Healey "closing the loophole" letter to gun dealers

Status
Not open for further replies.
sixer said:
They said "noon to 1". I am recording it and will make available the MP3 at 1pm.

I'm having a tough time with Egan and Braudie too. She's supposed to be the conservative yet I just heard her insinuate that anti-Hillary people are anti-women.
Click to expand...

On a station like THAT one she IS conservative.

She's a flaming liberal in actuality.
 
JoseyWales said:
http://www.wgbh.org/audioPlayers/wgbh.cfm

I think Gov. Beaker is on at 12pm.
Click to expand...

lol

Beaker-beaker-16860984-321-351-274x300.jpg
 
new guy said:
I think it would be a big move on her part. People would probably have to be given the opportunity to sell them out of state, which itself would be a cluster****.
Click to expand...

it may be like Connecticut shit show. Mora just nuked a whole lot of business yesterday, what will stop her nuking dollars from gun owners? Those are even more vulnerable when taken out on one by one cases.
 
Realtor MA said:
I sent the following to my senator and congressman...

I am writing today to ask for your assistance. Please take whatever actions are necessary to prevent the Attorney General, Maura Healey, from rewriting and redefining our existing gun laws.
She has recently decided to take action against lawful gun owners and is in essence implementing a ban on the sale of any rifle she, apparently in her sole discretion, deems to be an assault rifle.
She should not have the power to do this and I would urge you and your fellow legislators to stop her. Massachusetts gun laws are known to be some of the strictest in the country. The maze of laws that already exist make it difficult enough for law abiding people to enjoy the shooting sports. More importantly any further laws would continue to erode the rights of Massachusetts citizens to keep and bear arms, a right which is guaranteed not only by the Constitution of the United States but also by the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I think it is also important to note that the firearms the AG is attempting to eliminate are rarely used in any crimes. According to the Boston Herald – “According to FBI statistics, rifles of any variety were used in just two of the Bay State’s 779 murders in the past five years….”.
Click to expand...

Facts won't matter but I dropped snailmail letters to my state Rep., state Senator, and Gov. Baker this morning. For all the good it'll do--all of 'em are staunch antis.
 
So does this not qualify as an ex post facto law (which is prohibited at the Federal and State level in the US Constitution - Acticle 1, sections 9 and 10)? That is what saved folks in CT from having ARs declared illegal if already owned prior to 2013, but they still had to be registered.

I suppose she is claiming that she is not writing new law, she is just interpreting existing law in a stricter fashion. I can't see how that can hold up in court though when there is clear precedent for 18 or 20 years in MA that says semi-auto guns are fine as long as they do not have too many of the "evil features" or specifically listed in the MA AWB. I mean she can interpret all kinds of things but 20 years of precedent have to count for something.

I am watching this closely because I am sure the idiots in Hartford will be quick to copy this if it succeeds. Actually they probably won't wait. I will have to compare the CT AWB to the MA AWB to see what the wording is to determine what a copy or duplicate is. In CT I think it just says "copies or duplicates" but does not define that. I think in court an AK-47 style gun was declared a copy if the receiver was functionally the same and the bolt could be interchanged with an actual AK-47. So until the AK-74 was added to the ban list they were legal because the bolt could not be swapped out with an AK-47, I think. They are both banned in CT now anyway.
 
What most people don't get is that this issue is much, much bigger than guns.

It is about the stripping away of your rights, a little at a time.

I would bet money that the attacks in the USA are government backed to drive support for disarming the population.

That way full control will be easier - refer to Nazi Germany in the 1930's for a plan against the Jews.
 
cja1987 said:
Do people seriously worry this much about this crap?

You are giving the cops in this state way too much credit. They don't know crap about guns and they dont really care. If you think a cop on duty is running around looking to do research on whether or not a firearm is illegal you are out of your mind. Off duty at the range? You have got to be kidding! They dont run around their entire lives looking to hem up Joe Shmo at the range.
Click to expand...

I do worry about it, actually, given that I'd rather not have the felony on my record, and since I don't like giving money to lawyers.

