OK, so shall I EF10 my stripped lowers or not? Clear opinion please, lets not turn

Status
Not open for further replies.
Warm_Garand said:
What's really going on here is that people are afraid to obey the law, and would prefer to be criminals, and live in constant fear.

Man up and fill out the papers.

If they decide to confiscate so be it. You have recourse under the law.
Click to expand...
Then man up and do it. Good luck, let us know how it turns out.
 
Len-2A Training said:
^^^^ This!

As I just responded in another thread, nobody has or will (NORMALLY) get in trouble for registering a stripped lower. Nobody cares, and FRB would rather have more data than less data. Given the dictator's decree, at this point, registering anything may lead to legal troubles.

Also under normal circumstances, most of us know when we buy a lower what we plan on doing with it, so one could put down a bbl length and caliber. And even though it isn't built yet, FRB wouldn't know the difference. Again, right now we are NOT under "normal circumstances", so a wait and see mode is probably the most appropriate.




Correct, NO FA-10s on guns that never enter the state, even if you are a MA inmate.

If someone wants to poke the bear and see if he bites, that seems to be the intent of the person above stating they want to build the gun and leave it in NH but FA-10 it. Could be an expensive test case from which the rest of us could learn what the bitch really intends to do.
Click to expand...


The bitch is bluffing and dousing want a lawsuit.
 
I would also argue that the 5A protects you from not filing FA10 on an AR right now because you'd be incriminating yourself.
 
kalash said:
Then man up and do it. Good luck, let us know how it turns out.
Click to expand...


I'll check with a lawyer. It looks like a legal poking of the bear to me that will settle a lot for you guys.

Some of these ideas do take a certain amount of "man up," as you put it.

At least filing fa10's will shut Healey up on the precipitous drop in gun sales.
 
bigblue said:
You are back to square one falsifying a record since the lower would only need to be FA10'd when it was assembled into a rifle IN MASSACHUSETTS within 7 days. You put yourself into a catch-22: Either you brought it into MA illegally or you falsified the record.
Click to expand...

This is why its confusing. The AG has now said that a lower receiver is an assault weapon. So the law and the AG's interpretation of the law differ. Can a non-firearm be an "assault weapon"? On the day of the AG's directive, or the day that one received an understanding of the directive, the lower receive became a firearm (?) The AG is telling the media that the directive is clear and that there is no confusion. This is clearly not the case: I'm confused.
 
kalash said:
To paraphrase another poster, that is literally like going to the police station to register a kilo of cocaine.
Click to expand...

Actually it's more akin to going to the police with a bottle of aspirin which, since the law hasn't changed, is just as legal this week as it was last week.

ETA: Some of you are buying into the fallacy that the law has changed.
 
Last edited:
Jason Flare said:
Actually it's more akin to going to the police with a bottle of aspirin which, since the law hasn't changed, it just as legal this week as it was last week.
Click to expand...

Yeah but the AG has said that aspirin is a Schedule II controlled substance.
 
We're almost 300 posts into what should be a simple question, with no clear consensus as to what's legal or not. The curse of the law-abiding, and exactly the type of confusion Healey intended.

Meanwhile, that thug in Murderpan with the illegally obtained heater in his nightstand or in this underwear, goes on about his business as if nothing changed.
 
Jason Flare said:
Actually it's more akin to going to the police with a bottle of aspirin which, since the law hasn't changed, is just as legal this week as it was last week.

ETA: Some of you are buying into the fallacy that the law has changed.
Click to expand...
ORLY?
 
bigblue said:
So. What is the penalty for creating a falsified FA10? I'm sure if there was one, Four Seasons would be up shit's creek by now since they falsified every single FA10 filed on all receivers & lowers they sold.
Click to expand...

dennism said:
I am not 100% sure. But per jdubois

https://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/threads/314425-Poisoning-the-registration-system
Click to expand...

To be clear, I was speaking of purposely filing multitudes of fake records in order to screw up the FRB database, not people incorrectly filing an FA10 on their lower.
 
Warm_Garand said:
I did. Does that surprise you?
Click to expand...
Did you do it today? Or did you make sure to squeeze into the gray seven day window? I hope you did it today so we can really see if it's a good idea to openly admit to being a criminal.
 
kalash said:
Did you do it today? Or did you make sure to squeeze into the gray seven day window? I hope you did it today so we can really see if it's a good idea to openly admit to being a criminal.
Click to expand...

