1. If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

  2. Dismiss Notice

80% lower

Discussion in 'Massachusetts Laws' started by Judicator, Jan 31, 2019.

  1. babygorilla

    babygorilla NES Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2015
    Messages:
    1,961
    Likes Received:
    683
    Location:
    South Shore of Massachusetts
    She has decreed that even OWNING one is illegal, even if bought prior to her decree and after '94. Build it now, own it now. Still the same felon in waiting.
     

  2. kalash

    kalash

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,319
    Likes Received:
    4,870
    I'm certainly no lawyer but here's my two cents:

    I disagree simply because it wasn't a firearm part while it was at the 80% stage so what you possessed was just a hunk of metal. Now, if you finished it into a lower receiver prior to the enforcement notice, you could then legally build that into a firearm. It would be nearly impossible to definitively prove when the lower was completed.


    Yes, I would tend to agree (IANAL) although I would imagine they'd subpoena your online posts, credit card transaction history, etc) to look for any sort of evidence that would help their case. I would not want to be the test case for this.


    I don't think this would be legal because again, what you possessed prior to working on it was just some metal, not a lower.


    The law requires you to file an eFA10 within a certain number of days after completing the firearm. Before you ask, I wouldn't even dream of making the claim in court that you kept finished lowers and uppers separated and never attached one to the other so it was never a finished firearm.


    There is enough ambiguity in our laws to make strong arguments about all sorts of gray areas. That being said, how much money do you have to pay lawyers while you get dragged through the courts for several years? Do you really want to be a test case for any of this? If you have a high risk tolerance and can afford good legal representation, knock yourself out. Otherwise, just buy someone's used gun in the classifieds and FA10 it.
     
  3. one-eyed Jack

    one-eyed Jack Manufacturer Dealer NES Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    8,297
    Likes Received:
    7,507
    Location:
    Eastern Mass and southern NH
    Just engrave a pre Healey date on it and have it notarized. Right, Maura? Jack.
     
    Squib308 and TLB like this.
  4. shootermcgavin1

    shootermcgavin1 NES Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2017
    Messages:
    74
    Likes Received:
    51
    Location:
    Quincy
    Has anyone attached their upper to a previously bought lower (before 7/20/18) and registered it post-healey? I imagine you’d get a knock on the door...
     
  5. TLB

    TLB

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Messages:
    3,947
    Likes Received:
    1,520
    Location:
    Heading for greener pastures
    I'm pleading the 5th, but I can guaranty anyway that the answers to your questions are:
    "Yes and the knock didn't happen."
     
  6. kalash

    kalash

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,319
    Likes Received:
    4,870
    No one's gotten any knocks. All her enforcement notice did was scare dealers away from killy black guns, no one has gone after individual owners.
     
    Mass-diver and Mountain like this.
  7. Isaac862

    Isaac862

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2017
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Western MA

    I think mr Kalash hits the nail on the head here, that if one has the time and money to afford a lawyer and fight this kind of case, then they can afford a pre ban rifle or two and the whole point is moot. While these scenarios are interesting food for thought, reality is much more straightforward.
     
  8. SgtHal75

    SgtHal75 NES Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2016
    Messages:
    1,256
    Likes Received:
    1,138
    Location:
    Hidden rebel base
    Yup! That’s why she won’t charge anyone and she knows it
     
    Mass-diver likes this.
  9. SgtHal75

    SgtHal75 NES Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2016
    Messages:
    1,256
    Likes Received:
    1,138
    Location:
    Hidden rebel base
    Right, Buy that’s why we have that NFA of 1934, they knew no one could afford The tax stamp. This is no different. How come a 249 SAW wasn’t one of her enumerated weapons???? Because they cost about 8k.
     
  10. joe1231913

    joe1231913 Dealer NES Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    365
    Likes Received:
    212
    Location:
    MASS

    The burden of proof would be fairly easy, since you have to report a firearm within 7 days...
     
