At my local gun shop today....

Dave Nowlin

Member
Joined
May 23, 2012
Messages
89
Reaction score
34
Location
Tennessee
they were talking about a new ruling from the Attorney General of Mass. It redefined the meaning of assault weapon to include all semi-automatic weapons. She banned all of them in that state. Considering this ruling S&W should move out of that state and relocate in a state which is a bit more friendly toward gun owners. Then again I suppose the folks up there could have a recall vote and get rid of her.:)
 
Register to hide this ad
We have been having a rather spirited discussion about this here: http://smith-wessonforum.com/2nd-amendment-forum/482416-mass-ag-drops-bomb.html some of your thoughts have been addressed, and there have been some administrative additions, so that there is a lot of reference material.

Also there is a second amendment sub forum where this thread should probably go.

And I'm not saying I don't agree with you, on all counts.

Best Regards, Les
 
Last edited:
The Mass. AG should investigate and ban terrorist that want to fly out of Logan Airport. Isn't that where a majority of the 9-11 terrorist flew out of??
It seems like these ill informed politicians want to go after everything except what the real problem is.
I guess law abiding, tax paying citizens are "Soft Targets" and "Easy Pickings" for political hacks with aspirations??
 
If you can't get rid of her I'm sure PA would love to have them. A lot of NY FFL's and their employees moved to PA after the SAFE Act was enacted.

Otherwise. I think Texas would give them wicked tax breaks if they went down there.


Primum non Nocere
 
Having battled the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in the tax arena over the years, I have nothing good to say for their politics and their politicians undying contempt for individual freedom. A very troublesome, and self-important small plot of land to do business in. My unabridged opinions cannot be typed here.
 
Perhaps I am misreading this but, I am surprised that an appointed bureaucrat (AG) has the authority to write and implement laws. I would assume that all states require a law to go through the legislative process before going into effect. Regardless, I suspect that the AG's dictate will be challenged.
 
Perhaps I am misreading this but, I am surprised that an appointed bureaucrat (AG) has the authority to write and implement laws. I would assume that all states require a law to go through the legislative process before going into effect. Regardless, I suspect that the AG's dictate will be challenged.

The AG of Massachusetts, as in 43 states, is a publicly elected official.
 
Last edited:
I think that if you tried to order an M-1 today from CMP (assuming they had any left) you would be greatly disappointed.

You cant buy new semi auto rifles.....CMP shipped a M1D sniper Garand to my door Wed but you cants buy a 10/22 Ruger. Makes perfect sense to me.


SENT FROM BEHIND ENEMY LINES
 
Actually Arkansas and Alabama have recently gotten firearms manufacturing plants. Barrett is here in Tennessee. This state is very firearm friendly. All of these firearm manufacturing plants should move out of states which aren't firearm friendly.
 
Last edited:
Legislatures need to get back to the business of passing laws. Non legislative officials need to be removed if the majority of folks think they have a screw loose.
 
The AG of Massachusetts, as in 43 states, is a publicly elected official.

Elected or appointed makes no difference. The judicial branch shouldn't write legislation. Perhaps the AG has "interpreted" the existing laws to suit her agenda as the Federal judiciary often does.
 
She's basically a lawyer, no? How can she declare a ban on anything? Isn't ner job to INTERPRET laws after they are written by the legislative process?
 
Last edited:
She's basically a lawyer, no? How can she declare a ban on anything? Isn't ner job to INTERPRET laws after they are written by the legislative process?



Yes - to the question of the AG functioning as the state's chief attorney. No - to the issue of interpretation; the AG is part of the executive branch and enforces the law. The courts interpret the law. If the state's Chief Executive doesn't do his job, the people must sue the State and the AG, asking for relief. Overreaching officials must be checked by the courts; having said that, the aggrieved parties must take action and seek redress of those grievances in the appropriate forum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top