• 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.

Worman v. Baker - AWB Challenge.

CrackPot

NES Member
Rating - 100%
48   0   0
Joined
Aug 21, 2011
Messages
3,436
Likes
1,841
Location
Worcester County
Do you find this believable:

I call bullshit on the ATF audit caring. The ATF just audited every dealer at the Littleton Mill in June and July and other than the normal small paperwork issues everyone passed. There was ZERO scrutiny of lower transactions. Inventory audit, one year of 4473s, thank you and good bye. We had every inspector in a 300 mile radius on site, Boston, Hartford, NH, etc.

Now the local licensing authority may have overstepped their authority and pulled the “may issue” state license claiming a violation. I would love to see the details on that one. Pulling based on Healy is a shortcut to court proceedings on a Healy that I have to imagine everyone on our side would jump on.

I bet what really happened is the dealer in question was selling off list guns as frames straight up. Buy gun, break down, sell frame to MA resident, back door the slide. That will get you nailed the moment someone figures it out. It had nothing to do with AR lowers. That is my bet.
 

Varmint

NES Member
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Jul 5, 2014
Messages
11,918
Likes
4,142
Location
North Shore, MA
Lowers are already widely available.

Healy crap falls into two buckets
1) stuff that while utter crap has some basis in law and a marsupial MA court might agree with
2) totally made up out of thin air and no basis in law

the statement about lowers of AW being AW is #2. It’s still a paperweight under MA law and therefore lots of dealers are selling paperweights. 4473 and off you go.
FFLs get harrassed all the time for doing things that are completely legal.
 

Varmint

NES Member
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Jul 5, 2014
Messages
11,918
Likes
4,142
Location
North Shore, MA
I bet what really happened is the dealer in question was selling off list guns as frames straight up. Buy gun, break down, sell frame to MA resident, back door the slide. That will get you nailed the moment someone figures it out. It had nothing to do with AR lowers. That is my bet.
I think that'll get a nasty letter, not 'nailed' in the sense of losing your license. Even people selling Glocks straight up didn't lose their license, right, were just told to stop (or lose license)?
 

CrackPot

NES Member
Rating - 100%
48   0   0
Joined
Aug 21, 2011
Messages
3,436
Likes
1,841
Location
Worcester County
FFLs get harrassed all the time for doing things that are completely legal.
Which is why the smart ones have lawyers.

pulling a license is not “harassment” but a process with legal ramifications. If the state license was pulled followed by the federal license then there is more to the story. There are due process requirements on the state license pull that any attorney would be able to navigate. We would have heard a lot more about this if they dealer had not done anything illegal. I stand by my prediction on off list sales.

Pulling the federal license is actually very rare and drawn out. I had along talk with a couple of the agents doing inspections. They give a LOT of leeway to dealers to correct mistakes. They said about the only thing that results in immediate license pull is no 4473 done for a known prohibited person. Otherwise they have escalation steps that likely require as many as five audits with issues before they will pull.

Violation of state law they leave to the state. It is a violation of your federal license to violate state law, but an administrative pull of state dealers license is not proof of law violation.

So I still want to see details before I believe the story on this one.
 

Varmint

NES Member
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Jul 5, 2014
Messages
11,918
Likes
4,142
Location
North Shore, MA
Take note of WTF happened in CA. The court stuck down the mag ban, the reversed itself ... but, under the court order, >10 round mags procured during the window of legality remain legal. There will be a rush on lowers in MA if things open up a bit because gun owners are not going to let themselves get ambushed twice in a row.
I'm always confused why some anti-2A states seem to respect the 4th and 15th Amendments, while others will ban property you already own.
 

Behind Enemy Lines

Dealer
NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
570
Likes
547
I call bullshit on the ATF audit caring. The ATF just audited every dealer at the Littleton Mill in June and July and other than the normal small paperwork issues everyone passed. There was ZERO scrutiny of lower transactions. Inventory audit, one year of 4473s, thank you and good bye. We had every inspector in a 300 mile radius on site, Boston, Hartford, NH, etc.

Now the local licensing authority may have overstepped their authority and pulled the “may issue” state license claiming a violation. I would love to see the details on that one. Pulling based on Healy is a shortcut to court proceedings on a Healy that I have to imagine everyone on our side would jump on.

I bet what really happened is the dealer in question was selling off list guns as frames straight up. Buy gun, break down, sell frame to MA resident, back door the slide. That will get you nailed the moment someone figures it out. It had nothing to do with AR lowers. That is my bet.
I smelled BS as well, and suspect the dealer in question (I don't know who it was) was up to some other things.
 

