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

[JoseyWales]

Gun Owners’ Action League Announces Referendum Effort to Repeal Omnibus Gun Law July 26, 2024 Westborough, MA – Gun Owners’ Action League (GOAL) in conjunction with the Massachusetts Conservation Alliance (MCA) and firearms retailers will be filing a referendum in accordance with Article 48 of the Massachusetts Constitution to repeal An Act Modernizing Firearm Laws. The law, formerly known as H.4885 (in its final iteration) was signed by Governor Healey yesterday, July 25th, 2024 and has yet to receive a session law number. Per the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s State Ballot Question Petitions guide: The Massachusetts Constitution provides that people have the right to affect the state laws by which they are governed. One way or persons to affect the laws is through the use of a petition for a ballot question. A referendum petition is used to have a law that was recently enacted by the legislature to be repealed by the voters. If filed properly and enough signatures are collected, the question will appear on the first state election 60 or more days after filing certified petitions with the Secretary. This means that the soonest a question can appear on the ballot is this November election. As there is no emergency preamble attached to this law, this process can cause the law to be suspended until the results of the vote are tallied. This means that if enough citizens sign the petition, the law will likely not go into effect until after the November election – if the question makes it to that ballot. In order for the law to be suspended, the number of signatures required is currently 49,716, which is 2% of the total votes cast for Governor in 2022. (MA Constitution Art. 81 § 4) GOAL has already begun taking the necessary steps to file a referendum on the new law and is working with MCA and firearms retailers in the Commonwealth to coordinate the collection of signatures once the petition is accepted by the Secretary. For more information about the new law and for future updates on the referendum’s progress, check out our website at goal.org.​

Maybe edit this post and add a link to the petition.... Or, is it them same petition that was linked several pages back?

 

[Jenska22]

Who wrote this shit really had their head up their ass

well, duh,, yeah </sarcasm>

 

[drgrant]

Well, let's not go TOO crazy.

No LEO is ever going to arrest a fellow LEO over carrying a standard-cap mag off-duty in violation of this law. The best we can hope for is that their supervisors will go full Linsky and demand their compliance.

I love that they're feeling the pinch right now. Maybe they'll remember that once they get their carve-out, which I agree they'll get as an amendment to this law... but I hope it doesn't happen until the NEXT legislative session, so that they can wriggle like the rest of us in the meantime.

It would be funny if a PD can't buy patrol rifles or shotguns because of this. Then we can be like:

Hey cop union shitbirds:

View: https://youtube.com/shorts/Qcjf0U9w2-k?si=dQc8EHKoMpkecJS7

 

[drgrant]

I don't think they understand that by exempting those guns without language stating they had to be in a compliant state made it so that every one of them could legally be returned to its intended killy mode.

TBH its probably an acknowledgement of the inherent faggotry in the old laws. To have anything other than a clean cut off and one simple class of guns just makes things a nightmare but they seem to have even partially f***ed that up. TBH i can easily see a prosecutor just adopting the 8/1 cutoff and ignoring everything else. You only need a gun trace to use as a test for that, unless something was home-made. I don't think they're going to engage in level 2 gymnastics.

 

[Hombiez]

Section 121B says “shall be registered” - is this a section in the new bill speaking of future “registration “? If so, stripped lowers within your possession before 8/1/24 would not need any “registration”/FA 10, correct? Yes, I already know stripped lowers don’t need any FA10 entries, but should we build it out before 8/1/24 and then put it in the FA 10 that we currently have? I even heard that if you build your own, you don’t need to put it in the FA10 system.

Because there was no emergency preamble, I'm increasingly of the opinion that a stripped lower is:

a.) legal to possess on 8/1 because the current law applies on 8/1
b.) is legally possessed on 8/1 without an FA 10
c.) I believe the law is indeed referring to a future registration requirement
d.) the new law considers the receiver a firearm, and because it is a copy or duplicate it is an assault weapon

So now, by 131M, you have a lawfully owned assault weapon on 8/1 and as long as you do register in the new system when its ready, I don't really see how you lose based on the logical flow of this law.

Ironically enough, if it wasn't a copy or duplicate, 131M sub B wouldn't apply because it has to be an assault weapon to get grandfathered in 131M sub B, and if this bill didn't include the copies or duplicates test you'd have a featureless rifle and that wouldn't be an assault rife so it wouldn't get grandfathered.

If you do build it, under current law you do need to register it within 7 days I believe. However, you could have lawfully possessed it on 8/1 without an FA 10 if you constructed it 6 days or fewer prior.

IANAL - total amateur, I'm probably wrong.

