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

[Mark from ?]

Pathetic beyond words. Now you know why I think GOAL is a lost cause. I was so depressed after watching that, I couldn't decide if I should cry or scream.

GOAL is and has always been a reflection of MA gun owners.

Im fairly certain there is little support for GOAL statistically as compared to how many active LTC's there are in this state.

So if you blame them for sucking.....you can blame MA gun owners (or most of them, who are not members, or active) for sucking.

That said...overall, I don't think there are enough gun owners here as a part for voting block for the pols to give a rats ass....and with this bill, that is obvious.

I will support GOAL from any state I'm living in.....just because I feel for anyone left here, and as a middle finger to the a**h***s who trample on you guys.

 

[not new guy]

So if you blame them for sucking.....you can blame MA gun owners (or most of them, who are not members, or active) for sucking.

Maybe MA gun owners (rightly) recognize that there's nothing GOAL can do or could have done to stop this, and dumping money into GOAL is a waste compared to giving the money to litigation groups.

 

[Broc Tuah]

Maybe MA gun owners (rightly) recognize that there's nothing GOAL can do or could have done to stop this, and dumping money into GOAL is a waste compared to giving the money to litigation groups.

GOAL said they will file lawsuits if/when this passes.

We will see.

The only way to fight this junk is the COMM2A way, go to the courts

In my opinion, Trying to "educate" legislators is a huge mistake. We don't benefit from educated legislators. The goal should be for them to pass something so f*cked up the courts will destroy it, not for them to be smart about it. The only education they should get is letting them know this will end in court.

 

[not new guy]

GOAL said they will file lawsuits if/when this passes.

We will see.

The only way to fight this junk is the COMM2A way, go to the courts.

I honestly think I'd rather GOAL didn't. Join forces with COMM2A or FPC, otherwise stay out of the way.

 

[Lxpony]

Am I correct in thinking frame transfers of non assault weapon guns (like a glock handgun) are good for 90 days once this law passes and the 8/1 date doesn't pertain since a glock isn't considered an assault weapon?

 

[AJK129]

Depends on your tolerance for fines, legal fees, PP status and/or prison I suppose. Since I am old and don't wish to die in prison, I'd love a definitive answer before 8/1.

But we aren't going to get one. Our best and most knowledgeable members on this have different interpretations.

Im not saying to do something to go to prison, but they hate us and want us gone, so why look to them for how to live

 

[Broc Tuah]

I honestly think I'd rather GOAL didn't. Join forces with COMM2A or FPC, otherwise stay out of the way.

I don't know how they plan to do it.

 

[AJK129]

I honestly think I'd rather GOAL didn't. Join forces with COMM2A or FPC, otherwise stay out of the way.

Ill give FPC money all day, because they have a sense of humor and a record of wins in court

 

[42!]

SKS and Garand I’m sure unless the roster becomes the issue. They’re not detachable mag rifles so they can’t be assault weapons (ignoring the SKS-M).

You won't be able to buy anything, everything will need to be on a roster just like we have now for handguns. All long guns, every Mossberg Pump, every bolt action, every Marlin lever gun and yes, even Henry single shots. But even without the roster element I think all the long guns you mentioned would be banned, even the mini-14 and M1A's don't escape this time, I believe the "shroud" language is what does pretty much all semi's in.

@1903Collector is incorrect. Lets look at this as a muli layer test.

1. is it C&R?
C&R is inherently pre-ban as far as ASW is concerned and is specifically exempt from the roster if you have a C&R FFL. This will cover most Garands and a lot of the SKS. If the answer to this is YES, then a dealer can sell it to you. No need to look at the rest of the questions.

2. Is it ASW? Pre-ban Y/N? Even if it's pre-ban it will have to have been registered in MA by 8/1. If it's not pre-ban then its an "evil features" test. If it passes as not an ASW, or is pre-ban, a dealer is still restricted to on roster guns. This may be a bigger issue, since those pre-bans will never be on-roster, but that doesn't stop FtF sales.

