
Only in the movies or 80's music videos. Leader was always a skinny White guy, pleather jacket with the sleeves rolled up, 5 o'clock shadow and a bandana that was rolled like an aerobics instructor.
Whutmeworry
NES Member
mothybee
NES Member
Right all different races, so what are you implying?
Whutmeworry
NES Member
I'm simply saying it's not a racist law. At least not according to late 1970s/1980s Hollywood!
Last edited:
HorizontalHunter
NES Member
So they become felons when they renew?
If they renew more than two years from now, after they have registered all their gunz, will the police confiscate their illegally held, self reported, gunz?
Mesatchornug
NES Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 13,223
- Likes
- 27,558
only if they don't use any of the natural remedies available to them. I'm sure whoever wrote it considers several years to be time enough to upgrade to an LTC or sell their noncompliant items.
Not saying I agree with the idea, but it at least follows a reasonable logic.
They're only illegally held after the renewal, right? If they had enough info to enter their firearm(s) into the new registry, they could have found the info about whether their collection is lawful under the new system.
Frankly, if they bother to comply with a system of compulsive registration, I'm not sure how much compassion I have for them maintaining an insufficient FID. File it under #FAFO (Fudd Around and Find Out)?
That's what I do. I was shooting my .308 ar10 sbr last weekend and my neighbor yelled out his window "check your fire ". I just kept shooting (Western Worcester county)
Hey everyone I have read on on here that the consensus seems to be after 10/2 we where able to remove the weld our folding stocks and remove our muzzle brakes and put on a flash hider or other muzzle device. Is this true? Because I would like to put the flash hider that came with my rifle back on the gun but unfortunately I would have to buy a new one. Because the shop I bought my rifle from remove the flash hider and put a muzzle brake on and wouldn't give me the flash hider back. Also if I am able to unmassify my rifle how would I get the pinned muzzle break off?
Attachments
chris_1001
NES Member
Any shop that can pin and weld can remove that nicely without damaging the threads.
Yes, you can do whatever you want to it, provided it is federally legal.
And what the crap? The shop wouldn’t give you the flash hider back? What is the barrel length? Was the flash hider pinned and welded too, and the shop hacked it up too much when removing it? I certainly hope it wasn’t the shop trying to cuck you and keeping your lawful property. If so, out them.
As for getting that brake off, it depends. If the shop did the bare minimum required, then you should be able to drill through the weld and free the pin. However, some shops like to go above and beyond and use hardened steel pins, which are very difficult to free by drilling. You essentially need to use a grinder, which then destroys the muzzle device. But I’m guessing you don’t care about saving it.
Ya I don't care about the muzzle break so if I gets destroyed I don't care. But the barrel was 16 inch and I don't believe it was pinned and welded. But I asked for it and they gave a store about how they didn't charge me for the new muzzle brake that they put on so I wasn't getting it back. But I should be able to remove the weld on my folding stock it's only one little tack weld in the corner so that shouldn't be a problem. But as for getting the muzzle break off I don't know if I can do it without damaging the barrel. Do you think if I brought it to a shop they would remove it for me?
chris_1001
NES Member
My guy removed the pin and weld soooooooo well, your think it was never pinned and welded!
Amazing skills!!
I mean, if you don’t care about the brake, it is extremely easy with just a dremel and a grinding disc. Unless you’re a caveman, it is simple with little risk to the barrel. Just go slow and keep checking the pin to see if it drops free or you can knock out with a dead-blow hammer.
That said, yeah pretty much any shop should be able to remove it.
chris_1001
NES Member
My guy did an amazing job. You’d never suspect!
We must be using the same guy. Flawless work.
chris_1001
NES Member
Ron Jablonski
NES Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2020
- Messages
- 2,075
- Likes
- 5,136
That pin and weld looks like something I would have done when I was stoned in shop class.
FWIW, I heard it explained that, the "copies and duplicates test" and the "features test" are two different tests. If a rifle is exempt from the copies and duplicates test, it does not also exempt it from the features test. I'm not stating I necessarily agree with this guidance, or I'm looking to push this on anyone as the correct interpretation, but this is what I heard.
