End of the pullman arms v. Healey case today?

chindogg

NES Member
Rating - 100%
16   0   1
Joined
Sep 10, 2011
Messages
2,149
Likes
470
Location
A world surrounded by sellouts
If you read the post, the only outcome they were going to get was a clarification. The court was not going to throw the whole thing out or give any monetary rewards. So basically they agreed to just end it with the result that the AG's office make the clarification that they were seeking, which was the only "reward" they were going to get anyway.

So, they "won" their case against the AG, but it wasn't the kind of result people on here were hoping for.
So please tell me why the Attorney General wouldn’t just issue the clarification instead of wasting taxpayer money on something she probably didn’t even care about?
 

citoriguy

NES Member
Rating - 100%
27   0   0
Joined
Dec 14, 2018
Messages
2,197
Likes
1,567
Location
PRM
So please tell me why the Attorney General wouldn’t just issue the clarification instead of wasting taxpayer money on something she probably didn’t even care about?
She has more resources at her disposal, and she probably thought she could outspend or bully her notice into becoming widely accepted without becoming law. Or she cut a deal with the asshats on a Beacon Hill to force legislation through that cements her edict. That’ll likely be challenged in court too, and we’ll waste another 5 years and Lord knows how much money.
 

daekken

NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Feb 5, 2015
Messages
4,451
Likes
4,063
Location
NH
So please tell me why the Attorney General wouldn’t just issue the clarification instead of wasting taxpayer money on something she probably didn’t even care about?
That was basically what they agreed to do. After the case was narrowly restricted, there was no need to continue, so they just agreed to end it.
 
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Sep 18, 2010
Messages
22,394
Likes
13,578
Location
Suckachusetts
So please tell me why the Attorney General wouldn’t just issue the clarification instead of wasting taxpayer money on something she probably didn’t even care about?
Because, if you keep it vague you have the option to go after FFLs in the future.

This way, it is not so vague anymore and her future options are limited.

And because she doesnt care about the tax payer money. Saying she saved the tax payer money will not get her anywhere in politics. Saying she is fighting against evil baby killers will.
 

rsj

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jul 7, 2010
Messages
415
Likes
169
Except there are dealers in MA selling them for $50. Ok, so you have to promise to build them into a .22LR when you buy. Buy lower for $50, build into .22LR AR and FA-10. Anything you put on that lower later does not require another FA-10. Her BS edict (which is not law) says every AR is illegal anyway, but she just isn't prosecuting for now. I think her edict is BS and they don't dare prosecute someone for slapping a .223 upper on that lower. The emperor has no clothes (which is a scary visual), IMO. But everyone needs to proceed with their eyes open. Undoubtedly, BOHICA is in our future anyway.

Here's hoping Worman makes this all moot anyway with the help of a sane SCOTUS.
It's all a bluff. The MA AWB lists what an AR can lack in order to not be considered an "Assault Weapon". She is threatening to prosecute for following that part of the written law, which if she did would make her guilty of fraud.
 

Rob Boudrie

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
35,831
Likes
13,057
It's all a bluff. The MA AWB lists what an AR can lack in order to not be considered an "Assault Weapon". She is threatening to prosecute for following that part of the written law, which if she did would make her guilty of fraud.
If you think a fraud conviction or even charges are a possibility you are really new to the sport. There are NO consequences for a lie that is arguably opinion rather than fact in court - like the asst AG;s lie that an FID card allows one to own a handgun in MA.

You also seem to be lacking an understanding how a results oriented judiciary often works, particularly in MA. (also referred to as the "cuz guns" doctrine).

Ditto for her claim that an item that is clearly not a gun under MGL is a similar gun (stripped lower)
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Nov 8, 2005
Messages
25,039
Likes
3,563
If you think a fraud conviction or even charges are a possibility you are really new to the sport. There are NO consequences for a lie that is arguably opinion rather than fact in court - like the asst AG;s lie that an FID card allows one to own a handgun in MA.

You also seem to be lacking an understanding how a results oriented judiciary often works, particularly in MA. (also referred to as the "cuz guns" doctrine).

Ditto for her claim that an item that is clearly not a gun under MGL is a similar gun (stripped lower)
Is that THIS CASE? (which should be coming around again soon)
 

Rob Boudrie

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
35,831
Likes
13,057
Is that THIS CASE? (which should be coming around again soon)
Yup. It took a year+, $$$ and lots of prep and legal work just to be able to show the court that and FID+PTP may not be used in MA to meet the Heller requirements.
 

spt_1955

NES Member
Rating - 100%
88   0   0
Joined
Feb 6, 2014
Messages
1,720
Likes
294
So please tell me why the Attorney General wouldn’t just issue the clarification instead of wasting taxpayer money on something she probably didn’t even care about?
SHe posted the clarifications on her website yesterday. Following is the GOAL statement that basically says "NSSF has dropped it's case because she met their minimum requirements but our lawsuit continues. " THe GOAL statement links to the AG's new clarifications. I don't see anything good for us in here unless you wanted to buy a Beretta Storm, IWI Tavor, FN PS90, or Kel-Tec and your FFL wouldn't sell it because they were not sure.

