• 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.

Healey "closing the loophole" letter to gun dealers

Status
Not open for further replies.
GM-GUY said:
I swear to God, if any of you numb nuts register anything ever again; I'm going to kick you square in the nuts........and the obligatory keys, roof, upper decker.......
Click to expand...

It's normalcy bias. It is very difficult to accept a paradigm shift like this.

The antis have a hard-on for the mythical assault weapons and want to reduce us to bolt action rifles and revolvers.

Maura Healey has found a way to do this in Massachusetts. It will be a two step process. The first shoe just dropped.

The problem for us is that any LEGAL response will be INEFFECTIVE. Any EFFECTIVE response will be ILLEGAL and will only serve to further harden public opinion against gun owners.

You also need to understand that to anyone but Massachusetts gun owners, this looks like a very small thing. To us it's the apocalypse but to everybody else, Maura has merely closed a loophole in the existing law. No-one but us gets what has just happened.

So now, all of you tolerant, unprejudiced, multiculti-supporting folks, how is that working out for you? Are you starting to get there is a huge coalition of minorities who hate straight white males, everything they do and everything they stand for?
 
Bob P said:
This is a direct result of Draper v. Healey. She was challenged, politically embarrassed and won. She's doubling down. It's payback time. This is the problem with being in a position of weakness and politically gun owners in MA are a persecuted minority. If you stand up for yourself and lose you're ****ed. If you stand up for yourself and win, you're ****ed. It's like the Jews under the Tsar - keep your had down and try not to get noticed. MA is a lost cause. Either bend over or move.
Click to expand...

when you play the game of [STRIKE=]thrones[/STRIKE] guns you either win or you die
that really is the gist of it, right?
 
je25ff said:
My firearms were purchased before the 20th of this month so, apparently, they are legal to possess.
Click to expand...

Sorry, dude. Your firearms are NOT legal to possess. They just aren't coming after you at this time.

Once they shut down the FFL, you and I are next on the tyrant hit list.

Its called living on borrowed time.
 
Last edited:
Varmint said:
I'm not seeing the distinction.

http://freedomslighthouse.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/2012electoralmapresultsfinal110812.jp[/QUOTE]

Seriously? What does a presidential election have to do with local gun laws or how guns are viewed? NOTHING.

ME and VT have CC. NH will eventually have it. As it is, I walk into a store and buy what guns I want without a permit and carry them openly. Seriously, stop living in denial.

I don't care if you move to NH, but FFS get out of MA.

[COLOR="silver"][SIZE=1]- - - Updated - - -[/SIZE][/COLOR]

[quote="Horrible, post: 5118681"]Sorry, dude. Your firearms are NOT legal to possess. They just aren't coming after you [B][U]at this time[/U][/B].

Once they shut down the FFL, you and I are next on the tyrant hit list.

Its called living on borrowed time.[/QUOTE]

"It's OK, they're not coming for me yet, just the bad Jews" said the Jew.
Click to expand...
 
bigblue said:
I'm glad you are the only one to have interpreted what Healey said yesterday. Unfortunately, what she ACTUALLY said was that the written word of the AWB doesn't matter and that she will provide her own reading of it. At no point did she affirm the validity of pre 1994 rifles under the ban.

She is attempting to ban everything and the transfers of everything. Read her Q&A.
Click to expand...

The 94 thing is in the text of the actual MGL, so it would be dicey for her to try to "interpret" around that. Not that she couldn't try.

That's sort of beside the point though. There are a lot more post-94 guns (particularly if you read her "tests" at face value.)
 
W.E.C said:
Application of this Enforcement Notice (individual gun owners):

The Guidance will not be applied to possession, ownership or transfer of an Assault weapon obtained prior to July 20, 2016.
The AGO reserves the right to alter or amend this guidance.


i read this as ownership, and Private sales are ok at this time,11:08 am.
however the ag office is updating the website right now.

expect to be a felon soon.
Click to expand...


good point. line #2 means that somehow healy gets to send down her edicts, with sketchy or no constitutional authority, and ban any GD thing she wants, including 1911s.
 
Just received:

Yesterday, Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey announced that she wants to further restrict the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Massachusetts citizens by arbitrarily changing the way her office enforces the state’s existing “assault weapons” ban. Massachusetts state law currently prohibits the possession of “assault weapons” and large capacity feeding devices (defined as devices capable of holding certain amounts of ammunition) and “copies or duplicates of the weapons.” This law mirrors the federal “assault weapons” ban that expired in 2004. Attorney General Healey claims that gun manufacturers across the state have been selling firearms to citizens that they claim are compliant with the law, but that she says would be considered “copies or duplicates” of the “assault weapons” prohibited for possession under Massachusetts law.
By doing so, Attorney General Healey has over stepped her boundaries as Attorney General and created a new definition outside of the statute that currently regulates so-called “assault weapons” in Massachusetts. This new definition could lead to a total ban of all semi-automatic firearms in the state.
Your NRA-ILA will be working tirelessly to protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners in Massachusetts by looking into the legal options available to fight this egregious attack. Please stay tuned to your email inbox and www.nraila.org for further updates on this issue.
Click to expand...
 
jasons said:
The 94 thing is in the text of the actual MGL, so it would be dicey for her to try to "interpret" around that. Not that she couldn't try.

