End of the pullman arms v. Healey case today?

[mac1911]

I can tell you that moving is only a temporary solution. The communists in VT forgot to assault our right to defend ourselves in a major way until last year. They’ve since rectified that oversight. They didn’t even have the good graces to wait until I finished building my house. Tyranny will follow you wherever you go.

if you did not recognize Vt a a lib tard state before you moved you failed. 40 yrs ago my dad always sad he would move to VT if all the libtards sudenly left. It will get worse quicker in VT/NH than it happened here in MA.

 

[babygorilla]

She is trying to scuttle the other case that is headed to SCOTUS (Worman vs Baker?) via “mootness”. Just like NYC just did. Maybe she gives a tiny little inch by “clarifying” the enforcement notice, maybe not, but it avoids a larger fight at SCOTUS. Then the state of Mass passes a full-on AWB. Which then gets appealed to SCOTUS and burns up another 5 years in litigation. . .

I've said it once, I will say it again. That case is NOT all about her notice. It invalidates the whole original AWB and mag limits.

 

[amm5061]

You are probably correct. Yet I am still holding onto that sliver of hope that it is instead what we originally thought... where can we get some official word or have a lawyer comment?

The easiest way to answer this question is this: Did you get flooded with marketing emails from gun shops around here advertising ARs and AKs suddenly for sale?

 

[M125X]

The easiest way to answer this question is this: Did you get flooded with marketing emails from gun shops around here advertising ARs and AKs suddenly for sale?

No... but they could also be just as confused as we are??

 

[shootymacshootface]

The easiest way to answer this question is this: Did you get flooded with marketing emails from gun shops around here advertising ARs and AKs suddenly for sale?

For the consumer (us), we will have to wait and see if any Ma gun dealers are willing to find out by selling ARs again, then wait for a response from the AG. I bet the little guys won't risk it. They'll wait too.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Feels like it was an attempt to beg our overlords to let them keep selling their loophole guns for the time being until they can legislate that away too. IF IT PLEASE THE CROWN, MAY I SELL GUNS YOU ALREADY TOLD ME I COULD SELL?

A lot of people and a lot of dealers don't feel comfortable selling anything that might be considered questionable unless they get a clear OK from the AG . . . and that is NOT going to happen. She's an expert in creating FUD and that is what she did here, a "promise" to clarify is not a clarification. And now that the case is dead, what if she doesn't "clarify"? It would mean creating another case that will take 3-5 years thru the legal system. She'll be long gone from the AG job by then, so it is kicking the can down the road which has worked very well for them.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

90+% of the dealers will avoid doing something if they think the AG won't like it.

 

[boiler_eng]

A lot of people and a lot of dealers don't feel comfortable selling anything that might be considered questionable unless they get a clear OK from the AG . . . and that is NOT going to happen. She's an expert in createing FUD and that is what she did here, a "promise" to clarify is not a clarification. And now that the case is dead, what if she doesn't "clarify"? It would mean creating another case that will take 3-5 years thru the legal system. She'll be long gone from the AG job by then, so it is kicking the can down the road which has worked very well for them.

Unfortunate but likely quite true.

 

[jjm1986]

So should I buy that lower for 500 lol

 

[mothybee]

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

meaning fix her loopholes.

Right, like ban private sales and grandfathering too. Then good to go!

 

[1919FAN]

90+% of the dealers will avoid doing something if they think the AG won't like it.

90+% of the dealers think that the AG doesn't like what they are currently doing.

 

[firestorm]

So should I buy that lower for 500 lol

Or just go buy a new lower for normal price. Her nonsense IS NOT LAW, only the law is law. There are several MA dealers selling stripped lowers and advertising them even. If you want one, go get one.

 

[deerdad]

Oh how I wish some sanctuary city illegal driving drunk would hit her. The cherry on top would be if he was deported a half dozen times before.

 

[one-eyed Jack]

Or just go buy a new lower for normal price. Her nonsense IS NOT LAW, only the law is law. There are several MA dealers selling stripped lowers and advertising them even. If you want one, go get one.

This. Jack.

 

[MaverickNH]

I'm truly bummed out for y'all South of the Border (of NH) - you deserve better. But don't forget to buy what you can buy even if not an AR15 variant. A Tavor X95 is a pretty useful rifle in 556 or 300AAC.

 

[Len-2A Training]

So should I buy that lower for 500 lol

Read the "analysis" that some have done above. They claim (and likely correctly) that this suit and her "promise" of a clarification does not involve ARs specifically, but refers to other guns that some dealers have been selling all along and IIRC the AG's various Emails claimed weren't AWs under her re-interpretation.

