2023 MA Gun Ban: AR-15 Transfers Allowed After Registration?

[pastera]

The original bill gave me the option of removing them (specifically “assault weapons” [sic]) from the state. So was not sure how that will fly with the new bill

There is an "other transfers" so that might allow reporting that the firearm was relocated to another state.
I don't see an option for destruction which is a legal option especially with the requirement to register PMF that may spontaneously and destructively self-disassemble.

504 (b) All firearm transactions within the commonwealth, including, but not limited to, all purchases, sales, rentals, leases, loans or other transfers shall be reported to the electronic firearms registration system. All firearm transactions shall be reported by all parties to the transaction via the electronic firearms registration system within 7 days of the sale, rental, lease, loan or other transfer; provided, however, that no report shall be required for a loan of a firearm to a duly licensed or exempted person for a period of less than 7 days.

 

[SavageShooter]

This new "life as a newly-minted Massachusetts gun felon" thing is starting to sound like less fun than I expected. In fact, a lot less fun.

Shouldn't be a problem as long as nobody gets caught. Not sure how the people in NY and CT who refused to register their guns are doing. A lot of stuff is probably just gathering dust in safes because nobody wants to take it outside and risk arrest.

 

[sieveboy]

When was the last time an AR15 was used in an actual crime in MA?

Most recent FBI data indicates no rifles used in MA murders in 2019 or 2020

 

[chris_1001]

There is an "other transfers" so that might allow reporting that the firearm was relocated to another state.
I don't see an option for destruction which is a legal option especially with the requirement to register PMF that may spontaneously and destructively self-disassemble.

No “boat accident” check box either?

 

[EJFudd]

Shouldn't be a problem as long as nobody gets caught. Not sure how the people in NY and CT who refused to register their guns are doing. A lot of stuff is probably just gathering dust in safes because nobody wants to take it outside and risk arrest.

Unless SCOTUS decides to save us in time, methinks a lot of good people are potentially going to lose everything over ridiculous, unconstitutional provisions in the new law. One nutty "Demanding Mom" neighbor is all it would take to initiate a world of hurt and trouble and financial ruin... and all just for being a legal gunowner in Massachusetts.

 

[SavageShooter]

Unless SCOTUS decides to save us in time, methinks a lot of good people are potentially going to lose everything over ridiculous, unconstitutional provisions in the new law. One nutty "Demanding Mom" neighbor is all it would take to initiate a world of hurt and trouble and financial ruin... and all just for being a legal gunowner in Massachusetts.

OK, I am fully aware of the rules for posting here and I would not advocate doing anything illegal. That said, it is far more than just posting rules. I would never give someone advice, encourage them to act upon it, they end up in the shit and now I have that weight on my conscience. I have absolutely no interest in that. None whatsoever. I know what I will do if this bullshit gets Healey's signature. I am sure others do as well. Let's all just keep it on the downlow. The less we tip our hands, the better.

 

[EJFudd]

OK, I am fully aware of the rules for posting here and I would not advocate doing anything illegal. That said, it is far more than just posting rules. I would never give someone advice, encourage them to act upon it, they end up in the shit and now I have that weight on my conscience. I have absolutely no interest in that. None whatsoever. I know what I will do if this bullshit gets Healey's signature. I am sure others do as well. Let's all just keep it on the downlow. The less we tip our hands, the better.

Oh, I'm not looking for any kind of advice. Wouldn't take any anyway. I'm just lamenting the kind of stuff that @Rob Boudrie is talking about above. Pretty awful stuff to have to think about when the law they are trying to pass isn't even Constitutional.

 

[Tartakovsky]

No “boat accident” check box either?

Let me know when they add the “Go F Yourselves” check box

 

[TayNinh_66]

You never know how fast things can proceed. If LE thinks you are holding out on them, they can post a couple of uniformed officers outside your door while a detective beelines it to court to get a search warrant. There is always at least one judge on call, even after the close of court business hours. You might delay LE for a while, but you sure won't stop them if they are that determined.

I 'politely' declined an invitation to testify at a grand jury proceeding. Subpoena was hand delivered four days later.

 

[SavageShooter]

I 'politely' declined an invitation to testify at a grand jury proceeding. Subpoena was hand delivered four days later.

Some people seem to think that defying court orders is some kind of joke. When they face the consequences, they realize it is no laughing matter. If police come to your door to confiscate your guns, they will not wait patiently while you open your safe, put them in cases and hand them over. No, you will be handcuffed for officer safety. If you don't open the safe, they will have a flatbed tow truck haul the whole damn thing away to the police station or have it forced open by a locksmith. I love the bravado on this forum!

 

[StevieP]

I am so frickin' glad this is no longer a problem I have to consider.

Moving from MA to NC was one of the best decisions I've ever made. I can't see me ever moving back to New England.

f*** that shit.

 

[powerman]

i see the word "registration", doesn't the state constitution say that there shall be no registrations. and the state use the word "transfer" to skirt that?

 

[Reptile]

What is the status of a stripped lower?

Is that considered a gun now???

 

[pastera]

i see the word "registration", doesn't the state constitution say that there shall be no registrations. and the state use the word "transfer" to skirt that?

No registration is a federal thing - Mass doesn't care since all of the FUDS will hurt themselves rushing to register everything they own. Once the state has that info they will never destroy it even if the registry is struck down later.

 

[Broc]

What is the status of a stripped lower?

Is that considered a gun now???

Dude, you are going to be stuck with those $2K lowers for being greedy.

