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

Looks like no selling of ammo unless your are a dealer (licensed refers to dealer in this section):

"(e) Whoever not being licensed, as provided in section 122 or this section, sells ammunition within the commonwealth shall be punished by a fine of not less than $500 nor more than $1,000 dollars or by imprisonment for not less than 6 months nor more than 2 years."
Again how is this enforceable??
 
Not an official response to your question.

BUT, a “select fire automatic” rifle IS the literal definition of an (cough) “Assault Weapon”

Semi automatic versions are not.

Good luck, hope you get it soon!!
Where are you digging that from? I didn't look at this garbage but I highly doubt it says this as it would exclude title 1 semi auto rifles. If not and you mean "assault rifle" a military designation that includes select fire as part of the definition then you have the terminology wrong. Maybe you are confusing MA with CT where select fire is included along with semi auto's in their definition of "assault weapon" but that doesn't hold in MA, unless it's been drastically changed here.
 
No, it's not. "assault weapon" is a made up term that means nothing outside the specific law that's using it. Every definition of "assault weapon" I've seen includes "semi-auto" To be an "assault weapon" it has to be made after Sept. 13th, 1994. Same gun made a day earlier can never be an "assault weapon". And a rifle that's an "assault weapon" in Mass. ceases to be one when moved to NH, because Mass. law has no authority in NH.

What you're thinking of is "assault rifle", which is a real thing with a real definition. "assault rifles" are not explicitly banned or regulated, they're regulated under "machine guns" or sometimes also "short barreled rifles"
Ok, ok… I was wrong once! Sheesh!

lol.
 
No, it's not. "assault weapon" is a made up term that means nothing outside the specific law that's using it. Every definition of "assault weapon" I've seen includes "semi-auto" To be an "assault weapon" it has to be made after Sept. 13th, 1994. Same gun made a day earlier can never be an "assault weapon". And a rifle that's an "assault weapon" in Mass. ceases to be one when moved to NH, because Mass. law has no authority in NH.

What you're thinking of is "assault rifle", which is a real thing with a real definition. "assault rifles" are not explicitly banned or regulated, they're regulated under "machine guns" or sometimes also "short barreled rifles"
Check CT milkdud
 
Where are you digging that from? I didn't look at this garbage but I highly doubt it says this as it would exclude title 1 semi auto rifles. If not and you mean "assault rifle" a military designation that includes select fire as part of the definition then you have the terminology wrong. Maybe you are confusing MA with CT where select fire is included along with semi auto's in their definition of "assault weapon" but that doesn't hold in MA, unless it's been drastically changed here.
See my response above.
 
Entrapment coming soon.

Same with mags

@Reptile is screwed unless he unloads them soon.
I just updated my ad...


 
Yuuuuup.



Martin Short Wtf GIF by HULU




All of it's unenforceable... unless they appropriate money to enforce it. Lol.
That would mean taking more of our money from us than what the illegals are already taking. Get fvcked Maura.
 
I just updated my ad...


If you can't carry them, who cares.
 
I just updated my ad...


Wow!

I have two g17’s pre ban u notch’s with PLUS 2 extensions. $497.02 each.

Take that @Reptile
 
well, yeah. guns wasn't really even in the top ten reasons I moved away from so many family and friends. high cost of living. housing. taxes. crumbling infrastructure. I grew increasingly intolerant of winters. I like my quality of life here in coastal NC and don't ever see us moving back to New England. We visit a couple times a year and enjoy when people come visit us.
PM your address please. We want to party with you folks.
 
That would mean taking more of our money from us than what the illegals are already taking. Get fvcked Maura.

Yeah. The juice is not worth the squeeze.

NES thinks that gun control is a MAJOR priority on Beacon Hill, but it's not really. They're happy to pass meaningless legislation that they can sell to their constituents, but TPTB are aware that MA gun laws already do what they want them to do and generally skirt lawsuits enough to stay viable. They've never enforced those laws vigorously.

Spending more money on this now, in an era when there are a whole bunch more competing priorities that cost a lot more? Nope. They're aware that spending more on this is going to result in more prosecutions... but you're still talking about a TINY NUMBER of those. So why would they bother spending on this?

They know pant-shitters will obey. Look at this site alone: hardly a day goes by when someone doesn't ask us for our collected wisdom about how to comply more fully with these nonsensical laws.
 
Remember these shitbags when you can't buy a roll of TP without somebody getting a key for it because of the illegals stealing everything
CVS is in the police log every week in the local rag. Whenever I see someone riding on a sidewalk on a frigging scooter, blowing through red lights in a shitbox, kids running rampant in the stores, ebt cards at checkout, soccer shirts, no speaking English, or beggars with their signs holding babies, all better dressed than locals, My compassion fatigue pegs the meter. But I won't tell you how I really feel.
 
Well if you want to get technical

I present you with the StG 44

Yeah, I know. ;) There's a Sturmgewehr firearms board that includes NFA sales. It was an offshoot of Fred Vollmer's site after they closed. I used to troll the Mod there, Buddy Hinton, for fun like others did because he went from being a good guy to becoming an a**h*** when he became moderator. Andy Alberts ( Biggerhammer.net )hosted it last I know.
 
Last edited:
I just updated my ad...


You’re claiming your profits on your taxes….right???
 
Also, a formal House session has been called for tomorrow, where there was previously nothing on the calendar.
Are enough politicians even around this time of year for a quorum on a day that wasn't previously on the calendar? Wouldn't surprise me if most of the legislature is on vacation.
 
Are enough politicians even around this time of year for a quorum on a day that wasn't previously on the calendar? Wouldn't surprise me if most of the legislature is on vacation.

They are all there, vacation starts 8/1 so they cram everything in at the end of their session. I have no doubt that they will all vote on it and it will be signed by Healey next week, giving a few days before the 8/1 "grandfathering" date.
 
Are enough politicians even around this time of year for a quorum on a day that wasn't previously on the calendar? Wouldn't surprise me if most of the legislature is on vacation.
This is kind of inside baseball, but nearing the end-of-session push to get bills out it's not unusual for members to be on a sort-of tacit "on call" status.
 
Back
Top Bottom