No more private AR 'copycat'' transfers in MA?

[EJFudd]

Civil disobedience.

Apparently we've been doing that for years and didn't even know it.

Is simply ignoring the tyrant's unilateral decree "civil disobedience"? Or does it have to be active disobedience (à la BLM) to qualify?

On the other hand FFLs are very subjective and therefore exerting pressure on them would likely succeed, that (to me, IANAL) is most likely why she is taking the very different approach with them.

The way I see it, her entire approach to banning these perfectly legal guns is based on industrial strength dealer intimidation. None of the dealers can afford the endless legal insanity (paid for by us) that she could bring down on them. No dealer can possibly afford to be the first one to outright "offend" her highness... and so she doesn't even have to use her immense power to destroy them. Obedience is automatically assured.

 

[EJFudd]

She is obviously just making it up as she goes. Why anyone even gives a second thought to this nonsense I have no idea.

Her edict only has teeth cause all you worry warts let it. She LITERALLY is not going to do shit to enforce any of it.

I feel the same. She states she didn't (and can't) change the law. So f her and her fairytale "guidance"

Now that the initial shock and outrage of the 7/20 decree has dissipated, and as a non-dealer, I agree with this.

But per my post above, if I were a MA gun dealer, I'd feel a lot differently. She has her boot on their collective throats ready to financially destroy the first one who dares to offend her.

 

[rcwhat]

Some say yes,others say no...I'll find out shortly enough,sitting at 4 months since I sent in my stamp

4 months? lol I'm at over 8 months and still waiting

 

[jasons]

It's too difficult a case, they like slam dunks to feed their ambition.

It doesn't seem like a very difficult case to me. Put the average MA jury in a box, show them an unsympathetic defendant and a scary black rifle, and read them 131M.

 

[Yankee1956]

4 months? lol I'm at over 8 months and still waiting

Did you e-file or snail mail?

 

[bill o]

If she were to arrange prosecution of an individual (she doesn't do it, she'd have to convince a DA to do it) and someone like Atty Michael Sullivan were to jump onboard, she'd risk being exposed as the fraud that she is in court and that could destroy her political career/ambitions. No way I can see her risking it.

I doubt she'd be destroyed. Instead she'd be portrayed as the underdog darling of the left who bravely fought the powerful NRA to save our children. The legal beating she would take in any legitimate court will just be the impetus for new state legislation to "fix" the AWB, and there's no reason Mini-14's need to be exempted in the next round. This is the long con she is running.

 

[wmassregulators]

what do you think she would do if say 1,000-1,500 people decided to finish up and register a 80% lower in one day?

 

[LoginName]

It doesn't seem like a very difficult case to me. Put the average MA jury in a box, show them an unsympathetic defendant and a scary black rifle, and read them 131M.

But now she has a criminal case to contend with on top of the lawsuits.

Fighting and defending both would require a bit of a juggling act and losing one or the other could undermine either case.

 

[rcwhat]

Did you e-file or snail mail?

Eform1 2/18/16 pending/in process the same day as I submitted. I know of another member who is a few days before and is still waiting as well.

- - - Updated - - -

what do you think she would do if say 1,000-1,500 people decided to finish up and register a 80% lower in one day?

I'm game

 

[jasons]

what do you think she would do if say 1,000-1,500 people decided to finish up and register a 80% lower in one day?

She would probably call a press conference, surround herself with a bunch of sad looking kids, and say "something must be done."

 

[bill o]

what do you think she would do if say 1,000-1,500 people decided to finish up and register a 80% lower in one day?

Yes, we'd really show our defiance to the government by... registering our guns?

 

[milktree]

Yes, we'd really show our defiance to the government by... registering our guns?

It sounds funny yea, but the point is to declaw her edict, making it clear that she's unwilling to enforce it, because it's unenforceable and illegal.

 

[wmassregulators]

What I'm getting at is, she keeps pointing to "people aren't buying them anymore" so the ends justify the means... a good day of going against her in a big way would cause a stir.
I am not saying it's right to have to register. But if 1000 people cut them and didn't register the point would have been missed.

 

[wmassregulators]

And using 80% lowers keeps her from going after a couple gun stores from doing the transfers. She would have to back down or come after everyone.

 

[308rifleman]

If the govt manages to ban all transfers, it effectively eliminates lawful private possession in a generation without the complications of confiscation and compensation. Remember, elimination, not "reasonable regulation" is the goal.

A former neighbor in Alabama became a licensed machine gun dealer. He told me that, as such, he could legally own post-1986 fully automatic weapons. The catch? They could never be transferred. Upon his death or the surrender/expiration of his Class 2 license, all of his full-auto weapons would become the property of BATFE. No transfer to wife, no inheritance for his kids. Do you think Healey is following the same logic here?

 

[EJFudd]

And using 80% lowers keeps her from going after a couple gun stores from doing the transfers. She would have to back down or come after everyone.

No, in that situation I believe she would choose a small handful of licensed gun owners to totally destroy... ones specifically chosen for the greatest propaganda effect and their inability to withstand her massive legal/financial assault.