    Mass-diver likes this.
  11. jhallgren22

    jhallgren22

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2018
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    1
    There are a few shops that have sent letters into the AGs office about "mag locked" AR's, they have been producing them, selling them, and registering them since a few months after the new BS from Maura. According to lawyers the shops used, putting a "mag lock" on the lower makes it not fall under the AWB. And the Firearms Records Dept hasn't been saying no to the rifles being registered as a mag locked rifle.
     
    Crotchrocket likes this.
  12. MuzzleDiscipline

    MuzzleDiscipline NES Life Member NES Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2014
    Messages:
    413
    Likes Received:
    508
    Location:
    Spindle City
    Which shops would those be?
     
  13. Boris

    Boris Son of Kalashnikov NES Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2011
    Messages:
    18,043
    Likes Received:
    10,788
    Location:
    Back from Motherland
    I'm just curious about having an ATF agent in the family, do they eat babies and strangle puppies and recite the Constitution backwards?
     
    DPR likes this.
  14. daekken

    daekken NES Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2015
    Messages:
    3,317
    Likes Received:
    1,957
    Location:
    NH
    7/20 is not codified anywhere in the law. I think they'd have to go the "post 94" route and see if the courts will accept Maura's definition that the completed lower violates the original MA AWB as written (not "re-interpreted"). In this scenario, the 7/20 date within the notice is completely irrelevant and it would be ruling on whether or not Healey's interpretation/definition is correct with regard to the law. The ruling would be focused on that, and not "post 7/20". Reminder: if you purchased an AR/AK etc. after 1994, Healey says you committed a felony unless it is pre-ban (1994). In her interpretation all post 94 AKs and ARs are legally assault weapons. It's not "legal before the enforcement notice" as you claim above. It was illegal then, and is illegal now, it's only Healey's largesse and love of her subjects that has stopped her from seeking prosecution now.

    Same as above. The cops can't point to 7/20 since it doesn't exist in MGL. They'd have to argue you violated the AWB as written. You could then claim the interpretation that was applied to the Federal ban which was the de facto reality in MA until 7/20. The state would have to argue that the enforcement notice standard of what constitutes an AWB is the one that has been in effect since the MA AWB was passed.

    Registration would prove when it was made into a firearm. If you never register, you are violating that law (fine for first offense). A prosecutor can determine the date based on the manufacturer (if they didn't exist in 1994) or obtain payment records, etc. In this case, I think registration simply proves you had it post 1994, thus subjecting you to Healey's edict.

    For those that cling to 7/20, remember her words: "at this time" - tomorrow morning she can do another press conference and if you have a post 1994 AR/AK, she can decide that she wants to have prosecutors pursue charges.
     
    gxx9sdb likes this.
  15. Crotchrocket

    Crotchrocket NES Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2015
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    18
    Location:
    Holyoke
    We need a case to challenge in court. The more people that ignore her random edict the better chance we have of a prosecution and a day in court.
     
  16. RonBow

    RonBow

    Joined:
    May 3, 2019
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    1
    I see people claim, here and elsewhere, that you have to register a self-manufactured firearm within 7 days of completion. But I cannot find any statute to back that up. The Feds don't require registration of mfg firearms. Why would we consider mfg to a "transaction" under state law?

    Consider the Public Safety Notice on 3D printed weapons. Notice that "failure to register the weapon" is not listed as one of the potential crimes
    https://www.mass.gov/media/1894406/download
     
    pupchow likes this.
  17. mlaboss

    mlaboss NES Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2011
    Messages:
    4,075
    Likes Received:
    1,575
    MGL Chapter 140 section 128B

    https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXX/Chapter140/Section128B

    They key is the word "obtains" in the statute. It has been generally interpreted to mean that any self-made gun, whether made from scratch or built from an existing receiver, has to be registered within 7 days of making it as that is the date which you "obtained" it.

    Of course, one could argue that you didn't "obtain" it since you made it yourself, but I certainly wouldn't want to be in front of a judge arguing that.
     
  18. bgoum

    bgoum NES Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2015
    Messages:
    1,013
    Likes Received:
    477
    Location:
    Salem, NH

    IIRC... I think Len-2A talked about the states view on this in another thread - the state will ask did you have the AR-15 before you built it? if not, then you "obtained" it by building it.
     
