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

CrackPot said:
Why is GOAL going for super scare tactics on this topic?
Click to expand...

1. They are probably being as conservative as they can be, in order to keep people on the safe side of this.
2. They are not quite sure what all the subsections mean, which makes them the same as the rest of us.
3. They have a legitimate and honest disagreement with your interpretation.
4. They are acting in bad faith, cackling in their lair as we all scramble around.

Take your pick.
 
Picton said:
1. They are probably being as conservative as they can be, in order to keep people on the safe side of this.
2. They are not quite sure what all the subsections mean, which makes them the same as the rest of us.
3. They have a legitimate and honest disagreement with your interpretation.
4. They are acting in bad faith, cackling in their lair as we all scramble around.

Take your pick.
Click to expand...
I'm going with #5.......they know it's Massachusetts......
 
Picton said:
1. They are probably being as conservative as they can be, in order to keep people on the safe side of this.
2. They are not quite sure what all the subsections mean, which makes them the same as the rest of us.
3. They have a legitimate and honest disagreement with your interpretation.
4. They are acting in bad faith, cackling in their lair as we all scramble around.

Take your pick.
Click to expand...
Well, we can be sure that Maura and the Legislature is going with #4
 
CrackPot said:
From the summary on Goal

"July 20, 2016 – Applies to the list of enumerated weapons (copies and duplicates ofthem) This now officially makes any purchases/transfers of Ars, Aks, or other enumerated Aws on or after the day of her press conference (July 20, 2016) illegal."

That is not what the language says. It says that anything purchased, owned and registered before 7/20/16 is NOT A COPY OR DUPLICATE. That is not the same as anything on or after 7/20/16 being illegal. You are taking two steps when you should take one. Report that it is not a copy or duplicate if it is "pre-Healey". That is what the law will say.

On whether it is a copy or duplicate on or after has not be judicated by a competent court. It is purely the opinion of the AG

We have 22 years of precedent from both federal and MA courts that say no, this is NOT the definition of copy or duplicate. And the MA AWB currently says "shall have the same meaning as" federal so the federal interpretation is what matters.

Why is GOAL going for super scare tactics on this topic?
Click to expand...
I lile FPC's summary better
 
GOAL said:
Our updated breakdown and FAQ of the anti-rights bill from the Massachusetts legislature is on our website. Stay tuned and help spread the word.

Chapter 135

goal.org goal.org
Click to expand...
Another one from GOAL I cannot make sense of


"No, there are no exemptions for rimfire in the assault weapon law"

definition of ASW for rifle is "

(a) a semiautomatic, centerfire rifle with the capacity to accept a detachable feeding


145 device and includes at least 2 of the following features"

Since rimfire is not centerfire it would appear that by default rimfire is an exemption. Yes, the secretary of EOPPS can arbitrarily add rimfire weapons to the ASW list. There are other ways to go after rimfire, but on the service, rimfire rifles are NOT ASWs.
 
Individualist said:
Correct me if I’m wrong it’s been a long time since I read it but I don’t think copies and duplicates was/is even mentioned in the law. The law explicitly bans specific makers. It was not ambiguous as the terminology did not exist so should not have been open to administrative interpretation. She created an entirely new category and definition out of thin air. It’s like saying Jello shots was never defined so by interpretation they are now also illegal.
Click to expand...
No the federal AWB had copies and duplicates
 
Woodsloafer said:
The state essentially "raided" the Mill and went through every FFL with a fine tooth comb looking for problems and found shit. Afterwards, the same "illegal" stuff continued to be sold. This tells me they had/have no grounds at all to charge/prosecute on the basis of any law or "advisory" to date.
Click to expand...
They knew that if they did it would create standing and a path to scotus.
SCOTUS for them is like garlic to a vampire.
 
Read the GOAL FAQ and had a couple question, sorry if they've been addresses, there is just too much to keep up.

