I don't know. So, I murder someone, serve whatever sentence, and then "all is forgiven?" I can see both sides of this particular argument. I certainly put this into a different "bin" than arbitrary laws about barrel lengths or magazine capacity.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Two arrested in Burlington: Illegal assault rifle
- Thread starter vickers
- Start date
I don't know. So, I murder someone, serve whatever sentence, and then "all is forgiven?" I can see both sides of this particular argument. I certainly put this into a different "bin" than arbitrary laws about barrel lengths or magazine capacity.
I was under the impression that anonymous tips or informants did not provide PC, based on that alone, for a search warrant.
If you murder someone you probably should be in jail, lol.
One of the concepts of law was that serving (and completing) a prison sentence is supposed to be an act of repaying a debt to society.
Not giving rights back IMHO doesn't help with rehabilitation. And if we as a society think that someone convicted of murder cannot be rehabilitated, then we have no business releasing them from prison to begin with.
I'd rather pay to imprison more people than have a bunch of garbage laws laying around acting as a pox on otherwise free people.
A halfway concession in my mind would at least consistently allowing people to petition to have their rights restored by a court of law. The feds don't do this at all (outside of a pardon) and some shithole states (like MA) don't have an expungement process or similar.
-Mike
Unless you murder someone and then off yourself in prison while you have an appeal pending. In that case, your record is expunged and your heirs get a easier shot at your assets vis-a-vis the family of the guy you killed.
18 whole cartridges?! Holy smokes!!!
For clarification you support level 3 pedophiles and violent felons being the given the right to firearms?
Oh the huge manatee! I'm no expert in fire crackers but want does he have there? Snakes? Those little bags of rocks that pop when you throw them on the ground?
And is that one MRE in that rectangular bag? I can't tell what that is on my phone.
And is that one MRE in that rectangular bag? I can't tell what that is on my phone.
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
If the offenses are heinous enough that someone is concerned about them being a danger, they should still be in prison. Then this fails to be a problem.
A stupid gun law is not going to prevent a diddler or a violent felon from getting a gun anyways; it's only going to block others who mostly intend on obeying the law.
EX: guy gets convicted of stupid horseshit 900 years ago (say a bar fight) doesn't even know he is DQed. He buys a shotgun out of uncle henrys for home
defense. A few years go by and he shoots some prick trying to break into his house where he lives with his kid and girlfriend. He gets off on self defense but
still has to eat a FELONY for felon in possession because he was ineligible to have his shotgun.
Is society's interests really served by prosecuting this guy?
I have an old internet girlfriend from 900 years ago that got busted by the feds as an accessory to bank fraud because she was used as a pawn by her abusive boyfriend and his half
brother- they needed women to cash certain checks, so they conned the ladies into being part of the scam. She fully cooperated and sent the two guys down the river, went to danbury a
couple of years. After getting out she is doing pretty well and sells real estate and practices yoga, and works for dog foster orgs and that kind of thing. So you're saying that she
shouldn't be legally entitled to defend herself with a firearm? (she is federally prohibited). She's never had a violent offense on her record, not even once.
There are thousands of people prohibited that really are no threat whatsoever, but "the lawr is the lawr".
The system is f***ing retarded.
-Mike
You make some excellent point which I agree with.
I see your point. Still trying to make up my mind on this. In a perfect world, you would serve an appropriate sentence, and then be declared "debt paid." Rehabilitation is another matter. But with parole, early release, plea bargaining to lesser offenses for convenience, etc. I'm still not sure where I fall.
I understand what you mean, but I just think truly dangerous people should be locked up. Applying arbitrary gun laws to them only gives an illusion of safety. As a juror I once voted to keep a pedophile incarcerated beyond his original sentence, and I believe that action was truly effective. The animal never used a gun to commit his crimes as far as I know, so I don't see how a gun law would have changed anything.
KBCraig
NES Member
Under current federal law, there are "prohibited persons" who have never spent a minute in jail.
In this current case, the laws obviously did not stop this multi-time loser from obtaining firearms and ammunition. No law can. So, if someone is too dangerous to possess a firearm, they should not be on the street.
We are only supposed to punish people for what they actually do, not for what they might do. Banning possession by certain people who are otherwise free to walk the street amounts to a "pre-crime" sentence.
So... when I look at the picture of the super duper dangerous loot, I see an ammo charge... and that's it.
That thing at the top that looks like an SBR, is not, under Massachusetts law, a firearm, shotgun, or rifle. It's too short to fit into the law's definition of "rifle", it's absolutely not a shotgun, and it's not a "firearm" (since "firearm" as defined by MA law is what the rest of us would call a "handgun")
I wonder if his lawyer will notice that and bring it down to "ammo possession".
'course, the Feds might care about the SBR thing, and the PP thing, but then they'd have to bring the feds in.
That thing at the top that looks like an SBR, is not, under Massachusetts law, a firearm, shotgun, or rifle. It's too short to fit into the law's definition of "rifle", it's absolutely not a shotgun, and it's not a "firearm" (since "firearm" as defined by MA law is what the rest of us would call a "handgun")
I wonder if his lawyer will notice that and bring it down to "ammo possession".
