PSA: iS It pRe HEaLY?

BREWINZ

NES Member
Rating - 100%
10   0   0
Joined
Jan 16, 2016
Messages
743
Likes
559
Location
Central MA
When dealers start selling lowers at their intended retail price (MSRP or better), "Pre Healey" will essentially cease to exist. That's not what I'm seeing from ANYONE selling them. Capitalism and all that. Totally cool, but don't bitch about others when, IMHO, you're doing the same thing without the name.
 

TPNES

Dealer
NES Member
Rating - 100%
60   0   0
Joined
Feb 9, 2018
Messages
325
Likes
1,220
When dealers start selling lowers at their intended retail price (MSRP or better), "Pre Healey" will essentially cease to exist. That's not what I'm seeing from ANYONE selling them. Capitalism and all that. Totally cool, but don't bitch about others when, IMHO, you're doing the same thing without the name.

Well stated!
 

MAGAArms

Dealer
NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Feb 4, 2020
Messages
39
Likes
154
Location
Littleton, MA
You sir, are truly a piece of shit.

Assuming you're just trying to take attention away from your own scummy antics by posting how others are 'wrong' or 'unjust' by how they label THEIR overpriced wares...ads that they paid good money to post here. Meanwhile, the overpriced garbage you're peddling is somehow ok (by you) because you don't put a properly spelled name in your ad title?

Mind your own business and go f*** yourself.

Love,
The people of NES

P.S. I think I speak for a silent majority here. If i'm wrong, i'm sure they'll let me know.
Letting you know that you are not being polite. If you’re going to speak for me please do it with class and manners.
 

Tinkermatic

NES Member
Rating - 100%
11   0   0
Joined
Jun 9, 2018
Messages
2,149
Likes
3,356
Location
MA
We sold clean out!

Do you operate like TSUSA? If I give you my e-mail or phone number will you text me when they get back in stock, but only after it’s been in stock long enough that you’ve sold everything so when I follow the link provided it leads to out of stock items? ‘Cuz that would be awesome 😎
 

TPNES

Dealer
NES Member
Rating - 100%
60   0   0
Joined
Feb 9, 2018
Messages
325
Likes
1,220
Do you operate like TSUSA? If I give you my e-mail or phone number will you text me when they get back in stock, but only after it’s been in stock long enough that you’ve sold everything so when I follow the link provided it leads to out of stock items? ‘Cuz that would be awesome 😎

Shit you figured the model out, we keep you hooked and waiting long enough that eventually the blue balls get you to pay a premium.
 

GoodWillHunting

NES Member
Rating - 100%
10   0   0
Joined
Jun 30, 2016
Messages
1,572
Likes
1,279
Location
Masslandia
You sir, are truly a piece of shit.

Assuming you're just trying to take attention away from your own scummy antics by posting how others are 'wrong' or 'unjust' by how they label THEIR overpriced wares...ads that they paid good money to post here. Meanwhile, the overpriced garbage you're peddling is somehow ok (by you) because you don't put a properly spelled name in your ad title?

Mind your own business and go f*** yourself.

Love,
The people of NES

P.S. I think I speak for a silent majority here. If i'm wrong, i'm sure they'll let me know.
You are wrong, and speaking for myself you sound like a dick.
hugs and kisses,
Me
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
187
Likes
188
Location
New Hampshire
The disturbing aspect of this is that it was a double cross - the MA AWB was designed to not outright prohibited ARs as part of of a deal, with GOAL even declaring it was "good bill" rather than a "partial defeat". It turned out to be "They only took post ban mags for now; they'll be back for the rest later".

Senate President Karen Spilka seemed to have an open mind, and even seemed to understand that people used ARs for legit purpose. She didn't even bring a bodyguard on her fact finding trip to a range where she tried out out my JP AR15. But, shortly thereafter, I heard of her reply to a constituent regarding the Healy Ban that the law "was accomplishing what was intended".

The lesson is that the other side will double cross us any chance it gets.

There was a great example on Canada, eh? a couple of decades ago or so. For point of background the "self defense" argument was lost in Canada years ago - argue anything except sporting use up there and you have the same credibility as a US resident suggesting middle schoolers carry defensive sidearms. So,, when the govt made it clear they were banning > 5 round rifle and >10 round handgun mags (among other things), the govt pacified the sport shooters by adding a "high capacity magazine" license for competition shooters to the law. Almost immediately after passage of the law, the decision was "After consultation with sport shooters and gun control advocates, it has been decided that the need for public safety outweighs the legitimate need of sport shooters so no such licenses shall be issued.".

