Worman v. Baker (MA AWB) Oral Arguments 1-9-2019

I expect the bump stock ban / turn in laid out the path for the eventual same to occur with rifles covered by Healy’s expanded AWB. We’ll all be told to turn them in or face prosecution. Unlike bump stocks they know who has FA-10’d them.
 
I expect the bump stock ban / turn in laid out the path for the eventual same to occur with rifles covered by Healy’s expanded AWB. We’ll all be told to turn them in or face prosecution. Unlike bump stocks they know who has FA-10’d them.

But no idea on how many you can still build.
 
Yeah, this was the same Judge Young in the shoe bomber case. I used to like him. Today, not so much.

Young basically cribbed the 2A analysis from the en banc decision in the 4th Circuit (Kolbe v Hogan). In most people's opinion, that decision was a shoo in for a SCOTUS hearing due to its bizarre analysis of Heller (basically substituting dictum for holding -- and screwing up the dictum as well). Well, SCOTUS did not take up Kolbe v Hogan, but that might change. Unfortunately, it would take a couple of SCOTUS personnel changes to make this a really good time to push another 2A case.
 
Last edited:
I agree with Babygorilla that it was inevitable that this ruling at this level would have been appealed either way by the losing side. Don't panic just yet. Donate to Comm2a when possible.

It's unlikely to go much better for us in the First Circuit. The Fourth Circuit is (was) generally considered to be more conservative and less liberal than most other circuits, including the First, and yet they issued the Kolbe blasphemy.
 
Same as we’ve all known for years if you choose not to obey the law it doesn’t apply to you- unless you get caught AND have something to lose.

Not sure if serious...
Which law is that? The one where I build a legal stripped lower (not a firearm in MA) into a legal complete lower (not a firearm in MA) ?
Not sure what I would be caught for? Unless they enact a full "turn 'em in" ban and decide to go door to door.... not very confident in that happening. Even then... according to MGL... not a firearm.
 
Not sure if serious...
Which law is that? The one where I build a legal stripped lower (not a firearm in MA) into a legal complete lower (not a firearm in MA) ?
Not sure what I would be caught for? Unless they enact a full "turn 'em in" ban and decide to go door to door.... not very confident in that happening. Even then... according to MGL... not a firearm.
A stripped lower becomes a firearm under MGL one assembled, at which point you have to file an eFA-10. There is, however, no law that states that you cannot give your own model designation to a gun that you "build", so you might want to consider a designation of "ZK1000" (Zombie Killer) rather than "AR15" when filing your eFA10 if you do a from scratch build.
 
Last edited:
With FA10 registration next comes the $100 / day fine and knock on the door by Herr Healy’s SS.

I would be surprised if one in five people actually register out of state purchases. There doesn’t seem to be much benefit on the risk vs reward scale.
 
It's unlikely to go much better for us in the First Circuit. The Fourth Circuit is (was) generally considered to be more conservative and less liberal than most other circuits, including the First, and yet they issued the Kolbe blasphemy.

The 4th Cir. was considered relatively conservative, but it became a project of the Obama Administration to change that. I believe that it now has about eight(ish) Obama appointees. (I looked up every judge after the Kolbe decision, but don't have my notes in front of me.)
 
A stripped lower becomes a firearm under MGL one assembled, at which point you have to file an eFA-10.
And if I do not have an upper in the vicinity to connect it to? How is this able to fire a round and become a firearm in MA? (not challenging, asking...)
 
How much did the judge get or what promise was made? That judge is 1,000 % incorrect ! !!! It’s Bullshit a answer
 
i thought he was being kinda douchey when and how he said it, but he raised a good point.

a guy was talking one day that he was a gun owner and a cop and if you pulled the "boating accident" line, he would ask to see the receipt from the transaction reporting lost firearms. no production= free shiny bracelets.

have a back up plan. a chunk of junk for each numbered item that, as Mickey Mouse says, is a secret tool that will help us later. ;)
 
Was this intentional to force the issue in front of a national stage? They pretty much said that this isn't the right venue (applying a federal right to a state right).

The 14th amendment was ratified for the explicit purpose to apply federal rights to the states. And this has been happening to all rights since then.
 
Young's assertion that if a gun is useful for military purposes it is not protected is complete poppycock. If Scalia were alive today he would eviscerate this opinion.

Hmm, so shotguns, handguns and bolt action rifles should not be protected? Wake up, Fudds, they're coming for your stuff.
 
a guy was talking one day that he was a gun owner and a cop and if you pulled the "boating accident" line, he would ask to see the receipt from the transaction reporting lost firearms. no production= free shiny bracelets.

"Great that you're here, officer, cause someone just stole my guns this morning, i was about to call you guys!"
 
the FUDDs will never be on our side. When it comes time to turn in their guns, they will do so with a big smile on their face, because they are 2A supporters "but"

I've a hard time believing they won't care if their guns are declared illegal. But by that point, ARs will be long gone.

But I think this country has gone way past the point where you could confiscate guns on a large scale. If you can't even get NYers to turn in their guns, how's it gonna work in Kentucky?
 
My question to those that know better than me:

Generally gun cases in this area are losing propositions it seems. Did we have reasonable assurance we would win, and this is unexpected?

Or,

Did we think it was not a winner, yet, but could be if appealed to a higher court?

I think that question is significant in how we all interpret the results. If the end game was SCOTUS or something else, some of the concern is alleviated because this was roughly the expected outcome.
 
Last edited:
But I think this country has gone way past the point where you could confiscate guns on a large scale. If you can't even get NYers to turn in their guns, how's it gonna work in Kentucky?

No one will confiscate firearms. The types of weapons people can own will get small, and the people who can own them will get smaller. This is the long term plan from the left, it wont happen overnight but one day people are going to be sitting around saying what the hell happened.
 
No one will confiscate firearms. The types of weapons people can own will get small, and the people who can own them will get smaller. This is the long term plan from the left, it wont happen overnight but one day people are going to be sitting around saying what the hell happened.

This will only happen if people stop wanting guns - no sign of that, in fact it's the opposite.

Will be interesting to see come november what is the effect on politicans who came out pro-confiscation and gun bans.
 
Back
Top Bottom