I say that if you are going to build, keep it to yourself.

 

[bmac10]

at the bottom of the guidance is this: Application of this Enforcement Notice (individual gun owners):

The Guidance will not be applied to possession, ownership or transfer of an Assault weapon obtained prior to July 20, 2016.

Am I wrong to interpret that to mean that if an individual has one prior they are ok to transfer? Sounds to me like we can transfer if we owned it prior to 7/20

 

[jeepchute]

And using 80% lowers keeps her from going after a couple gun stores from doing the transfers. She would have to back down or come after everyone.

Have a lower party, then group registration of the lower. Someone bring an upper from another rifle and pass it around to "build" the final rifle. Doesn't need to be 1500 people. 56 would be a good number. Take a video and post it on YouTube. Tweet to the Globe, local news and the AG.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

 

[whtmtnhiker54]

We spend a lot of money to become members of the NRA and to a lesser extent, GOAL. Are they going to take this to court???

 

[jasons]

And using 80% lowers keeps her from going after a couple gun stores from doing the transfers. She would have to back down or come after everyone.

Why?

 

[bill o]

We spend a lot of money to become members of the NRA and to a lesser extent, GOAL. Are they going to take this to court???

The Friday emails you get as a GOAL member cover this fairly well. There is a NSSF lawsuit just filed.

 

[jasons]

We spend a lot of money to become members of the NRA and to a lesser extent, GOAL. Are they going to take this to court???

Probably not GOAL since they typically work things from the legislative angle. Maybe other orgs, but they'd be dumb to advertise their plans before something is filed.

 

[308rifleman]

10 FUDDs not hard to find.

Would you be so kind and explain to me what a FUDD is?

 

[bill o]

Would you be so kind and explain to me what a FUDD is?

FUD=fear, uncertainty and doubt
Fudd=Elmer Fudd, a gun owner who hates practical pistol and rifle shooting
FUDD=not knowing the difference between FUD and Fudd

 

[Len-2A Training]

Why would she need to arrange prosecution? Couldn't any DA do so on their own? There are what, a dozen DAs in MA - none have their own ambitions?

Because any prosecutor who can read and understand law would realize that her position is on shaky ground with 10 yrs of BATFE support for the exact opposite of her position.

On the other hand, the Middlesex DA's office runs like a torch run where they always pass the torch to the next hand picked one. Some ADA is picked to be the next DA when the DA becomes AG. So her clout in her old office is the best shot she has to convince an ADA to take a case and run with it.

It's too difficult a case, they like slam dunks to feed their ambition.

Exactly.

Is simply ignoring the tyrant's unilateral decree "civil disobedience"? Or does it have to be active disobedience (à la BLM) to qualify?


The way I see it, her entire approach to banning these perfectly legal guns is based on industrial strength dealer intimidation. None of the dealers can afford the endless legal insanity (paid for by us) that she could bring down on them. No dealer can possibly afford to be the first one to outright "offend" her highness... and so she doesn't even have to use her immense power to destroy them. Obedience is automatically assured.

Precisely my point, rattle the sabers and all the dealers fall into line lock-step. They can't afford not to do so. She wouldn't even have to get someone to prosecute them, merely having their chief "find out" that they are disobeying "Her Law" is enough for many chiefs to yank the dealer's license to sell guns/ammo on "suitability".

It doesn't seem like a very difficult case to me. Put the average MA jury in a box, show them an unsympathetic defendant and a scary black rifle, and read them 131M.

Although what you state would be true . . . if the defendant didn't put an expert witness on the stand to refute the BS. Someone like Atty. Michael Sullivan, with full access to all those archived BATFE Tech Branch letters outlining what was legal should be enough to sway a jury if they had two brain cells to rub together!!

 

[DarthRevan]

FUD=fear, uncertainty and doubt
Fudd=Elmer Fudd, a gun owner who hates practical pistol and rifle shooting
FUDD=not knowing the difference between FUD and Fudd

Easy chief. Not everyone is as savvy as the rest of us.

 

[308rifleman]

FUD=fear, uncertainty and doubt
Fudd=Elmer Fudd, a gun owner who hates practical pistol and rifle shooting
FUDD=not knowing the difference between FUD and Fudd

Got it. Thanks, friend!

 

[jasons]

....if they had two brain cells to rub together!!

That's my point.

 

[NewGuyRay]

Does anyone truly believe that the AG's end-game is to actually put AR owners in prison? i can see there being a few test cases where an ADA goes after someone and uses the SOP of offering a plea deal where you plead to a lesser charge with a promise from the ADA to recommend probation instead of prison time. However, the plea will be to something that makes you a prohibited person.

I see that scenario being the ultimate win for the Healey types. The State doesn't have to bear the cost of incarcerating you, the State gets to take your guns away, you are prohibited from ever owning guns again, and they may just bankrupt you in the process. The alternative is rolling the dice and risking real prison time.

 

[bill o]

Does anyone truly believe that the AG's end-game is to actually put AR owners in prison?.

No, they don't have the resources for that. The end game is to end private gun ownership. It's that simple.