Help me understand Maura's 7/20/2016 ban on "Assault" weapon

[SgtHal75]

No guarantee SCOTUS would hear the case, but it can make it to SCOTUS on appeal.

Let’s hope either way. I should be out of MA by then, I hope!

 

[M60]

Something tells me that carpet munching activist Fraud would tell SCOTUS to screw and do whatever she wants. She is blinded by the Rainbows!

I would really enjoy watching healy try to ignore a SCOTUS ruling against her. I don't think she's that dumb though.

 

[Prepper]

I'm pretty sure the case for AR dealer sales is already in the system. If and when the SCOTUS hears this case and rules against the Ma., A.G. on it, I doubt that even healy would defy the supreme court ruling against her.

I hope you are right.

 

[M60]

I hope you are right.

From your keyboard, to God's ears.

 

[SgtHal75]

I would really enjoy watching healy try to ignore a SCOTUS ruling against her. I don't think she's that dumb though.

She did tell the FEDS to pound sand down in Texas and got away with it. I wouldn’t put it past her. The problem is we need a US AG to send in the Agents and arrest her miserable ass.

 

[M60]

She did tell the FEDS to pound sand down in Texas and got away with it. I wouldn’t put it past her. The problem is we need a US AG to send in the Agents and arrest her miserable ass.

It seems that a good path to that end would be her ignoring a SCOTUS ruling against her.

 

[MaverickNH]

Hmmm... I’m sure there’s a more relevant thread I can’t find but clipped this from the Short Circuit Roundup on Volokh Conspiracy Short Circuit: A Roundup of Recent Federal Court Opinions

http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/18-1545P-01A.pdf

• A Massachusetts ban on certain semiautomatic weapons and magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds does not violate the Second Amendment, says the First Circuit. Though law-abiding, responsible citizens will no longer be able to use such weapons in defense of hearth and home, they can still use handguns. "[W]hen asked directly, not one of the plaintiffs or their six experts could identify even a single example of the use of an assault weapon for home self-defense, nor could they identify even a single example of a self-defense episode in which ten or more shots were fired."
• Further: “Viewed as a whole, the record suggests that wielding the proscribed weapons for self-defense within the home is tantamount to using a sledgehammer to crack open the shell of a peanut. Thus, we conclude that the Act does not heavily burden the core Second Amendment right of self-defense within the home.”

 

[Chevy 2 65]

Hmmm... I’m sure there’s a more relevant thread I can’t find but clipped this from the Short Circuit Roundup on Volokh Conspiracy Short Circuit: A Roundup of Recent Federal Court Opinions

http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/18-1545P-01A.pdf

• A Massachusetts ban on certain semiautomatic weapons and magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds does not violate the Second Amendment, says the First Circuit. Though law-abiding, responsible citizens will no longer be able to use such weapons in defense of hearth and home, they can still use handguns. "[W]hen asked directly, not one of the plaintiffs or their six experts could identify even a single example of the use of an assault weapon for home self-defense, nor could they identify even a single example of a self-defense episode in which ten or more shots were fired."
• Further: “Viewed as a whole, the record suggests that wielding the proscribed weapons for self-defense within the home is tantamount to using a sledgehammer to crack open the shell of a peanut. Thus, we conclude that the Act does not heavily burden the core Second Amendment right of self-defense within the home.”

It's NOT just about self defense in the home ! It went from hunting to now this BS

 

[namedpipes]

Hmmm... I’m sure there’s a more relevant thread I can’t find but clipped this from the Short Circuit Roundup on Volokh Conspiracy Short Circuit: A Roundup of Recent Federal Court Opinions

http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/18-1545P-01A.pdf

• A Massachusetts ban on certain semiautomatic weapons and magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds does not violate the Second Amendment, says the First Circuit. Though law-abiding, responsible citizens will no longer be able to use such weapons in defense of hearth and home, they can still use handguns. "[W]hen asked directly, not one of the plaintiffs or their six experts could identify even a single example of the use of an assault weapon for home self-defense, nor could they identify even a single example of a self-defense episode in which ten or more shots were fired."
• Further: “Viewed as a whole, the record suggests that wielding the proscribed weapons for self-defense within the home is tantamount to using a sledgehammer to crack open the shell of a peanut. Thus, we conclude that the Act does not heavily burden the core Second Amendment right of self-defense within the home.”

After grueling search of hundreds of thousands of media news sites, I was able to find an instance of the defensive use of an AR-15.

Defensive Use of AR-15, Man Kills Two, Wounds One Attacker | Gun Owners of America

On May 6th, 2017, an armed man was sitting on his front porch in the 400 block of Glenburnie Drive in Houston, Texas. He had a concealed carry permit. His brother says that he goes to the range often. He was on his porch and had another firearm with him. An AR-15 type rifle.