So you're saying the GOAL sellout / compromise was OK? I can see Heally's point, MGL Chapter 140, Section 121 says (with emphasis added):

Section 121. As used in sections 122 to 131Y, inclusive, the following words shall, unless the context clearly requires otherwise, have the following meanings:—

'Assault weapon'', shall have the same meaning as a semiautomatic assault weapon as defined in the federal Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(30) as appearing in such section on September 13, 1994, and shall include, but not be limited to, any of the weapons, or copies or duplicates of the weapons, of any caliber, known as: (i) Avtomat Kalashnikov (AK) (all models); (ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil; (iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC–70); (iv) Colt AR–15; (v) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR and FNC; (vi) SWD M–10, M–11, M–11/9 and M–12; (vi) Steyr AUG; (vii) INTRATEC TEC–9, TEC–DC9 and TEC–22; and (viii) revolving cylinder shotguns, such as, or similar to, the Street Sweeper and Striker 12; provided, however, that the term assault weapon shall not include: (i) any of the weapons, or replicas or duplicates of such weapons, specified in appendix A to 18 U.S.C. section 922 as appearing in such appendix on September 13, 1994, as such weapons were manufactured on October 1, 1993; (ii) any weapon that is operated by manual bolt, pump, lever or slide action; (iii) any weapon that has been rendered permanently inoperable or otherwise rendered permanently unable to be designated a semiautomatic assault weapon; (iv) any weapon that was manufactured prior to the year 1899; (v) any weapon that is an antique or relic, theatrical prop or other weapon that is not capable of firing a projectile and which is not intended for use as a functional weapon and cannot be readily modified through a combination of available parts into an operable assault weapon; (vi) any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than five rounds of ammunition; or (vii) any semiautomatic shotgun that cannot hold more than five rounds of ammunition in a fixed or detachable magazine.

Think about this , a post ban AR 15 (meaning one that does not have a threaded barrel, flash suppressor, bayonet lug or collapsible stock) uses the same magazines, the same trigger parts, the same bolt and carrier and the same buttstock as the Colt AR-15 banned by name in the statute. This is pretty obvious because her list of allowed guns included Springfield M1A, Tavor, Ruger Mini 14 and Kel Texc Sub 2000s. Get over it, Heally is right, stop bitching, GOAL sold you out and the law bans these firearms.

Once all of you realize that GOAL is a loser compromising group then maybe someone or some group of people will form a real gun rights organization in Massachusetts instead of complaning online.
 

Lxpony

NES Member
Rating - 100%
23   0   1
Joined
Apr 26, 2006
Messages
821
Likes
511
When dealers start selling lowers at their intended retail price (MSRP or better), "Pre Healey" will essentially cease to exist. That's not what I'm seeing from ANYONE selling them. Capitalism and all that. Totally cool, but don't bitch about others when, IMHO, you're doing the same thing without the name.


There are dealers in ma that sell stripped lowers at msrp. Just gotta know which gun stores to stop at off 495
 

Rob Boudrie

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
38,039
Likes
16,381
Get over it, Heally is right, stop bitching, GOAL sold you out and the law bans these firearms.
So do you concur with her assertion that an item that is not a firearm under MA law is banned by a law against similar guns?

The existing guidance for interpretation accepted for years was the federal one, that accepted differences relating to things like flash hiders and establishing "not similar". The understanding at the time was GOAL agreed to tout this as a "good law" specifically because of that.

I as very disturbed seeing GOAL capitulate and announce they it felt a ban on new high cap mags was a "good law". I could never figure out why they said that.
 

Mountain

NES Member
Rating - 100%
21   0   0
Joined
Jan 6, 2013
Messages
12,608
Likes
11,079
Well that went in an odd direction sir, everything else aside, are you saying you support perpetuating the false narrative of an AR ban in our state that keeps FFLs and citizens from legally purchasing what they can out of fear of committing a non existent felony... ? Plenty of new LTC’s and first time buyers in light of 2020’s non stop catastrophe of a year, they come here for info and first thing they mistakenly see is glocks are illegal and cost 1000 private sale, and ARs are illegal and cost 2500$ private sale.

You’re entitled to your opinion of me and my business practices however, no complaints from me there. You vote with your wallet, and the other thousand customers voted with theirs and were fine paying less than other listings on here.

There is no such thing as a silent majority on an Internet forum, the keyboard commandos are always out in force to tell people to go f*** themselves with the misguided moral authority that they speak for a silent majority. Such bellicose rhetoric is how we get threads locked where people are otherwise not taking themselves too seriously and poking fun at Healey.

It's commendable that you have the sack to openly sell new lowers when many won't and those who will might restrict to LEO only or some other BS. In many, if not most cases your pricing is scaling similarly to the inflated 'Pre Healey' prices we see for those magical pre-7/16 lowers. While some folks may find that objectionable, it is indeed a free market and we are all welcome to channel our inner Martin Shkreli and let the buyers determine if they are willing to foot the bill or not.

