New Mass law possibilities

[SKS Ray]

With all the stuff thats been going on lately about gun control talk and "putting the teeth back in gun laws", what is the most likely scenario for future gun laws in Massachusetts?
I can see restrictions on sales of AK47s, AR types, and other large capacity military style rifles, basically a new ban put into motion, but does anyone think there could actually be a confiscation of rifles currently owned by law abiding citizens? Maybe not the entire state, but what about individual cities?
I'd hate to think all the ARs and Aks that people have been buying up here could wind up becoming illegal to own.
I'm also betting on the 1 gun per X days and no more face to face transfers, but what are the chances of outright confiscation?

 

[Jay G]

Confiscation is a tricky one. They learned their lesson in Katrina - they will NOT go door-to-door. And even CA didn't confiscate when they outlawed either assault weapons or .50 BMG.

I'd wager it would be more along the lines of a complete ban, coupled with the elimination of face-to-face transactions.

Then, when they've run off 99% of MA gun owners, they'll just wait us out...

 

[drgrant]

Confiscation is a tricky one. They learned their lesson in Katrina - they will NOT go door-to-door. And even CA didn't confiscate when they outlawed either assault weapons or .50 BMG.

I'd wager it would be more along the lines of a complete ban, coupled with the elimination of face-to-face transactions.

Then, when they've run off 99% of MA gun owners, they'll just wait us out...

+1. I'm doubtful about confiscation because it costs money, and there's
always the potential that they'll reach a person who's not willing to give
up their guns willingly. (which would easily create a negative effect on their little "program" if
it goes horribly wrong.) It's easier for them to just limp wrist a ban w/grandfather
clause of some sort into place. I figure worst case in the next 5 years we'll have a
dupe of the CA AWB. (which is pretty awful, especially for people that don't already have
the so called "AW"s. ).

-Mike

 

[Twigg]

I really don't think confiscations would happen, but I've secured out of state storage just in case.

Like I've said before everybody take a deep breath, relax and wait & see. It does no good to get all worked up running over the "What if ?" scenarios.

Remember, the S.F. handgun ban was overturned, and the N.J. 1 per month was just struck down also.

But be a good scout and be prepared anyway.

 

[LoginName]

Legally... I don't think they can do that (confiscation, that is), because of "post de facto" laws (IANAL).

If it appeared that it was heading that way, expect the rental/storage space business in NH to pick-up (a lot of Kali gun owners store their EBRs in Nevada).

It's a bit unfair to compare the confiscation scenario to what happened in NOLA as a state of emergency was declared there.

I think the worse we could possibly see is a Kalifornia type AWB and complete registration of all "semi-automatic military type rifles" (meaning to include those that were brought into MA by new residents and no FA-10 exists on file).

I suppose that if they really wanted to put the screws to us they could ban or restrict the sales of certain calibers of ammo. Not that that would have any effect on misuse, but since it's the MA legislature 'effect" is irrelevant.

(Edit to add: Normally, once a bill is passed and signed by the Governor, it doesn't go into effect until 90 days. If the legislature were to enact a stricter ban they could pass it as emergency legislation that goes into effect immediately. Doing that would close the predictable 90 day window of opportunity/rush for gun owners to make thier purchase before the ban set-in)

 

[Rob Boudrie]

L
(Edit to add: Normally, once a bill is passed and signed by the Governor, it doesn't go into effect until 90 days. If the legislature were to enact a stricter ban they could pass it as emergency legislation that goes into effect immediately. Doing that would close the predictable 90 day window of opportunity/rush for gun owners to make thier purchase before the ban set-in)

I believe that Romney has already demonstrated that the governor's office is able to add an "emergency statement" when signing a bill, which gives it the same immediate effect as legislation passed with the emergency designation by the legislature.

 

[FalArAk]

IMO a CA style AWB with a grandfather clause,coupled with the elimination of FTF transactions.

 

[Jay G]

Legally... I don't think they can do that (confiscation, that is), because of "post de facto" laws (IANAL).

I think that the powers-that-be have shown that, in MA, WRT gun owners, they can do whatever the f**k they feel like. We are lower than smokers in the MA public eye...