 

[not new guy]

TBH its probably an acknowledgement of the inherent faggotry in the old laws. To have anything other than a clean cut off and one simple class of guns just makes things a nightmare but they seem to have even partially f***ed that up. TBH i can easily see a prosecutor just adopting the 8/1 cutoff and ignoring everything else. You only need a gun trace to use as a test for that, unless something was home-made. I don't think they're going to engage in level 2 gymnastics.

That bit felt more to me like they were just lazy/incompetent and gave up trying to either connect or tie off those loose ends. They made it too complicated and losing the features ban was a casualty.

 

[Picton]

I used to get that mad but I saw the writing on the wall and left.

I might have phrased that poorly: I'm not mad.

When I say I'm "fired up," I mean I'm excited. I never thought I'd be a part of something like this. When I was in school, learning about the civil rights struggle, it didn't really resonate with me: I was a white kid in Southern California during the '80s, so the idea of guys getting firehosed and clubbed for their civil rights felt far, far away from me.

Now I'm getting an inkling of what they were thinking about as they dealt with a state that was blatantly and deliberately acting in contravention of their constitutional rights, then daring them to do something about it. It's not really anger. It's making me feel invigorated. Like I have nothing else to lose. Like I've got a kind of power, really.

I KNOW the constitution is on my side. I KNOW the state will lose, though it might take several years. I'm fine with that. I love that this situation puts Maura Healy in the shoes of George Wallace as an obstructionist tyrant with no sense of the liberties she's supposed to protect. I find that amusing, frankly.

 

[Beretta92FS]

If you do build it, under current law you do need to register it within 7 days I believe. However, you could have lawfully possessed it on 8/1 without an FA 10 if you constructed it 6 days or fewer prior.

I think just a few pages back, someone indicated that a new gun you yourself build on a stripped lower is neither “purchased or obtained”, and hence it’s no legal requirement to FA10 such a gun. I’d love to explore that topic a little deeper.

 

[mothybee]

I guess Mass residents will find out 8/2 if TSA is still shipping ammo in.

I think I read 90 days after signature, so Oct.23. I don't know, I'm so confused. Guess I'll just keep doing what I do.

 

[AJK129]

I might have phrased that poorly: I'm not mad.

When I say I'm "fired up," I mean I'm excited. I never thought I'd be a part of something like this. When I was in school, learning about the civil rights struggle, it didn't really resonate with me: I was a white kid in Southern California during the '80s, so the idea of guys getting firehosed and clubbed for their civil rights felt far, far away from me.

Now I'm getting an inkling of what they were thinking about as they dealt with a state that was blatantly and deliberately acting in contravention of their constitutional rights, then daring them to do something about it. It's not really anger. It's making me feel invigorated. Like I have nothing else to lose. Like I've got a kind of power, really.

I KNOW the constitution is on my side. I KNOW the state will lose, though it might take several years. I'm fine with that. I love that this situation puts Maura Healy in the shoes of George Wallace as an obstructionist tyrant with no sense of the liberties she's supposed to protect. I find that amusing, frankly.

My ancestors owned one of the gun caches in Concord, and fought and killed the british on the North Bridge.

The state can get f***ed

 

[VTski4x4]

Isn't a referendum a dumb idea? The State aided by the media will push this as a ghost gun bill, and it will be upheld by a huge margin of voters. Won't that make it harder to beat?

 

[Jenska22]

Isn't a referendum a dumb idea? The State aided by the media will push this as a ghost gun bill, and it will be upheld by a huge margin of voters. Won't that make it harder to beat?

Maybe, but is step#2 to request an injunction until the referendum?

 

[ddeck]

Isn't a referendum a dumb idea? The State aided by the media will push this as a ghost gun bill, and it will be upheld by a huge margin of voters. Won't that make it harder to beat?

I see it as a delay tactic. Get the number of sigs to delay the implementation and then perhaps lose the referendum, but by then maybe you've got a lot more people knowing about the shitshow that is the bill.

 

[MAJoe]

Isn't a referendum a dumb idea? The State aided by the media will push this as a ghost gun bill, and it will be upheld by a huge margin of voters. Won't that make it harder to beat?

Not sure if it hurts future court cases, but I see its success similar to thinking this was going to get line item vetos.

I do think GOAL can get the 50k signatures.

 

[Gunowner80]

Because there was no emergency preamble, I'm increasingly of the opinion that a stripped lower is:

a.) legal to possess on 8/1 because the current law applies on 8/1
b.) is legally possessed on 8/1 without an FA 10
c.) I believe the law is indeed referring to a future registration requirement
d.) the new law considers the receiver a firearm, and because it is a copy or duplicate it is an assault weapon

So now, by 131M, you have a lawfully owned assault weapon on 8/1 and as long as you do register in the new system when its ready, I don't really see how you lose based on the logical flow of this law.