'course, the Feds might care about the SBR thing, and the PP thing, but then they'd have to bring the feds in.
True, but this guy isn't one of those. He was a run-of-the-mill felon.
Although your point(s) have merit, I disagree with the "pre-crime" part. Essentially, the sentence for a felon is "xxx years in jail and loss of 2A rights." The loss of rights is essentially part of the sentence, every bit as much as the jail time.
Varmint
NES Member
I was gonna say he's got an extra stock that isn't pinned therefore constructive possession of an evil assault weapon. But yeah, you're probably right.
Varmint
NES Member
I'm guessing they're on their way. Not gonna endanger funding for their $200 tax collection scheme.
So, you’re saying if I brought my stamped, legal SBR into MA, I’d be good to go, since it’s not a firearm according to MA?
Sniff. Sniff. Smells like bullshit.
Since a "firearm" is a handgun, an SBR is not a firearm according to MA.
Since a "rifle" according to MA law has a barrel of at at least 16 inches, it's not a rifle according to MA.
I didn't say you wouldn't get jacked up.
I said that an SBR isn't regulated in MA law because it's not a firearm, shotgun, or rifle, as defined by MGL.
If I'm wrong, please show me where in MGL there's a definition that covers an SBR.
You'd be surprised- I give it about a 10% chance actually. Depends on how bored the local ATF office and USA/AUSA are. I've seen a few of "these" kinds of guns confiscated but never heard of a federal prosecution in the recent past locally. Doesn't mean it can't happen I just think for one offs like this they're not usually
interested. Food for thought- a shitload of 'bangers are effectively arrested FIP (felon in possession) in places like Boston, but the feds do nothing, unless something they can rack up a big score on like finding some guy with a
brick of coke and a gun etc, or they can align a bunch of charges to try to whack a guy on something like "armed career criminal" which pretty much causes the feds to sprout a prosecutorial boner. (because it has a 15 year minimum prison sentence with life max)...
The nexus seems to be that they'll prosecute you if they can ruin your life and make a dog and pony show about it.... eg, an otherwise law abiding citizen has an "illegal" SBR? they'd go full retard. This particular guy isn't that attractive to them though, because nobody would pay attention, since he's already an ex con, etc.
-Mike
They're right... by the letter of the law an SBR really isn't defined under MGL.
That does not mean that the state would not attempt to prosecute you for -something- though (if we're talking, SBR w/o LTC-A, etc. ) then you'd have to make sure your attorney was savvy enough to explain the difference.
One problem though is currently the ATF doesn't seem to believe that- because if they did they wouldn't care about
the 7/20 healeyban BS (and they've been flagging ARs submitted for form 1 SBR apps) but I think a lot of that is just poisoning of the NFA branch conducted by the state, whether its the AGs office or EOPS. This wouldn't be the first time that the state "filled their ears with shit" down at the NFA branch, and they sucked for it hook line and sinker. ATF types in NFA branch are too accustomed to state authorities acting in good faith. (and MA does not, and never has... always dirty pool here. )
-Mike
CrackPot
NES Member
MGL 140 121
''Firearm'', a pistol, revolver or other weapon of any description, loaded or unloaded, from which a shot or bullet can be discharged and of which the length of the barrel or barrels is less than 16 inches or 18 inches in the case of a shotgun as originally manufactured; provided, however, that the term firearm shall not include any weapon that is: (i) constructed in a shape that does not resemble a handgun, short-barreled rifle or short-barreled shotgun including, but not limited to, covert weapons that resemble key-chains, pens, cigarette-lighters or cigarette-packages; or (ii) not detectable as a weapon or potential weapon by x-ray machines commonly used at airports or walk- through metal detectors.
A SBR is a Firearm under MA law. A shockwave is a firearm. A SBS is a firearm. If it is not a Maxhine Gun, Rifle or Shotgun, it is a firearm.
''Firearm'', a pistol, revolver or other weapon of any description, loaded or unloaded, from which a shot or bullet can be discharged and of which the length of the barrel or barrels is less than 16 inches or 18 inches in the case of a shotgun as originally manufactured; provided, however, that the term firearm shall not include any weapon that is: (i) constructed in a shape that does not resemble a handgun, short-barreled rifle or short-barreled shotgun including, but not limited to, covert weapons that resemble key-chains, pens, cigarette-lighters or cigarette-packages; or (ii) not detectable as a weapon or potential weapon by x-ray machines commonly used at airports or walk- through metal detectors.
A SBR is a Firearm under MA law. A shockwave is a firearm. A SBS is a firearm. If it is not a Maxhine Gun, Rifle or Shotgun, it is a firearm.
CrackPot
NES Member
Please re-read. It says not include any weapon that is constructed in shape that does not resemble a SBR or SBS. It does not exclude SBR and SBS, it excludes guns that are shaped differently.
This guy still has LCAFD w/o a licence, which is another EZ-bake felony. They can drop the large cap firearm and still have LCAFD and ammo w/o a license to hang him
on.
Course part of me wonders if the DA will try to brace him with the fed thing- even though I don't think they can immunize him from the feds. (unless theres some professional courtesy BS I don't see
here, etc. ) The feds usually don't touch these one offs.
-Mike
Similar threads