Most cops may not care, but some do. The fact that they don't know crap about guns makes them more dangerous.
 
new guy said:
Who the hell knows. If she pulls this off it will be a pretty massive win for the antis and she'll have MA at the front of the pack nationally.
Click to expand...

Everybody paying attention knows. The anti's have been talking full on confiscation for years.
 
cja1987 said:
Do people seriously worry this much about this crap?

You are giving the cops in this state way too much credit. They don't know crap about guns and they dont really care. If you think a cop on duty is running around looking to do research on whether or not a firearm is illegal you are out of your mind. Off duty at the range? You have got to be kidding! They dont run around their entire lives looking to hem up Joe Shmo at the range.

I shoot whatever the hell I want at the range and about 1/50th of my collection is "Mass Compliant". At some point you have to stop letting these morons run your life, Healey does not care about us, why would I care if I do something she does not like?
Click to expand...

Some of them do. I've seen it first hand. It was about 30rd mags. I wasn't the mark though.
 
Carl in Ct said:
So does this not qualify as an ex post facto law (which is prohibited at the Federal and State level in the US Constitution - Acticle 1, sections 9 and 10)? That is what saved folks in CT from having ARs declared illegal if already owned prior to 2013, but they still had to be registered.

I suppose she is claiming that she is not writing new law, she is just interpreting existing law in a stricter fashion. I can't see how that can hold up in court though when there is clear precedent for 18 or 20 years in MA that says semi-auto guns are fine as long as they do not have too many of the "evil features" or specifically listed in the MA AWB. I mean she can interpret all kinds of things but 20 years of precedent have to count for something.

I am watching this closely because I am sure the idiots in Hartford will be quick to copy this if it succeeds. Actually they probably won't wait. I will have to compare the CT AWB to the MA AWB to see what the wording is to determine what a copy or duplicate is. In CT I think it just says "copies or duplicates" but does not define that. I think in court an AK-47 style gun was declared a copy if the receiver was functionally the same and the bolt could be interchanged with an actual AK-47. So until the AK-74 was added to the ban list they were legal because the bolt could not be swapped out with an AK-47, I think. They are both banned in CT now anyway.
Click to expand...

I think the ex post facto thing is why she's explicitly applying her guidance on a going forward basis.
 
Boris said:
Fundamental difference between libtard shit stirrers and most guns owners:

1. Having a ****ing job and a responsibility to support family, not FSAing on someone else's dime.
2. If arrested = suitability, if felon = PP for life.

Gun owners are trapped in the legal maze that they created. We started with sensible laws shit, and then obeyed them to the letter, so much so that we are afraid to stir shit up to loose whatever remaining "rights" that we still have.

This is why any response to any gun laws or regulations should be **** you! No compromise of any kind, none of this sensible shit. We need to do away with Hughes amendment, we need to go back to the root of "shall not infringe" Anyone who says that a little rape is OK is either moonbat or a traitor.
Click to expand...

Well Healey just made us all felons - so there's no reason to worry about that any more - you already are. Learn to embrace it and move forward.

I have a family to support. I have a job. I have more shit to do than I can get thru on any average day. I have three cars in the driveway - and all three are in various stages of broken. My mother in-law has Alzheimers and is a constant maintainence problem. The wife refuses to move to NH - even when I explained to her that the AG just made me a multiple count felon yesterday for following the laws. We recently watched the Helen Mirren movie "Woman in Gold" - which is about a woman who escapes Austria after the Nazis took over. It happened fast - and some people thought it would be ok. I told her that what just happened yesterday is that level of historical bullshit.

She doesn't get it. So I may have to dump her ass to save myself.
But we've been talking about having a kid - so I go and do that - I'm losing half of all I own - and starting over completely. At a late age.

I have a house that I probably couldn't even sell because I've still got a couple of years of hard work to make it whole enough so that anybody would want to buy it.

The company I work for is doing a massive merger - and all I hear is talk of layoffs. Which may happen soon.

I've been trying to sell off some of the large collection I have to get the money out of it - and because I sensed that things were going to shit and I may just need one or two in the end.
Now I'm screwed on that score too.