CrackPot

NES Member
Rating - 100%
48   0   0
Joined
Aug 21, 2011
Messages
3,436
Likes
1,841
Location
Worcester County
Gartman Arms was being audited years ago and it made the owner nuts. He said they would harass him every few years.
Clarity is needed around audits. There are two types, ATF and local licensing authority.

The ATF audits on average every 5 years (what they told me/us). If they find significant issues, they will increase an individual FFLs audit frequency to as frequently as every year. I know FFLs that are on the every year plan. They do this to insure that large issues are addressed after which they return to the ~5 year plan (sounds like a socialist country). Remember, the ATF cares about FEDERAL law and regulations. Correct bound book. Inventory matches book. 4473s correctly filled out, etc.

Then there is the local licensing authority. By law (MGL 140 123) they SHALL audit dealers every year (once per calendar year). They are looking at MA law and need to insure compliance with the MGL 140 123 paragraphs 1 through 21. Glidden's book has a nice checklist of made up steps that are not aligned with MA law that most licensing authorities use. In any case, yearly audits by the local licensing authority are the law. Harassment? possible. That is why you have a lawyer. The law actually says "in a reasonable manner" for how the audit shall be conducted :)

From MGL 140 123
The licensing authority shall enter, one time per calendar year, during regular business hours, the commercial premises owned or leased by any licensee, wherein such records required to be maintained under this section are stored or maintained, and inspect, in a reasonable manner, such records and inventory for the purpose of enforcing the provisions of this section. If such records and inventory contain evidence of violations of this section, the inspecting officer shall produce and take possession of copies of such records and, in the event that the licensee subject to inspection does not possess copying equipment, the inspecting officer shall arrange to have copied, in a reasonable time and manner, such records that contain evidence of such violations and the costs for such copying shall be assessed against the owner of such records. Licensees found to be in violation of this section shall be subject to the suspension or permanent revocation of such license issued under section 122 and to the provisions of section 128. Nothing herein shall prohibit the licensing authority or the department of state police from conducting such inspections pursuant to a valid search warrant issued by a court of competent jurisdiction.
So if they visited Gartman Arms "every few years" it does not necessarily imply "harassment"
 

GaryO

NES Member
Rating - 100%
16   0   0
Joined
Aug 15, 2006
Messages
11,725
Likes
3,748
Location
Franklin
Clarity is needed around audits. There are two types, ATF and local licensing authority.

The ATF audits on average every 5 years (what they told me/us). If they find significant issues, they will increase an individual FFLs audit frequency to as frequently as every year. I know FFLs that are on the every year plan. They do this to insure that large issues are addressed after which they return to the ~5 year plan (sounds like a socialist country). Remember, the ATF cares about FEDERAL law and regulations. Correct bound book. Inventory matches book. 4473s correctly filled out, etc.

Then there is the local licensing authority. By law (MGL 140 123) they SHALL audit dealers every year (once per calendar year). They are looking at MA law and need to insure compliance with the MGL 140 123 paragraphs 1 through 21. Glidden's book has a nice checklist of made up steps that are not aligned with MA law that most licensing authorities use. In any case, yearly audits by the local licensing authority are the law. Harassment? possible. That is why you have a lawyer. The law actually says "in a reasonable manner" for how the audit shall be conducted :)

From MGL 140 123


So if they visited Gartman Arms "every few years" it does not necessarily imply "harassment"
If you knew the former owner, he was quite the character so it probably didn't take much for him to say he was being harassed. It was a great shop.
 

PappyM3

NES Member
Rating - 100%
11   0   0
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
1,127
Likes
382
Take note of WTF happened in CA. The court stuck down the mag ban, the reversed itself ... but, under the court order, >10 round mags procured during the window of legality remain legal. There will be a rush on lowers in MA if things open up a bit because gun owners are not going to let themselves get ambushed twice in a row.
After CA, I started to stock up on magazines out of state for everything I currently own, may own, or would own if our unconstitutional laws were shut down. I wouldn’t have to worry about stores selling out during a narrow window.
 

PappyM3

NES Member
Rating - 100%
11   0   0
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
1,127
Likes
382
...

