MA Gun Grab 2024: Senate bill S.2572

[scott-o]

So the plan is to carry just enough drugs to get charged with user level possession, leverage that to drop the gun charge, then take a diversion program or rehab to dismiss the drug charge.... walk away free of any conviction.

I like the play. Crack group buy?

 

[bigred460]

Sent another round of emails out to the committee members. Won't hold my breath waiting for a response.

 

[EJFudd]

This is very likely the plan because they know people will be mass-purchasing if they knew when the window will close. This is why I have been very undisciplined with purchases lately.

Oh, I think we all know that this "window of relative freedom" will be closing on us soon enough... and probably forever or at least for a very long time. The good news is that we have had lots of notice this time about the ridiculous anti-2A insanity coming at us... over a year and a half, in fact. No one should be surprised... or unprepared... or able to claim afterwards that they didn't know what was coming at us.

I'm glad I'm not the only one lol I haven't been reckless per se, just haven't been as disciplined as I have in the past, I have been putting away a lot of the stuff I recently picked up for a 'rainy day' so that I can still have that excited new gun feeling.

Smart move.

 

[Woodsloafer]

Sent another round of emails out to the committee members. Won't hold my breath waiting for a response.

Probably went into their spam folders, not kidding.

 

[inerlogic]

I like the play. Crack group buy?

don't forget, 10% for the big guy (Derek)

 

[JuergenG]

You might be in for a can of Marine whoop-a$$.

 

[nitsuj]

Smart move.

I might have done it again

 

[GM-GUY]

With higher and higher penalties for simply keeping what you have and not requesting a super special permit - those NFA violation penalties start to look silly.


I also note that SCotUS is going to consider Standard Capacity Magazine bans in an upcoming case - I wonder if Mass will ignore it?

 

[pdm]

With higher and higher penalties for simply keeping what you have and not requesting a super special permit - those NFA violation penalties start to look silly.


I also note that SCotUS is going to consider Standard Capacity Magazine bans in an upcoming case - I wonder if Mass will ignore it?

If it doesn't fit MA's "plan", then yes, they will ignore it.

 

[Dadstoys]

Sent another round of emails out to the committee members. Won't hold my breath waiting for a response.

Those in Tarr's district remember that when Mr. "I'm pro 2A" comes sucking around for votes next time.

 

[JDL]

For these little dictator fefdoms like Massachusetts, Hawaii, California and NY the Supreme Court means nothing. Huray huray for the one party system. This country is doomed when the Supreme Court has no power. 2A dosent matter in these states and the bill of rights is only for the consatunilst states the others are there own country to do as they please. FU all, we know what is best for you and you better like it.

 

[CatSnoutSoup]

I also note that SCotUS is going to consider Standard Capacity Magazine bans in an upcoming case - I wonder if Mass will ignore it?

Unless I am missing something that is not strictly accurate. They are however going to review petitions to grant certiorari for five such cases on May 16th. So perhaps they grant one (or combine all) a review next session (October).

 

[Joeldiaz]

Unless I am missing something that is not strictly accurate. They are however going to review petitions to grant certiorari for five such cases on May 16th. So perhaps they grant one (or combine all) a review next session (October).

I predict SCOTUS grants cert to Bianchi v. Brown out of CA4 dealing with MD’s AWB, then they remand the other cases in light of their decision in Bianchi.

 

[GM-GUY]

Unless I am missing something that is not strictly accurate. They are however going to review petitions to grant certiorari for five such cases on May 16th. So perhaps they grant one (or combine all) a review next session (October).

I read the blurb on my homepage this AM - then couldn't find a live link to the article to get more detail.

 

[Darksideblues42]

I want to see them add something to this bill.

40 days to issue. At day 45, your $100 fee is refunded. At day 50, you get $100 from the PD. Then $20 each day beyond day 50.

 

[aphextwin11]

I want to see them add something to this bill.

40 days to issue. At day 45, your $100 fee is refunded. At day 50, you get $100 from the PD. Then $20 each day beyond day 50.

Four months and counting going for me... absolutely ridiculous

 

[JDL]

Four months and counting going for me... absolutely ridiculous

I hope you are not holding your breath.

 

[aphextwin11]

I hope you are not holding your breath.