Oh--so NOW you think it might have been a good idea to use the seven day window.

The bottom line is that you are frightened. Understand that.
 
jdubois said:
To be clear, I was speaking of purposely filing multitudes of fake records in order to screw up the FRB database, not people incorrectly filing an FA10 on their lower.
Click to expand...


So I can be reckless, extremely careless, and have poor judgement but as long as I don't have intent to create false records I am ok?
 
dennism said:
Does it make sense to buy an 80% lower in NH and FA10 it/build (while keeping it in NH) and see what happens?
Click to expand...

If that is consistent with your interpretation of the law [wink], I would love to see you (and everyone else who's a dual resident or has reliable out of state storage) do it.
 
bigblue said:
So I can be reckless, extremely careless, and have poor judgement but as long as I don't have intent to create false records I am ok?
Click to expand...

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • Killary.jpg
    Killary.jpg
    26.1 KB · Views: 155
Goliathan said:
We're almost 300 posts into what should be a simple question, with no clear consensus as to what's legal or not. The curse of the law-abiding, and exactly the type of confusion Healey intended.

Meanwhile, that thug in Murderpan with the illegally obtained heater in his nightstand or in this underwear, goes on about his business as if nothing changed.
Click to expand...

That is because those cases of possession without a license get plea bargained down since they hold the mandatory sentence over their head, to get them to admit to lesser charges, no jail time , all so the DA's clear a case and not have to clog the courts with another trial. That is pathetic no doubt.

This directive should be challenged in court as we all know, the law has NOT been changed.
 
Warm_Garand said:
Oh--so NOW you think it might have been a good idea to use the seven day window.

The bottom line is that you are frightened. Understand that.
Click to expand...
No, I don't think that. You keep saying that every illegal rifle should be registered - so go ahead an register one and we'll see what happens.
 
slipknot said:
This directive should be challenged in court as we all know, the law has NOT been changed.
Click to expand...

Healey's use of the word "loophole" speaks volumes to me. If she is merely enforcing the law as it was originally enacted, then how can she publicly say that she's closing a "loophole"? "Closing a loophole" is an explicit, new act. If there is a loophole in the law, then only the legislature has the power to close it, by changing the law in question.

By saying that she's closing a loophole, Healey is saying right out loud that she's changing the law to be different from what it was before, something that is patently outside of her purview as AG.
 
kalash said:
It's like mailing a video of yourself going 140mph in a school zone to the police.
Click to expand...

No it isn't. It is like mailing a video of yourself driving 20 miles per hour through a school zone, and capturing a crazy lady stepping from the curb shouting that you are driving at 140 miles per hour and need to stop--and you heeding her admonition because you are afraid to get arrested.
 
Goliathan said:
Healey's use of the word "loophole" speaks volumes to me. If she is merely enforcing the law as it was originally enacted, then how can she publicly say that she's closing a "loophole"? If there is a loophole in the law, then only the legislature has the power to close it, by changing the law.

By saying that she's closing a loophole, Healey is saying right out loud that she's changing the law to be different from what it was before, something that it patently outside of her purview as AG.
Click to expand...

In her own words she has not changed the law. Therefore her guidance does not have the force of law. Ergo nothing has changed.
 
bill o said:
Yeah but the AG has said that aspirin is a Schedule II controlled substance.
Click to expand...

Close. She's said that in her opinion all of the existing laws (both federal and state) governing the sale and possession of aspirin over the last 22 years were wrong.

ETA: I don't buy into a guidance that aspirin is a class II substance any more than I buy into a guidance that my guns are assault weapons.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Preban or not
2 3
Replies
65
Views
2K
not new guy
N
Mayhem is not organic. It’s seriously funded by us.
Replies
0
Views
145
rogersmithiii
R
not indicted.......2yrs later, indicted
Replies
5
Views
501
LakeTrout
L
Manual safety or not? 365X
6 7 8
Replies
218
Views
4K
Supermoto
Supermoto
What not to do with your new gun.
2
Replies
42
Views
1K
Coyote33
Coyote33
Back
Top Bottom