Massachusetts Sneak Legal Attack on Gun Owners and Dealers

[Spats McGee]

Threads in Legal merged.

 

[barnbwt]

Not sure if this qualifies for posting in "Legal," seeing as it has no basis in law whatsoever, but here goes;

The AG helpfully clarifies, unilaterally, what weapons are/aren't covered by her unilateral edict. Shouldn't the broad guidelines of enforcement and compliance with laws like this be subject to at least some level of due process, the way regulations have to be?

Guns That Are Not Assault Weapons

Q: Are there examples or categories of weapons that are not assault weapons?

Yes. Many rifles, shotguns, and pistols are not assault weapons, and therefore are not “copies or duplicates” of enumerated assault weapons. For example, the following are not assault weapons under G.L. c. 140, § 121:

Any handgun on the current version of the state’s Approved Firearms Roster, available here links to PDF file;
Any .22 caliber rifle;
Any Ruger Mini 14 or substantially-similar model weapon;
Any of the hundreds of rifles and shotguns listed on this list links to PDF file —Appendix A to 18 U.S.C. § 922, as appearing on September 13, 1994;
Any weapon that is operated by manual bolt, pump, lever, or slide action;
Any weapon that is an antique, relic, or theatrical prop;
Any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than five rounds of ammunition;
Any semiautomatic shotgun that cannot hold more than five rounds of ammunition in a fixed or detachable magazine.
This list is not exhaustive; it is meant for illustrative purposes only. Many other weapons are not assault weapons or “copies or duplicates” of assault weapons.

Q: Are any .22 caliber rifles affected by the Enforcement Notice?

No. However, a weapon that is manufactured as an Assault Weapon cannot be made legal by alterations that allow it to discharge .22-caliber ammunition.

Q: Does this Enforcement Notice change which semi-automatic pistols may be sold in Massachusetts?

No. The Enforcement Notice makes no change to the list of handguns, including semi-automatic pistols, approved for sale in Massachusetts. The most recent list (August 2016) is available here links to PDF file. The Massachusetts Assault Weapons Ban does prohibit the sale of five semi-automatic pistols, the INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and the Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil. Only these weapons and copies or duplicates of these specific pistols are prohibited under the ban, and none appear on the approved list.

For more information, please visit the Assault Weapon Ban Enforcement page.

Apparently any substantially similar version of the Mini-14 is legal, but simultaneously any rifle substantially similar to a semi-auto that can accept a >5 round magazine is banned. I assume the Mini alone was mentioned and remains itself legal, solely because it would appear to be one of only two models of semi-auto centerfire rifles on their helpful list* that are still in production (the other being the older, rather expensive Browning BAR Safari Mk II). I would assume neither the AC556 select-fire nor the M14 nor the FNAR are acceptable, despite being copies of exempted weapons & with five-round mags available, and despite the clarification that 'substantially similar' weapons are exempted as well.

Oh, she also explicitly (repeatedly) says all ".22 caliber" rifles are not assault weapons (forgot to mention rimfire, I'm guessing, but seeing as gunowners are to conduct themselves as if these edicts are the law if they wish to avoid being prosecuted, it seems rather reckless for her to issue contradictory guidelines). She also appears to say the exemptions list is not exhaustive .

Plot holes, spelling errors, and a single woman's ignorant whims are no way to instill respect for the law.

TCB

*Is there anything stopping whoever owns "Iver Johnson" from coming out with an AR15 and calling it the "M-1 Carbine" as a way to sneak back onto the list? None of those models are defined by manufacture date or characteristics.

 

[Rockrivr1]

Depends on which "list" you end up talking about. There's a supposed list of weapon's legal due to this action as well as a supposed list that has cleared the AG's consumer protection process (AKA Pay us to selling MA tax) New Glocks are not on the consumer protection tax, um list because they will not submit their guns for testing, even though Glocks are carried by more LE/Military personnel then people in MA combined.

Welcome to MA, where all laws are clear as mud and they want it that way so laws can be "adjusted" depending on who's in office.....

 

[barnbwt]

Well that's the crux of the problem; the law says one thing, and the AG says another, and a ten-year felony hangs in the balance.

"The only winning move is not to play" --some sissy computer in a movie

TCB

 

[Frank Ettin]

Well that's the crux of the problem; the law says one thing, and the AG says another,....

That might be your opinion, but it is not a forgone conclusion.

We know that the Massachusetts law defines assault weapons as certain named guns and duplicates or copies of those guns. The Massachusetts AG has told us how whether or not a gun is a duplicate or copy of a named gun will be decided for enforcement purposes. So now the question for the courts will be whether that test is proper under the statute.

 

[Neo-Luddite]

Ahh, the Mini-14 is yet exempted by name. The double-edged legacy of the late Bill Ruger along with his magical 10 rd. "Honest Man" limit that continues to haunt us....

 

[barnbwt]

Ahh, the Mini-14 is yet exempted by name.

Yeah, from what I can determine from this conflicted morass, this is the only reason the Mini and BAR may still yet be legal, since both those have several "assault weapon" variants that are beyond 'substantially similar' by any measure. And like I said, I don't think any of the others (Rem 7400 maybe?) are still in production.

My question about renaming a "banned" platform after a defunct "exempted" platform stands, since this is the flip-side of the same logic used to exclude new models of handguns from the Cali roster, when they change frame colors/etc --that it is not longer the 'same' model as exempted. Seems that any changes to the Mini/BAR since the law's passage (which are sure to be many) would make even these few remaining holdouts vulnerable to ban, and if not you should be able to bring in new-production "Iver Johnson M-1 Carbines" shaped suspiciously like CZ805's

That might be your opinion, but it is not a forgone conclusion

Frank, she plainly states not once but twice that no 22 caliber rifles are subject to the law, whereas the statute explicitly exempts rimfires alone. Considering the only reason "substantially similar i.e. ALL" semi-auto rifles are now in the crosshairs is because she took it upon herself to enforce the statute as she feels it is written, it is indeed worth mentioning where her interpretation appears mistaken. That point at least appears quite clear, at least until she 'clarifies' her position further.

I know her little newsletter updates are not legally binding, but considering the new enforcement regime sprang entirely from her own noodle, by what else are law-abiding gun owners in MA supposed to conduct themselves to avoid prosecution? The law as written, or the law as claimed (today, not yesterday or tomorrow) by the people who would arrest them? This is exactly why regulatory changes need to duly follow a prescribed approval/adoption process, and if widely impactful in effect such as this, the legislative process. Otherwise you get confusing schlock of no use to anyone, that lands the unwitting in trouble. Law by trial and error.

And then we have a thread a year from now about some poor schmo getting nabbed because his five-round sporter Garand or Norinco was part of a police sting, and get to hear all about how only the opinion that matters to justice is the hostile local/district courts' who won't even be bothered to make a proper logical argument for us non-law-types to understand & follow that addresses our concerns. Surely you can empathize with me on this, since surely there are areas of law too confusing for even you to comprehend clearly, which still have important implications for you personally.

TCB

 

[barnbwt]

So now the question for the courts will be whether that test is proper under the statute.

Indeed, that is when the ball comes into play, for sure.

Which begs the question; considering how adamant she was about enforcement beginning immediately (to the tune of reports that police were seen searching some gun ranges' patrons for AW's shortly after her op-ed), and considering how many banned guns are floating around waiting to become contraband...I assume still no arrests yet at this time?

TCB

 

[Spats McGee]

. . . . Indeed, that is when the ball comes into play, for sure.

Which begs the question; considering how adamant she was about enforcement beginning immediately (to the tune of reports that police were seen searching some gun ranges' patrons for AW's shortly after her op-ed), . . . .

Really?!? I hadn't heard that.

Got any good links to those stories?

 

[barnbwt]

That was merely what was relayed by several locals online; just rumors. That said, it is neither unreasonable that authorities would take the AG's lead (after all, she said enforcement was to take her direction immediately) nor that there were/are ongoing assault weapon checks at shooting ranges. Even a simple coincidence of officers checking weapons at a range after practicing would explain what was seen, but doesn't exactly change the practical danger to previously-law-abiding-now-felons-in-waiting.

As I'd said, I haven't heard of any arrests or test cases at this time, so it sounds as though 'real' enforcement has not supplemented the chill effect as of yet.

TCB