    AHM likes this.
  19. Isaac862

    Isaac862

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2017
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Western MA
    Have you ever heard someone say Ford “obtains” cars, colt “obtains” rifles, or a baker “obtains” cakes?

    Obviously I’m not a lawyer but it’s food for thought. Shame we sit here trying to decipher all this when we all know it makes no sense in the first place and that's the way they want it.
     
  20. pupchow

    pupchow NES Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2008
    Messages:
    2,963
    Likes Received:
    495
    "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"

    I'm drawing a blank.
     
  21. Fixxah

    Fixxah NES Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Messages:
    27,702
    Likes Received:
    6,500
    Location:
    Norwood mostly.
    After shooting the dogs and the owner.
     
  22. lambchop

    lambchop NES Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2013
    Messages:
    155
    Likes Received:
    46
    I’m not a lawyer but just for shiets and giggles...when you read the law it states you don’t need to register a firearm unless you obtain it from a non license LTC/FID holder or non dealer.

    Let’s break it down...

    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...

    This states any Mass resident who purchases/obtains (buy it, was given to you, manufactured it, stole it) from any one except a licensee (LTC/FID holder) or a FFL

    ...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.

    Then the section that states you must report it.

    So the law clearly states you must report it if you purchase or obtain a firearm from anyone except from a licensee or dealer. Obviously they don’t probably don’t mean this but the way it’s written and worded, that’s what it states.

    Correct me if I’m reading the law incorrectly.
     
    Isaac862 likes this.
  23. Isaac862

    Isaac862

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2017
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Western MA
    That’s kinda funny. So theoretically one could argue after building their 80% into a functioning firearm that they “obtained” it from themselves, a valid LTC holder.
     
    AHM likes this.
  24. KMM696

    KMM696 NES Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2006
    Messages:
    3,232
    Likes Received:
    536
    Location:
    Western PRofMA

    Confusing mess, isn't it? I'll admit I laughed when I read "So the law clearly states..." I do disagree with your premise here.

    A license under C140 S122 is a MA gun dealers license, not an LTC/FID holder. LTCs and FIDs are issued under C140 S131. It's a confusing mess, but to start figuring out what's going on with the laws you should read all of C140, S121 through S131Q. Don't skip reading the definitions - MA does some weird stuff there where you'd think it was obvious. As an example, by MA law definition firearms are pistols, and rifles and shotguns are not firearms.

    I would also advise reading everything that Len-2A Training has written in the MA Law forum, especially threads he started. Len has been following this stuff for years. If you want the easier way to understand all this, I can highly recommend Len's course on MA gun owner law - if you have specific questions, bring them.
     
    MAJoe and Jason Flare like this.
  25. AHM

    AHM NES Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2013
    Messages:
    5,311
    Likes Received:
    2,647
    Those definitions of "firearm"/"(non-)firearm" apply in many Mass laws,
    but I have the stinking suspicion that they're not universally
    applicable in all statutes and regulations (and case law and yadda³...).

    I can't point to a counterexample offhand,
    but I'd never make a serious decision that depended upon that
    without an explicit check.
     
    KMM696 likes this.
  26. KMM696

    KMM696 NES Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2006
    Messages:
    3,232
    Likes Received:
    536
    Location:
    Western PRofMA
    Oh, agreed. The fire CMRs, (which are now written by reasonable people living in states that aren't Massachusetts) don't necessarily match MA definitions. We did catch a little bit of a break that Section 121 flat out tells us where the definitions apply, only in C140 S121-131q, inclusive.
     
    AHM likes this.
  27. lambchop

    lambchop NES Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2013
    Messages:
    155
    Likes Received:
    46
    Thanks for the clarification
     
  28. rommel

    rommel NES Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2012
    Messages:
    1,119
    Likes Received:
    627
    Yes x 3, and 0 knocks
     
  29. greencobra

    greencobra NES Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    6,227
    huh? registered? whats this "registered" you all talk about? [wink]
     

Share This Page