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

[Goliathan]

In her own words she has not changed the law. Therefore her guidance does not have the force of law. Ergo nothing has changed.

I agree with this. My point is that by declaiming to the world that she is closing a loophole, she is admitting to an action that is illegal for her to engage in. She says out of one side of her mouth that she didn't change anything. How, then, if she closing a loophole (also her words)?

 

[kalash]

In her own words she has not changed the law. Therefore her guidance does not have the force of law. Ergo nothing has changed.

Wanna be the test case?

 

[Jason Flare]

I agree with this. My point is that by declaiming to the world that she is closing a loophole, she is admitting to an action that is illegal for her to engage in. She says out of one side of her mouth that she didn't change anything. How, then, if she closing a loophole (also her words)?

.

I agree. You can't close a loophole without a law closing it. It takes statute to close a loophole not the opinion of a lawyer.

Wanna be the test case?

Yes.

ETA: (Provided that there is not something I'm missing in the law that makes this idea completely idiotic.)

 

[bigblue]

.

I agree. You can't close a loophole without a law closing it. It takes statute to close a loophole not the opinion of a lawyer.



Yes.

ETA: (Provided that there is not something I'm missing in the law that makes this idea completely idiotic.)

Just the whole felony thing and possible PP when the first MA court convicts you "because stupid".

 

[Jason Flare]

Just the whole felony thing and possible PP when the first MA court convicts you "because stupid".

That's it? We're already felons.

 

[babygorilla]

.

I agree. You can't close a loophole without a law closing it. It takes statute to close a loophole not the opinion of a lawyer.

Yes.

ETA: (Provided that there is not something I'm missing in the law that makes this idea completely idiotic.)

The problem you have with being the test case is you need to find an FFL to sell to you and be a test case as well. I've already thought along these lines and thought an FFL and buyer needs to exchange what she believes to be an assault weapon in a gun friendly town. Both individuals must be upstanding citizens in that town / state. Politician would be great, as would a lawyer. Then both go to the PD and turn themselves and the gun in. Wait and see what happens.

ALL THIS MUST BE PUBLICIZED / FILMED BY MEDIA.....

 

[bigblue]

That's it? We're already felons.

You are not (I assume) currently convicted of a felony. You are not (I assume) a prohibited person. This would change until it worked itself out in the courts which could take 3-10 years. I realize that you know this, that I am simply pointing out the obvious, and that someone will need to be charged and probably convicted for this to play out in the courts. Knowingly doing so takes a big, brass pair that (if I had) my wife would remove in my sleep if I even hinted at what you are suggesting.

 

[inerlogic]

That's it? We're already felons.

no, we're all criminals with illegal weapons.... we haven't been convicted yet, so we're not felons yet

 

[Warm_Garand]

Wanna be the test case?

Clearly you are frightened. Do you want me to hold you?

Don't you worry. You don't have to do anything. Other people who aren't afraid will do it for you.

 

[kalash]

Clearly you are frightened. Do you want me to hold you?

Don't you worry. You don't have to do anything. Other people who aren't afraid will do it for you.

The guy that made sure to report his possessions to his master at the first sign of trouble is the brave one, got it. Makes perfect sense.

 

[bigblue]

 

[Warm_Garand]

The guy that made sure to report his possessions to his master at the first sign of trouble is the brave one, got it. Makes perfect sense.

So you'll suddenly find your courage when the SHTF, right?

Yeah/no.

 

[kalash]

You win, oh brave courageous hero. I'm done with this before this thread gets locked. Anyone still reading can make their own decisions with regards to the issues discussed.

 

[spt_1955]

You win, oh brave courageous hero. I'm done with this before this thread gets locked. Anyone still reading can make their own decisions with regards to the issues discussed.

Funny that the first answer was the correct one and this thread continued on for over 300 posts... And yes I mean CORRECT... not "in my opinion". The AG said that any AR sale after 7/19 was a felony.... So why are you asking on 7/21 whether you should register an AR on 7/21 unless you are volunteering to be a Comm2a test case. If you are just start a FundMe page and send me the link.

 

[Varmint]

I feel safer in Mass being a criminal than a law abiding citizen. So there's an upside.

 

[vmarx7]

dumb ?
a stripped lower purchased & registered before 7/20/16 could it be transferred to a new owner ?
if so what process is needed

 

[Jason Flare]

dumb ?
a stripped lower purchased & registered before 7/20/16 could it be transferred to a new owner ?
if so what process is needed

I think you hand it to him and he hands you money. Welcome to America.

 

[MAJoe]

dumb ?
a stripped lower purchased & registered before 7/20/16 could it be transferred to a new owner ?
if so what process is needed

No one knows yet. Open to interpretation.

 

[drgrant]

dumb ?
a stripped lower purchased & registered before 7/20/16 could it be transferred to a new owner ?
if so what process is needed

AWB Questions in the wake of AG bullshit edict =


You basically have 3 options:

1. Assume the edict is meaningless
2. Assume the edict means something (and make effluvial guesses at what the "new" law means in light of the edict. Have fun with that stupidity.
3. Assume it's meaningless, but act with caution not registering anytihng or doing anything that could cause you problems.
4. Call a gun attorney and they will pick one of the above for you.

Strong arguments can be made for #1 and #3, #2, not so much.... #2 is the armflapping, retard option, IMHO. Pick one.

-Mike