In 2016, the AGO determined that the Features Test is an independent basis for qualification as an assault rifle separate from being a Copy or Duplicate. The AGO enforcement of 7/20/16 stated that the guidance would not apply to possession or ownership of assault weapons obtained prior to 7/20/2016. The Assault-Style Firearm definition in section 121 exempts Copy or Duplicate from the definition if sold, owned and registered prior to July 20, 2016. It does not exempt post 9/13/1994 assault weapons with two or more of the listed features as the Features Test is separate from the Copy or Duplicate qualification
Summary of applicable dates:
Enumerated List: Legal if lawfully owned prior to 9/13/1994
Features test: Legal if lawfully owned prior to 9/13/1994
Copy or duplicate: Legal is lawfully owned prior to 7/20/2016
Not previously illegal but prohibited by new definition: Legal if lawfully owned on 8/1/24
Not Exempted
Any post 9/13/1994 assault-style firearm that has two or more of the listed features
Any copy or duplicate made or assembled after 7/20/2016
Any assault-style firearm made or assembled after 8/1/2024
In 2016, the AGO determined that the Features Test is an independent basis for qualification as an assault rifle separate from being a Copy or Duplicate. The AGO enforcement of 7/20/16 stated that the guidance would not apply to possession or ownership of assault weapons obtained prior to 7/20/2016. The Assault-Style Firearm definition in section 121 exempts Copy or Duplicate from the definition if sold, owned and registered prior to July 20, 2016. It does not exempt post 9/13/1994 assault weapons with two or more of the listed features as the Features Test is separate from the Copy or Duplicate qualification
Summary of applicable dates:
Enumerated List: Legal if lawfully owned prior to 9/13/1994
Features test: Legal if lawfully owned prior to 9/13/1994
Copy or duplicate: Legal is lawfully owned prior to 7/20/2016
Not previously illegal but prohibited by new definition: Legal if lawfully owned on 8/1/24
Not Exempted
Any post 9/13/1994 assault-style firearm that has two or more of the listed features
Any copy or duplicate made or assembled after 7/20/2016
Any assault-style firearm made or assembled after 8/1/2024
You have 2 years to get your secret stuff out of state and not need to worry about registration.
Buy a small safe and let friends store it for you who live in NH.
lord_bacon
NES Member
The AGO’s conference on 7/20 didn’t change a single thing under the law, nor did it somehow change more than a decade of understood and accepted case law around “copies or duplicates”.
If you owned it prior to 8/1, it’s grandfathered. 7/20 is meaningless.
Unless you subscribe to the idea that a press conference can change law. I don’t.
We will really never know if this is accurate or not because it will never be used by a district attorney as a charge for fear of it being smacked down by the court. It's there to instill fear. Nothing more
Yes. And it's working, in spades.
SO many comments on this site reflect that fear. There are people here falling all over themselves to try to obey this pile of garbage. I have to believe that if there are quite a few who are posting about that, there are a whole bunch more NOT posting about it. That's a lot of scaredy-cats.
The state's calculation was correct, sadly. We just don't love freedom enough, as a populace.
For everyone concerned about the registration requirement, can anyone point to a documented case where an individual was charged under the old law with failure to FA10 a firearm? I certainly have never heard of one.
allen-1
NES Member
Now consider that the population of NES is a very small subset of the population of (mostly) New England, and the same ratio applies to Massachusetts. People are posting here about others who are just learning about this law.
The problem is that for the mostly law-abiding gun owner, there's a lot to lose with a felony conviction, starting with your permit, firearms and legal fees.
When the ATF started with their "braces are stocks, and those are SBRs" bullshit, I took two separate courses of action. I bought a couple of 16" uppers to have on hand, and I joined FPC, GOA and SAF and sent them money because they're fighting the ATF in court.
Massachusett's new gun law is far worse than the ATF's bullshit.
