.

Uzi2 said:
People in free states would never understand the question, they don't accept or live under tyranny.
Click to expand...
There's another reason as well... most of them are complacent and don't even think about it for more than 10 seconds. They're not even cognizant that places are f***ed up as mass is.
 
drgrant said:
There's another reason as well... most of them are complacent and don't even think about it for more than 10 seconds. They're not even cognizant that places are f***ed up as mass is.
Click to expand...
It’s a short sighted statement.

Everyone lives under tyranny in this country. It’s just a question of how much your willing to tolerate.

Income tax?
Sales tax?
Excise tax?
Property tax?

Etc. etc.
 
Junior314 said:
It’s a short sighted statement.

Everyone lives under tyranny in this country. It’s just a question of how much your willing to tolerate.

Income tax?
Sales tax?
Excise tax?
Property tax?

Etc. etc.
Click to expand...
Too much of the above in MA.

Just paid my excise (ouch) and my W/S/T bill with a (sorta new) ~$10 tax on my property for rain water that may drain into the sewers.
 
drgrant said:
There's another reason as well... most of them are complacent and don't even think about it for more than 10 seconds. They're not even cognizant that places are f***ed up as mass is.
Click to expand...
MA laws don’t surprise me - I lived in CT for about forty years. My friends down here however, when hearing about MA or CT laws typically respond with disbelief.
 
Reptile said:
Grandfathering does mean something...

It will buy the state time.

If the DON'T grandfather - we'll have a better chance in court to have the whole thing thrown out.
Click to expand...
None of that is true. All grandfathering does is make the majority of gun owners easier to manipulate. One sided compromising.
 
Bluestateblues413 said:
Ahh ok… interesting take.. I’m curious what this belief is based upon? That the state has the burden of proof to prove you didn’t.

Not doubting you just curious if there is any case law around this.

I am just trying to give a friend good advice, personally I am exempt from most of this nonsense (LE) *for now* - until the decide to come after us too.

All of us western MA Leo’s can’t stand this BS… idk about the cops out east tho.
Click to expand...

Then I'd ask you to speak to your chiefs about coming out against MCOPA's support for it if they can without jeopardizing their future. Because they are speaking for you and taking your silence as active support.

As someone in western MA as well, I sent out 8 emails to COP's in my locality, and pretty much got a cop-out (pun unintended but liked it when I realized so it stayed) reply from all of them stating they support it because it's the "best" one out of the two. Which they only gave once their carve out was acquired. Amherst, Northampton, Granby, Hadley, South Hadley, Belchertown, Ware and Palmer all gave me the same basic answer.

And your carve out only applies to your duty weapons and while you are active LEO, based on the last peice I read.
 
Bluestateblues413 said:
the question has been answered. A lot of shit slinging in here now. I don’t really care but I’m sure the forum mods don’t appreciate the drama. I would have deleted the thread but it doesn’t seem to want to allow me to do that was my solution. Appreciate the input, and all the snark.

I’m not so sure about that… if you read the new law it has a line about Healy’s bullshit basically saying everything will be grandfathered *IF* it was in the state and registered before 07/20/2016.

Absolute nonsense.

My friend is just going to have to decide for himself how much risk he is willing to take. I was only trying to get him an answer, believe me I asked around my LEO circles first and NO ONE knows the answer. Which is why I came here.

We are all just as baffled and annoyed by her bullshit as all of you are.
Click to expand...
You are partly right. There isn't a "new law". It's 2 bills. And the 2 bills have differences between them. If I recall correctly only one of the bills has that language, which means it will need to be reconciled before it goes any further.

My point above is to allow you to legitimately register it without having to buy another upper. Look at it this way. If the bill passes and that lower can't be kept, then you haven't spent any extra money on a neutered upper.

If the new language grandfathers it, then you can then spend your money building up a pre-ban gun. Since it will be grandfathered. Either way, building it up and registering it with an upper that you already own achieves 2 things.
1) you can say under oath that it was built when you registered it.
2) its a hedge. Because regardless of how things end up, you want to spend as little money right now.
 
Grendizer138 said:
Note to self: if I ever want to drive traffic to a thread, delete the title.

View attachment 860883
Click to expand...
or better - never have a title
Modern Problems Funny Gif GIF by MOODMAN
 
Reptile said:
Grandfathering does mean something...

It will buy the state time.

If the DON'T grandfather - we'll have a better chance in court to have the whole thing thrown out.
Click to expand...
So what grandfathering is in the proposed bill?
You must be looking at a different package of possibilities than I am if you think any of the wording allows for anyone to substantially keep anything post 1994.