However (or here's the 'but...'), negative selling packaged as a 'PSA' in order to elevate your wares vs. the wares others may be promoting brings a certain carpetbagger ambiance to the forum that some if not many will find objectionable. We're all big boys and girls and can smoke out the BS just fine on our own, thank you. On most forums, the #1 reason responses are not allowed in the member classifieds is to prevent such 'helpful' posts from mucking up someone's ad.
 

TPNES

Dealer
NES Member
Rating - 100%
60   0   0
Joined
Feb 9, 2018
Messages
325
Likes
1,220
It's commendable that you have the sack to openly sell new lowers when many won't and those who will might restrict to LEO only or some other BS. In many, if not most cases your pricing is scaling similarly to the inflated 'Pre Healey' prices we see for those magical pre-7/16 lowers. While some folks may find that objectionable, it is indeed a free market and we are all welcome to channel our inner Martin Shkreli and let the buyers determine if they are willing to foot the bill or not.

However (or here's the 'but...'), negative selling packaged as a 'PSA' in order to elevate your wares vs. the wares others may be promoting brings a certain carpetbagger ambiance to the forum that some if not many will find objectionable. We're all big boys and girls and can smoke out the BS just fine on our own, thank you. On most forums, the #1 reason responses are not allowed in the member classifieds is to prevent such 'helpful' posts from mucking up someone's ad.

Very well stated sir! Could not agree more with your sentiments, including the meat and potatoes of your statement (the most important body of which always comes after the but). Now that is intelligent discourse well presented and much appreciated!
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
187
Likes
188
Location
New Hampshire
So do you concur with her assertion that an item that is not a firearm under MA law is banned by a law against similar guns?

The existing guidance for interpretation accepted for years was the federal one, that accepted differences relating to things like flash hiders and establishing "not similar". The understanding at the time was GOAL agreed to tout this as a "good law" specifically because of that.

I as very disturbed seeing GOAL capitulate and announce they it felt a ban on new high cap mags was a "good law". I could never figure out why they said that.

i disagree with banning guns and magazines but I agree with Heallys interpretation of Copies or duplicates. the existing guidance as I understand the history was from ATF not from anyone at the mass attor general. Healy decided that she was going to enforce a longstanding law. The law needs to be repealed but that will never happen unless and until someone forms a real gun group to counter GOALs anti gun deal making. And some on this board supported Jim Wallace for the nra board.
State moves on assault weapons ban
Now others are pushing Jason Guida for state rep, you are certainly getting the government you deserve

.
 

Broccoli Iglesias

NES Member
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
Joined
Sep 18, 2010
Messages
26,940
Likes
25,696
i disagree with banning guns and magazines but I agree with Heallys interpretation of Copies or duplicates. the existing guidance as I understand the history was from ATF not from anyone at the mass attor general. Healy decided that she was going to enforce a longstanding law. The law needs to be repealed but that will never happen unless and until someone forms a real gun group to counter GOALs anti gun deal making. And some on this board supported Jim Wallace for the nra board.
State moves on assault weapons ban
Now others are pushing Jason Guida for state rep, you are certainly getting the government you deserve

.
Look at that, the guy from NH agrees with Healey.

I wonder who he/she is voting for up there.

Or maybe you are Maura?
 

p.tice

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Apr 2, 2020
Messages
157
Likes
279
Location
Massachusetts

I’m going to focus on this section of the law:

“...shall include, but not be limited to, any of the weapons, or copies or duplicates of the weapons,of any caliber, known as: (i) Avtomat Kalashnikov (AK) (all models); (ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil; (iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC–70); (iv) Colt AR–15;...”

In my opinion, you have the wrong interpretation. I believe the intended purpose of this wording was to create a standard of what Is considered an AR15 (as well as other rifles) so that they need not list every manufacturer. They can’t write the law as “anything labeled ar15” because then we’d just change the name to something else. Likewise, they can’t ban a single manufacturer because a new manufacturer could pop up and be legal. They would be constantly revising the legislation to include new makes, models and variants. Therefore, by making a category of “copies” they can cover all manufacturers ar15’s. (For example, the m&p15 is a copy of the colt ar15 design) Secondary, the law describes what is then legal with the feature test. This has always been my interpretation of the law. “Copies or duplicates of” creates the category, the features test tells you wether or not it’s legal. Hopefully this makes sense, I’m typing this on my phone. Like any law, it can be interpreted a thousand ways. I don’t think we’re without firm, arguable ground that ma compliant AR’s are in fact legal.
 

