More likely they're suspending shipments until things settle down a bit.
Perhaps avoid having to choose a more permanent consent decree.
-
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.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Healey "closing the loophole" letter to gun dealers
- Thread starter CAR
- Start date
- Status
More likely they're suspending shipments until things settle down a bit.
Perhaps avoid having to choose a more permanent consent decree.
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2014
- Messages
- 24,058
- Likes
- 30,234
Um an armed angry mob is nothing something to take lightly. They will curtesy and get you tea if we ask. This will be the biggest organizing of armed people in this state since the shot heard round the world.
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2011
- Messages
- 1,297
- Likes
- 1,339
Maybe it will be the shot heard around the world.
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2014
- Messages
- 24,058
- Likes
- 30,234
Shoulda stopped drinking, we pick our battles correctly. Haven't heard a peep out of those idiots over the unarmed care taker. Which is the exact type of shooting they should be indemnifying. Instead they go pop off about guys fist fighting with cops after a robbery and try and change the story so it fits their narrative. Fu(k them and fu(k you for comparing people who want to make change to a hate group.
Actually since Shay's Rebellion.
Doesn't change the point that a protest of an armed populace is not to be sneered at.
It's, after all, the purpose of the 2nd Amendment.
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2014
- Messages
- 24,058
- Likes
- 30,234
Lol I knew I was off base but I just woke up and couldn't think of anything more current.
CockedAndLocked
Banned
"Network" - probably on my top ten list of movies. I watch it every few years to remind me how little this country has accomplished since ending the Apollo program.
"I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!"
My point was that if gun owners or the Tea party went on a terror rampage like BLM, Occupy, they would bring in the swat teams and riot squads. We wouldn't be given 'space to destroy' and it certainly wouldn't be reported as our 'right to protest'.
They would never get rid of something that only continues the feed this corrupt judicial system, especially now when theres more "clarity" to jam up upstanding citizens that they can squeeze money out of. I'm sure Judges, clerks, procecutors, lawyers, are just foaming at the mouth for Maura to start throwing the book at FFL and Citizens that are in the grey with these new interpretations. It's all a business in the end.
SteelShooter
NES Member
very good
I think what he is getting at is that this is by their admission. Just like the new 'interpretation' of the AWB essentially conceding that this has only ever been about cosmetics.
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2014
- Messages
- 24,058
- Likes
- 30,234
Im just saying he's not paying close enough attention this state is riddled with bs and crap we have no control over. Like getting rid of tollbooths I hate that idea I don't want a tracking device installed on my car basically. Or the push to get tolls on rt 3. Or the free healthcare to illegals. There's so much rampant sh!t in this state. Idk how you can look at it and be like well they took ours gun f them. It's the whole system here. We basically had to threaten a government overthrow to get rid of the olympics which only like 6 people wanted.
I think this is part of their plan and it explains the timing. If Scalia were still alive and Hilldog didn't have such a good shot at the presidency, Healey would have never announced this.
They're trying for a SCOTUS decision that will put this to bed forever, in their favor.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,548
- Likes
- 33,605
The problem is if we bundle a general AW challenge with the challenge against the Heliban, the court can issue a decision explaining why the AW ban is legal (as similar ones have been upheld by various federal courts, and SCOTUS denied cert); totally ignore the questions presented regarding the AG's actions; and issue a ruling against us.
GlockJock
NES Member
I'm not a lawyer.
But am I the only one here who thinks/realizes that Healey simply saw a weakly/vaguely worded law/rule/statute/whatever and realized that no statewide or other association or legal group (GOAL/2A etc) had taken it upon themselves to forcefully and aggressively hash out and clarify the laws?
In other words, unless I'm missing something here, Healey took it upon herself to (as a good lawyer would) sit down in the aftermath of a spate of recent "gun violence" and, as any political ass-kissing dweeb would, jumped on a "hanging curveball" that had been sitting out there in the M.G.L., realizing nobody had legally clarified the section/paragraph whatever, and made a politically correct move in a moonbat state...
And issued her "directive" the other day - cuz she knew that she had checkmated the non-existent or volunteer legal teams who support the 2A?
What I'm getting at is... Shouldn't someone have seen this coming?.. that this statute is among several "hangers" just sitting out there waiting for a miserable c*nt to spend her evenings poring over the law books instead of having a poolside Corona with her wife or hanging out on the Vineyard with the rest of the Libs who actually have a life?
To a non-lawyer like me, it seems she just pulled a classic Anti move, jumped all over the Bucholz-ish hanger like A-Rod would and belted it onto the Commuter Rail tracks behind Lansdowne Street, much to the rage, anger and frustration of law abiding legal gun owner like ME.
Please correct /enlighten me if I'm wrong here..??
But am I the only one here who thinks/realizes that Healey simply saw a weakly/vaguely worded law/rule/statute/whatever and realized that no statewide or other association or legal group (GOAL/2A etc) had taken it upon themselves to forcefully and aggressively hash out and clarify the laws?
In other words, unless I'm missing something here, Healey took it upon herself to (as a good lawyer would) sit down in the aftermath of a spate of recent "gun violence" and, as any political ass-kissing dweeb would, jumped on a "hanging curveball" that had been sitting out there in the M.G.L., realizing nobody had legally clarified the section/paragraph whatever, and made a politically correct move in a moonbat state...
And issued her "directive" the other day - cuz she knew that she had checkmated the non-existent or volunteer legal teams who support the 2A?
What I'm getting at is... Shouldn't someone have seen this coming?.. that this statute is among several "hangers" just sitting out there waiting for a miserable c*nt to spend her evenings poring over the law books instead of having a poolside Corona with her wife or hanging out on the Vineyard with the rest of the Libs who actually have a life?
