• 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.

End of the pullman arms v. Healey case today?

Just watch the scum bags at the statehouse will most likely rain on our parade. It's probably been waiting in the wings in case she lost or gave in. I hope not but I'm way too pessemistic of our state's legislative critters
I would be very wary of this too.

Let's get the sales flowing ASAP.
 
I breezed through the case text online. From what the judge said, it looks like the post healey ban is done.

Buy a new AR at 8am sharp tomorrow morning people! By noontime tomorrow, the state house will pass another ban probably!

The hell you waiting for? Mass has to have gun shops that are open between now and say 9pm (I'm in RI, just here for the lulz).
 
I wouldn't get too excited yet, I don't think this is an all encompassing dismissal of all of her bullshit.

This case may have gotten shoehorned into a limited version of what it originally was, and there was a small cauldron of guns mentioned in the
suit specifically by the plaintiffs, because at the time the AG refused to say "the guns were not assault weapons". etc. That refusal to render a judgement, was part of
the foundation for the lawsuit.

I would love to be wrong, of course....

-Mike
 
I wouldn't get too excited yet, I don't think this is an all encompassing dismissal of all of her bullshit.

This case may have gotten shoehorned into a limited version of what it originally was, and there was a cauldron of guns mentioned in the
suit specifically by the plaintiffs, because at the time the AG refused to say "the guns were not assault weapons". etc.

I would love to be wrong, of course....

-Mike

This is my feeling as well. If there were specific guns they were fighting about in the case, then we may be up the creek.

We really just needed an outright late term abortion of her entire notice.
 
I wouldn't get too excited yet, I don't think this is an all encompassing dismissal of all of her bullshit.

This case may have gotten shoehorned into a limited version of what it originally was, and there was a small cauldron of guns mentioned in the
suit specifically by the plaintiffs, because at the time the AG refused to say "the guns were not assault weapons". etc. That refusal to render a judgement, was part of
the foundation for the lawsuit.

I would love to be wrong, of course....

-Mike

Do we know what that list was? Like specific neutered ars or stuff even called out by name like ars etc?
 
Do we know what that list was? Like specific neutered ars or stuff even called out by name like ars etc?
(i) Avtomat Kalashnikov (AK) (all models); (ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil; (iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC-70); (iv) Colt AR-15; (v) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR and FNC; (vi) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9 and M-12; (vii) Steyr AUG; (viii) INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and (ix) revolving cy
 
(i) Avtomat Kalashnikov (AK) (all models); (ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil; (iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC-70); (iv) Colt AR-15; (v) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR and FNC; (vi) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9 and M-12; (vii) Steyr AUG; (viii) INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and (ix) revolving cy

😮
 
(i) Avtomat Kalashnikov (AK) (all models); (ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil; (iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC-70); (iv) Colt AR-15; (v) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR and FNC; (vi) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9 and M-12; (vii) Steyr AUG; (viii) INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and (ix) revolving cy

That's the list from the law, right? So that would still be undeniably not allowed. I am trying to figure the delta between that and what hasn't been available for retail since her (incorrect) interpretation guidance.
 
This is my feeling as well. If there were specific guns they were fighting about in the case, then we may be up the creek.
Do we know what that list was? Like specific neutered ars or stuff even called out by name like ars etc?

This is the stuff I see in the original complaint...,

60. The subsequently issued notices have added to the uncertainties facing retailers when deciding what firearms they may lawfully sell. One “Questions & Answers” notice, appearing at Exhibit H, states on page 1 that the Enforcement Notice controls in the event of any discrepancies between it and the Questions & Answers. These notices create confusion because there are a large number of models of .22 caliber rimfire semiautomatic rifles manufactured and sold by many manufacturers, including the Nordic NC-22LR, the CMMG MK4 T 22LR, a Smith and Wesson M&P 15-22, the DPMS Bull Barrel 22 LR and the DPMS AP4 22 LR. Although these would be prohibited under the new definition of “copy” appearing in the Enforcement Notice, which bans copies of any caliber, the later issued “Guns That Are Not Assault Weapons” notice states that they are not banned. 61. Simply put, the Office of the Attorney General is making ad hoc decisions untethered to the statute that constrains her lawful authority. 62. Retailers also face uncertainties with firearms such as the MK 14 EBR which appear to be allowed under the subsequently issued “Guns that Are Not Assault Weapons” notice. That firearm would not pass the substantially similar or interchangeability tests issued under the Enforcement Notice. 63. The Attorney General’s Office does not even know exactly what the Enforcement Notice means. After the Office of the Attorney General issued the Enforcement Notice, Christine Noyes from Grrr! Gear, Inc. contacted the Attorney General’s Office at the telephone number provided on the Office’s announcement to receive guidance on whether certain Ruger firearms constituted “copies” of assault weapons and would be prohibited. After speaking to the person at the office, the Attorney General’s office informed her that they did not know the answer, and they did not have a list of what would be prohibited assault weapons. Instead, the Office also Case 4:16-cv-40136 Document 1 Filed 09/22/16 Page 15 of 22 16 informed Ms. Noyes that her store should use “its best judgment” in deciding which firearms fell under the term “copies or duplicates.” 64. Representatives from Pullman Arms also contacted the Attorney General’s office to ask questions concerning the scope of the Enforcement Notice, and they were also told to use their best judgment. 65. Guns and Gear, LLC has sold IWI Tavor model rifles in the past but does not sell them now out of fear of being prosecuted. 66. Paper City Firearms, LLC has sold .22 caliber rimfire AR-15 style rifles in the past but does not sell them now out of fear of being prosecuted. 67. Grrr! Gear, Inc. has sold Smith and Wesson M&P 15-22 rifles in the past, but does not sell them now out of fear of being prosecuted. 68. Pullman Arms Inc., has sold IWI Tavor model rifles, Smith and Wesson M&P 15- 22 rifles, and the FN PS90 rifles in the past but does not now sell them now out of fear of being prosecuted.

Maybe something to do with these?

Would be nice if there was a link to whatever this "agreement" supposedly is.


(i) Avtomat Kalashnikov (AK) (all models); (ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil; (iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC-70); (iv) Colt AR-15; (v) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR and FNC; (vi) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9 and M-12; (vii) Steyr AUG; (viii) INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and (ix) revolving cy

Nope, that's just from an earlier section, really, but that's not what the suit is about... that's just from a section that gives background to the original fed AWB, how MA adopted it, etc, so on and so forth... These laws are so f***ing complicated and retarded that you basically have to tell an hour long story about the old garbage before you can even cover a current issue, because
the laws layer on top of one another etc.

-Mike
 
This is the stuff I see in the original complaint...,



Maybe something to do with these?

Would be nice if there was a link to whatever this "agreement" supposedly is.




Nope, that's just from an earlier section, really, but that's not what the suit is about... that's just from a section that gives background to the original fed AWB, how MA adopted it, etc, so on and so forth... These laws are so f***ing complicated and retarded that you basically have to tell an hour long story about the old garbage before you can even cover a current issue, because
the laws layer on top of one another etc.

-Mike

What bothers me, is that it feels like they just sent it back to Maura to 'get it right'...

meaning fix her loopholes.
 
The OPs text is like that engineer video where the guy talks about shit that makes no sense [rofl]

Is there an English translation? Jesus christ

NSSF press release


still says nothing, but formatted better for your pleasure
 
Back
Top Bottom