• 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.

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

Mike S said:
Just saw a report from State House News that the same budget featuring the amendment to ban bump stocks also features an amendment to make it easier for people with a criminal history to get jobs at MA casinos. You really can't make it up.
Click to expand...

Hey, politicians have to have somewhere to empoly their deadbeat relatives, and there are no Mass Pike toll-taker jobs to be handed out anymore.
 
LuvDog said:
No way.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

not to mentioned, from what I heard, the MG license is given out to collect MGs as an investment, i.e. don't tell the chief that you like shooting them. That's the reason for C&R in the first place, to position yourself as a bona fide collector/investor.

Telling the chief that you got a bumpfire stock would probably mean auto disqualifier.

I kind of wish that cops weren't paid well and you can bribe them, like in Russia, to get proper papers.
 
Please explain the pass to legalization for bump stocks? Can we get MG licenses now?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Reptile said:
Please explain the pass to legalization for bump stocks? Can we get MG licenses now?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

path. No you can't, it won't be easier to get 'em. It's the same bullshit "no taking" but taking. There are 1000s legal ways to take yours and still make you feel guilty about keeping anything.
 
You don't necessarily need a C&R to get a MG license.
It can be helpful though...

Ive never felt the need to use my slide fire stock..i think ill break it out this weekend just so everyone at the range can say "thats illegal" i usually get all my legal advice through gunstore employees and strangers at the range.
 
JayMcB said:
Reptile said:
Will it be legal to own if not installed on a rifle?
Click to expand...
nope.
Click to expand...
Relabel it as a LGBTQA Transition Aid. Then if you don't install it on rifle nobody can argue it's not a LGBTQATA. If someone does, just claim that you're offended by their racist, gender-assuming accusation. [hmmm] In MA, who knows, it might work.
Or just take it out of state.
Their rules, their game, their prizes. [sad]
 
Reptile said:
Mass. Senate holds public hearing on bump stock ban, but no one shows up

After the Massachusetts Legislature sped restrictions on bump stocks, a tool to increase the firing rate of guns, through the legislative process, senators opened the issue up to a public hearing.

No members of the public showed up.

"I was not going to ask most of our people to take a day off and come to the Statehouse to talk about something that already happened," said Jim Wallace, executive director of Gun Owners' Action League of Massachusetts.

Bump stocks gained national notoriety after the man who killed 58 people and injured hundreds at a Las Vegas concert used a bump stock to turn a semi-automatic rifle into a fully automatic one. Automatic guns are illegal. The federal government and some states are now considering banning bump stocks.

In Massachusetts, the Senate and House passed different versions of bump stock restrictions as part of a budget bill.

The Senate language would classify bump stocks and trigger cranks the same way as machine guns. A trigger crank is another mechanism to speed up a gun's ability to fire. This would allow someone to get the device only after obtaining a particular type of license. For example, a gun collector or a firearm instructor who trains police officers could get one.

Continues...

http://www.masslive.com/politics/in...olds_hearing_on_gun_bi.html#incart_river_home
Click to expand...

Hopefully, everyone was home tuning their machine guns.
 
kevin9 said:
Relabel it as a LGBTQA Transition Aid. Then if you don't install it on rifle nobody can argue it's not a LGBTQATA. If someone does, just claim that you're offended by their racist, gender-assuming accusation. [hmmm] In MA, who knows, it might work.
Or just take it out of state.
Their rules, their game, their prizes. [sad]
Click to expand...

AS I said before if you keep it just about guns WE LOSE!
 
Horrible said:
Exactly. Votes have already been cast in both the House and Senate. Bullshit rush job.

What good is a public hearing at THAT point?!
Click to expand...

I believe (and since there are so many things going on with this crap, i could be wrong) the public hearing was based on the bill that Tarr filed. The house shoved their wording in via an amendment to a finance bill that had an emergency preamble which circumvented public hearings. The senate altered the wording of the amendment, but still, no hearing.

Tarr was pushing for a public hearing before altering firearms laws, this hearing was the result. He wanted the process to work as its supposed to. (i caught on to this statement when i was watching the senate session a week ago). So if this hearing was a result from SD.2348, it was Tarr making a statement that there is a process that should be followed.
 
JayMcB said:
He should veto...but he won't
Click to expand...

Curious, why? It will cost him major political capital and accomplish nothing, since they will have a veto proof majority.

I don't like what's happening either but I see no reason to commit suicide.
 
JayMcB said:
He should veto...but he won't
Click to expand...

Would it matter? Legislature would easily override a veto.

My Rep is typical:

Thank you for your email regarding legislation that would prohibit “bump stock” devices in Massachusetts.

This amendment, which passed the House last week with vote of 151-3, bars the possession, ownership, or sale of any device that is designed to increase the rate of fire of a firearm. The Senate passed a different version, which criminalizes possession of bump stocks and trigger cranks by categorizing them as “machine guns”. The House version gives residents six months to comply, while the Senate version allows three months to dispose of the devices. The House and Senate now need to agree on language before sending the legislation to Governor Baker for his approval.

These devices, that mimic automatic fire by allowing a shooter to fire at a rate of 400 to 800 rounds a minute, are dangerous and pose a public safety risk. I feel that this ban does not infringe on the second amendment because these items are an optional accessory.

I appreciate hearing your concerns regarding this legislation and thank you for taking the time to share them with me.

Sincerely,
William C. Galvin

I think the best we can hope is that it's so specific it doesn't include other "accessories" in the ban.
 