To a non-lawyer like me, it seems she just pulled a classic Anti move, jumped all over the Bucholz-ish hanger like A-Rod would and belted it onto the Commuter Rail tracks behind Lansdowne Street, much to the rage, anger and frustration of law abiding legal gun owner like ME.
Please correct /enlighten me if I'm wrong here..??
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2013
- Messages
- 565
- Likes
- 76
No, you're not.
I'll vote democrat before I vote for that .... Gentleman ... again. At least the democrat is honest about his or her plan to screw us.
R
amm5061
NES Member
You're not totally wrong, but no one saw it coming because for 22 years what is and is not an assault weapon was pretty clearly defined based on the feature test. It may have been a little awkwardly worded, but precedent is a huge part of the law.
babygorilla
NES Member
Second video
[video]https://youtu.be/X6cf4sr8Y9c[/video]
[video]https://youtu.be/X6cf4sr8Y9c[/video]
Nope, I've seen that "copies and duplicates" wording as a turd on the table ever since it was part of the federal AWB. I'm surprised it took this long for somebody to attempt to take advantage of it. As soon as I started reading Healey's Boston Globe drivel the other morning, I knew exactly what she'd done.
They can call it whatever they want but the only reason they know anything about what types of firearms you own is because of the fa10 system. Rifle, shotgun, pistol, make, model, caliber. None of that is included during the background check when you buy a firearm. When I sell a customer a gun I turn the computer to them. They fill out all their personal information and answer the questions. Then I answer a couple questions about whether they made it seem like this could be a straw purchase.Then I click go and the background check is performed. Once the check comes back, either proceed delay or deny, I enter all of the firearms information on to the form. Other than the fa10, the only other record of the actual type of firearm you purchased is recorded on the 4473 in the gun shop where you bought the gun.
Without the FA10s all the state would know is, John bought "a gun" on <date>. And they would have to contact the FBI w/ a court order to even get that data from them. In the form of a log of any BG checks run in John's name. Which technically shouldn't even exist since, according to the FBI, they "flush" that data after a certain number of days. Or so they claim.
Enzo
NES Member
The democrat that will most likely be running against him is Healy.....
You are completely wrong, and there is ample evidence about exactly what "copies and duplicates" means so that no legitimate court would ever side with Healey at this point in the game. It simply means Colt can't make an AR-16 to skirt the law that bans Colt AR-15s by name.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2014
- Messages
- 9,431
- Likes
- 9,051
The answer to the AG reinterpretation is ovious. Its called an FU-MA-15.5
A new design rather than redesigned non-ar15 with new unique FCG, different buffer tube threads/gripscrew theads and grip shape,a relocation of the takedown pins so a standard ar15 upper couldnt be used, and a new rail/picitinny spacing so i can't accept standard ar15 assesories, and new magizines..
This design would be limited to 10rd mags do to lack of prebans, or an adapter could be fashion to use ar mags... unless her interpretation means "any semi auto rifle with detachable magizine"
Which to her I'm sure it does, but thats the only thing im confident would be ruled unconstitutional unless hillary is elected...but im sure the SC won't take up the case.. so ya where screwed.
Edit different bcg lenght, buffer lenght/diameter, spring lenght.. ect...
Im sure gun manufactures can over come this.
A new design rather than redesigned non-ar15 with new unique FCG, different buffer tube threads/gripscrew theads and grip shape,a relocation of the takedown pins so a standard ar15 upper couldnt be used, and a new rail/picitinny spacing so i can't accept standard ar15 assesories, and new magizines..
This design would be limited to 10rd mags do to lack of prebans, or an adapter could be fashion to use ar mags... unless her interpretation means "any semi auto rifle with detachable magizine"
Which to her I'm sure it does, but thats the only thing im confident would be ruled unconstitutional unless hillary is elected...but im sure the SC won't take up the case.. so ya where screwed.
Edit different bcg lenght, buffer lenght/diameter, spring lenght.. ect...
Im sure gun manufactures can over come this.
Last edited:
mibro
NES Member
I don't think anyone could have seen this coming because the language of the Federal AWB was crystal clear and commonly understood when it was written. It was intended to ban rifles with certain features of military weapons. At the time there was no intention of banning semi-automatic rifles en masse.
What has happened is the antis latched onto the word "automatic," conflated that with "semi-automatic" and gradually stirred the moonbat pot until automatic/semi-automatic became the Devil's work.
Having decided that the issue was not bayonet lugs but was semi-automatic operation, Maura and her minions pored over the language of the Massachusetts AWB and found a way that they, in their mind, could credibly reinterpret the scope of the ban.
Maura's reinterpretation is a huge problem for us because the general public can not grasp the unconstitutional scope of what has happened, think Maura closed a minor loophole and many of them don't care anyway as long as their feelz are catered to.
Last edited:
RubiconLJ
NES Member
You were right behind my son and I.
F
Finalygotabeltfed
Just tell them, "I had to spend what I would have donated TO YOU on legal fees to defend my rights FROM YOU!!!
namedpipes
NES Member
If that proves to be true then just possibly there are enough of the good guys wearing blue** to make a difference and maybe ease some of the tension between "us" and "them".
[video=youtube_share;ajTgndCNdW0]http://youtu.be/ajTgndCNdW0[/video]
(The wall starts to come down around 2m30s)
** of course enough of us have to chip at the wall too
Jason Flare
NES Member
Nice, but I'm very tired of hearing the word, "democracy."
- Status
Similar threads