Ironically enough, if it wasn't a copy or duplicate, 131M sub B wouldn't apply because it has to be an assault weapon to get grandfathered in 131M sub B, and if this bill didn't include the copies or duplicates test you'd have a featureless rifle and that wouldn't be an assault rife so it wouldn't get grandfathered.

If you do build it, under current law you do need to register it within 7 days I believe. However, you could have lawfully possessed it on 8/1 without an FA 10 if you constructed it 6 days or fewer prior.

IANAL - total amateur, I'm probably wrong.

Thanks for the response. If I can get my hands on a lower before 8/1, I won’t build it out then. Hopefully I can have my hands on more than one to make some good money post 8/1.

 

[silversquirrel]

Isn't a referendum a dumb idea? The State aided by the media will push this as a ghost gun bill, and it will be upheld by a huge margin of voters. Won't that make it harder to beat?

Maybe so. But its a step in right direction. Get some awareness out there about all the other crap besides ghost guns that were slid in under false pretences.

 

[sig shooter]

I heard it's like the TSA, as long as they don't have more than 3oz of liquid in them, you

Breaking news.

I’ll sign it

 

[scott-o]

Random Q, is a pre-8/1 mega LOWER SWAP meet legal? Everyone shows up with a lower and an LTC and you pass it around until the music stops and everyone leaves?

 

[Gunowner80]

I think just a few pages back, someone indicated that a new gun you yourself build on a stripped lower is neither “purchased or obtained”, and hence it’s no legal requirement to FA10 such a gun. I’d love to explore that topic a little deeper.

Yeah, I read the same.

 

[TriggeredFinger]

Just to clarify, do we have to take possession of any newly-acquired semi-auto rifles BEFORE 8/1 or if something is acquired on that day we’re in the clear?

 

[sig shooter]

“A referendum petition is a way for people to propose repealing a law enacted by the Legislature and are voted on in statewide general elections. Referendum petitions to repeal a law are filed with the Secretary of State’s Office 30 days after the law is enacted.”

Seems like it’s not a typical ballot question. People are voting to repeal or keep a current law. GOAL might have to exhaust every avenue of relief before they can file a lawsuit.

 

[not new guy]

So what happens if everyone consigns their post-2016 AWs with an FFL prior to 8/1 and takes them back after that date? They all become automatically grandfathered because they were legally possessed on 8/1, right?

 

[GL2020]

Breaking news.

I can't wait to see the arguments they put on the ballot

Remember those? Each side gets to make an argument for and against and it's published on the question.

I applaud the effort, it would be a great win to be able to just repeal the law, but I'm skeptical it will work.
The average non gun owner thinks gun laws work....not understanding that people who do bad things with guns are unencumbered by laws

You should see how many shocked faces I get when I explain to coworkers who take the time to listen:

1) Most pistols don't have a safety...some do, but many do not. Too much TV
2) There is no gun registry either at the state or federal level. MA is "closer" with transaction tracking but it has gaping holes
3) over half the states require no permit at all to carried a loaded firearm
4) ballistics is not as accurate as a fingerprint (again too much Perry Mason) and rarely used. Shoot a few thousand rounds through a barrel and it's characteristics change...the barrel can be changed completely...intentionally damaged...and rarely is there a fragment that is in tact enough to test PLUS you need a weapon to test it against. They think crimes are easily solved cause someone found a spent casing on the ground.
5) There is no such thing as a silencer....suppressors are like mufflers....and criminals never use them...they don't have to
6) No you can't buy guns over the internet and have them shipped to your door unless you a collector with a permit for certain collectibles
7) A so-called "assault weapon/rifle" is not a machine gun - this was intentional subterfuge and it appears to have worked
8) of course having a serial number on guns doesn't keep up safer. It proves nothing unless you tie a transaction to a person and the firearm to a crime
9) There is no gun show loop hole no matter what PBS says

 

[Hombiez]

I think just a few pages back, someone indicated that a new gun you yourself build on a stripped lower is neither “purchased or obtained”, and hence it’s no legal requirement to FA10 such a gun. I’d love to explore that topic a little deeper.

I mean it depends. Here is the relevant section. Up to you how broadly "obtained" can be read. I think you're going to get the broadest interpretation of this possible if you were ever in a court over this. They could probably argue you are the "any other source" in this equation. I get that a strict reading wouldn't require this though.