Three men attacked him in a drive-by shooting at about 2:15 a.m. He fired back, hitting all three. They car they were in crashed, and all three left the vehicle to continue the attack.

That search was the toughest 0.00000001 seconds of my life.

I would summarize some of the others, but I have other tasks to accomplish this month. The instances are too numerous to do justice in less time than that.

I can only assume the experts were all that a*****e billboard guy.

 

[amm5061]

After grueling search of hundreds of thousands of media news sites, I was able to find an instance of the defensive use of an AR-15.

Defensive Use of AR-15, Man Kills Two, Wounds One Attacker | Gun Owners of America



That search was the toughest 0.00000001 seconds of my life.

I would summarize some of the others, but I have other tasks to accomplish this month. The instances are too numerous to do justice in less time than that.

I can only assume the experts were all that a*****e billboard guy.

Doesn't fit the narrative. Will be ignored and barred from being submitted as evidence.

 

[TPNES]

.

 

[Ultimate Shield]

Here in MA our dealers are all from New Zealand! They simply follow what authorities demand.

Supposedly there’s FFL’s in the state that’ll still hook you up with what you want so long as its made compliant with the as written MA AWB law since Heir Maura’s edict is non-law overreach bullshit, shes not a legislature, but I’ve yet to find one of these mythical places. Sure wish I could before November rolls around...

 

[Queen Bee]

The easiest way i have found so far is the Kalikey. If the rifle is built from the ground up with this, it is a bolt action AR. Fixed mag is kind of a pain in the ass, sure it is cheaper , but reloading sucks.

 

[Mr.E]

Easy question, in so far as “redefining” AWB, one thing I don’t understand is the specific Colt language that evidently was always there (right?). Was never an AWB expert and just knew enough to get by...how does/ did that specific language effect things with a Colt (either complete or lower)? Moot point, more gray? never thought of Colt specifically as a no fly zone (almost bought a 6920 years ago)..

 

[PappyM3]

Easy question, in so far as “redefining” AWB, one thing I don’t understand is the specific Colt language that evidently was always there (right?). Was never an AWB expert and just knew enough to get by...how does/ did that specific language effect things with a Colt (either complete or lower)? Moot point, more gray? never thought of Colt specifically as a no fly zone (almost bought a 6920 years ago)..

Colts have been fine. The federal AWB text, that is cited MGL, bans Colt AR-15s (a specific model) and their copies or duplicates. For the entire span of the federal AWB, the ATF used the correct definitions for “copy” and “duplicate” and took a narrow view of what is banned by name. There are many AR pattern Colts that were lawfully sold without features during the federal AWB and even after in Massachusetts up until Maura redefined copy and duplicate to encompass things that are even just similar.

To follow the letter of the law and almost two decades of legal opinion, you just can’t have an AR pattern rifle (Colt or otherwise) built like a copy of the original Colt AR-15. But to do that, you’d need to have banned features anyway.

 

[Queen Bee]

@TPNES love you brother. did you see what your great gift has made for me? will link you to it.

 

[Mr.E]

Colts have been fine. The federal AWB text, that is cited MGL, bans Colt AR-15s (a specific model) and their copies or duplicates. For the entire span of the federal AWB, the ATF used the correct definitions for “copy” and “duplicate” and took a narrow view of what is banned by name. There are many AR pattern Colts that were lawfully sold without features during the federal AWB and even after in Massachusetts up until Maura redefined copy and duplicate to encompass things that are even just similar.

To follow the letter of the law and almost two decades of legal opinion, you just can’t have an AR pattern rifle (Colt or otherwise) built like a copy of the original Colt AR-15. But to do that, you’d need to have banned features anyway.

So the colt referenced is a specific Colt AR15? Probably a detail in there I’m not picking up. Thus a copy would likely be more along the lines of something with the AW “features” that are still excluded?

 

[DarthRevan]

Surely you aren’t looking hard enough good sir. The answer is right in front of your face

The funny thing is I know him and he’s already talked to you since then.

 

[PappyM3]

So the colt referenced is a specific Colt AR15? Probably a detail in there I’m not picking up. Thus a copy would likely be more along the lines of something with the AW “features” that are still excluded?

“AR-15” itself refers to a very specific gun when you say “Colt AR-15”. The gun community uses the term AR-15 to describe pretty much all guns based on Armalite’s AR-15 design, but there are only certain old Armalites and Colts actually designated as “AR-15”. And yes, the Colt AR-15 had various banned features. So in order to copy it or duplicate it, you’d need to have those banned features. You start neutering an AR-type gun, and you are no longer copying or duplicating the original.

Here we have an actual Colt AR-15, with flash hider and bayonet lug:

 

[Behind Enemy Lines]

What they didn't want was Colt just calling it the AR-16 and saying it was a different gun.