So if you are waiting for $50 lowers to be available at dealers in MA again, I'm afraid that you'll have a very long wait.

Personally, I have 4 lowers purchased long before the AG's BS. I'm offering 2 (only one currently posted) in MA before I legally vacate the state. And no, I'm not going to sell them for what I paid for them. I look at this like a neighbor friend who bought a 1966 Mustang for ~$3K, if he were to sell it today he isn't going ot offer it for $3K or even $6K, but price it to the current market. Essentially no more AR lowers are coming into MA thru dealers, so it inflates the price accordingly. If I don't sell them, I'm fine with building them up per plan in NH (I have all the parts, just never assembled the barrels to the uppers).

90+% of the dealers think that the AG doesn't like what they are currently doing.

Very true. Since it is their livelihood on the line, they tend to be very gunshy (pun intended) about what they offer for sale. And the AG isn't going to help them to determine what she's OK with them selling. Every AG since the 1998 law has told dealers to consult with their own lawyer or mfr when queried about what they could legally transfer.

 

[slap shot]

90+% of the dealers will avoid doing something if they think the AG won't like it.

I can live with those numbers...well, if I still lived in MA.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Oh how I wish some sanctuary city illegal driving drunk would hit her. The cherry on top would be if he was deported a half dozen times before.

And if that were to occur, her Asst AG would take her position and carry on from where she left off. We'd be no better off.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I wonder how many dealers will be brave enough to sell the Glock 44 (.22LR) since it has a witness hole in the barrel like the one accepted as such an indicator on S&W handguns.

 

[glide]

A lot of people and a lot of dealers don't feel comfortable selling anything that might be considered questionable unless they get a clear OK from the AG . . . and that is NOT going to happen. She's an expert in creating FUD and that is what she did here, a "promise" to clarify is not a clarification. And now that the case is dead, what if she doesn't "clarify"? It would mean creating another case that will take 3-5 years thru the legal system. She'll be long gone from the AG job by then, so it is kicking the can down the road which has worked very well for them.

I suspect this is correct. So I would then wonder why, on a slam dunk case, would the plaintiffs accept this “deal”?

Was it a money issue?

 

[CrackPot]

I wonder how many dealers will be brave enough to sell the Glock 44 (.22LR) since it has a witness hole in the barrel like the one accepted as such an indicator on S&W handguns.

First they need to do the testing and get it on the list. Then we can decide if we offer it for sale as compliant with 940CMR16.

 

[firestorm]

I suspect this is correct. So I would then wonder why, on a slam dunk case, would the plaintiffs accept this “deal”?

Was it a money issue?

More likely they had no choice. The lawsuit was narrowed and then they were given what they wanted. Generally a court will not let anything go after the other side caves. They wanted a judgement saying those things were legal, the AG said "Ok, those things are legal". Unfortunately, arguing that the other side might not act in good faith and actually do the thing they agreed to is not likely to get you anywhere and you would get the "Well, if they don't you can take them to court again" answer. Judges don't care about your problems, and us losing rights for another 5 years is an upside for many of them.

 

[38ExtraSpecial]

Just got off the phone with NSSF.
This was only about clarifying and putting in writing the firearms that are not copies or duplicates.
M1A
Tavor
17 rimfire 22 rimfire etc

so no AR and no AK

sorry folks. Morning burger it is.

 

[SFC13557]

So is this just clarifying my Tavor X95 is still legal?

 

[shootymacshootface]

80%, 70%, 60%, 50%, 40%, 30%, 20%, 10%, 0%
No problem.

 

[GaryO]

I want to post something about the AG but since I got banned from Reddit yesterday I don't want to get another ban from here.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Just got off the phone with NSSF.
This was only about clarifying and putting in writing the firearms that are not copies or duplicates.
M1A
Tavor
17 rimfire 22 rimfire etc

so no AR and no AK

sorry folks. Morning burger it is.

Thank you. Sadly as I expected.

 

[daekken]

I suspect this is correct. So I would then wonder why, on a slam dunk case, would the plaintiffs accept this “deal”?

Was it a money issue?

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.

 

[LuvDog]

Even if this changed the landscape. So many online dealers won’t even sell hats to people in MA. You think they’re going to ship an AR or lower?

 

[citoriguy]

Just got off the phone with NSSF.
This was only about clarifying and putting in writing the firearms that are not copies or duplicates.
M1A
Tavor
17 rimfire 22 rimfire etc

so no AR and no AK

sorry folks. Morning burger it is.

What about AR-9s or the Sig MPX/MCX that don't use the traditional gas block on .223/5.56s? Does her edict that those are off limits still stand?