There are a shit load of trolls in this thread.
We have been invaded by the libs
We have been invaded by the libs
-
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
This reminds me that I haven't been to MT in about 30 years. Man, time flies.
alan226
NES Member
I believe she also said that it was OK to buy/sell/trade pre 7/20/2016 AW's. Doesn't that make it legal?
scott-o
NES Member
She also said 22's can NEVER be an AW.
Unfortunately for the same reason her press conference is not a law, what she may have said / wrote in an FAQ is also not a law. Only legislation creates law.
What matters most is what is written, though legislators don't seem to care much about that, seeing how they only read summaries if at all.
Second what matters is how it is enforced/interpreted by the state.
HARRYM
NES Member
I think they were already here.............
CrackPot
NES Member
There is no changing the law. It is final. It either gets signed, vetoed, or ignored. There is no ability to make changes. They can pass a NEW law that changes language.
i got confused a bit with the previous mention that they will have some group established to keep its content as a 'work in progress' with some potential adjustments to it.
mothybee
NES Member
I vote for #3 aka the screw'em act.
mothybee
NES Member
Just to close all the loopholes they missed.
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
What if I already own a gun that is a copy or duplicate?
If a weapon is a copy or duplicate of one of the models enumerated in the law, it is an Assault Weapon. The Enforcement notice will not be applied to possession, ownership or transfer by an individual gun owner of weapons obtained on or before July 20, 2016.
The AGO also will not enforce the law against a gun dealer that possesses or transfers a “copy or duplicate” weapon that was obtained on or before July 20, 2016, provided that transfers, if any, are made to persons or businesses in states where ownership of the weapon is legal.
Are any .17 or .22 caliber rimfire rifles affected by the Enforcement Notice?
No. However, a weapon that is manufactured as an Assault Weapon cannot be made legal by alterations that allow it to discharge .17 or .22 caliber ammunition.
She said that pre 7/20/16 are LEGAL.
Also, .22 are LEGAL.
I expect that webpage to disappear, soon.
Take screen shots while you can!
CrackPot
NES Member
The new language does require a rifle to be centerfire to be an ASW. So they did codify going forward that rimfire semi auto rifles are NOT ASWs. You can have a happy M&P 15-22 with evil features...
There will be a committee to add things to the newly created AW roster - basically there’s a provision to add to the list of enumerated weapons via a ‘living document’ so when they see something that passes the existing criteria they can add it to the AW roster and the it and it’s copies/duplicates are also banned. The only things officially safe from a future add to the list are items specifically excluded from being an AW (‘94 config Mini-14)
Hire a lawyer or two to help if necessary. Let's get it right. We look to GOAL to help us, not just scare us and take our money like the NRA used to do.
There has got to be a better way. Please GOAL... do better.![[thumbsup]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/044.gif "Thumbs Up [thumbsup]")
You're being unrealistic. GOAL exists in order to do lobbying, and informing the public is a part of that. They are not responsible for what's in the bill, and the one thing you should have picked up on by now is that what's in the bill is SHIT. So if GOAL is meeting its mandate and keeping us informed, their summaries are bound to reflect that.
They can only deal with what they're given. Intentionally, the law as written is vague and rife for misunderstanding; to the people in charge of our state, that is a feature and not a bug. GOAL cannot fix that, no matter how many lawyers they hire.
Why do you think those Republican legislators have any better understanding of this law than you or I do?
What you're not getting is that there is ZERO incentive for the legislature to write a nicely-packaged, easily understood law. So they wrote a pile of dog vomit. I'd argue there's no good reason to even try to understand a pile of dog vomit.
Which I guess is what the press conference said too. I was wondering if someone was going to get charged since 2016 with a rimfire “assault weapon” that wasn’t illegal per the enforcement notice but clearly violated MGL.
EJFudd
NES Member
Thank you for pointing that out. Kinda makes the "You are and have been a felon for 20+ years" thang sound kind of stupid.
so, say, if a standard lower was fa10`ed as an .22lr rifle - it is a no longer an ASW? even with a .223 wilde upper smacked on it at later time?
it`s just way too ridiculous, all of it.
AFVet
NES Member
Is there an actual list linked here ?? My sons don"t believe what I am trying to tell them, and I am getting tired of having to explain it over and over to them. Thank You. Paul
I wonder how this is going to work. Say the AR-1000 is okay today, and then 2 years from now it gets added. Are they going to allow all the current ones to remain and track all adds/deletes to the roster vs reg date? Will they tell people tough shit sell it? What a nightmare.
This is what CA has in their ban, concept for the exclusion likely came from there (since Fed94 banned all calibers)
Amputee Marksman
NES Member
That would depend on if someone else came along, say the feds, and tried to jam you up and then what the courts said. I was simply pointing out yet another possible interpretation.
IANAL so all I can do is toss in how I would interpret what i have red. Anyone who listens to me and uses that as a basis for their decisions on how to proceed is a fool.
It isn’t while it’s in rimfire configuration. If you throw a centerfire upper on it, it’s an assault weapon.
Woodsloafer
NES Member
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2008
- Messages
- 9,174
- Likes
- 16,149
So I guess these are still OK. It's one gun I would like but the ammo is just too expensive. It would be handy for defending against hordes of woodchucks and porcupines though.
F17®-L
Franklin Armory is a California & Nevada quality based AR-15 manufacturer. We offer quality, reliable firearms for civilians, law enforcement, & military agencies
franklinarmory.com
Yes, the law as written does now have a mechanism to deal with stuff that passed the ban/was sold for X time and then gets added later. There is no language for pre- 7/27 roster AR-1000
Rob Boudrie
NES Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 48,909
- Likes
- 36,370
In order to defeat the post "Healy ban" in the ew legislation one would have to prove (as in get a court to agree, not just pnotificate on NES) that:
1. The AG enforcement did not have the force of law. The is theoretically possible as the old law referred to the federal AW ban definition, but the cuz guns doctrine is stong. Such a decision would establish that post-notice guns were legally possessed.
2. That banning these legally possessed and owned guns is a taking
3. That the state may not do a taking absent compensation, and better yet, that compensation is not an option the state can use.
Our side would need a win on all three points to prevail.
1. The AG enforcement did not have the force of law. The is theoretically possible as the old law referred to the federal AW ban definition, but the cuz guns doctrine is stong. Such a decision would establish that post-notice guns were legally possessed.
2. That banning these legally possessed and owned guns is a taking
3. That the state may not do a taking absent compensation, and better yet, that compensation is not an option the state can use.
Our side would need a win on all three points to prevail.
Last edited:
Da_lucche
NES Member
To each their own. I lost my dad at a very young age and he is buried in MA but obviously a child is something else. Everyone has their reasons to stay and also to move. It took me until the age of 42 to move and if it wasn't for my fiancee I would still be saying it would never happen.
i also do not get that 'fluid law' BS part.
from a bureaucrat point of view it is only a thing that registry database entry says it is. the lower is the only numbered part and lower itself is now called a gun. not a complete build.
f#ck it all, i refuse to think of it any further. none of this will work, and it will go down same way as previous 2016 BS went.
Coda
NES Member
So dropping a .22 cal upper on a lower that was originally fitted with a 5.56 upper is not legal.
Great!
So, can a person with a bunch of AR15 lower receivers bought Post Healey turn them all into .22's?
At least all those AR15 lowers that some people own are not useless, now.
Yes, because it started out as a AW.So dropping a .22 cal upper on a lower that was originally fitted with a 5.56 upper is not legal.
The lower itself would still be an ASW (assault-style weapon) under the 8/1 copy/duplicate tests
