This is the parallel I’m trying to create here. Pre-94 ARs are completely legal in MA. Zero question. No argument.
There is an argument here that post-7/20 ARs are not lawfully possessed. Why? Dealers were not shut down selling lowers during inspections. ATF approved Form 1s after state confirmation. CLEO notifications sent for each form.
The new law only mentions 1994 twice. Once for Appendix A exempt rifles and once for mags. People are making the assumption the intent of the new law is to criminalize post-7/20 ARs but in the text of the law it makes zero distinction based on manufacture date if it was first in the state on 7/20 or later. It’s a copy or duplicate.
I agree (not a lawyer so means nothing) with Dean, Attorney Tassel, and others that ARs up until 8/1 are (most likely) okay. But if you’re in the camp that they’re aren’t, I see any lower or rifle that’s a copy/dupe first in state 7/20 or later in the same boat. In practicality I can see the risk of being charged lower.
I mostly agree. Though I’d say it’s more than an assumption about the intent of the language in the law. It’s a presumption as it’s based on evidence. There’s only one reason for them to include 7/20 in the text of the law the way they did.
I also agree that if you have a post 7/20 rifle/lower, you’re
most likely okay. As we have 8 years of precedent showing 7/20 to be meaningless, and 18 years before that of precedent showing that a copy/duplicate isn’t just any AR. There is also the fact that the new law says nothing about post 7/20 being unlawfully possessed prior to 8/2.
However, you’re wrong about ANY copy/dupe rifle/lower in the state after 7/20 being in the same boat. Yes, the law doesn’t mention ‘93/94 except for those two times, but it doesn’t need to. If someone bought a 1993 preban in 2018, it would have been 100% zero questions legal. Not even Healey could argue against it. And the new law only stipulates that the new “preban” was lawfully possessed prior to 8/2.
This creates four buckets:
1. Any AR lawfully possessed prior to 7/20
2. Any pre-94-ban lawfully possessed prior to 8/1
3. Any AR purchased post-7/20 and pre 8/1
4. Any AR purchased post 8/1, and before the bill goes into effect
Buckets 1 and 2 are functionally identical. This is where the extra money spent on “preban” status before becomes meaningless.
Bucket 3 is almost certainly never going to have any problems. But the state is clearly trying to say it is different, insinuating that post 7/20 was not lawfully possessed. In the end, yes it will probably end up being just the same as an original pre-94-ban. And the whole section of the new law discussing post-7/20 copies and duplicates will be meaningless for anything prior to 8/1. But it’s still not totally equivalent to buckets 1 and 2 above.
Bucket 4 will be seen as illegal according to the state once the law goes into effect. But anybody buying a lower post 8/1 should just play by big boy rules.