3. is it on-roster? C&R is exempt to this but otherwise this will be a BIG killer of sales. MA is a small market so manufacturers aren't going to jump in and get all there models on the roster. And anything that isn't in current production will never be on roster. So used guns that aren't registered in MA on 8/1 will be a big no for sales/transfer by a dealer, and no way to bring more into the state. This will absolutely kill the used market, and severely limit the new selection.

So C&R impact isn't much. People seem to be focusing on the ASW ban but the roster is going to have a bigger more damaging impact. It will drive shops out of business and permanantly and radically reduce supply and selection in MA. They played the long game and played it well, if not overturned this law will kill guns in MA in 10 years, you'll end up giving hours to a small shop that has nothing but some old beat up guns and super pricy shotguns.

Hopefully FPC is ready to push a stay up to the fed courts to keep this law shut down until it gets to SCOTUS. MA was my home for most of my life and I haven't given up on MA, as soon as FPC makes their involvement official I'm sending them $$$$ and setting up regular payments, they are MA's best hope.

 

[MAJoe]

Am I correct in thinking frame transfers of non assault weapon guns (like a glock handgun) are good for 90 days once this law passes and the 8/1 date doesn't pertain since a glock isn't considered an assault weapon?

Ask an FFL but I believe so.

 

[Mark from ?]

Maybe MA gun owners (rightly) recognize that there's nothing GOAL can do or could have done to stop this, and dumping money into GOAL is a waste compared to giving the money to litigation groups.

JFC....if you cant throw 30 bucks a year to GOAL on top of GOA, FPC, and Comm 2A, donations.......you fully deserve what you get. I do believe support for those other groups should be larger because they are lawsuit groups and do something.

GOAL is the spokesgroup for our state, the training and information arm.......if they are strong in numbers that might sway the pols a bit more........but realistically when they look at the statistics of LTC vs. support for GOAL....all legislators do is laugh and say.....yeah.....Gun owners in this state is a non issue at the poling place. We can do what we want to those idiots.

My feeling is because GOAL talks to legislators....and wants a good repore, they don't want to be the ones doing the suing....not sure.

 

[Picton]

I like his advice but do get a little squeamish when it comes to putting a confession into an electronic database in the face of this, when they've made it clear that they think post-2016 ARs are illegal.

This isn't me "confessing" to anything. Everything I've posted so far, as far as legality is concerned, is nothing more than the blusterings of an internet tough guy. Maybe it's all just talk; perhaps, on 8/2, I'll be at my local police station, turning in all my shit. Or? Maybe not.

Hear that, Maura?

But I don't think I will. And It's not exactly seditious for me to come to a public forum and state that my government is overreaching and treading on my rights; they know that as well as do. I'm happy to double down on that in person; I've, in fact, put it in writing, over my name, through letters and emails to my duly elected representatives. They know how I feel, and they know where I live; they know I spurn their unconstitutional laws, because I've told them I do.

I have a right to do all those things. I'm not squeamish about them at all. I'd go as far as to gently point out that a man who's squeamish about exercising his rights is not really a man who understands those rights. I get that everybody has differing risk levels, but I'm not all that sympathetic with people who, as Adams put it, "crouch down and lick the hands that feed them."

Depends on your tolerance for fines, legal fees, PP status and/or prison I suppose. Since I am old and don't wish to die in prison, I'd love a definitive answer before 8/1.

But we aren't going to get one. Our best and most knowledgeable members on this have different interpretations.

You are your own answer. You are supposedly a free man in a free Republic. You know what the answer is.

 

[pastera]

I dare her to sign it with an emergency preamble prior to 8/1.

That would benefit us in the long run because it just shows how absurd this all is and will sooner be thrown out in court!

Thank you for taking the correct stance on this.
We want the worst to be done here - that gives us the best standing to move quickly with summary judgment up to the Supreme Court.
Since no lower court is going to issue a broad injunction nor rule in our favor we want the fastest path - unfortunately that's the most painful.

