What happened to Healeys law by FAQ?

[Waher]

I am not saying we should do this, but it would be really interesting to see how the state dealt with Mass civil disobedience. what would happen if on the anniversary of her "guidance" 10,000 otherwise law abiding gun owners filed papers on an ar lower.... what would they do?

Pick one example and ruin them.

Worth noting MA declined to prosecute the creeps that stole real assault rifles from the National Guard. Because crimes with a penalty up to life in prison aren’t a priority if committed by career scumbags.

But if some dim Bubba moved into MA with a bump stock and didn’t realize he needed a permit for simple possession; oh boy he’d be a “potential terrorist” going away for life.

 

[Chevy 2 65]

Via decree or legislation - they can stuff it. I might even go out of my way to ignore older laws too.

This one is for you. Enjoy..

 

[drgrant]

Pick one example and ruin them.

Worth noting MA declined to prosecute the creeps that stole real assault rifles from the National Guard. Because crimes with a penalty up to life in prison aren’t a priority if committed by career scumbags.

Did the feds prosecute them though? That's probably why. Some shitty MA judge would probably allow them to plea out and not do jail for that
shit... whereas if the feds get them, there is absolutely no way they will escape doing time for it, due to federal sentencing guidelines... and as shitty as
they can be, fed USA/AUSAs rarely prosecute cases unless its almost a slam dunk, lest their vaunted win/loss record get tarnished in the process.
The mass DA probably thinks its a waste of time which is why they let it go if the feds picked it up.

But if some dim Bubba moved into MA with a bump stock and didn’t realize he needed a permit for simple possession; oh boy he’d be a “potential terrorist” going away for life.

Nope, probably suck for a plea deal and walk, worst case as a PP with a record, just like most other MA "gun crimes". The only thing that really changes
is it actually ruins Bubba's life because he probably cared about actually having a clean record, so bubba will spend thousands to try to save it and probably go
broke in the process. Meanwhile scumbag criminal #65537 is not really concerned about any of that stuff, so he can skinflint on his lawyer (or get a public defender) and get a deal drawn up where he sucks for a paper conviction (and whoopty do, he's already a felon, so what difference would it make there?) that makes the court look good but avoids physical punishment or incarceration.

-Mike

 

[SgtHal75]

Soooooo.....does this mean we can buy AR’s now????????

 

[apander]

This one is for you. Enjoy..

Is this that Bradly Trans-thing Mother?

 

[EJFudd]

"Maura's Law"!

In all seriousness, should the Dimpled One ever decide to go after an individual (not a dealer) under her 7/20/2016 edict, wouldn't it have to be charged as a violation of the MA AWB? Seems to me that her 7/20/2016 edict redefined terms in the MA AWB to mean what she wants them to mean and the courts have, so far, gone along with it.

We all know why she hasn't gone any further with it. Simply put, she doesn't have to. It has already achieved her political goals and she has a lot to lose testing it further in court on a real case.

Something may be up with her (and I'm sure nothing good), but I don't think she is backing down from her edict. She has her reasons for keeping it low key (basically, because it is working and she got re-elected). But like a poisonous snake, I wouldn't assume anything about her next move against us.

 

[drgrant]

In all seriousness, should the Dimpled One ever decide to go after an individual (not a dealer) under her 7/20/2016 edict, wouldn't it have to be charged as a violation of the MA AWB? Seems to me that her 7/20/2016 edict redefined terms in the MA AWB to mean what she wants them to mean and the courts have, so far, gone along with it.

Not sure what you mean by this. IIRC this hasn't really been tested in a court of law, in any direct sense, as to the validity of her interpretation. I don't think any legal challenge has
taken that head on yet. As you are aware, this whole thing has been a bunch of posturing and grandstanding. And worse yet, because charlie faker didn't flush the toilet at EOPS when he
took over, the moonbats at EOPS have basically gone along with her bullshit and rolled out the red carpet for the AGs office to do stupid things with their data, which is an unprecedented act of
cowardice on their part. (there used to be a "wall" between EOPS data and the AGs office, for good reason. )


-Mike

 

[EJFudd]

Not sure what you mean by this. IIRC this hasn't really been tested in a court of law, in any direct sense, as to the validity of her interpretation. I don't think any legal challenge has taken that head on yet.

This is the case I was referring to:
U.S. judge upholds Massachusetts assault weapons ban | Reuters

... and this quote from the article:

He also rejected a challenge to an enforcement notice Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey issued in 2016 to gun manufacturers and dealers clarifying what under the law is a “copy” of an assault weapon like the Colt AR-15.

 

[Chevy 2 65]

This is the case I was referring to:
U.S. judge upholds Massachusetts assault weapons ban | Reuters

... and this quote from the article:

The judge is another one who can't read. Not surprised this came from a federal judge in Boston.

" U.S. District Judge William Young in Boston ruled that assault weapons and large capacity magazines covered by the 1998 law were most useful in military service and fall outside the scope of the Second Amendment’s personal right to bear arms."