Q: Are rifles and shotguns now subject to the mandatory testing requirementsformerly associated with handguns only?
• Yes, it appears so.

more of a comment, this is going to kill a number of the low price AR platforms, certainly dry up supply for a while while things get tested.

Q: What about 80% or “unfinished” lowers and receivers – possession, serialization,possession, building?
• There is nothing in the new law that references 80% lowers, it simply refers to“unfinished” frames and receivers.
• All frames and/or receivers (unfinished or otherwise) that could be considered acopy or duplicate of an enumerated Assault Weapon must have been lawfullypossessed and registered in Massachusetts on or before July 19, 2016.
• Any frames or receivers (unfinished or otherwise), not on the enumerated ban list,but meet the new features test must be possessed and registered in Massachusettson or before August 1, 2024.
• Private builds for any firearm that would fall under the new semi-automatic AssaultStyle Firearm definitions are prohibited after August 1, 2024

So no more 80%? What's the point of buying an 80% if it's going to be considered a gun. It will need a serial, and testing. How are they going to test unfinished and stripped lowers?
Q: Is there anything new concerning non-residents?
• Are no longer exempt from possessing handguns and/or semi-automatic firearmsfor competitions or hunting.
• Bans youth non-resident hunting (under 18).• Bans the possession of semi-automatic firearms for hunting.
• All firearms entering the state for any purpose other than traveling through must beregistered prior to them entering the state.

Wasn't there something about non-res being able to carry in a vehicle while traveling through MA?
What is "through", if I come from NH, drive into MA, and then go back to NH, I've gone through part of MA. Or is it only from one stte, through MA, to another state?
This appears to require a non-resident to register any gun they want to bring into MA even if it's just to shoot at a range, competition or recreational. WTF, a NH resident is going to have to register their gun in MA even if they have a MA LTC?
 
What I do not understand in this whole thing is if Dimple's notice was the correct interpretation of the Fed AWB, why was it not enforced for 22 years? Why was it not enforced for the 8 years after the notice.

If Dimple's notice was the correct interpretation of the 94 ban, why is it being rewritten? Copies and duplicates have been illegal for 30 years, why now do we have to name every make and model if they are already illegal?

Edit - If every semi-auto rifle with a detachable magazine was a copy or duplicate, why did the Fed AWB have a feature test?

Edit #2 - I am a window licker and can not spell.
 
Last edited:
pastera said:
Or not and be a freeman
Click to expand...
Maybe I can have the best of both worlds.

I can be legal by registering and not get caught with an illegal gun.

I'll store all my goodies in NH at my ski chalet.

Being in the registry makes me scared of confiscation.

But, storing out of state alleviates that problem.

If the registry is leaked online and I get robbed, the robbers will only find one gun at my house.

They have no idea where the rest is or where stuff is buried.

IF the state does do door to door confiscation - let them - they will leave disappointed from my house.


GOAL says that there is Grandfathering for pre 8/1 guns. That is good news. Jason A. Guida says that post Healey's are illegal. I can't imagine that the state would make all the post Healey's illegal because if anyone were to be charged - they would lose in court and the whole house of cards would collapse.
 
Reptile said:
Maybe I can have the best of both worlds.

I can be legal by registering and not get caught with an illegal gun.

I'll store all my goodies in NH at my ski chalet.

Being in the registry makes me scared of confiscation.

But, storing out of state alleviates that problem.

If the registry is leaked online and I get robbed, the robbers will only find one gun at my house.

They have no idea where the rest is or where stuff is buried.

IF the state does do door to door confiscation - let them - they will leave disappointed from my house.


GOAL says that there is Grandfathering for pre 8/1 guns. That is good news. Jason A. Guida says that post Healey's are illegal. I can't imagine that the state would make all the post Healey's illegal because if anyone were to be charged - they would lose in court and the whole house of cards would collapse.
Click to expand...
Till they torture you to find your hidden stache. You didnt think this through enough yet
 
Remember;
We complied with the AWB, jumped through hoops and begged for permission.
We complied with Pistol permit to LTC (A,B), took our classes payed our fees.
That got us Maura’s edicts, that made us all felons in waiting.