Dadstoys said:
You guys just don't understand politics.
A Democrat would sign it twice and make it extra infringey . [rolleyes]
Thank God for Charlie.
Click to expand...

what do we have left? We can't sell or buy ARs or AKs, most pistols are out of reach. The only thing we got are pre-ban mags that I'm sure will be next somehow. We don't have much left anymore.

let's ****ing ban everything, may be more people will get involved.
 
Boris said:
what do we have left? We can't sell or buy ARs or AKs, most pistols are out of reach. The only thing we got are pre-ban mags that I'm sure will be next somehow. We don't have much left anymore.

let's ****ing ban everything, may be more people will get involved.
Click to expand...

The more they ban, the less people will comply with their bullshit. This has been proven over and over again. Thankfully, there will be many free states left, so the black market will be well-stocked and easy to find.

J.D. Tucille has many good articles on this subject:
https://www.google.com/amp/reason.c.../repealing-the-2nd-amendment-wont-make-gu/amp
 
Acujeff said:
Would it matter? Legislature would easily override a veto.

My Rep is typical:

Thank you for your email regarding legislation that would prohibit “bump stock” devices in Massachusetts.

This amendment, which passed the House last week with vote of 151-3, bars the possession, ownership, or sale of any device that is designed to increase the rate of fire of a firearm. The Senate passed a different version, which criminalizes possession of bump stocks and trigger cranks by categorizing them as “machine guns”. The House version gives residents six months to comply, while the Senate version allows three months to dispose of the devices. The House and Senate now need to agree on language before sending the legislation to Governor Baker for his approval.

These devices, that mimic automatic fire by allowing a shooter to fire at a rate of 400 to 800 rounds a minute, are dangerous and pose a public safety risk. I feel that this ban does not infringe on the second amendment because these items are an optional accessory.

I appreciate hearing your concerns regarding this legislation and thank you for taking the time to share them with me.

Sincerely,
William C. Galvin

I think the best we can hope is that it's so specific it doesn't include other "accessories" in the ban.
Click to expand...

You fight for what's right win or lose.
5 guys home invade your house in the middle of the night.
You can bail and live while they kill your wife and kids or you can fight till the death and take as many of the f*ckers with you as you can before you go down.
If you chose the bail option , no one I know would congratulate you for it.
There seems to be a great deal of concern over poor Charlie's political career over our rights.

The idea that he may down the line speak up for us on some other 2A infringment that comes down the line is absolutly delusional.
He's a Dem that ran one on us and hates the 2nd amendment as much as any of them, so lets get past that fantasy.
 
Current wording from the House per my Rep:

Amendment #1, as changed to H3951​
Automatic Weapons​
“SECTION XX: Chapter 140 of General Laws is hereby amended by inserting after section 131Q, as appearing in the 2016 Official Edition, the following section:-
Section 131R. Whoever possesses, owns or offers for sale any device which attaches to a rifle, shotgun or firearm, except a magazine, that is designed to increase the rate of discharge of the rifle, shotgun or firearm or whoever modifies any rifle, shotgun or firearm with the intent to increase its rate of discharge, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison by not less than 3 nor more than 20 years.
SECTION YY. Section XX shall take effect 180 days after the effective date of this act.”
SECTION ZZ. The Secretary of Public Safety shall promulgate regulations by January 1, 2018 concerning the allowability of maintenance and enhancement of rifles, shotguns and firearms consistent with the intent of this section.
 
The bump stock legislation establishes the precedent that the state of MA may declare lawfully procured and owned property contraband, and require disownership with no compensation from the state.

Expanding it to other items becomes a simple implementation detail. "We can't confiscate private property without compensation" is no longer a barrier.
 
Rob Boudrie said:
The bump stock legislation establishes the precedent that the state of MA may declare lawfully procured and owned property contraband, and require disownership with no compensation from the state.

Expanding it to other items becomes a simple implementation detail. "We can't confiscate private property without compensation" is no longer a barrier.
Click to expand...

I am brazenly stealing this to reply to my rep.

Ms. Dykema:



I appreciate what I'm sure you feel is a thoughtful reply. This process is simply unconstitutional, as the bump stock legislation as written establishes the precedent that the state may retroactively declare lawfully procured and owned property contraband, and require disownership with no compensation from the state.

Expanding it to other items becomes a simple implementation detail. "We can't confiscate private property without compensation" is no longer a barrier. With a lawless activist like AG Healy in office, this is an uncomfortable place for a firearm owner. It isn't as though the legislature has made any effort to reel in her extra-Constitutional reimagining enforcement letter re-writing 20+ years of settled firearm law.



This is a slippery slope. While I realize it is a 'done deal', kindly consider which side of the Constitution you swore an oath to protect you are on.



I believe it to be the wrong one.



Regards,
 

Similar threads

Pre vs post ban Beretta mags
Replies
10
Views
595
Rob Boudrie
Rob Boudrie
Supreme Court Hears Texas Gun Store Owner’s Lawsuit Against Bump Stock Ban
2 3
Replies
87
Views
2K
HorizontalHunter
HorizontalHunter
Manhunt Underway After Mother and Daughter Shot, Killed in Gun-Controlled Massachusetts
2
Replies
33
Views
1K
Varmint
Varmint
How can I bump my ad and edit the content?
Replies
1
Views
212
Fixxah
Fixxah
Worcester PD - Going after the guns but how about the perps…
Replies
14
Views
528
houdini
houdini
Back
Top Bottom