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

Coda said:
So dropping a .22 cal upper on a lower that was originally fitted with a 5.56 upper is not legal. :mad:
Click to expand...
Prove it... My lower was not yet built and in the portal. Thus when it was mated to an upper, that upper was a .22lr upper.

So all lowers are OK IF the intent and ultimate build was always as a dedicated .22lr build?
 
The "enforcement notice" and definitions they are establishing in this bill are being done maliciously with the intent at harming citizens, but as I said regardless of what interpretations they invented, once this bill is signed; the state has no authority to penalize anyone who acted in manners prior to its signing.

"Hey uhh you know that Honda Civic you owned for 10 years that you bought from a dealership in state? Remember when we talked about making it illegal to own and gave out a toothless enforcement notice? Yeah uh, well now with this bill we are making it illegal to have owned for that time so HAHA gotcha citizen!" It does not work this way.
 
pastera said:
You would have 90 days to get rid of anything not conforming to the new law
Click to expand...
Reflecting more on this. There’s a hard coded 8/1 date. Law goes into effect say 11/2. No one could be charged while the law is not in effect. But, what stops someone from being charged on 11/2 if they still possessed any banned items on 8/2?
 
Foudre said:
The "enforcement notice" and definitions they are establishing in this bill are being done maliciously with the intent at harming citizens, but as I said regardless of what interpretations they invented, once this bill is signed; the state has no authority to penalize anyone who acted in manners prior to its signing.

"Hey uhh you know that Honda Civic you owned for 10 years that you bought from a dealership in state? Remember when we talked about making it illegal to own and gave out a toothless enforcement notice? Yeah uh, well now with this bill we are making it illegal to have owned for that time so HAHA gotcha citizen!" It does not work this way.
Click to expand...
They’re not doing that. They’re saying if you still have it as of a future date, we can charge you. No one is being charged for rifles on 7/21/16. But if you still have it after 8/1…
 
chris_1001 said:
Prove it... My lower was not yet built and in the portal. Thus when it was mated to an upper, that upper was a .22lr upper.

So all lowers are OK IF the intent and ultimate build was always as a dedicated .22lr build?
Click to expand...
I was not referring to a rifle that you assembled yourself. I was referring to a rifle you purchased that was sold as a 5.56 cal. center fire.

Not very hard to prove that rifle did not originally come with a .22 cal upper. ;)
 
pavlin said:
Can someone define what means "legally owned by/on 08/1" ?
Does that mean eFA-10ed before 08/01?
Click to expand...
i am kinda getting more interested at this point if all this is going to gradually progress into the 'illegally owned' as guida response above is insinuating.
and if he indeed knows something more than he speak about in there. who knows.

'if people were foolish enough to register violations' , good grief. quite a loaded thing to say in the world of socialist scum judges.
 
I know this is AWB 101, but which guns are we supposed to be worried about having a copy or duplicate of? Which base guns are included? ARs, AKs, but what else? Uzis? HKs? Anything that accepts stanag mags ("magazine port" language)?
 
Foudre said:
The "enforcement notice" and definitions they are establishing in this bill are being done maliciously with the intent at harming citizens, but as I said regardless of what interpretations they invented, once this bill is signed; the state has no authority to penalize anyone who acted in manners prior to its signing.

"Hey uhh you know that Honda Civic you owned for 10 years that you bought from a dealership in state? Remember when we talked about making it illegal to own and gave out a toothless enforcement notice? Yeah uh, well now with this bill we are making it illegal to have owned for that time so HAHA gotcha citizen!" It does not work this way.
Click to expand...
True, but possession of a post-Healyban after 8/1 would not be an act prior to the signing. The law is not talking about retroactive prosecution.

Similar to the screw job on Kei truck owners.
 
Mark from ? said:
Ignoring her notice.....was never a gamble, no one was charged and non pants shitters just bought what was sold from non pantshitter dealers.

Ignoring this one that's gone thru the legislation.....not so much.

Thats as far as I go with thinking this one out.
Click to expand...
In fact one was charged with a post healy compliant rifle.
 
not new guy said:
I know this is AWB 101, but which guns are we supposed to be worried about having a copy or duplicate of? Which base guns are included? ARs, AKs, but what else? Uzis? HKs? Anything that accepts stanag mags ("magazine port" language)?
Click to expand...
''Assault weapon'', shall have the same meaning as a semiautomatic assault weapon as defined in the federal Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(30) as appearing in such section on September 13, 1994, and shall include, but not be limited to, any of the weapons, or copies or duplicates of the weapons, of any caliber, known as: (i) Avtomat Kalashnikov (AK) (all models); (ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil; (iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC–70); (iv) Colt AR–15; (v) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR and FNC; (vi) SWD M–10, M–11, M–11/9 and M–12; (vi) Steyr AUG; (vii) INTRATEC TEC–9, TEC–DC9 and TEC–22; and (viii) revolving cylinder shotguns, such as, or similar to, the Street Sweeper and Striker 12
 
Reptile said:
Ok! We need a test case.

Any volunteers to flaunt their AR's?

I don't think anybody will be charged.

It'll open up a whole can of worms for the state and if it goes to court the whole house of cards will come crashing down.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Their strategy must be a chilling effect as everyone always assumed.

Edit: I’m wrong. See my latest post.
 
Last edited:
pastera said:
No, prebans are preban as far as compliance work so none is necessary.
This bill changes the law to meet the decree - Once an AW always an AW so compliance work doesn't cure AW status.
In order to side step a takings clause violation they are exempting (grandfathering) everything in the state that is listed in the transaction portal (registered) as of 8/1.
So after 8/1 you can't bring firearms (which now include frames and receivers) in Mass if they weren't registered here some time in the past.
CrackPot will call me crazy but this is the plain reading of the bills language.
Click to expand...
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?
 

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