 

[maltc]

The possibility of people getting jammed up for stuff like this is a big part of why I have a problem with parties like GOALuida going on the record and saying all post-2016 ARs are illegal. It's not clear so why the hell would you concede the argument and empower the would-be prosecution?

I’ll tell you why Guida thinks the way he does. We’re in a one party state where the courts are stacked against us. Legal protections can be over ridden by intangibles like “interpretation” in a court stystem filled with self fulfilling idealogues. Reposting his response if you missed it.

 

[pastera]

Maybe MA gun owners (rightly) recognize that there's nothing GOAL can do or could have done to stop this, and dumping money into GOAL is a waste compared to giving the money to litigation groups.

GOAL works behind the scenes to keep this shit contained. The only time we see it is when outside forces overcome their efforts.
If not for GOAL we would be living under Linksy and Creeme's wet dreams of gun control with goats in every bedroom and notna gun in sight.

 

[not new guy]

This isn't me "confessing" to anything. Everything I've posted so far, as far as legality is concerned, is nothing more than the blusterings of an internet tough guy. Maybe it's all just talk; perhaps, on 8/2, I'll be at my local police station, turning in all my shit. Or? Maybe not.

Hear that, Maura?

But I don't think I will. And It's not exactly seditious for me to come to a public forum and state that my government is overreaching and treading on my rights; they know that as well as do. I'm happy to double down on that in person; I've, in fact, put it in writing, over my name, through letters and emails to my duly elected representatives. They know how I feel, and they know where I live; they know I spurn their unconstitutional laws, because I've told them I do.

I have a right to do all those things. I'm not squeamish about them at all.



You are your own answer. You are supposedly a free man in a free Republic. You know what the answer is.

In their eyes you registering a post-2016 AR in their electronic database is a confession that you've dared to flout the law as they interpret it. As a practical matter I don't think they'd do anything about it, but if they decided to try the data is all there and it wouldn't take a half an hour for them to identify all of the people who did it. That's all.

 

[pastera]

Are pump shotguns still going to be sold post 8/1? This bill is super unclear.

No - they are not on the roster so they cannot be transferred to you from a licensed dealer.
Unless there is an emergency update to the roster or a change slipped into another bill, every single long gun out there becomes verboten the moment this bill becomes active.

 

[Picton]

In their eyes you registering a post-2016 AR in their electronic database is a confession that you've dared to flout the law as they interpret it. As a practical matter I don't think they'd do anything about it, but if they decided to try the data is all there and it wouldn't take a half an hour for them to identify all of the people who did it. That's all.

No, I get that.

But in buying things after 2016 and recording the transfers on an EFA-10, I was obeying their laws in good faith. If they try to jam me up for that now, it's an easy 5A win for me (or for you, or for anybody else who did it) because they compelled me to incriminate myself. I'm not even slightly concerned.

F*** 'em. I'm in the right, they're in the wrong. They agree with me, or they'd have taken one of us to court by now.

 

[not new guy]

GOAL works behind the scenes to keep this shit contained. The only time we see it is when outside forces overcome their efforts.
If not for GOAL we would be living under Linksy and Creeme's wet dreams of gun control with goats in every bedroom and notna gun in sight.

If that's true we may have already been on the other side of a big favorable win in court but for GOAL's involvement. I mean if we're talking about theoretical would-be situations...

 

[pastera]

There have to be some FFLs who will sell compliant pumps shotguns while the roster gets created. I mean, this is just such an f'ing mess.

How much does a dealer make on a basic shotgun? $50, $30 - not a whole lot to put his business and finances in legal jeopardy.

 

[not new guy]

GOAL is the spokesgroup for our state...if they are strong in numbers that might sway the pols a bit more........but realistically when they look at the statistics of LTC vs. support for GOAL....all legislators do is laugh and say.....yeah.....Gun owners in this state is a non issue at the poling place. We can do what we want to those idiots.

Do you think the legislators are looking at GOAL membership numbers before deciding whether to take them seriously and consider their input or not? Is 60k members going to make a difference vs 6k members? I'm not convinced it matters.