So I think I'm fully understanding the meaning of shit show and what being completely fu(ked in the ass is all about.
 
new guy said:
I do worry about it, actually, given that I'd rather not have the felony on my record, and since I don't like giving money to lawyers.

Most cops may not care, but some do. The fact that they don't know crap about guns makes them more dangerous.
Click to expand...

This, absolutely. Arrest you and let the court figure it out, at your expense.

And it only takes you running into the one who does give a crap, or is trying to make a name for themselves.
 
Paul455 said:
What most people don't get is that this issue is much, much bigger than guns.

It is about the stripping away of your rights, a little at a time.

I would bet money that the attacks in the USA are government backed to drive support for disarming the population.

That way full control will be easier - refer to Nazi Germany in the 1930's for a plan against the Jews.
Click to expand...

Yeah to most people it's about guns and we're all gun nuts and need to be controlled. They do not see the massive overreach in power and are unable to connect that to a cause that they care about. Sheep. Lemmings. Morons. Voters.
 
jasons said:
Everybody paying attention knows. The anti's have been talking full on confiscation for years.
Click to expand...

wet dream, one police chief in one town may do it ... nothing happens ... few more towns.

if it goes badly, chief get blame, then try again sometimes later.
 
Dressed to Kill said:
In dissent on Monday, Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Antonin Scalia, accused the court of abdicating its responsibility to enforce the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. (Justice Scalia wrote the majority opinion in the Heller case, which was decided by a 5 to 4 vote.)

“Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles,” Justice Thomas wrote, referring, he said, to “modern sporting rifles.”

" in common use "

I don't see how this " ban " would stand as Constitutional considering that. She's directly infringing on people's Second Amendment rights. It will be years before they sort this out so we have to suffer in the mean time.
Click to expand...
Massachusetts doesn't recognize or care about the constitution. There is no 2A in MA.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk
 
Who is on the barricade and burning tires committee? I have a few old tires to donate.
 
xtry51 said:
Still noting on Drudge or Breitbart. Which is totally baffling.
Click to expand...

As I said before, they don't really understand what just happened. This is being presented as closing a minor loophole in the existing law and non gun-owners don't get it, at all. They think it's a small change and not the earthquake it really is.
 
gunofthrones said:
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.
Click to expand...
I was thinking about this last night since i have a mp15-22. I'm pretty sure this will be considered an 'assault weapon' since it uses the same triggers as AR's

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
 
calsdad said:
Well Healey just made us all felons - so there's no reason to worry about that any more - you already are. Learn to embrace it and move forward.

I have a family to support. I have a job. I have more shit to do than I can get thru on any average day. I have three cars in the driveway - and all three are in various stages of broken. My mother in-law has Alzheimers and is a constant maintainence problem. The wife refuses to move to NH - even when I explained to her that the AG just made me a multiple count felon yesterday for following the laws. We recently watched the Helen Mirren movie "Woman in Gold" - which is about a woman who escapes Austria after the Nazis took over. It happened fast - and some people thought it would be ok. I told her that what just happened yesterday is that level of historical bullshit.

She doesn't get it. So I may have to dump her ass to save myself.
But we've been talking about having a kid - so I go and do that - I'm losing half of all I own - and starting over completely. At a late age.

I have a house that I probably couldn't even sell because I've still got a couple of years of hard work to make it whole enough so that anybody would want to buy it.

The company I work for is doing a massive merger - and all I hear is talk of layoffs. Which may happen soon.

I've been trying to sell off some of the large collection I have to get the money out of it - and because I sensed that things were going to shit and I may just need one or two in the end.
Now I'm screwed on that score too.

So I think I'm fully understanding the meaning of shit show and what being completely fu(ked in the ass is all about.
Click to expand...

I get it too, I had to walk away from everything and come to another country with just a shirt on my back. It sucks, I'd rather not do it again.
 
