Just curious does the state of Mass have a dept that you can contact about technical questions? I know you can contact the ATF and they'll send confusing often contradicting information about your questions. Yet they will send you a letter all the same. I feel this would be a good thing to have if the courts ever got involved.
-
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.
Does Mass have a technical dept like the ATF?
- Thread starter fiberguy
- Start date
The AG has a secret "these items are banned in MA because we said so list" which you won't know what's on it until they file charges against you or a retailer.
edit:
No really I'm not kidding they AG's office literally decides at random what they want to ban with consumer protection powers on a given day and files charges or threatening letters.
The Executive Office of Public Safety has the approved roster of handguns which there are written specifications firearms go through to get on the roster, but EOPS does't answer roster questions to the public. EOPS can't reliably be asked for legal interpretations either.
The state level (kangaroo) courts have made it clear that "because they said so" is an acceptable reason/level of scrutiny for anything without a defined legal reasoning from the enforcing party.
edit:
No really I'm not kidding they AG's office literally decides at random what they want to ban with consumer protection powers on a given day and files charges or threatening letters.
The Executive Office of Public Safety has the approved roster of handguns which there are written specifications firearms go through to get on the roster, but EOPS does't answer roster questions to the public. EOPS can't reliably be asked for legal interpretations either.
The state level (kangaroo) courts have made it clear that "because they said so" is an acceptable reason/level of scrutiny for anything without a defined legal reasoning from the enforcing party.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 17, 2008
- Messages
- 16,978
- Likes
- 2,836
![[laugh2]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/014.gif "Laugh at above [laugh2]")
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
. No, not even close.
Rob Boudrie
NES Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 48,439
- Likes
- 35,585
MGL establishes that the State Police lab and Boston PD lab are the entites that can make certifications for prosecution like "this is a gun".
They do not provide this service to individuals, and the position of the state with regard to legal questions is "retain legal counsel".
They do not provide this service to individuals, and the position of the state with regard to legal questions is "retain legal counsel".
Spend enough time on NES and you will learn who knows their stuff - like LenS. You can also contact Goal. They would be willing to help. Join while you are at it. But don't take their word as legal advice. Even though they know more about the law than those charged with its enforcement, the AG can change their interpretation at any time.
MisterHappy
NES Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,936
- Likes
- 18,427
Seems to be really good advice. I was just thinking since the awb in Mass mirrored the original drafted by the feds they might offer some of the same assistance. I know the ATF office here in Vermont always attempts to be helpful but as you know the ambiguity of some of their statements can make the muddy water even muddier sometimes. Again I appreciate all the advice here.
MisterHappy
NES Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,936
- Likes
- 18,427
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
No.
It's also NOT necessarily a good thing in some circumstances. Also, asking for clarification is risky business in and of itself, anyways. "Let the sleeping dogs lie" is best practice 99 out of 100 times.
-Mike
- - - Updated - - -
Trust me when it comes to the AWB being muddy its a good thing. If the state vetted it out it would be more restrictive than it actually is on the ground currently. We like it this way compared to the alternative.
-Mike
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2005
- Messages
- 56,824
- Likes
- 20,616
Yes, and I can give you the name of a MSP ballistics "ex-spurt" who testified that a Norinco SKS is an 11+1 gun and the clips that feed it are also 11 rd clips thus making possession felonies. He did this in Norfolk Superior Court a week ago and had previously submitted an attested written ballistics report to this effect. I was brought in as an "expert witness" to testify that they were NOT large-capacity and thus those charges against the individual were pure bullshit! The judge agreed with my position and found him not guilty on those particular charges (he was convicted on some other charges - I have no info on those other charges).
An 'Ex' is a washed-up has-been, and a 'Spurt' is just a drip... under pressure.
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2005
- Messages
- 56,824
- Likes
- 20,616
That is why I used the term that way!
Rob Boudrie
NES Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 48,439
- Likes
- 35,585
![[hmmm]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/009.gif "Hmm [hmmm]")
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2008
- Messages
- 1,272
- Likes
- 185
Most SKS's use clips, not magazines.
Or at least clips to feed their magazines
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2005
- Messages
- 56,824
- Likes
- 20,616
No, they confiscated both the gun and numerous loaded clips for the gun.
No-one testifying was allowed in the courtroom except when called to testify and then escorted out after their testimony. I have his written ballistics report but never saw him testify. I immediately succeeded him in testifying.
NOTE: The defense counsel (public defender, not knowledgeable about guns) kept confusing the clip vs. mag issue when questioning me.
WRONG!
There is an internal 10-rd mag on the SKS in question. You can feed it manually or by using the 10-rd clips available for that gun.