So the colt referenced is a specific Colt AR15? Probably a detail in there I’m not picking up. Thus a copy would likely be more along the lines of something with the AW “features” that are still excluded?

 

[SFC13557]

I'm pretty sure the case for AR dealer sales is already in the system. If and when the SCOTUS hears this case and rules against the Ma., A.G. on it, I doubt that even healy would defy the supreme court ruling against her.

I wouldn't bet on that, what consequences would she/State suffer? Majority of citizens support her and her vendetta against US. I bought a X95 in FDE, added a Giessele trigger, Strikefire red dot scope, curved buttstock. 4" shorter than M4 and perfectly legal in Maura's world.

 

[Mr.E]

”. And yes, the Colt AR-15 had various banned features. So in order to copy it or duplicate it, you’d need to have those banned features. You start neutering an AR-type gun, and you are no longer copying or duplicating the original

That’s what I was looking for. Appreciate the clarification.

what the is the difference between copy and duplicate?

 

[PappyM3]

...

what the is the difference between copy and duplicate?

So Healey made up a similarity test and an interchangeability test to redefine “copy” and “duplicate”. However, the MA AWB directly cites the federal ban and the federal ban’s usage of copy and duplicate were interpreted by the ATF in a way that aligned with the actual definitions of the words.

Meridian-Webster
Copy: one of a series of especially mechanical reproductions of an original impression

Duplicate: consisting of or existing in two corresponding or identical parts or examples

Basically, the actual definitions require something to be pretty much identical. But Healey thinks they should just have to be similar.

 

[rommel]

What is most crazy about Healy reinterpretation to me is how she declared a lower receiver as a copy or duplicate. According to MA code, a lower is not a firearm in the first place. Secondly, how is the outer shell of an item a copy or duplicate of something else when the internal working parts have not been determined yet. She is a batshit crazy dictator

 

[42!]

What is most crazy about Healy reinterpretation to me is how she declared a lower receiver as a copy or duplicate. According to MA code, a lower is not a firearm in the first place. Secondly, how is the outer shell of an item a copy or duplicate of something else when the internal working parts have not been determined yet. She is a batshit crazy dictator

Wrap your head around this. An AR10 is somehow a copy or duplicate of an AR15. Must be time travel.

 

[Queen Bee]

Wrap your head around this. An AR10 is somehow a copy or duplicate of an AR15. Must be time travel.

as others have pointed out. that is incorrect, and i choose to ignore it thus i have a new AR10.

 

[NewGuyRay]

I tried the search feature and couldn't find a match for my question and since this thread has come back to life, I will drop it here.

The original federal AWB that the state version is based on specifically exempts the Springfield M1A. On that basis, should this guy be "legal" to possess in MA?


It's the Springfield M1A "Loaded" in 6.5 Creedmoor. It should be exempt as being a variant of the M1A but it contains multiple evil features; a pistol grip, a detachable mag, and a length-adjustable stock.

I do feel foolish even asking as the obvious answer passes both the common sense and logic tests. However, we're talking MA and neither of those tests is applicable. So, what says the community? If I head up to NH to purchase one from an FFL, will they sell it to me?

Yes, I could simply call a NH dealer and ask, but posing the question on NES is way more entertaining.

 

[Glockster30]

What is most crazy about Healy reinterpretation to me is how she declared a lower receiver as a copy or duplicate. According to MA code, a lower is not a firearm in the first place. Secondly, how is the outer shell of an item a copy or duplicate of something else when the internal working parts have not been determined yet. She is a batshit crazy dictator

...not to mention this quote that I stole from someone else - "Being a sanctimonious virtue-signaling phony is far more important than protecting the property of our citizens."

 

[Queen Bee]

@NewGuyRay

you can pick one up right now if you find the right shop

 

[42!]

I tried the search feature and couldn't find a match for my question and since this thread has come back to life, I will drop it here.

The original federal AWB that the state version is based on specifically exempts the Springfield M1A. On that basis, should this guy be "legal" to possess in MA?
View attachment 362836

It's the Springfield M1A "Loaded" in 6.5 Creedmoor. It should be exempt as being a variant of the M1A but it contains multiple evil features; a pistol grip, a detachable mag, and a length-adjustable stock.

I do feel foolish even asking as the obvious answer passes both the common sense and logic tests. However, we're talking MA and neither of those tests is applicable. So, what says the community? If I head up to NH to purchase one from an FFL, will they sell it to me?

Yes, I could simply call a NH dealer and ask, but posing the question on NES is way more entertaining.

I've heard it argued that the exempt list firearms are "as manufactured at that time", there may even be language in the fed bill to that extent, but I'm not 100% on this.

But as far as the pictured gun is concerned, I would think that if the stock wan't "telescoping" or is pinned, you be good to go.