- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,505
- Likes
- 33,507
The AG is staking out a position that an MA defined AW cannot be "made compliant". Note slide #36 from the dealer training:
-
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.
Compliance modification
- Thread starter Rob Boudrie
- Start date
Mass-diver
NES Member
This law seems unconstitutional. Oh wait, it’s not even a law.
But ya, sounds like anything pre-94 is an AW even if it’s “AWB compliant” so I’m not sure the point of pinning stocks etc.
But ya, sounds like anything pre-94 is an AW even if it’s “AWB compliant” so I’m not sure the point of pinning stocks etc.
This.
According to this horse-puckey, you're in for a penny, in for a pound: you'll get "prosecuted" for a pinned stock OR an unpinned one.
I HOPE someone takes that cheese. I HOPE a CoP tries to test that. I HOPE the AG pushes this. It'll just make the whole house of cards fall faster. Almost makes me want to go out and buy an AR simply so I can keep that daft plastic stock unpinned...
Almost.
![[puke]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/023.gif "Puke [puke]")
the intent there is to feed it to police for enforcement, and it will arrest you, take your ltc, confiscate all your guns, drag you into the court on those charges, will make you fired from your job, make you to pay $30k for a lawyer, for all that to be finally settled positively for you with charges dismissed - and leave you with all the guns stolen from you, no job and no future prospects.
it is how they operate and they know it works very well. it matters not if it is lawful or constitutional, as long as police is covered for their actions and AG and DA are working in sync.
the process itself is made into the ultimate punishment, and actual judgment outcome does not interest no one.
Absolutely correct, and I lack the moral courage (as well as the postban rifles, lol) to test this stuff. But somebody somewhere, hopefully, is willing to be the Ernesto Miranda in this case. Say the CoP does what you're saying, though, and the person they do it to is the right sort of plaintiff for a civil rights lawsuit... yum.
I doubt it'll matter, personally. I believe the AG's office is probably not so dumb as to TRY to enforce this.
ag office is not liable for any charges or monetary losses of a person that gets unjustifiably prosecuted for an imaginary crime.
again, as long as the process itself is a punishment enough, they are happy with the status-quo on this.
and i have a feel with MA judges and their predisposition they will make you go all the way to circuit or higher courts to be found not guilty - making you to pay for all the proceedings.
justice here is a cruel joke when it gets to political agendas, as there is no real code of law in america, just 'opinions', and those 'opinions' can differ any way a judge can decide. and no real liability there, at all.
Glidden has been preaching this for probably 20 yrs now. It's nothing new and he's been training officers, LOs, chiefs on this interpretation all along.
In the MA marsupial court system, this interpretation will lead to a conviction. If it ever saw the USSC (very doubtful) it might fall, but not until that point.
In the MA marsupial court system, this interpretation will lead to a conviction. If it ever saw the USSC (very doubtful) it might fall, but not until that point.
there was that time in history when people had to go to actual offices in order to be able to get good paying jobs.Tell me again whay MA is worth living and working in??? Heck, for me, it is not even worth visiting...![[banghead]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/045.gif "Bang Head [banghead]")
I would not take that approach.
not new guy
NES Member
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2009
- Messages
- 36,042
- Likes
- 54,168
So he’s the one behind this?
Maura is behind it. Glidden is just aiding and abetting.
Original sin applied to guns. That’s novel.
Last edited:
namedpipes
NES Member
There are around 650 FFLs in Mass, of which the vast majority will have MA dealer licenses.
I wonder if the AG would have sufficient resources to provide "qualified assistance" to them if each and every one calls in the AG to evaluate every single rifle coming into their possession.
Maliciously comply. Bury them with BS.
my take on this - in this rather interesting period of a transitional time i am partially joining pantshitters camp.
as, frankly, i have heard those rumors circulating too much lately, so, i have plenty of other bolt guns i can shoot meanwhile, until our glorious reichsführers decide upon how far they want to go. it just does not smell too good right now. may be nothing, or may be something. who knows.
How is this any different from the previously eructated bullshit on 7/20/16? Lol. The AGs clowns have always maintained that described doctrine even if it clearly doesn't exist in law.
They fittin to be crying when their shit fails.....
View: https://youtu.be/4heHLbchPKk
They fittin to be crying when their shit fails.....
View: https://youtu.be/4heHLbchPKk
by having a very different person at the top of the enforcers food chain. it is all about the motivation of those who have power to enforce unlawful decisions.
they may do it, or may not do it. or can postpone it. all depends upon what the party will throw at them as a major topic for next upcoming elections.
biden was pretty adamant to push that thing through, so it would be silly to deny that possibility.
and even sillier to end up in a scapegoat position for those enforcers.
This was also the shitlogic used in that promulgated EOPS memo that went out long before 7/20/16.... aka "the unisgned by guida" memo.... that upon receiving it, every dealer basically was like.....
View: https://youtu.be/S4mY4FHyT80
Mass-diver
NES Member
How is this any different from the previously eructated bullshit on 7/20/16? Lol. The AGs clowns have always maintained that described doctrine even if it clearly doesn't exist in law.
They fittin to be crying when their shit fails.....
View: https://youtu.be/4heHLbchPKk
Is this one meant to cover 94-2016? So no pre-Healy? Lol.
or may not. and a 'win' there will only be granted if it makes it all the way to scotus that can take a decade of proceedings, and by the time it gets there - the scotus can look very different majority wise.
as with any political shit there are 0 guarantees for anything.
If you read all of the b******* that came out of the AG's office after 7/20/16 that was always their position.... basically she claimed that anybody with the AR etc after 9/94 is a felon "but that she wasn't going to prosecute anyone" with a gun in that class. Strictly speaking according to the garbage there is no pre healey.
Marty McFly
NES Member
Similar threads
