AHM
NES Member
-
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 (MA AWB) Oral Arguments 1-9-2019
- Thread starter Comm2A
- Start date
Varmint
NES Member
Get the F to work, slacker!
Everyone is always so excited on TV and movies when they have a new baby. I was scared crapless all 3 times. "S-word. My life just changed. . . . again!"
Our first week i got like 1hr sleep a night, since my wife had a c section. It's how I imagine Navy Seals hell week.
Varmint
NES Member
Yup if this FAQ gets slapped down I'm going shopping same day. The legislature probably has the new bill already penned.
Varmint
NES Member
This threads not about New York!
Why did you stop shopping? Find an ffl who isn't a pussy who will mtransfer a lower to you and call it a day. Healey ain't bringing anyone to court over this shit. Its all scare tactics to keep ffls from selling.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,502
- Likes
- 33,500
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.
CrackPot
NES Member
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.
Varmint
NES Member
I know of one but don't want to mess with that.
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2017
- Messages
- 731
- Likes
- 1,201
namedpipes
NES Member
Having dabbled a little in Boris's lego technique, I can make stripped lowers (LEGALLY) for around $0.10 each, for my own, personal use.
That might be the "core" part, but it isn't the "expensive" part.
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.
CrackPot
NES Member
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
FFLs get harrassed all the time for doing things that are completely legal.
Varmint
NES Member
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
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
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.
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2017
- Messages
- 731
- Likes
- 1,201
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
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"
GaryO
NES Member
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.
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.
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
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.
CrackPot
NES Member
I have shipped a lot of normal capacity magazines to out of state addresses recently. You are not the only person thinking this way.
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
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
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.