That's sort of beside the point though. There are a lot more post-94 guns (particularly if you read her "tests" at face value.)
Click to expand...


Exactly.

She might go over pre-94 at some point, but they are a small percentage of rifles out there in MA.
 
larueminati said:
Man the handgun thing is a whole nother dynamic. If a "mass complaint" handguns has parts that interchange with a non-complaint model (every handguns available) some dealers could take this to the extreme and stop selling them all together. This is a stretch, but possible. It at least applies to glocks since the parts interchange with a full auto model, as posted by paper city.
Click to expand...

It's not really that much of a stretch if you read her "similarity" test.

Similarity Test: A weapon is a Copy or Duplicate if its internal functional components are substantially similar in construction and configuration to those of an Enumerated Weapon. Under this test, a weapon is a Copy or Duplicate, for example, if the operating system and firing mechanism of the weapon are based on or otherwise substantially similar to one of the Enumerated Weapons.
Click to expand...
 
Regarding the whole felon-waiting-for-a-prosecutor thing, she says that "The Guidance will not be applied to possession, ownership or transfer of an Assault weapon obtained prior to July 20, 2016." Despite separately saying that all of the guns sold since 94 were "illegal," she's very clearly saying - in her official guidance - that it doesn't apply to rifles obtained before yesterday. In the absence of her changing her mind, this new interpretation doesn't impact the possession, ownership or transfer of an Assault weapon that had been obtained prior to July 20, which makes sense because she'd be facing a new set of legal challenges if she was trying to impose this specious decree retroactively.

In a world where her whims are law, rifles that fit her definition of assault rifles and that were "obtained" between '94 and yesterday are fine for us to own.
 
new guy said:
Regarding the whole felon-waiting-for-a-prosecutor thing, she says that "The Guidance will not be applied to possession, ownership or transfer of an Assault weapon obtained prior to July 20, 2016." Despite separately saying that all of the guns sold since 94 were "illegal," she's very clearly saying - in her official guidance - that it doesn't apply to rifles obtained before yesterday. In the absence of her changing her mind, this new interpretation doesn't impact the possession, ownership or transfer of an Assault weapon that had been obtained prior to July 20, which makes sense because she'd be facing a new set of legal challenges if she was trying to impose this specious decree retroactively.
Click to expand...

So what if you owned stripped lowers for years, but just built them Tuesday and registered them Wednesday, you should be good correct? You owned them before said date, have sales receipts from the delears.
 
mousegunguy said:
GOAL sent an email out: rally 10am, Saturday morning. At the statehouse!!
Click to expand...

The rally should have started at 10am today, and continued daily through Saturday. Don't follow organizations that are ineffective, they're likely controlled opposition.

Also, where are the gun shops in all this? They should have come together and hired a law firm to sue the state of Massachusetts.
 
Boris said:
+1000, like it or not, you ARE a felon. Mora said it yesterday herself.
Click to expand...

Agreed. There really isn't any ambiguity here. She stated that you illegally bought a prohibited assault weapon in violation of the MA AWB, but since you are a simpleton and didn't know it, she is not coming after you. Subject to change at any time.

Go to your gun safe. Count your semi-automatic firearms. That is how many violations of the MA AWB you may potentially be charged with. Stack all those 'pre-ban' high capacity mags you bought from <gun shop A> and you die in jail while leaving your family paupers after spending your life savings plea-bargaining your way down to a minimum-cornholing prison.
 
Here is a stupid question to be asked:

Is AR 15-22 also an assult weapon? I know CT has excluse that from the assault weapon ban.
 
Id be more pumped if one of these facebook events was titled "Assault on ____________, we have air support, bring comms and spare mags, 5pm".
 
Rider said:
Agreed. There really isn't any ambiguity here. She stated that you illegally bought a prohibited assault weapon in violation of the MA AWB, but since you are a simpleton and didn't know it, she is not coming after you. Subject to change at any time.

Go to your gun safe. Count your semi-automatic firearms. That is how many violations of the MA AWB you may potentially be charged with. Stack all those 'pre-ban' high capacity mags you bought from <gun shop A> and you die in jail while leaving your family paupers after spending your life savings plea-bargaining your way down to a minimum-cornholing prison.
Click to expand...

Seeeeeems that way, you bought a copy of assult weapon=you are felon
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Biden Closing "Gun show loophole"
2
Replies
30
Views
863
zboys
zboys
Thousands more gun dealers must run background checks on buyers as Biden administration moves to close 'doggone dangerous' loophole
Replies
4
Views
187
AJK129
AJK129
ATF Report Undermines Left’s Hysteria Over So-Called ‘Gun Show Loophole’
Replies
0
Views
152
Reptile
Reptile
These Are The Worst States To Be A Gun Owner In 2024
Replies
9
Views
538
Zappa
Zappa
Local Dealers who Sell on Consignment Through GunBroker?
2
Replies
49
Views
1K
alan226
alan226
Back
Top Bottom