I just received response, non-response from Baker's office:

[FONT=&quot]On behalf of Governor Charlie Baker, thank you for your recent correspondence regarding the ban assault weapons ban. We understand your concern about this issue, and we are grateful to have your voice as part of the discussion.
Please feel free to contact our office in the future with any further questions or concerns; your comments are always welcome in this administration.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] Sincerely,

Constituent Services Aide
Office of Governor Charlie Baker
(617) 725-4005
www.mass.gov/governor/contact[/FONT]
 
Thank God I have CMP and other firearms that even this doesn't touch by a mile.

- - - Updated - - -

Just heard Charlie Baker is on after 12PM EST after commericals.


http://www.wgbh.org/audioPlayers/wgbh.cfm
 
Rod_Tel said:
Below is a letter I came up with that I intend to send to my reps and the Governor. What do you guys think?




I am writing this letter to express my utter outrage at the obvious overreach of the Attorney General, Maura Healey, regarding the re-interpretation of the Massachusetts Assault Weapons Ban. This re-interpretation has unilaterally banned firearms that have been legally sold and possessed by law-abiding citizens for over 20 years.

The Attorney General’s reasoning is flawed on its face. She is relying on the words “copy” & “duplicate” as they appear in the definition of an “Assault Weapon” under MGL Chapter 140 Section 121. This definition, in part, states “and shall include, but not be limited to, any of the weapons, or copies or duplicates of the weapons [emphasis added], of any caliber, known as”, and goes on to list a series of specific firearms manufactured by specific companies. The Attorney General has unilaterally taken it upon herself to redefine the words “copy” & duplicate”. She has invented a so-called “Similarity Test” as quoted below:

“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.”

First, this so-called “Similarity Test” appears nowhere in the General Laws. It is purely an invented idea by the Attorney General. If the Legislature wanted a “Similarity Test” included in the law, the Legislature would have included it.

Second, by inventing this “Similarity Test”, the Attorney General has re-defined the words “copy” & “duplicate”. Based on numerous sources, the definition of “copy” is “an exact duplicate”. And the definition of the word “duplicate” is “an exact copy”. These words do not mean “substantially similar”, as used in the above “Similarity Test”. The words used in the statute are basic, plain, simple words. There is no reason to think these words mean anything other than their Plain English definition. Since when does the Attorney General have the authority to change the definitions of the most basic of words in the English language?

As a result of this, the Attorney General is threatening criminal enforcement based on this re-interpretation. She is threatening to charge otherwise law-abiding citizens and/or business owners with felonies.

This move by the Attorney General is clearly an over-reach of her authority. The Attorney General is attempting to re-write a statute. I urge you to oppose this illegal action by Maura Healey and remind her that the law-making authority falls to the Massachusetts Legislature, not to the Attorney General.
Click to expand...

This is pretty good. Nice job.
 
10thSFFD said:
I just received response, non-response from Baker's office:

[FONT="]On behalf of Governor Charlie Baker, thank you for your recent correspondence regarding the ban assault weapons ban. We understand your concern about this issue, and we are grateful to have your voice as part of the discussion.
Please feel free to contact our office in the future with any further questions or concerns; your comments are always welcome in this administration.
[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000][FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="] Sincerely,

Constituent Services Aide
Office of Governor Charlie Baker
(617) 725-4005
[URL="https://iqconnect.lmhostediq.com/iqextranet/iqClickTrk.aspx?&cid=FSL_MA_GOV&crop=14237.5107403.5106294.7064617&redirect=http%3a%2f%2fwww.mass.gov%2fgovernor%2fcontact"]www.mass.gov/governor/contact[/URL][/FONT]
Click to expand...

you should copy/save and mail it back to that POS when he asks for re-election donation next time around
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Biden Closing "Gun show loophole"
2
Replies
30
Views
896
zboys
zboys
Thousands more gun dealers must run background checks on buyers as Biden administration moves to close 'doggone dangerous' loophole
Replies
4
Views
194
AJK129
AJK129
ATF Report Undermines Left’s Hysteria Over So-Called ‘Gun Show Loophole’
Replies
0
Views
169
Reptile
Reptile
The 10 Commandments of Gun Safety
Replies
2
Views
237
deerdad
deerdad
These Are The Worst States To Be A Gun Owner In 2024
Replies
9
Views
610
Zappa
Zappa
Back
Top Bottom