 

67ray

NES Member
Rating - 100%
191   0   0
Joined
Feb 27, 2006
Messages
2,194
Likes
1,453
The question becomes "Do you want to risk the chance of being the test case for AG?"

Sure you may be right and you may win. But a case will suck the life, money and free time out of you for years.

Think the best strategy is the one perfected the teenagers: the grin f***
Say yes ma'am and then do whatever you want
 

drgrant

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
59   0   0
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
70,198
Likes
30,360
The question becomes "Do you want to risk the chance of being the test case for AG?"

Sure you may be right and you may win. But a case will suck the life, money and free time out of you for years.
Lol, but no. There will be no test case for this, except for the ones that 2A people are bringing from the back end. It's not politically advantageous for the AG to produce a bogus charge in a court of law and potentially get crushed over it and invalidate the whole thing, quickly. The entire game for her is using the free fear produced by a bogus threat. There's no logical
reason why she would do something to jeopardize the use of that. Trying to prosecute someone criminally gives the pro gunners a huge tactical advantage because criminal defense has certain rights, advantages and procedures with it that aren't obtained in any other legal context. Right now she gets to throw rocks at gun owners while standing uphill, she sure as hell isn't going to choose standing downhill and throwing rocks uphill for the sake of attempting to prosecute just one person.

-Mike
 

Dadstoys

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
14,485
Likes
9,683
Location
North Shore
So please tell me why the Attorney General wouldn’t just issue the clarification instead of wasting taxpayer money on something she probably didn’t even care about?
As long as you, I and everyone else that works for a living keeps paying up there's a limitless supply of money for her to burn at her whim.
 

Rob Boudrie

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
35,831
Likes
13,057
Trying to prosecute someone criminally gives the pro gunners a huge tactical advantage because criminal defense has certain rights, advantages and procedures with it that aren't obtained in any other legal context.
The danger is greater for dealers than individuals.

As to criminal defendants - there is a good chance a clean defendant (no other baggage) would find some org to step forward and provide them with legal counsel to make sure the test case was handled properly. o_O Bring it on. Comm2A is ready.
 

JJ4

NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
2,965
Likes
1,467
Location
South Central MA
The danger is greater for dealers than individuals.

As to criminal defendants - there is a good chance a clean defendant (no other baggage) would find some org to step forward and provide them with legal counsel to make sure the test case was handled properly. o_O Bring it on. Comm2A is ready.
Would this hypothetical Mother Theresa video tape herself building out an AR/AK according to the letter of the MA law, then send copies to the AG and news organizations?
 

Rob Boudrie

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
35,831
Likes
13,057
Would this hypothetical Mother Theresa video tape herself building out an AR/AK according to the letter of the MA law, then send copies to the AG and news organizations?
I'm thinking of someone who gets jammed up in the absence of malfeasatory behavior, though that is going to be hard to find.
 

Dench

NES Member
Rating - 100%
99   0   0
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Messages
17,151
Likes
5,624
While mostly true, there are some pockets of neutrality. r/guns is a good subreddit.
There are a few decent non ultra liberal subs.

Reddit is filled with sock puppets and international people plus most are trying to farm karma for who the f*** knows why
 

CrackPot

NES Member
Rating - 100%
55   0   0
Joined
Aug 21, 2011
Messages
3,758
Likes
2,574
Location
Worcester County
In her "clarification" does anyone else think that a Fixed Magazine AR is both banned because it shares those features listed and exempt because it is a fixed magazine?
Her language clearly says that a rifle w/o a detachable mag is not an assault weapon, consistent with the written law. I am sure it is a mistake...
 

Waher

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 2, 2014
Messages
9,658
Likes
10,279
Location
Boston Gun & Rifle and Braintree Rifle & Pistol
In her "clarification" does anyone else think that a Fixed Magazine AR is both banned because it shares those features listed and exempt because it is a fixed magazine?
The Boston AWB is written similarly where x,y,z, are banned by name but the following section exempts fixed magazines of 10 rounds or less.

The SKS is listed as one of the banned rifles, but should be exempted by the following section's fixed magazine of 10 rounds or less language.
 

rsj

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jul 7, 2010
Messages
415
Likes
169
There are NO consequences for a lie that is arguably opinion rather than fact in court - like the asst AG;s lie that an FID card allows one to own a handgun in MA.

Ditto for her claim that an item that is clearly not a gun under MGL is a similar gun (stripped lower)
All this means is that the Mass courts are thoroughly corrupt and covering for the crimes of their own. Is that what I'm not getting? I knew that. I was arguing how the law is supposed to work, not the free-for-all that a cabal has made it into.
 

Mass Firearms

Instructor
Dealer
NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Jan 5, 2009
Messages
1,091
Likes
500
Location
100 Kuniholm Drive, Holliston, MA
mods if this is not the appropriate place for this please delete...

after reading this thread I asked my staff to work out a $39 Anderson stripped lower sale...we are working on the details and will post the sale as soon as we get it confirmed...I believe our normal price for these is $49.
 
Top Bottom