Fortunately it's no longer waiting for a half asleep state bureaucrat with crumbs stuck on the side of their mouth to hit the "approve" button in MIRCS, and its merely pending mailing by local PD (who are actually great), but still pretty outrageous overall

 

[CatSnoutSoup]

I read the blurb on my homepage this AM - then couldn't find a live link to the article to get more detail.

Happy to help…

SCOTUS DISTRIBUTES SAF GUN BAN CHALLENGES FOR MAY 16 CONFERENCE - Second Amendment Foundation

BELLEVUE, WA – Two Second Amendment Foundation cases challenging bans on so-called “assault weapons” and magazine capacity—one in Illinois and the other in Maryland—are among five cases distributed Tuesday by the U.S. Supreme Court for conference May 16. The cases are known as Harrel v. Raoul...

saf.org

P.S.> Folks, please join me in donating to SAF to support this work.

 

[pastera]

So the plan is to carry just enough drugs to get charged with user level possession, leverage that to drop the gun charge, then take a diversion program or rehab to dismiss the drug charge.... walk away free of any conviction.

That only works if you have no resources for the system to consume
So you need to be poor and unemployable in order to get the deals.

 

[pastera]

I predict SCOTUS grants cert to Bianchi v. Brown out of CA4 dealing with MD’s AWB, then they remand the other cases in light of their decision in Bianchi.

They may have learned their lesson with the last round of GVRs from Bruen and consolidate all of those cases.

 

[pastera]

I want to see them add something to this bill.

40 days to issue. At day 45, your $100 fee is refunded. At day 50, you get $100 from the PD. Then $20 each day beyond day 50.

It's a civil right - your proposed penalties need at least three more zeros added.
If a license is constitutional it's issue should be immediate after a NICS check with the issuing authority having 40 days to do a follow-up review to find objective evidence for a judge to issue a revocation.
But given how the anti states are handling licensure, I believe we have shown Bruen's presumptive constitutionality of licensing to be an incorrect assumption.

 

[VTski4x4]

May 16th 2 cases including Bianchi are scheduled for conference. Fingers, toes, eyes - all crossed.

 

[Taipan01]

May 16th 2 cases including Bianchi are scheduled for conference. Fingers, toes, eyes - all crossed.

Sorry to hear about the afflictions.

 

[Darksideblues42]

It's a civil right - your proposed penalties need at least three more zeros added.
If a license is constitutional it's issue should be immediate after a NICS check with the issuing authority having 40 days to do a follow-up review to find objective evidence for a judge to issue a revocation.
But given how the anti states are handling licensure, I believe we have shown Bruen's presumptive constitutionality of licensing to be an incorrect assumption.

Oh, I agree, but you need to start small, then you can increase the penalty.

 

[Cap'n Mike]

They may have learned their lesson with the last round of GVRs from Bruen and consolidate all of those cases.

I believe Bianchi V Brown was one of the cases SCOTUS granted Cert and then GVRd when they issued Bruen.
The case title was changed. Was originaly Bianchi V Frosh.

 

[Joeldiaz]

I believe Bianchi V Brown was one of the cases SCOTUS granted Cert and then GVRd when they issued Bruen.
The case title was changed. Was originaly Bianchi V Frosh.

This is correct. They GVR’d it post-Bruen back to the 4th Circuit and they still haven’t issued a decision in the case. Now they’re looking for SCOTUS to grant certiorari before judgement, which is an extraordinary remedy. Fingers crossed it works out

 

[Parker Schreiber]

This is correct. They GVR’d it post-Bruen back to the 4th Circuit and they still haven’t issued a decision in the case. Now they’re looking for SCOTUS to grant certiorari before judgement, which is an extraordinary remedy. Fingers crossed it works out

The 4th Circuit, having stalled by granting an en banc hearing before a 3-judge panel could issue a decision, is likely waiting on a petition for cert before judgment at the Supreme Court:

Docket for 23-863

 

[Joeldiaz]

The 4th Circuit, having stalled by granting an en banc hearing before a 3-judge panel could issue a decision, is likely waiting on a petition for cert before judgment at the Supreme Court:

Docket for 23-863

I doubt they’re actually waiting on the petition specifically. They were already planning on slow walking this case as long as possible in the hopes that the composition of SCOTUS changes after this next presidential election.

 

[AmeriKHAN]

SCOTUS will either find some excuse to not hear the AWB cases and if pushed will most likely rule in favor of AWBs as a "state's rights" issue and we will be screwed forever.