Massachusetts Legal Attack: Sweeping Gun Ban Enacted - Page 3

Elkins45 · July 23, 2016, 07:25 AM

Maybe I'm thinking with too broad a view, but this talk about "substantially similar operating system" is the truly big worry IMO.

In reality all cartridge firearms have a 'similar' operating system: a metal firing pin strikes a cartridge within the chamber of a barrel or tube resulting in the ignition of a charge of smokeless powder.

As others have said, this isn't a slippery slope: it's a greased cliff. All it will take is for someone to be bold enough to redefine the similarity of all modern cartridge arms.

Bartholomew Roberts · July 23, 2016, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Anything that can be boiled down to "I have a right to a gun to fight the government" brands you as a wackjob of some degree to these people, and NOTHING else you say will be listened to.

I saw a t-shirt the other day, and Lord knows you are in trouble when you are taking your philosophy from a t-shirt, but it said "The Second Amendment isn't there to guarantee your safety. It is there to guarantee your ability to fight back."*

I thought that was a succinct summation of the issue. I have no interest in fighting the government. I, and just about everyone else, can relate to wanting to at least have the choice of being able to fight back. Phrasing it that way, you can defuse the attempt to associate you with wackjobs? "Fight the government? Sure, I guess if reptiloid Nazis became the government I'd fight back <laugh>. That's probably not likely but there are more common threats I'd like to be able to defend myself from..."

Although if you want to attempt the scholarly fight the government argument, this link is a must read: http://www.constitution.org/2ll/2ndschol/76holo.htm

*And on a tangential matter, I think the deep source of a lot of support for gun control is rooted in the phenomenon described in Jeffrey Snyder's "A Nation of Cowards." Having to seriously contemplate fighting the government or taking responsibility for your own self-defense is an immensely frightening prospect to anyone with a brain. Some people will choose to face their fears and some will deny they have anything to fear to deal with it.

If you want to reach out to antis, you have to understand that fear and help them find the courage to overcome it without triggering that propensity for denial.

barnbwt · July 23, 2016, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Maybe I'm thinking with too broad a view, but this talk about "substantially similar operating system" is the truly big worry IMO.

In reality all cartridge firearms have a 'similar' operating system: a metal firing pin strikes a cartridge within the chamber of a barrel or tube resulting in the ignition of a charge of smokeless powder.

As others have said, this isn't a slippery slope: it's a greased cliff. All it will take is for someone to be bold enough to redefine the similarity of all modern cartridge arms.

I'm glad at least a few people are getting it. This isn't "just another ban," it's the Final Solution for semi-autos, outright. Frankly, it accurately describes semi-autos for ban even better than an explicit "semi-autos are now illegal" statute language would. It's function is very similar to the NFA language that describes & dispositions machineguns and devices deemed too similar to them, only the MA law describes what makes a machine readily convertible to AW's, which just happens to encompass every present or imaginable semi-auto firearm (except perhaps HK roller guns & VZ58s, until they're added as well)

This law explicitly targets semi-autos, manuals (though often mechanically identical) are at least specifically exempt. But ancient, obsolete, and ineffective firearms aren't what the RKBA is about, nor are they even adequate to partially fufill its purpose (case in point: Mexican Federales/Narcos vs. civilian Autodefensas with bolt rifles & single shot scatterguns). From that perspective, this power play is the death blow, coup de grace, whatever you want to call it, for gun owners' political power in MA. If it stands, gun owners interested in their freedoms will either leave, or grow disillusioned & fade away. A deal of that has happened already in MA.

There will be no more retreating, unless it's to leave MA entirely, it would seem.

TCB

Pacman · July 23, 2016, 04:59 PM

My brother lives in Connecticut, and he let his handgun license lapse by mistake. This meant he couldn't even purchase handgun ammo until he took classes and became re-certified. In the class was a former service member that just moved to Ct. from another state. He mentioned that he had an AR-15 and a bunch of 30 round mag's he wanted to bring into his new home. The instructor told him he would be a FELON if caught with ANY of those items!.

Massachusetts is simply duplicating the law already instituted in CT.

If it weren't for the newly elected Republican governor we voted for here in Maryland, I have no doubt I would find myself in the same boat.

Contact your congressperson and let them know how you feel.

barnbwt · July 23, 2016, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Massachusetts is simply duplicating the law already instituted in CT.

CT bans features and specific models, IIRC, and has not (yet) had an expansive interpretation that broadens those to "things the AG thinks are indistinguishable." The language may be the same, but the practical effect appears to be ramping up dramatically.

**Aguila Blanca** · July 24, 2016, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pacman

My brother lives in Connecticut, and he let his handgun license lapse by mistake. This meant he couldn't even purchase handgun ammo until he took classes and became re-certified. In the class was a former service member that just moved to Ct. from another state. He mentioned that he had an AR-15 and a bunch of 30 round mag's he wanted to bring into his new home. The instructor told him he would be a FELON if caught with ANY of those items!.

Massachusetts is simply duplicating the law already instituted in CT.

Totally unrelated to Connecticut.

After the Sandy Hook school shooting, Connecticut re-wrote it's assault weapons ban law, essentially reducing the allowable number of "evil" features from two down to one. That made all formerly legal post-ban configuration AR-15s (and similar firearms) into instant "assault weapons." Owners who already had them were given a window of opportunity to register them with the state police. IIRC, the law was passed in April and the deadline was in December. After that, no AR-type firearms falling within the outlawed configuration could be registered in Connecticut or imported into Connecticut. The new law also applied to magazines holding more than 10 rounds. Same window of opportunity to register them; after the deadline, they became contraband.

This former service member was not allowed to bring in his AR for the sinmple reason that the law didn't allow him to bring it in, not because anyone reinterpreted an old law to suddenly encompass much more than the law was intended to encompass.

Dragline45 · July 24, 2016, 03:39 PM

MA resident here. The biggest issue here isn't even the banning of most semi-autos, and believe me that is a huge issue for me, it's the AG's clear overreach of power. It sets an extremely dangerous precedent. She basically got away with reinterpreting a law that has been on the books for almost 20 years to how she sees fit. I foresee this being overturned, but that takes time, so for the time being it's here to stay. I'll tell you this though, I am damn glad I bought a second lower a couple months back and ordered my upper from BCM before they stopped shipping to MA, which they did as of 2 days ago.

rickyrick · July 24, 2016, 06:55 PM

Seems like this is the new gun control format:
Step 1. Pass a common sense gun law that can get through the legislature.
Step 2. Enforce the law in excess of how the law is written.
Step 3. Take a gamble with legal challenges, worst case scenario is that after years in court the decision is not in the state's favor; not to worry, the damage has long since taken hold

doofus47 · July 25, 2016, 05:11 PM

Do you think that this will spur the development of caseless ammo?
Wouldn't a mechanism that is cycling caseless ammo and igniting it w/out hammer or striker be outside of this law?

I dunno. Just trying to be hopeful.

Pacman · July 25, 2016, 07:11 PM

Quote:
"The new law also applied to magazines holding more than 10 rounds. Same window of opportunity to register them; after the deadline, they became contraband."

Did the state mark those magazines somehow that hold over 10 rounds when owners registered them? How do you prevent someone from buying more at an out-of-state gun show?

kilimanjaro · July 25, 2016, 08:21 PM

Doofus, I guarantee you that caseless ammo would be blasted by the anti-funners as a clear attempt to evade the use of ballistic evidence in linking a shell casing to a gun used in a crime. They would demagogue it for about two weeks and then get it banned, as well. Kind of like the 'plastic gun' issue that was a fraud, as well.

Glenn E. Meyer · July 26, 2016, 11:09 AM

Work arounds aren't going to work anymore. Unless you can establish that we have the right to own a good old standard AR, AK, Tavor, etc. rifle - playing with MSR, bullet buttons, compliant NY stocks, blah, blah - are just spitting in the wind.

**44 AMP** · July 26, 2016, 04:06 PM

We feel the right is long established. THEY DON'T. Or rather they feel our right to arms is limited to only those arms that THEY approve of.

And that's the bottom line, until/unless some GOVT agency that THEY respect announces we do have the right, they won't listen. (and even then, I doubt they will stop trying to ban guns)

They see GUNS as the problem. We see people shooting each other for fun and profit as the problem.

The only time these gun ban advocates have shut up, slowed, or toned down their rhetoric was for a short time after 9/11.

A small number of them even admitted that they had been wrong to focus on privately owned firearms as the greatest danger we face. With a couple thousand people dead, many thousands injured, and two of the world's tallest buildings (or was the Twin Towers one building??) destroyed, without a single gun being used, the evidence was pretty obvious.

Only took them about a decade to forget that, and a few more years to resume their full court press....

ronl · July 28, 2016, 06:16 PM

I agree with Dragline, the assumption of such power by a single person has no part in representative government. That is the definition of tyranny; simply said, despite what the "law" says. Tried such an end run here in Va with concealed carry reciprocity. That went down in flames when the legislature threatened to take away the gov.'s budget for security personnel. Ended up biting McAwful in the butt. Seems the only recourse left to those in Mass. is to elect those who will stand up for the right to have weapons. I think we all can agree that opposing tyranny is one of the primary reasons the right to keep and bear arms was included in the Constitution. Funny thing is, you don't need it until it is taken away.

LogicMan · July 28, 2016, 06:33 PM

What is needed is an open-carry rally of thousands of people carrying ARs in say Boston. Peaceful carry, but I mean the police couldn't possibly arrest thousands of people. Or if not open-carry, just thousands of protesters period.

Dragline45 · July 29, 2016, 07:34 PM

Quote:

What is needed is an open-carry rally of thousands of people carrying ARs in say Boston. Peaceful carry, but I mean the police couldn't possibly arrest thousands of people. Or if not open-carry, just thousands of protesters period.

Open carry rallies here in MA will just turn more people away from our cause, I guarantee it. The media will paint us as wack jobs, and the viewers will eat it all up. Not saying I think it's right, I'm just telling you how it is. As far as saying the police couldn't possibly arrest thousands of people, sure they wont be able to, but I'm not willing to risk my carry license to protest while open carrying when I can do so carrying concealed. There was a rally 2 days after she announced it and on short notice we got close to 1000 people. There will be another rally tomorrow and they are encouraging protesters to go into the state house to speak directly with legislators, which the public are open to do. They wont be able to ignore us when we are literally at their doorstep.

ATN082268 · August 1, 2016, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dragline45

Open carry rallies here in MA will just turn more people away from our cause, I guarantee it. The media will paint us as wack jobs, and the viewers will eat it all up.

In Massachusetts, the Politicians, Media and the Courts seem especially hostile to private gun ownership. If the general population of Massachusetts "eats up" all the bad press about private ownership of guns, then that should tell you a lot about them as far as gun rights go...

Skans · August 3, 2016, 10:32 AM

Quote:

The only time these gun ban advocates have shut up, slowed, or toned down their rhetoric was for a short time after 9/11.

That is so true!

Rockrivr1 · August 3, 2016, 07:09 PM

To make matters worse the MA Speaker of the House will not bring forward legislation filed to reverse what the AG has done. He's about as left as you can get, so this isn't really a surprise.

Another turn of events is that the AG is sending letters to MA firearms and parts manufacturers demanding records. Not really sure what that's all about, but it can't be good for us.

July 25, 2016, 05:11 PM	#59
doofus47 Senior Member Join Date: June 9, 2010 Location: live in a in a house when i'm not in a tent Posts: 2,483	Do you think that this will spur the development of caseless ammo? Wouldn't a mechanism that is cycling caseless ammo and igniting it w/out hammer or striker be outside of this law? I dunno. Just trying to be hopeful. __________________ I'm right about the metric system 3/4 of the time.

July 26, 2016, 11:09 AM	#62
Glenn E. Meyer Senior Member Join Date: November 17, 2000 Posts: 20,064	Work arounds aren't going to work anymore. Unless you can establish that we have the right to own a good old standard AR, AK, Tavor, etc. rifle - playing with MSR, bullet buttons, compliant NY stocks, blah, blah - are just spitting in the wind. __________________ NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens

July 26, 2016, 04:06 PM	#63
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 28,790	We feel the right is long established. THEY DON'T. Or rather they feel our right to arms is limited to only those arms that THEY approve of. And that's the bottom line, until/unless some GOVT agency that THEY respect announces we do have the right, they won't listen. (and even then, I doubt they will stop trying to ban guns) They see GUNS as the problem. We see people shooting each other for fun and profit as the problem. The only time these gun ban advocates have shut up, slowed, or toned down their rhetoric was for a short time after 9/11. A small number of them even admitted that they had been wrong to focus on privately owned firearms as the greatest danger we face. With a couple thousand people dead, many thousands injured, and two of the world's tallest buildings (or was the Twin Towers one building??) destroyed, without a single gun being used, the evidence was pretty obvious. Only took them about a decade to forget that, and a few more years to resume their full court press.... __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

July 23, 2016, 07:25 AM	#51
Elkins45 Senior Member Join Date: February 24, 2010 Posts: 498	Maybe I'm thinking with too broad a view, but this talk about "substantially similar operating system" is the truly big worry IMO. In reality all cartridge firearms have a 'similar' operating system: a metal firing pin strikes a cartridge within the chamber of a barrel or tube resulting in the ignition of a charge of smokeless powder. As others have said, this isn't a slippery slope: it's a greased cliff. All it will take is for someone to be bold enough to redefine the similarity of all modern cartridge arms.

