Linsky after bump stocks AND pre ban mags !!!!!!!!!

[STRIKE=Tarr about to move amendment be dropped in favor public process.]Tarr about to move amendment be dropped in favor public process.[/STRIKE]

I'm sure whether I stand corrected?!?!?
 
Last edited:
At least Tarr can string together five words into a sentence. Ms. Cream is an embarrassment.

- - - Updated - - -




"unlawful to purchase, sell, or offer for sale"

Nothing about "possess..." Sounds like grandfathering to me.


that would be ****ing brilliant, can still "make" then
 
Tarr:

"I'm gonna thank everyone, blah blah blah, I can't even remember where in western MA that one guys is from. Well, it's been a big group effort. We gotta act. We shouldn't be putting this as an amendment in a spending document, but should rather be completely vetting this through the legislative process and especially receiving public comment/testimony. Still, I know that it ain't happening because the majority party is a bunch of hacks. THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC HEARING ON MY BILL, YOU DICKS. My bill is better than this BS. Obviously you don't know what you're talking about, because the language I've added here clarifies Linsky's mumblings. There will be a delayed effective date AND all gun owners must be notified so there's no legal trap. Manufacturers will also be notified that they should not be shipping these devices into the state. Now we have a reasonably balanced amendment so people can't circumvent the machinegun licensing scheme. I would like us to move forward with this, to be taken on a standing vote."
 
Now they are all confused about voting on the standing vote. They moved forward to adopt the amendment.

TO CLARIFY: The amendment has been adopted.
 
Eldridge.

Eldridge = POS

- - - Updated - - -

This is the Tarr bill:


[FONT="][B]Amendment ID: S2177-5-R1[/B][/FONT][/COLOR]
[RIGHT][COLOR=#000000][FONT="]Redraft Amendment 5[/FONT]
[/RIGHT]
[FONT="][B]Relative to rapid fire firearms[/B][/FONT][/COLOR][/CENTER][COLOR=#000000][FONT="]Ms. Creem, Messrs. Tarr and Moore, Ms. Spilka, Messrs. Rodrigues, Hinds and Timilty move to amend the bill by inserting the following new sections:-[/FONT]
[FONT="]SECTION X: Section 121 of Chapter 140 of the general laws as appearing in the 2016 official edition, is hereby amended in line 100 by inserting after the words “submachine gun” the following:-[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000][FONT="]“The term machine gun shall include bump stocks and trigger cranks.”[/FONT]

[FONT="]SECTION Y. Section 121 of chapter 140 of the general laws as appearing in the 2016 official edition, is hereby amended in line 100 by inserting the following new definitions:-[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000][FONT="]“Bump stock” any device for a semiautomatic firearm that increases the rate of fire achievable with such firearm by using energy from the recoil of the firearm to generate a reciprocating action that facilitates repeated activation of the trigger.[/FONT]

[FONT="]“Trigger Crank” any device to be attached to a semi-automatic firearm that repeatedly activates the trigger of the firearm through the use of a lever or other part that is turned in a circular motion, but does not include any firearm initially designed and manufactured to fire through the use of a crank or lever.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000][FONT="]SECTION Z. The executive office of public safety and security shall notify any individual licensed under chapter 140 of changes made under section X and the effective date of those changes. The executive office shall also notify manufacturers of bump stocks and trigger cranks of changes made under section X and the effective date of those changes.[/FONT]

[FONT="]SECTION XX. Section X shall take effect 90 days after the passage of this act; but it shall be unlawful to purchase, sell, or offer for sale a bump stock or trigger crank in violation of chapter 140 of the General Laws after the effective date of this act.[/FONT]


Is this the language that was just added to the budget bill?​
 
So - if I want to use a bump stock/crank - I need a Machine gun license?

As they are defined, yes. But someone is going to come out with ways around this. Then you can look forward to a future event where Linsky, Creem, or maybe Gov. Healey pens a Globe article horrified that we are all exploiting the bump fire loophole and we'll go through all of this again.
 
As they are defined, yes. But someone is going to come out with ways around this. Then you can look forward to a future event where Linsky, Creem, or maybe Gov. Healey pens a Globe article horrified that we are all exploiting the bump fire loophole and we'll go through all of this again.

GOOD. **** them!
 
Eldridge is also praising the Justice reform to make up for "decades of institutional racism" and the "failed war on drugs" and allow for compassion in sentences for criminals.
 
Now some lady's virtue signalling about how she's going to a memorial and will tell everyone there how "we did something."
 
Moore's up: "We're awesome and should be proud because we did something with bipartisan support." He actually thanked 2A advocates.
 
In all honesty, thats a better bill than i first thought.

If you have a green card, you are good to go with a bump stock. I thought for sure it would have been outright banned (heck they may think they did that).

I don't have a bump stock, but i think i will go fill out an application for a green card, i heard a rumor the COP here doesn't deny them.

- - - Updated - - -

I’m on the road. What just happened? Do we have any official ruling?

yes / no

the Senate approved a better version of the statute.
This does not align with the house.
So now the house needs to take the matter back up.
 
So - when they tell manufacturers they can't sell to MA unless licensed. They'll know, unlicensed versus LTC versus LTC w/ Machine Gun?

You're kidding, right? They are just going to tell manufacturers that they can't sell to MA, period.

- - - Updated - - -

did he mention any names?

I hear John Rosenthal owns a shotgun.
 
Back
Top Bottom