Behind Enemy Lines

Dealer
NES Member
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
721
Likes
939
This is a correct interpretation, based on my reading/research. The intent was to prevent Colt et al from just calling it an AR-16 and continuing to sell the same rifle.

Plenty of places to find normally priced lowers from what I hear.

I’m going to focus on this section of the law:

“...shall include, but not be limited to, any of the weapons, or copies or duplicates of the weapons,of any caliber, known as: (i) Avtomat Kalashnikov (AK) (all models); (ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil; (iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC–70); (iv) Colt AR–15;...”

In my opinion, you have the wrong interpretation. I believe the intended purpose of this wording was to create a standard of what Is considered an AR15 (as well as other rifles) so that they need not list every manufacturer. They can’t write the law as “anything labeled ar15” because then we’d just change the name to something else. Likewise, they can’t ban a single manufacturer because a new manufacturer could pop up and be legal. They would be constantly revising the legislation to include new makes, models and variants. Therefore, by making a category of “copies” they can cover all manufacturers ar15’s. (For example, the m&p15 is a copy of the colt ar15 design) Secondary, the law describes what is then legal with the feature test. This has always been my interpretation of the law. “Copies or duplicates of” creates the category, the features test tells you wether or not it’s legal. Hopefully this makes sense, I’m typing this on my phone. Like any law, it can be interpreted a thousand ways. I don’t think we’re without firm, arguable ground that ma compliant AR’s are in fact legal.
 

TPNES

Dealer
NES Member
Rating - 100%
60   0   0
Joined
Feb 9, 2018
Messages
325
Likes
1,220
I’m going to focus on this section of the law:

“...shall include, but not be limited to, any of the weapons, or copies or duplicates of the weapons,of any caliber, known as: (i) Avtomat Kalashnikov (AK) (all models); (ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil; (iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC–70); (iv) Colt AR–15;...”

In my opinion, you have the wrong interpretation. I believe the intended purpose of this wording was to create a standard of what Is considered an AR15 (as well as other rifles) so that they need not list every manufacturer. They can’t write the law as “anything labeled ar15” because then we’d just change the name to something else. Likewise, they can’t ban a single manufacturer because a new manufacturer could pop up and be legal. They would be constantly revising the legislation to include new makes, models and variants. Therefore, by making a category of “copies” they can cover all manufacturers ar15’s. (For example, the m&p15 is a copy of the colt ar15 design) Secondary, the law describes what is then legal with the feature test. This has always been my interpretation of the law. “Copies or duplicates of” creates the category, the features test tells you wether or not it’s legal. Hopefully this makes sense, I’m typing this on my phone. Like any law, it can be interpreted a thousand ways. I don’t think we’re without firm, arguable ground that ma compliant AR’s are in fact legal.

Nail on the head sir! What people are missing is that the colt AR15 at the time of the ban language qualified AS AN ASSAULT WEAPON eg flash hider, adjustable stock, bayo lug etc ad nauseum we all know the feature list. People are caught up on the NAME “AR15”. If a modern copy or duplicate violates the FEATURES and qualifies as an Assault Weapon then it is banned. No one here disputes that. The issue is that AW are banned, and the state defers to the AWB for what qualifies as an AW. An ar15 style lower built out to accept a detachable magazine, is semi auto, and has a pistol grip, but with pinned/welded muzzle brake, pinned stock, no bayo lug and no grenade launcher attachment is NOT AN ASSAULT WEAPON by definition of the law. Therefore it violates neither the AWB of 1994 that didn’t sunset in MA nor “healey’s reinterpretation”. Therefore is legal. Again don’t get caught up on how evil and black rifle it LOOKS if it’s not an AW it’s not an AW and therefore NOT AN AW and not banned.
 

MAGAArms

Dealer
NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Feb 4, 2020
Messages
39
Likes
154
Location
Littleton, MA
Legislative intent will almost always end in arbitrary points. It is practically impossible to capture the intent of a large deliberative body. When interpreting statutes one must focus on the actual text of the bill, as passed-through a bicameral body then signed by a separate yet equal branch of government. Once you put intent aside you will see that MGL 140 § 121 is clear and unambiguous. The legislature, through the deliberative democratic process, can at any time expand the named and enumerated weapons should they wish but that has yet to happen.
 

Rob Boudrie

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
38,039
Likes
16,381
i disagree with banning guns and magazines but I agree with Heallys interpretation of Copies or duplicates.
The me rephrase the question to make it clearer:

Do you agree with the AG's interpretation that an item that is not a firearm, rifle or shotgun under Massachusetts law is a duplicate of a prohibited firearm? This is a yes or no question.
 
Top Bottom