Having a couple cases of stripped lowers is a nice "FU" but unless you also have a couple cases of LPK's, a couple cases of barrels, a couple cases of uppers, a couple dozen cases of magazines, etc., it doesn't mean much.
Well, if you want to strictly follow the “capable of firing a round” aspect of the FA10 registration, you really only need one upper, one set of lower parts, and a couple nights at the workbench. Make one gun, FA10 it. Swap parts to the next lower, FA10 it, and repeat. There is nothing in the law about keeping an FA10ed firearm capable of firing a shot.
 

bfm

NES Member
Rating - 100%
14   0   0
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
6,665
Likes
3,349
Location
Somerville
Having a couple cases of stripped lowers is a nice "FU" but unless you also have a couple cases of LPK's, a couple cases of barrels, a couple cases of uppers, a couple dozen cases of magazines, etc., it doesn't mean much.
Since you are hearing more about people busted with ghost guns in the news I do worry about new laws regarding parts kits. I have seen a few being thrown around in discussions among anti 2A regulars.
 

Masswhole

NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Feb 17, 2017
Messages
460
Likes
648
Location
north shore
Since you are hearing more about people busted with ghost guns in the news I do worry about new laws regarding parts kits. I have seen a few being thrown around in discussions among anti 2A regulars.
Restricting access to consumable/wear components seems like a reach and a different conversation that stripped lowers /80% etc.
 

CrackPot

NES Member
Rating - 100%
48   0   0
Joined
Aug 21, 2011
Messages
3,436
Likes
1,841
Location
Worcester County
After CA, I started to stock up on magazines out of state for everything I currently own, may own, or would own if our unconstitutional laws were shut down. I wouldn’t have to worry about stores selling out during a narrow window.
I have shipped a lot of normal capacity magazines to out of state addresses recently. You are not the only person thinking this way.
 
Rating - 100%
99   0   0
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Messages
16,635
Likes
5,117
No reason they will grant cert on this. Maybe in a couple years when Trump needs to put a RBG replacement on the court they will have something worth deciding.
Theres zero chance they will see this case. SCOTUS's strategy has been to see the stupidest most niche 2A cases possible so they can pretend they are keeping an eye on 2A. Then all the actual legit shit that needs to be heard gets brushed aside.

Looking at you NYC case coming up. Complete waste of f***ing time compared to the real shit going down. Scotus will hear it, be proud that it hear its occasional gun case and then continue to deny all the other cases.

Even if we win NYC we lost big time by wasting our time on bullshit.
 

Varmint

NES Member
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Jul 5, 2014
Messages
11,918
Likes
4,142
Location
North Shore, MA
Theres zero chance they will see this case. SCOTUS's strategy has been to see the stupidest most niche 2A cases possible so they can pretend they are keeping an eye on 2A. Then all the actual legit shit that needs to be heard gets brushed aside.

Looking at you NYC case coming up. Complete waste of f***ing time compared to the real shit going down. Scotus will hear it, be proud that it hear its occasional gun case and then continue to deny all the other cases.

Even if we win NYC we lost big time by wasting our time on bullshit.
Not sure I understand that. The NYC case could prevent a lot of states creating and pulling laws to avoid SC scrutiny. That by itself would be valuable.
 
Rating - 100%
99   0   0
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Messages
16,635
Likes
5,117
Not sure I understand that. The NYC case could prevent a lot of states creating and pulling laws to avoid SC scrutiny. That by itself would be valuable.
In the age of the antis trying to ban SKS's under AWBs theres bigger fish to fry right now. The "you can own these guns for X arbitrary reasons" case law is not currently in our favor and at this rate isnt going to be.

Just wait till our case here in MA gets to SCOTUS and they say no thanks. It's a case that would be impossible to lose in SCOTUS short of them refusing to hear it. Which is what they are going to do since they are getting their freebie 2A case out of the NYC challenge.

Instead of striking down arbitrary bans we are striking down NYC's games. Ones a lot more important than the other.

SCOTUS has been going way out of its way to avoid legit 2A cases. It mailed it in with Heller with "common use" whatever the f*** that means (because AR15s are the most common rifle sold yet apparently still fail to qualify under every court that hears this), and then onto Caetano which said if the gun didnt exist 9,000 years ago it's still covered under the 2A. And here we are back again with states still banning guns arbitrarily for looking to killy, etc.

They refuse to define what common is, what an authorized bearable arm is, etc. They just use vauge language that gives enough space for hostile courts to abuse.
 

Varmint

NES Member
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Jul 5, 2014
Messages
11,918
Likes
4,142
Location
North Shore, MA
In the age of the antis trying to ban SKS's under AWBs theres bigger fish to fry right now. The "you can own these guns for X arbitrary reasons" case law is not currently in our favor and at this rate isnt going to be.

Just wait till our case here in MA gets to SCOTUS and they say no thanks. It's a case that would be impossible to lose in SCOTUS short of them refusing to hear it. Which is what they are going to do since they are getting their freebie 2A case out of the NYC challenge.

Instead of striking down arbitrary bans we are striking down NYC's games. Ones a lot more important than the other.