So keep pushing bullshit to sell overpriced newbie rape kits to butt fck the desperate for a dollar or two.
 
pastera said:
So what grandfathering is in the proposed bill?
You must be looking at a different package of possibilities than I am if you think any of the wording allows for anyone to substantially keep anything post 1994.

So keep pushing bullshit to sell overpriced newbie rape kits to butt fck the desperate for a dollar or two.
Click to expand...
There is no mention of grandfathering.

I think it will be addressed one way or another in the new law.

They could just say that ALL AR's are banned - or codify Healey's edict and say post 2016 AR's are banned.

They said they want to codify Healey's edict but they don't say if anything will be grandfathered or not.

If they make Healey's edict law - her edict on her website says that AR's and lowers owned in state before July 16, 2016 are legal.
Her FAQ also says that AR's that are of the 22LR caliber are legal.
All of this is in her FAQ that is still up.
 
Reptile said:
I think it will be addressed one way or another in the new law.

or codify Healey's edict and say post 2016 AR's are banned.

They said they want to codify Healey's edict but they don't say if anything will be grandfathered or not.
Click to expand...
Not that our statehouse 'lawmakers' are known for making any sense but...
How is it that the 2016-press-release-that-was-and-is-still-not-law, can now be codified as law while using the original 2016 date?
The guns in compliance of the awb obtained since then were done so legally, using the 2016 cutoff would be ex post facto...
 
Last edited:
wcorey said:
Not that or statehouse 'lawmakers' make are known for making any sense but...
How is it that the 2016-press-release-that-was-and-is-still-not-law, can now be codified as law while using the original 2016 date?
The guns in compliance of the awb obtained since then were done so legally, using the 2016 cutoff would be ex post facto...
Click to expand...
I never thought of the ex post facto thing.

They still want to ban ARs though.

By hook or by crook.

So what is your guess???

Will they have a new ban date?
 
Reptile said:
So what is your guess???

Will they have a new ban date?
Click to expand...

I have no idea, you can't assume they use reason or logic, it's like trying to guess what a person born blind sees in their dreams...
What I would bet on is that, if the bill even makes it out of committee, the frame/receiver thing will then align with the federal definitions.
Hedge your bets and get your off roster stuff/receivers soon...
 
Last edited:
VTski4x4 said:
I'd venture to guess that roughly 500k ARs have been bought or built since 2016 - with likely more than half of them being "registered" in the online portal. I like those odds 😏
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Once it’s built, I think it’s dumb not to register it.

There are no recordkeeping requirements on dispositions outside of the state, and they know their database is garbage. Registration just keeps you legal,

I don’t understand why you wouldn’t want to break an actual law by being afraid of violating the guidance.

If the gun is gone, and there is a knock at the door, the answer is very simple. I no longer have it, no I won’t tell you where it went.

That kind of response is 100% within the law.

If you want to keep the gun out of the states, database and stay legal the answer is simple. Don’t build it.

Now you are 100% in compliance with the law, the state doesn’t know about it, and yet you still have the ability to put something together if the world goes sideways.

One of the nice things about AR is that you can function test, and zero the intended upper on an existing built lower,
 
dcmdon said:
Absolutely. Once it’s built, I think it’s dumb not to register it.

There are no recordkeeping requirements on dispositions outside of the state, and they know their database is garbage. Registration just keeps you legal,

I don’t understand why you wouldn’t want to break an actual law by being afraid of violating the guidance.

If the gun is gone, and there is a knock at the door, the answer is very simple. I no longer have it, no I won’t tell you where it went.

That kind of response is 100% within the law.

If you want to keep the gun out of the states, database and stay legal the answer is simple. Don’t build it.

Now you are 100% in compliance with the law, the state doesn’t know about it, and yet you still have the ability to put something together if the world goes sideways.

One of the nice things about AR is that you can function test, and zero the intended upper on an existing built lower,
Click to expand...
1712926942559.png
 
dcmdon said:
Absolutely. Once it’s built, I think it’s dumb not to register it.

There are no recordkeeping requirements on dispositions outside of the state, and they know their database is garbage. Registration just keeps you legal,

I don’t understand why you wouldn’t want to break an actual law by being afraid of violating the guidance.

If the gun is gone, and there is a knock at the door, the answer is very simple. I no longer have it, no I won’t tell you where it went.

That kind of response is 100% within the law.

If you want to keep the gun out of the states, database and stay legal the answer is simple. Don’t build it.

Now you are 100% in compliance with the law, the state doesn’t know about it, and yet you still have the ability to put something together if the world goes sideways.

One of the nice things about AR is that you can function test, and zero the intended upper on an existing built lower,
Click to expand...
I hear you. But in a state that has demonstrated their willingness to publish 10+ years of transaction records, 'I would agree with St. Augustine that "an unjust law is no law at all."'
 
Back
Top Bottom