Given the religious zealotry exhibited by the MA legislature, does a group that's trying to rein in new laws help or hurt? The legislature is limited only by considerations for what might stand up to legal scrutiny, so to the extent GOAL is talking about that sort of stuff are we better with laws that consider GOAL's input or laws that the legislature pulls out of their asses all on their own?

 

[btnh6668]

I honestly think I'd rather GOAL didn't. Join forces with COMM2A or FPC, otherwise stay out of the way.

Fpc could actually make the situation worse. Listen to goals podcast and Jim explains why.

 

[not new guy]

Fpc could actually make the situation worse. Listen to goals podcast and Jim explains why.

Not putting you on the spot but what's the crux of the argument? I don't really do podcasts.

 

[drgrant]

GOAL said they will file lawsuits if/when this passes.

We will see.

The only way to fight this junk is the COMM2A way, go to the courts

In my opinion, Trying to "educate" legislators is a huge mistake. We don't benefit from educated legislators. The goal should be for then to pass something so f*cked up the courts will destroy it, not for them to be smart about it. The only education they should get is letting them know this will end in court.

If it's any consolation it's abundantly clear that the legislature really didn't listen to anybody from rkba land when they wrote this pile of garbage.

Basically for those watching that thread, the MA legislators are the equivalent of moredweebs at this point, talking to them is like trying to have a dialog with something that has the IQ of a warm pile of steaming shit.

 

[Picton]

If that's true we may have already been on the other side of a big favorable win in court but for GOAL's involvement. I mean if we're talking about theoretical would-be situations...

A lot of us said precisely that, at the time. Remember when this bill was up for consideration the first time, in its more-egregious form? I billed it as a win-win: either it doesn't pass and we're status quo, or it passes and gets enjoined immediately. I would have been very happy with that. Speaker Mariano apparently agreed with me, because he blinked and ordered the sponsor to tamp the language down.

 

[btnh6668]

I do think it's funny that Mass has 600,000 gun owners. Only 20,000 are GOAL members. The. People complain they don't do anything when the majority does not support them. Sounds logical. It's like listening to my business owner customers complain about the state of our economy yet make zero effort to vote.

 

[JMI13]

So hypothetically speaking, what is the general consensus on lowers not built, but purchased before 8/1 grandfather date? I understand under current law a stripped lower is not a firearm but hypothetically, if I had 3-4 stripped lowers that are not going to be built before 8/1, would it be recommended to EFA-10 in an attempt to comply with grandfathering date or not? I understand that there is no definitive correct answer.. just wondering what every one else is doing.. semi-pantshitter, forum lurker here.

 

[pastera]

This is the most critical question for which we need a definitive answer between now and 8/1. Too bad that I don't think we are going to get one.

No, you don't need an answer, you need balls.
Decide now if you are willing to comply or attempt compliance - if so, then build it out and take the chance you will need to sell it off later but have a full preban on the upside.

Or if you're not interested in compliance just do whatever you want and take your chances.

Sitting on the sideline begging for permission to act and direction on where to go is how we ended up here in the first place.

 

[Picton]

So hypothetically speaking, what is the general consensus on lowers not built, but purchased before 8/1 grandfather date? I understand under current law a stripped lower is not a firearm but hypothetically, if I had 3-4 stripped lowers that are not going to be built before 8/1, would it be recommended to EFA-10 in an attempt to comply with grandfathering date or not? I understand that there is no definitive correct answer.. just wondering what every one else is doing.. semi-pantshitter, forum lurker here.

Bolded part: by whom?

The answer depends on who you believe, and only you can answer that.

 

[not new guy]

I do think it's funny that Mass has 600,000 gun owners. Only 20,000 are GOAL members. The. People complain they don't do anything when the majority does not support them. Sounds logical. It's like listening to my business owner customers complain about the state of our economy yet make zero effort to vote.

If there was a group of 600k loud, proud and organized Trump supporters in MA do you think the legislature would take their views into consideration? Or would they view them as a foil that they should disagree with at every turn?