SCOTUS has been going way out of its way to avoid legit 2A cases. It mailed it in with Heller with "common use" whatever the f*** that means (because AR15s are the most common rifle sold yet apparently still fail to qualify under every court that hears this), and then onto Caetano which said if the gun didnt exist 9,000 years ago it's still covered under the 2A. And here we are back again with states still banning guns arbitrarily for looking to killy, etc.

They refuse to define what common is, what an authorized bearable arm is, etc. They just use vauge language that gives enough space for hostile courts to abuse.
When the Court was divided 50/50 nobody wanted to take 2A cases. Now they're taking them because they have a 2A majority. We really need one more Trump appointee though.
 

jpk

Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
14,764
Likes
8,506
When the Court was divided 50/50 nobody wanted to take 2A cases. Now they're taking them because they have a 2A majority. We really need one more Trump appointee though.
Two actually

Roberts is shaping up to be a squish bag
 
Rating - 100%
10   0   0
Joined
Jul 1, 2012
Messages
2,750
Likes
1,410
Location
Portland, ME
I think this makes a lot of sense. The court is always deeply concerned with its own legitimacy. Suddenly deciding a ton of gun cases in one term, right after Kavanaugh's appointment, with decisions released during an extremely contentious presidential election year, is playing a dangerous game.

Best to move the needle more slowly, over a longer period. If the left is ascendant after the 2020 election, they're sure to pass some full retard gun laws that will be ripe to be struck down. Best to lay the groundwork for that now, rather than immediately make a bunch of strong rulings that will cause pushback in the political sphere. If they let the left lead with their stupid laws and/or executive orders after 2020, there will be very strong political pushback against it, and the court can be seen as following public opinion to some degree rather than leading it.
The very FACT that there are so many similar cases being escalated on this issue right now says a lot about the situation in the country.
 

Knuckle Dragger

NES Member
Rating - 100%
26   0   0
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Messages
7,141
Likes
3,487
Location
My forest stronghold
The very FACT that there are so many similar cases being escalated on this issue right now says a lot about the situation in the country.
The shadow docket is about 12 deep right now. Today's orders list is out and we have our first denial of cert: Lopez v. Mass - a burden shifing criminal case from Massachusetts.

There will be a good table tracking all these petitions on the new Comm2A website.
 

Rob Boudrie

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
34,502
Likes
11,043
Well, if you want to strictly follow the “capable of firing a round” aspect of the FA10 registration, you really only need one upper, one set of lower parts, and a couple nights at the workbench. Make one gun, FA10 it. Swap parts to the next lower, FA10 it, and repeat. There is nothing in the law about keeping an FA10ed firearm capable of firing a shot.
Actually, a glock upper will do it. Very easy to make a popsicle stick and pencil trigger that will turn a completed slide into a very high quality single shot zip gun.
 

Rob Boudrie

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
34,502
Likes
11,043
Theres zero chance they will see this case. SCOTUS's strategy has been to see the stupidest most niche 2A cases possible so they can pretend they are keeping an eye on 2A. Then all the actual legit shit that needs to be heard gets brushed aside.

Looking at you NYC case coming up. Complete waste of f***ing time compared to the real shit going down. Scotus will hear it, be proud that it hear its occasional gun case and then continue to deny all the other cases.

Even if we win NYC we lost big time by wasting our time on bullshit.
And if our side wins the NYC case, expect some dicta or perhaps even a finding about the restriction on anything except unloaded locked case outside the home being Heller compliant.
 
Rating - 100%
99   0   0
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Messages
16,635
Likes
5,117
And if our side wins the NYC case, expect some dicta or perhaps even a finding about the restriction on anything except unloaded locked case outside the home being Heller compliant.
I hope so. I'm very pessimistic about the (R) justices and their lack of conviction regarding 2A federally. They will be the 1st to hammer in some draconian police state case law and subsequently dodge the next (R) case which would be a good gun ruling.

I wish I had the optimism and I really hope I'm wrong.
 

rivet_42

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
1,007
Likes
354

HorizontalHunter

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
4,512
Likes
2,329
Location
Western Massachusetts
Bringing this back on topic, Healey has filed for a 45-day extension of her deadline for filing a response to petitioners' request for cert. Petitioners have assented, which makes it sound like this is a legit request for an extension (because SCOTUS filings are a lot of work and her office is swamped) and not a mere dilatory tactic.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-404/119829/20191022142040556_FINAL Motion for Extension of Time on BIO.pdf
It is more likely that her office didn’t start her response as they never thought it would be heard.

Bob
 
Top Bottom