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***
You don't understand how ****ed up the MA gun registration system is. This isn't like the revenue machine at the RMV.
This isn't about entering the data for a few weeks" its about having a system that flags people, and then reports it to another system, etc.
For starters, even based on make and model, how can someone tell whether or not that gun, as configured, violates the law?
Also, consider the data contamination- guns in MA's system are never disposed of. So if you buy 100 guns and sell them all, the system still says you own 100 guns. So they're going to suspend people's drivers license renewals for guns they don't own? MA's system, as currently configured, is not set up to provide clean data.
-Mike
She is gay, progressive, and doesn't care for the rule of law. She'll fit right in.
By the time Clinton is done packing her adminstration with M******* politicians, the rest of the country will want a Constitutional Amendment to nuke MA.
Irrelevant. What is not built is not illegal and only becomes banned under this definition once assembled. I can use it for an xmas decoration for a decade if I so wish and it will never be a firearm under MA SETTLED LAW.
If the prosecution's burden of proof still applies after today then logically, any FA-10 filed less than 7 days post AG's declaration should be fine as the burden would be on the state to prove the rifle was assembled after the AG's declaration?
Here's a question maybe one of the legal minds can answer.
How the hell are you supposed to "comply" with a law - when you don't even know it exists?
As pointed out a number of times in this thread - this whole thing is only seemingly showing up on the Boston Globe site (although I'm sure it will be on the news tonite).
But I don't watch the news. And I don't read the Globe anymore. So technically - how the fu(k am I supposed to know that the "law" (I'll put that in quotes from now on) - even changed?
I've always been told that ignorance of the law is no excuse - well I'm not ignorant of th "law" - I was pretty familiar with the damn law the way it was very clearly laid out before and I complied with it.
I know there's people out there who still don't know about the MA change in the damn FID cards for crying out loud.
And I'll be moving back to MA in less than 6 months.
The point is to get dealers to stop selling them. Everything else is a happy side effect (from her point of view)Here's a question maybe one of the legal minds can answer.
How the hell are you supposed to "comply" with a law - when you don't even know it exists?
As pointed out a number of times in this thread - this whole thing is only seemingly showing up on the Boston Globe site (although I'm sure it will be on the news tonite).
But I don't watch the news. And I don't read the Globe anymore. So technically - how the fu(k am I supposed to know that the "law" (I'll put that in quotes from now on) - even changed?
I've always been told that ignorance of the law is no excuse - well I'm not ignorant of th "law" - I was pretty familiar with the damn law the way it was very clearly laid out before and I complied with it.
I know there's people out there who still don't know about the MA change in the damn FID cards for crying out loud.
And, they'd get it with an easy majority.....maybe three state shy of unanimity.
Here's a question maybe one of the legal minds can answer.
How the hell are you supposed to "comply" with a law - when you don't even know it exists?
As pointed out a number of times in this thread - this whole thing is only seemingly showing up on the Boston Globe site (although I'm sure it will be on the news tonite).
But I don't watch the news. And I don't read the Globe anymore. So technically - how the fu(k am I supposed to know that the "law" (I'll put that in quotes from now on) - even changed?
I've always been told that ignorance of the law is no excuse - well I'm not ignorant of th "law" - I was pretty familiar with the damn law the way it was very clearly laid out before and I complied with it.
I know there's people out there who still don't know about the MA change in the damn FID cards for crying out loud.
...
I know there's people out there who still don't know about the MA change in the damn FID cards for crying out loud.
Interesting points. However your part about make/model is irrelevant. The edict from today states they are all illegal, configuration notwithstanding.
Regarding buying 100 and selling them, an FA-10 is supposed to be submitted upon that transfer.
While some may not, most likely have been logged. Maybe they will just start from when they only allowed the eFA-10. That data is MOST CERTAINLY query-able in a db. I
As far as the data contamination, if that's true then yes it would (thankfully) be a lot of work to try and do something like this.
I'm not saying this is going to happen tomorrow, but every time there is an erosion of rights (or a damn avalanche like today), it moves the concept a few notches from "tinfoil" to "quite possible".
Well, the statists will of course say "ignorance of the law is no excuse". It used to be an excuse, back in the old days where they also had to show criminal intent to violate it, not just accidentally do something that harmed no one and they didn't know a "law" was written about it. And, it is literally impossible to know and comply with all the law. Even a super computer 1,000,000X times more powerful than anything we have now, combined with artificial intelligence technology we don't have yet and merged with a human's mind couldn't comply.
Thanks. A little disheartening to see the petition to buy a goat has 110K signatures and we have 1300
Admin should maybe make a sticky with an announcement. I am fairly sure not everyone has seen the petition
Application of this Enforcement Notice
(dealers licensed under G.L. c. 140, § 122):
The Guidance will not be applied to
future possession,ownership or transfer of Assault weapons
by dealers, provided that the dealer has written evidence that the weapons were
transferred to the dealer in the Commonwealth
prior to July 20, 2016, and provided further that a transfer made
after July 20, 2016, if any, is
made to persons or businesses in states where such weapons are
legal. 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
.
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[
Well, the statists will of course say "ignorance of the law is no excuse". It used to be an excuse, back in the old days where they also had to show criminal intent to violate it, not just accidentally do something that harmed no one and they didn't know a "law" was written about it. And, it is literally impossible to know and comply with all the law. Even a super computer 1,000,000X times more powerful than anything we have now, combined with artificial intelligence technology we don't have yet and merged with a human's mind couldn't comply.
You don't understand how ****ed up the MA gun registration system is. This isn't like the revenue machine at the RMV.
This isn't about entering the data for a few weeks" its about having a system that flags people, and then reports it to another system, etc.
For starters, even based on make and model, how can someone tell whether or not that gun, as configured, violates the law?
Also, consider the data contamination- guns in MA's system are never disposed of. So if you buy 100 guns and sell them all, the system still says you own 100 guns. So they're going to suspend people's drivers license renewals for guns they don't own? MA's system, as currently configured, is not set up to provide clean data.
-Mike