So now, here we are again. Considering, what is allowed, fretting over what we have and planning on the elites in black robes to hear our pleas and grant us back a fraction of what this bill takes.

As for me, as I mentioned previously, I contacted my reps and was quite clear that I will not comply. I have no reason to change that perspective. Further, why worry about the previous laws? They were sold as the solution, tricked the FUDDS and lulled many to sleep. What duty do we have to comply when no matter what, after they pass the latest grab - they are coming back next year.
 
GM-GUY said:
As for me, as I mentioned previously, I contacted my reps and was quite clear that I will not comply. I have no reason to change that perspective. Further, why worry about the previous laws? They were sold as the solution, tricked the FUDDS and lulled many to sleep. What duty do we have to comply when no matter what, after they pass the latest grab - they are coming back next year.
Click to expand...

The “fudds” are in for a wake up call this time for sure. Especially the ones with FID cards and semiautomatic squirrel and duck guns…..and just bout anyone else who wants to buy a new long gun for the hunting season.
 
As long as you're not a gangbanging thug or someone who has some pretty significant violent tendencies that are documented both from a medical and legal side..... I don't think the boots are going to knock in your door for what you have/what you will eventually get.

Still, I feel the most pain for the FFLs that are trying to run businesses. That is where I think the most damage will be done is you'll eventually see DOZENS of shops close. Healey and her minions don't want guns in this state, so how do you prevent them from coming in? Get rid of the FFLs. Put them in such a chokehold that they have to close down...
 
I just read GOAL’s Q&A. Does that mean pre 1994 rifles must have MA compliance work done? No more flash hiders and collapsible stocks?

Or does it mean pre 2016 can have “evil features”?
 
doolz said:
As long as you're not a gangbanging thug or someone who has some pretty significant violent tendencies that are documented both from a medical and legal side..... I don't think the boots are going to knock in your door for what you have/what you will eventually get.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of examples of regular dudes getting jammed up over stupid shit like this. Stupid shit that actual gangbangers skate on every day. Maybe an ex or a kid says the wrong thing to somebody. Maybe cops are up in your business for something else.
 
doolz said:
As long as you're not a gangbanging thug or someone who has some pretty significant violent tendencies that are documented both from a medical and legal side..... I don't think the boots are going to knock in your door for what you have/what you will eventually get.

Still, I feel the most pain for the FFLs that are trying to run businesses. That is where I think the most damage will be done is you'll eventually see DOZENS of shops close. Healey and her minions don't want guns in this state, so how do you prevent them from coming in? Get rid of the FFLs. Put them in such a chokehold that they have to close down...
Click to expand...
With the testing for everything, including "unfinished" receivers (80%), there is going to be a big drop in supply and a lot fewer choices.
 
Mark from ? said:
Go kick some ass like the Jan 6th guys did. Except in a totally communist state with very few active gun owners. Half of which are Fudds and closet Dems. The other half are sheep
Click to expand...

I think you should go to almost any gun club here in Mass and tell the guys if you are not a Fudd then you are a sheep... Should be interesting and I know a few people who will or will try to kick your ass. Myself I feel you are wrong but entitled to your opinion of the people on the forum who live in Mass.
 

Similar threads

Check out TSUSA @ the Great American Outdoor Show
Replies
0
Views
35
TargetSportsUSA
TargetSportsUSA
Overheard at the airport
4 5 6
Replies
154
Views
3K
dcmdon
dcmdon
Any dealers still at the Mill
Replies
2
Views
97
VTski4x4
VTski4x4
The GLOCK AIMPOINT COA *** HOLSTER *** THREAD
Replies
2
Views
35
M1911
M1911
Post in the correct forums
2 3 4
Replies
96
Views
2K
StevieP
StevieP
Back
Top Bottom