• 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.
The AG could also ban house cats on the basis that they're nothing more than copies or replicas of prohibited larger exotic cats sharing the same features.

LOL. I just informed Bella that she's a banned felon. She wasn't happy - she took a crap on the floor and scratched the shit out of me. More than most of the gun owners in this state will likely do.
 
That is exactly what Healy, an ADA and two COP said during the press conference - "Mass has strong gun laws and they work since we have one of the lowest murder by gun rates - this will further strengthen our gun laws and make Mass a safer place"

How do you get safer than zero? If they ban assault weapons is the number of abortions in this state going go down?
 
How do you get safer than zero? If they ban assault weapons is the number of abortions in this state going go down?
She means safer for them. For some reason politicians are terrified we might feel the need to use arms against them. Makes me wonder what they are planning to make them fear a response if no one has acted yet after all they have already done.

Sent from my LG-H810 using Tapatalk
 
Essentially you are stuck with a stripped receiver that you technically can't build up into a complete receiver since it is illegal due to her new interruption. So that pretty much means it would have been useless to even try EFA-10ing it on the 20th.

No. It is already illegal. Building it out doesn't change that. The EFA10 requirement would flag the build.
 
Last edited:
As if this is any surprise to anyone, a rep from Seth Moulton's office got back to me when I asked what he thought (I already know Seth's stance but was curious on her actions, not the outcome of what she did):

[FONT="][I]Dear Anthony,

[/I][/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000][FONT="]Thanks very much for taking the time to write. My name is Brendan O'Bryan and I work in Congressman Moulton's office in DC. The Congressman supports the Attorney General's recent directive regarding the sale of replica and copy-cat assault weapons. He believes this is an important step to ensure that manufacturers and dealers in the Commonwealth are compliant with the spirit of the law. As you may have heard, last year 10,000 assault style weapons were legally sold in Massachusetts, despite the existing ban. The Attorney General's actions were within her authority to issue clarifying directives regarding the enforcement of existing law.
Thanks again for writing. If we can be of any further assistance, please don't hesitate to reach out.

Sincerely,

Brendan O'Bryan
[/FONT]

She forgot to add that Seth believes only true operators like himself should have guns. And that he knows what is best for us peons.
 
Q: What if I already own a gun that is a copy or duplicate?

  • If a weapon is a copy or duplicate of one of the models enumerated in the law, it is an Assault weapon. The Enforcement notice will not be applied to possession, ownership or transfer by an individual gun owner of weapons obtained on or before July 20, 2016.

  • The AGO also will not enforce the law against a gun dealer that possesses or transfers a “copy or duplicate” weapon that was obtained on or before July 20, 2016, provided that transfers, if any, are made to persons or businesses in states where ownership of the weapon is legal
Did they rewrite? On or before July 20, 2016

Yes
 
Called Sen. Brownsberger and Rep. Rogers today, talked to their aides who were very nice, didn't get much of anything meaningful by way of response. Rogers's aide said something about how "people can sue to have it overturned," I pointed out to her that in order to have standing to sue, someone would need to be arrested and charged criminally, and mounting a criminal defense like that costs a life-ruining amount of money for an average person.

Letters were snail-mailed yesterday.
 
Just an FYI if it hasnt been mentioned, Both Bravo company and PSA canceled orders on me today. PSA said not more rifle parts to MA and Bravo said no more products what so ever... Land of the FREE...
 
So if the AG decides that the legislature meant that any unborn child is a person...she can retroactively arrest and prosecute every women who had an abortion in the state?

This is exactly the analogy I've been using to explain this to my liberal-leaning friends and social acquaintances.
 
Who is honestly saying that it isn't? Option number 2 on the efa10 page is "Registration" https://mircs.chs.state.ma.us/fa10/action/home?app_context=home&app_action=presentTrans



It says "if you wish" but then says "and there is no record..." So clearly it is required.

The tag line when they passed this crap back in '98 that is that it wasn't/isn't gun registration as it doesn't technically register guns, it registers TRANSFERS. Total load of lefty double-talk.
 
1f86a51.jpg

https://www.linkedin.com/in/brendan-o-bryan-33a98112
I've met that guy. He was a complete slimeball.

Sent from my LG-K371 using Tapatalk
 
The tag line when they passed this crap back in '98 that is that it wasn't/isn't gun registration as it doesn't technically register guns, it registers TRANSFERS. Total load of lefty double-talk.
There is a difference.

With true registration (for example, handguns in NY) all legal guns are, bu definition, registered and it is illegal to have an unregistered gun.

There are many reasons one may have an unregistered gun in the DPRM - for example, registration is not required if you move in from out of state. Many of us have guns from the "blue card" days and rumor has it that the state didn't exactly do a stellar job of transcribing these into the database, and many cases of filled out blue cards were destroyed. The bottom line is that "not in the transfer database" is proof of nothing. The state would have to prove the gun was transferred under such conditions as to require a report to the state, and furthermore, that the offense of not reporting the transfer was done within whatever is the applicable statute of limitations.
 
There is a difference.

With true registration (for example, handguns in NY) all legal guns are, bu definition, registered and it is illegal to have an unregistered gun.

There are many reasons one may have an unregistered gun in the DPRM - for example, registration is not required if you move in from out of state. Many of us have guns from the "blue card" days and rumor has it that the state didn't exactly do a stellar job of transcribing these into the database, and many cases of filled out blue cards were destroyed. The bottom line is that "not in the transfer database" is proof of nothing. The state would have to prove the gun was transferred under such conditions as to require a report to the state, and furthermore, that the offense of not reporting the transfer was done within whatever is the applicable statute of limitations.

Anyone know the statute of limitations for registering a lower build and transfers?
 
Uniform of the day for tomorrow , the clam bag nazi a.g. Decrees it.

And bring bottled water tomorrow .
 
Just an FYI if it hasnt been mentioned, Both Bravo company and PSA canceled orders on me today. PSA said not more rifle parts to MA and Bravo said no more products what so ever... Land of the FREE...

So the AG has declared that PARTS are now illegal in the Commonwealth?
 
Just an FYI if it hasnt been mentioned, Both Bravo company and PSA canceled orders on me today. PSA said not more rifle parts to MA and Bravo said no more products what so ever... Land of the FREE...

Officially full retard now.
 
So the AG has declared that PARTS are now illegal in the Commonwealth?

She doesn't have to. These companies are not in it for their principles; they're money-making ventures. When MA AGs imply that items might be illegal in MA, many of these companies usually don't wait to stop doing business here. The legal risk isn't worth it for them; it's doubtful they get a huge amount of business out of MA anyway.

Been happening with ammo shipments for years now, all based on a past AG's "interpretation" of MA law.
 
Officially full retard now.

BCM after Sandy hook. I wonder if this still stands?

"The people at Bravo Company USA and BCM support responsible private individuals having access to the same tools of civilian Law Enforcement to affect the same ends...As such Bravo Company's policy is that law enforcement officials and departments will be restricted to the same type of products available to responsible private individuals of that same city or state."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom