Mass AG drops the bomb

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
33,448
Reaction score
60,499
Location
NC
Admin Edit-
Massachusetts enacted an assault weapons ban that copied the federal ban of 1994.
See it here-
General Laws: CHAPTER 140, Section 121

Note the wording of the Mass law-
''Assault weapon'', shall have the same meaning as a semiautomatic assault weapon as defined in the federal Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(30) as appearing in such section on September 13, 1994, and shall include, but not be limited to, any of the weapons, or copies or duplicates of the weapons, of any caliber, known as:
That sounds like the rifles exempted under the fed law would have to be exempted under the Mass law.
The Attorney General of Mass decided that the exempted weapons are NOT exempt, and ordered dealers on Wednesday to stop selling them.
I hope there is a challenge.

//////////////////
original post-

They're not coming for your existing "assault rifles" just yet.


BREAKING: Massachusetts Attorney General Bans Sales of All New "Assault Weapons" As of Today - The Truth About Guns


The loophole in the Mass. assault weapons ban - The Boston Globe
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Register to hide this ad
Again,someone over stepping their authority.

The Mass. lawmakers make the laws same as the Congress of the US.

People in the Executive branches of government are sworn to enforce the laws.

The judiciary are charged with impartially ruling on whether the laws are in accordance with the state and federal constitutions.
 
Last edited:
We residents of the free states weep for the plight of folks who live in the tiny minority of states with heinous laws which recklessly endanger the lives of their residents. Massachusetts has long been one of these repressive states, and now, with this announcement by the AG, things there have become even bleaker.

Massachusetts, we extend our deepest sympathy to your residents.

If you haven't already, take advantage of handejector's offer, and renew, or upgrade your NRA membership before the end of the month, it is a wonderful deal. We need to all be in this fight, the enimies of freedom are everywhere, and are just more successful in some states than others.

Join your state firearms organization also. And vote in November!!!

Best Regards, Les
 
You beat me to the post! We are still not sure if this bans most semi-autos because part of her ruling is that "If a guns operating system is essentially the same as that of a banned weapon" it is illegal to possess or sell
 
A little off track, but here in WV, we even have a "State Gun". I know that Utah has one as well, and a few other states. I have heard that in Mass. they want to remove the dangerous musket from the Minuteman statue. Geeze.



Dangerous 1775 model "Assault Rifle". Needs to be removed from statue. Might traumatize folks. Also, was made from melted down Civil War cannons. Therefore has a shady past.

If you guys think I'm making this stuff up, just check it out.

Best Regards, and best of luck. Les
 
Last edited:
A little off track, but here in WV, we even have a "State Gun". I know that Utah has one as well, and a few other states. I have heard that in Mass. they want to remove the dangerous musket from the Minuteman statue. Geeze.

Alaska does as well - Pre64 Winchester M70 in .30-06

I fled California a good while back, somewhat in part to the BS politics and laws that were ruining what once was a nice, diverse and beautiful state. Other than losing a few years to retirement, but coming away with loads of experience and "life"...it was completely worth it. Now it's like watching a bad reality show....except I don't even watch.
 
So...one of these dedicated .22 LR carbines would be illegal to sell in MA now.

One is a dedicated .22LR rifle and is blow back operated - unlike the AR-15 - but it has a receiver and other parts that are "interchangeable" with an AR-15.

The other one is also a dedicated .22LR but doesn't have interchangeable parts (unless they count accessories that could go on any picatinney rail.

IMG_4081_zpsb2b4da44.jpg


That's pretty stupid...
 
Last edited:
AG said anyone who bought one in the last 22 years is now a felon, but they won't go after us AT THIS TIME because we thought they were legal. But she also reserves the right to change her mind at any time and come after you.
 
I believe the anti's are getting smarter and someone, maybe an adviser knows guns. Instead of focusing on the superficial items like pistol grips or extendable stocks they are focusing on the opeating system. This strategy could, IMO, then allow them to add any semi auto to the current class three designation along with full auto and shot barrell weapons. Not an outright ban but a vey heavy restriction which becomes a ban for all practical purposes.
 
(vi) any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than five rounds of ammunition;

OK - how many Semi Auto rifles have you seen that cannot accept a magazine capable of holding more than 5 rounds?
 
This sort of executive overreach can happen anywhere, don't think you are safe from it just because you're not in MA, CA, NY, ect.
Those people have moved around and taken up residence and public office all over the country.
They love the warm weather and no snow!

VOTE in November.


,,,or be satisfied with a Remington Model 8 , 81 or Standard Arms Model G.
But they;ll take them away too once they figure out they exist.
 
.....We are still not sure if this bans most semi-autos because part of her ruling is that "If a guns operating system is essentially the same as that of a banned weapon" it is illegal to possess or sell

elpac3 said:
(vi) any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than five rounds of ammunition;

OK - how many Semi Auto rifles have you seen that cannot accept a magazine capable of holding more than 5 rounds?


To clarify what was quoted by elpac3, the law excludes from the banned list semi-auto rifles that cannot accept a magazine capable of holding more than 5 rounds.

I understand this is state law but based on my experience of interpreting Federal law the past 5 years I can see how this could be interpreted that any semi-auto rifle that uses magazines would be illegal because, even though a magazine holding more than 5 rounds might not be available, the rifle is certainly capable of accepting a magazine of greater capacity. It will be interesting to see how this gets interpreted. Based upon my recent experience those writing rules frequently fail to consider obvious possibilities or exceptions. I doubt this rule was meant to make illegal all semi-auto rifles that accept magazines, but who knows? It certainly leaves the door open.
 
Total insanity. :mad: At some point, good, law-abiding citizens are just going to give up trying to obey the anti-Constitutional gun laws (and extreme lunatic interpretations thereof) that the sicko gun-grabbing moonbats want to impose on us. I think Massachusetts is now very close to that point with this bizarre decree.

I fear for our future greatly. :(
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top