Section 128B. Any resident of the commonwealth who purchases or obtains a firearm, rifle or shotgun or machine gun from any source within or without the commonwealth, other than from a licensee under section one hundred and twenty-two or a person authorized to sell firearms under section one hundred and twenty-eight A, and any nonresident of the commonwealth who purchases or obtains a firearm, rifle, shotgun or machine gun from any source within or without the commonwealth, other than such a licensee or person, and receives such firearm, rifle, shotgun or machine gun, within the commonwealth shall within seven days after receiving such firearm, rifle, shotgun or machine gun, report, in writing, to the commissioner of the department of criminal justice information services the name and address of the seller or donor and the buyer or donee, together with a complete description of the firearm, rifle, shotgun or machine gun, including the caliber, make and serial number. Whoever violates any provision of this section shall for the first offense be punished by a fine of not less than $500 nor more than $1,000 and for any subsequent offense by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than ten years.

 

[scott-o]

RANT: Such a pity the general attitude in MA is against gun owners.
Here in my NH home, I go into town its not rare to see multiple guys and/or gals open carry or shirt riding up when concealed, etc.

No body cares. To the police just another day, citizens everyone's happy, conversing, living life and letting others live theirs. "Nobody's getting hurt so what's the big deal?"
My only thought is usually "wow he needs a better holster" or maybe he should pick a different position for that spare tire.

I go to my MA home, I'm in a conservative town overall, but we got our Karens for sure.

If you are a gun owner in the state you have to first jump through all the BS to become one.

Then, once you become one you are so "scared straight" by the training process that the state F*CKING HATES YOU and all the things you CANT DO, oh and also, you're going to get boned if you do have to use it anyway; so be ready.

Then continue to actually DARE to carry, you have to dodge the Karen's who will see you printing and/or have to check for your shirt riding up constantly and chances of Karens increase based on the town you are in or people you can pick out of a crowd.

Disheartening

 

[mothybee]

The more I look at this I can see the technicality web weaved throughout this thing is crafted to effect a semiautomatic ban with killing the dealer outlets, shut down the flow in of anything, and control with Commie defined rosters, barriers with licensing and training, It’s not some “non-gun” idiot ramblings, it’s smartly crafted in many areas.

The Left Coast and Bloomberger have had a long time and a lot of money to fix all their small mistakes of the past and cut anything they deemed as “loopholes”.

Someone knew, a Benedict Arnold, and told them exactly how to write this thing to let the axes fall everywhere.

I had a dream last night of thousands of the Kings men marching on the commonwealth.

Damn Canadians.

 

[LuvDog]

They're going to have to be sending out thousands of those letters though.

Also the thing you posit, technically that's also something EOPS doesn't do. They might rat but they don't act. Suspensions or Revocations are on your issuing authority. Is your town going to pay a clerk locally to contact and threaten all these people? Lol

Regardless my response will be the same "Sorry, but, get f***ed"

Yup. The response will basically be Get Bent or Come back with a warrant.

Why the pant sh*tting over what the FRB has as recorded transfers. We all know the data they have is an inaccurate picture of what you may own.
You could have sold them, you could have destroyed them. Heck, even if you still own it, maybe you store it at a cabin in ME.

 

[pastera]

Because there was no emergency preamble, I'm increasingly of the opinion that a stripped lower is:

a.) legal to possess on 8/1 because the current law applies on 8/1
b.) is legally possessed on 8/1 without an FA 10
c.) I believe the law is indeed referring to a future registration requirement
d.) the new law considers the receiver a firearm, and because it is a copy or duplicate it is an assault weapon

So now, by 131M, you have a lawfully owned assault weapon on 8/1 and as long as you do register in the new system when its ready, I don't really see how you lose based on the logical flow of this law.

Ironically enough, if it wasn't a copy or duplicate, 131M sub B wouldn't apply because it has to be an assault weapon to get grandfathered in 131M sub B, and if this bill didn't include the copies or duplicates test you'd have a featureless rifle and that wouldn't be an assault rife so it wouldn't get grandfathered.

If you do build it, under current law you do need to register it within 7 days I believe. However, you could have lawfully possessed it on 8/1 without an FA 10 if you constructed it 6 days or fewer prior.

IANAL - total amateur, I'm probably wrong.

Other than (c) we are all in agreement
Because they mention registered in the definition of ASW with a date in the past the legislative intent to treat the transaction database as a registry is clear.
However, there was no requirement for you to ensure the portal was a true inventory of your guns the lack of an entry wouldn't stop you from 8/1/24 grandfathering as long as you can show it was possessed on that day.

 

[pastera]

I think just a few pages back, someone indicated that a new gun you yourself build on a stripped lower is neither “purchased or obtained”, and hence it’s no legal requirement to FA10 such a gun. I’d love to explore that topic a little deeper.

Go for it.

 

[pastera]

Isn't a referendum a dumb idea? The State aided by the media will push this as a ghost gun bill, and it will be upheld by a huge margin of voters. Won't that make it harder to beat?

It's not about beating it, it's about delaying it.