If it appeared that it was heading that way, expect the rental/storage space business in NH to pick-up (a lot of Kali gun owners store their EBRs in Nevada).

I've secured my out-of-state storage. Actually got two possible locations in two different states...

It's a bit unfair to compare the confiscation scenario to what happened in NOLA as a state of emergency was declared there.

You've got a point; however a precedent is a precedent... They were able to go door-to-door in a more gun-friendly state and confiscate legally owned firearms without a single shot fired against them. I'd say it was a MIGHTY successful dry run...

And while, yes, it was a State of Emergency, the fact MORE than bore out that privately owned armed were not only justified, they were absolutely CRITICAL to those who remained in NOLA...

I think the worse we could possibly see is a Kalifornia type AWB and complete registration of all "semi-automatic military type rifles" (meaning to include those that were brought into MA by new residents and no FA-10 exists on file).

I suppose that if they really wanted to put the screws to us they could ban or restrict the sales of certain calibers of ammo. Not that that would have any effect on misuse, but since it's the MA legislature 'effect" is irrelevant.

I'd be shocked if there WASN'T some new sort of proposed AWB; I would guess it would mimic those of CA.

As far as ammo, well, hell, I'd be sad not to give Carl the business, but there are LOTS of stores in NH to buy from. Many of them do not give a rat's ass about MA laws, too...

(Edit to add: Normally, once a bill is passed and signed by the Governor, it doesn't go into effect until 90 days. If the legislature were to enact a stricter ban they could pass it as emergency legislation that goes into effect immediately. Doing that would close the predictable 90 day window of opportunity/rush for gun owners to make thier purchase before the ban set-in)

I'm hoping I have until tax time to get my AR-15 clone. I'm banking that "Ban-em-all-Deval" won't have the stones to rush anything through THAT quickly...

 

[tele_mark]

No more progressive reloading equipment. After all, why would a common citizen need the ability to reload 100's, if not 1000's of rounds of ammo per hour?!? Only the military and official State entities need that capability! The citizen gun owner should be limited exclusively to single stage reloading setups......

 

[drgrant]

You've got a point; however a precedent is a precedent... They were able to go door-to-door in a more gun-friendly state and confiscate legally owned firearms without a single shot fired against them. I'd say it was a MIGHTY successful dry run...

I wonder what ultimately happened with guys like this, that talked
back to the cops.... this guy obviously didn't sound like he was going
anywhere, -or- giving up his guns.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1EdC5y8EGU


-Mike

 

[Jay G]

I wonder what ultimately happened with guys like this, that talked
back to the cops.... this guy obviously didn't sound like he was going
anywhere, -or- giving up his guns.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1EdC5y8EGU


-Mike

What ultimately happened? $20 says his life gets progressively less and less pleasant.

Big Brother will not be challenged.

 

[drgrant]

What ultimately happened? $20 says his life gets progressively less and less pleasant.

Big Brother will not be challenged.

I don't know... I wish I could find out. I heard in a slightly different
report that the guy is a Lawyer, so maybe that had something to do
with it. It's possible he had some connections... enough to get the
supervisor to "wave off".

Another interesting thing is some of the more well heeled folks down in
NOLA hired PMCs (eg Blackwater, etc) to guard their property.... none
of those people had any trouble with getting evicted or harassed by
the police. Leads one to wonder if it was because a lot of these guys
were deputized, or wether it was simply because the sight/notional of having
to deal with a squad of men with firepower and body armor was intimidating
enough that they didn't even want to try to "negotiate". A lot of those
PMC guys are not people you want to mess with, that's for
sure. I gleaned this info from some after action reports from the guys
at warriortalk. A few of the board members had varying security jobs
down there during the disaster. Most of them were "unmolested" by the
PD.

Edit: I did a little digging, and I discovered that this guy, as it turns out, was
the lawyer that ended up representing Patricia Konie, the little old lady who was
beat up and forcefully disarmed by the police who forced their way into her
house. It also turns out this guy is a pretty prominent lawyer there, as
well, and owns a pretty fancy house there. I'm guessing the fact that he's
part of the city's elite, maybe he was able to put some pressure in the right
places. Too bad not everyone else had that option.


-Mike