Healey welcomed Young’s ruling. “Strong gun laws save lives, and we will not be intimidated by the gun lobby in our efforts to end the sale of assault weapons and protect our communities and schools,” This is another idiot statement. So, laws now save people.

 

[sigfanboy13]

Isn't there a NSSF case that's still ongoing? Whats the status of that 1?

 

[babygorilla]

Both are still ongoing.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Isn't there a NSSF case that's still ongoing? Whats the status of that 1?

Sadly cases like this take many years, they are not a high priority in the judicial system. Think 3-5 yrs or more.

 

[SgtHal75]

Then there’s the Bay State Firearms case too. There is also Another plaintiff on that I can’t remember who. If target sports ammo could lawyer up and tell Mora to F off... makes you wonder why a shop like four seasons couldn’t do the same.. I know they do a lot of business anyways.

 

[Frannyw]

Then there’s the Bay State Firearms case too. There is also Another plaintiff on that I can’t remember who. If target sports ammo could lawyer up and tell Mora to F off... makes you wonder why a shop like four seasons couldn’t do the same.. I know they do a lot of business anyways.

Cape gun works has filed a suit, I’m not sure if that with bay state firearms or separate

 

[Len-2A Training]

Then there’s the Bay State Firearms case too. There is also Another plaintiff on that I can’t remember who. If target sports ammo could lawyer up and tell Mora to F off... makes you wonder why a shop like four seasons couldn’t do the same.. I know they do a lot of business anyways.

A non-MA company has no licenses/permits from Mass to risk. A Mass dealer is worried that the AG could arm-twist the local chief to revoke their state licenses to do business (basically would never happen) or prevent EOPS from approving a renewal of said state licenses (I wouldn't bet against this).

 

[SgtHal75]

A non-MA company has no licenses/permits from Mass to risk. A Mass dealer is worried that the AG could arm-twist the local chief to revoke their state licenses to do business (basically would never happen) or prevent EOPS from approving a renewal of said state licenses (I wouldn't bet against this).

Ahh..makes sense. Well put Len! I never thought I would wish ass cancer on a woman but there isn’t a better person for it than her!

 

[MarkT]

This....making laws without full legislation will not stand up in court. It can be used to bully dealers and misinform. But what "law" would you be charged with breaking??

I wonder if this case before SCOTUS will help us with Maura's law?

SCOTUS Plans to Hear a Regulatory Case That Could Be a HUGE Win For Gun Owners

 

[Dench]

What if I already own a gun that is a copy or duplicate?
If a weapon is a copy or duplicate of one of the models enumerated in the law, it is an Assault Weapon. The Enforcement notice will not be applied to possession, ownership or transfer by an individual gun owner of weapons obtained on or before July 20, 2016.

The AGO also will not enforce the law against a gun dealer that possesses or transfers a “copy or duplicate” weapon that was obtained on or before July 20, 2016, provided that transfers, if any, are made to persons or businesses in states where ownership of the weapon is legal.
----------
"Possession" does not mean a FA10. Most people don't FA10 a lower receiver so if you owned one on July 20, 2016 or before you are all set.


May I return a weapon covered by the Enforcement Notice to a manufacturer after July 20, 2016 for repairs or replacement under warranty or pursuant to a recall? And may the manufacturer return it to me thereafter?
Yes. If you purchased the weapon prior to July 20, 2016, you may return the weapon to the manufacturer, who may then return it to you after it is repaired or replaced.
----------
I have a crack in one of my lowers on the trigger guard ears. This allows me to obtain a replacement.

Under this line of thinking of grandfathering past AWs, what's to stop a person from jamming it up the states ass via this guidance if the weapon in question was an actual assault rifle? Stste seems to just forfeited it's right to prosecute MG law. Now it's the feds problem?

What the f*** is going on here? In so confused.

 

[Squire]

SCOTUS should dissolve the f***ing ATF, repeal NFA and GCA of 1934, 1938, and 1968 (and any other bullshit subsequent to that), and smack down the state regulations in deference to the crystal-f***ing clear words "Shall Not Be Infringed".

I wonder if this case before SCOTUS will help us with Maura's law?

SCOTUS Plans to Hear a Regulatory Case That Could Be a HUGE Win For Gun Owners

 

[Varmint]

I am not saying we should do this, but it would be really interesting to see how the state dealt with Mass civil disobedience. what would happen if on the anniversary of her "guidance" 10,000 otherwise law abiding gun owners filed papers on an ar lower.... what would they do?

Remember the first day of her decree (July 20?), when thousands of people transfered ARs - despite her saying the decree was dated the day before. She just changed the date to the next day. You still have people transfering ARs today and she does nothing, cause she knows she has no legal ground to stand on.

 

[Varmint]

Then there’s the Bay State Firearms case too. There is also Another plaintiff on that I can’t remember who. If target sports ammo could lawyer up and tell Mora to F off... makes you wonder why a shop like four seasons couldn’t do the same.. I know they do a lot of business anyways.

one's in state, one isn't, that's probably why.