July 23, 2016, 04:59 PM	#54
Pacman Member Join Date: March 12, 2012 Location: Maryland Posts: 53	My brother lives in Connecticut, and he let his handgun license lapse by mistake. This meant he couldn't even purchase handgun ammo until he took classes and became re-certified. In the class was a former service member that just moved to Ct. from another state. He mentioned that he had an AR-15 and a bunch of 30 round mag's he wanted to bring into his new home. The instructor told him he would be a FELON if caught with ANY of those items!. Massachusetts is simply duplicating the law already instituted in CT. If it weren't for the newly elected Republican governor we voted for here in Maryland, I have no doubt I would find myself in the same boat. Contact your congressperson and let them know how you feel.

July 24, 2016, 03:39 PM	#57
Dragline45 Senior Member Join Date: November 30, 2010 Posts: 3,513	MA resident here. The biggest issue here isn't even the banning of most semi-autos, and believe me that is a huge issue for me, it's the AG's clear overreach of power. It sets an extremely dangerous precedent. She basically got away with reinterpreting a law that has been on the books for almost 20 years to how she sees fit. I foresee this being overturned, but that takes time, so for the time being it's here to stay. I'll tell you this though, I am damn glad I bought a second lower a couple months back and ordered my upper from BCM before they stopped shipping to MA, which they did as of 2 days ago.

July 24, 2016, 06:55 PM	#58
rickyrick Senior Member Join Date: March 15, 2010 Posts: 8,236	Seems like this is the new gun control format: Step 1. Pass a common sense gun law that can get through the legislature. Step 2. Enforce the law in excess of how the law is written. Step 3. Take a gamble with legal challenges, worst case scenario is that after years in court the decision is not in the state's favor; not to worry, the damage has long since taken hold

July 25, 2016, 07:11 PM	#60
Pacman Member Join Date: March 12, 2012 Location: Maryland Posts: 53	Quote: "The new law also applied to magazines holding more than 10 rounds. Same window of opportunity to register them; after the deadline, they became contraband." Did the state mark those magazines somehow that hold over 10 rounds when owners registered them? How do you prevent someone from buying more at an out-of-state gun show?

July 25, 2016, 08:21 PM	#61
kilimanjaro Senior Member Join Date: November 23, 2009 Posts: 3,963	Doofus, I guarantee you that caseless ammo would be blasted by the anti-funners as a clear attempt to evade the use of ballistic evidence in linking a shell casing to a gun used in a crime. They would demagogue it for about two weeks and then get it banned, as well. Kind of like the 'plastic gun' issue that was a fraud, as well.

July 28, 2016, 06:16 PM	#64
ronl Senior Member Join Date: December 2, 2007 Posts: 1,100	I agree with Dragline, the assumption of such power by a single person has no part in representative government. That is the definition of tyranny; simply said, despite what the "law" says. Tried such an end run here in Va with concealed carry reciprocity. That went down in flames when the legislature threatened to take away the gov.'s budget for security personnel. Ended up biting McAwful in the butt. Seems the only recourse left to those in Mass. is to elect those who will stand up for the right to have weapons. I think we all can agree that opposing tyranny is one of the primary reasons the right to keep and bear arms was included in the Constitution. Funny thing is, you don't need it until it is taken away.

July 28, 2016, 06:33 PM	#65
LogicMan Senior Member Join Date: January 16, 2013 Posts: 280	What is needed is an open-carry rally of thousands of people carrying ARs in say Boston. Peaceful carry, but I mean the police couldn't possibly arrest thousands of people. Or if not open-carry, just thousands of protesters period.

August 3, 2016, 07:09 PM	#69
Rockrivr1 Senior Member Join Date: June 6, 2002 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 271	To make matters worse the MA Speaker of the House will not bring forward legislation filed to reverse what the AG has done. He's about as left as you can get, so this isn't really a surprise. Another turn of events is that the AG is sending letters to MA firearms and parts manufacturers demanding records. Not really sure what that's all about, but it can't be good for us.