 

[Varmint]

You live in MA. You and all of the other brave patriots over there haven’t done anything about the the tyranny in MA, and you want us to believe you’re going to be watering the liberty tree if SCOTUS doesn’t uphold previous rulings at the federal level? Thanks for the laugh.

Right, the real men ran away from Mass.

 

[Varmint]

So what happens to a mass resident who decides just to move his firearms to Florida. Under the pending bill it appears he is ok because the ar is not in Mass despite him being a resident still in Mass?

Are you asking if it’s illegal in Mass to possess a gun in Florida?

 

[radioman]

So I guess no more—— Our lives, Our fortunes and Our sacred honor!

 

[Knob Creek]

At one time you could get copies of records of your FA10s and previous transfers. I did this quite a few years ago.

 

[pastera]

At one time you could get copies of records of your FA10s and previous transfers. I did this quite a few years ago.

I have no need to create a digital record showing that I am aware of the accuracy of the state's illegal data collection on my privately held property.

 

[kalash]

Are they talking about creating a whole new registration system or just mandating eFA10 for a wider range of possessions?

 

[Woodsloafer]

Are they talking about creating a whole new registration system or just mandating eFA10 for a wider range of possessions?

I believe a whole new registration system BUT, and herein lies the problem, they will probably use the eFA10 system to "proof" your registrations. So, as I see it, at some point, perhaps when you go to renew your LTC, etc., they will inquire about those firearms that are on the eFA10 list that you have not registered in the new system. And this is how we will get frucked, especially if you cannot provide documentation of selling/trading that firearm. And if you cannot produce the documentation, will that preventing you from renewing your LTC and force you to turn in the guns you do have??? Complete shit show possible IMO.

 

[kalash]

Many of my friends and family who own guns didn't even know about this bill until I told them. They're not going to have any idea that they need to go register all their guns in some new system if this passes - I bet 98% of gun owners won't realize that they have to do something.

 

[SavageShooter]

Are they talking about creating a whole new registration system or just mandating eFA10 for a wider range of possessions?

That FA10 system is a monster that keeps growing. The major problem with it is that records are entered but never removed. Over the course of my life, I have owned many vehicles, including motorcycles and one boat. When I sold or traded them, canceled the insurance and surrendered the tag, the RMV took them out of my name. If a car that I sold 12 years ago is used in a crime tomorrow, it will not be my problem. There are guns in that FA10 system that I sold out-of-state back in the 1980s. I do not have records of sales. I keep all records for 7 years, then shred them.

 

[maltc]

To efa10 your rifle, all you need is serial number, barrel length, color and caliber. Not sure why you can not build your rifle, efa10 it, then strip it down. I know of no law that says you can not change the barrel, or color of your rifle or keep it whole. I bet you could build that rifle, efa10 it and strip it down in under an hour. Possibly even faster if you used your imagination

Had the same exact thought. You could even efa10 a stripped lower and NOT build it. (Just pretend to use all the parts from one of your other complete builds). No one is checking. Technically you could have built, efa10’d, immediately stripped.

 

[MAJoe]

Had the same exact thought. You could even efa10 a stripped lower and NOT build it. (Just pretend to use all the parts from one of your other complete builds). No one is checking. Technically you could have built, efa10’d, immediately stripped.

Many dealers also used to FA10 stripped lowers. Many of those owners then did an FA10 when the rifle was built, so two entries for the same firearm. Easy to see the SN is the same, but nonetheless, one example of poor data.

 

[Knob Creek]

I have no need to create a digital record showing that I am aware of the accuracy of the state's illegal data collection on my privately held property.

This was probably 25 years ago. You snail mailed them the request. They copied what they had including the rice paper forms.

If they do have a new system for Registration it would be a difficult task but they could view the eFA10 system for firearms and compare it to what you have put into the new system.

 

[pastera]

If you have firearms that are currently or would be prohibited under this bill, you are under ZERO requirement to register those firearms.

Haynes v. United States, 390 U.S. 85 (1968)

Haynes v. United States

supreme.justia.com

National Firearms Act | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

The NFA was originally enacted in 1934. Similar to the current NFA, the original Act imposed a tax on the making and transfer of firearms defined by the Act, as well as a special (occupational) tax on persons and entities engaged in the business of importing, manufacturing, and dealing in NFA...

www.atf.gov

For these reasons, the Supreme Court in 1968 held in the Haynes case that a person prosecuted for possessing an unregistered NFA firearm had a valid defense to the prosecution — the registration requirement imposed on the possessor of an unregistered firearm violated the possessor’s privilege from self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The Haynes decision made the 1934 Act virtually unenforceable.

But that didn't last long

In 1971, the Supreme Court reexamined the NFA in the Freed case and found that the 1968 amendments cured the constitutional defect in the original NFA.

However, Haynes is still in effect therefore a person cannot be held accountable for not reporting or registering the possession of a firearm that would put the possessor at risk of prosecution.

If you have an item that doesn't meet the AWB in Mass, you cannot be charged for failure to report loss or theft, transfer or possession. However you can still be charged with the possession of that item.

 

[pastera]

This was probably 25 years ago. You snail mailed them the request. They copied what they had including the rice paper forms.

If they do have a new system for Registration it would be a difficult task but they could view the eFA10 system for firearms and compare it to what you have put into the new system.

Even 25 years ago the request and its fulfillment created searchable records of those actions.

And merging the current system with a new database would be a exceedingly simple task - especially when the state assumes zero risk from error

 

[kalash]

The challenge with porting over FA10 into the new system is that you'd end up with the same garage data, at least as the starting point. Not that the state is even remotely concerned with that, of course.