What to do when the ban sets in?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rockrivr1

Rockrivr1

Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
1,873
Location
Massachusetts
I posted on another thread that Massachusetts is looking to ban all 50 caliber rifles without a grandfather clause. Meaning a few days after it passes, a nice friendly police officer will be at my door to collect my rifle and ammo. :uhoh:

With that said, I'm thinking I either have to get the rifle out of the state or sell it. I'm not to fond of having to sell it so I'm wondering what other options I have. (I'm not moving out of state as I have to many roots here) I'm thinking more on the lines of storing it in NH, VT, CT or RI. Are there any places that anyone can think of that will legally store a firearm for you out of state? Some place like a storage unit company etc. I'm not sure if this is even legal or not. Don't want to do something illegal, but I also don't want to give up my rifle either.

What do you think?
 
I'm not up on Massachusetts gun laws but could you just pull a "Why no sir, no .50 BMG rifles here". That's assuming they don't get to go searching through your home.
 
US Constitution, Article I

Section 9
No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
Click to expand...

Section 10
No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility.
Click to expand...

Clearly Massachusetts needs some re-education. Of course we already know the 2nd means nothing so that may not sway them...
 
Being an MA resident with the rifle registered to you, they'll confiscate it regardless of where in the country it is as long as you live here.

Perhaps you find it missing, stolen, just after the law is signed? You should really secure your rifles better.
 
Unfortunately that's just more Constitutional protection that's been shot down by the black-robes... See the Lautenburg(sp) demestic violence law.

I would say good luck confiscating an item located in another state, of course we are talking about massachusettes here.
 
lose all your guns?

"Why no sir, no .50 BMG rifles here"

Wouldn't that be a felony? And if/when they found out (because if they know you had it, they WILL want to know what happened to it--if you report it stolen, that's just a deeper hole) you'd lose the right to own ANY gun.

Yeah, best thing to do is sell it or find someplace to store it. Sounds like a business opportunity for someone in Texas or Arizona--storing guns that have been restricted elsewhere.


Man, I miss our rights.
 
"Man, I miss our rights."

That's what the founders said, except they didn't move to a new state.
 
I guess it's time for you to get active with letter writing and inform your elected officials they will be replaced if they vote for another ban on your rights.

Ever think of supporting a grass root gun rights group that speaks for you in your state?
 
Don't they just have to be registered? Or are they actually confiscating them?

It was my understanding the here in Cali, (although that is a different law,) they aren't taking them away, just forcing registration and prohibiting new sales.

I would suggest you move, but that would make me a hypocrite, since I intend to stay in Cali and fight. (I also have no EBRs, hig-cap magazines or .50cals, so it is easy for me to stay.)

Best of luck in your situation.
 
I'm currently supporting the NRA, Goal and I write/call my elected official. I'd love to do more, but am not sure what that should be at this point.

As to the registration question. According to GOAL, the ban is for the elimination of the 50 caliber rifle. No registration or grandfather clause. If it's passed as is you will lose your rifle.
 
If you want to stay legal, your options are either hand over the rifle or take your case to court. Keeping the rifle in the face of a law which demands you turn it in will, obviously, put you on the wrong side of the law. I agree with dolanp, this law is clearly in violation of the Constitution, but that can only be enforced through the court system. If you're willing to "take one for the team" and be the test case, then more power to you. I haven't read the law in question, but if it specifically addresses ownership of a .50 cal rifle, you're going to have to not be the owner of the rifle in order to stay legal. Sotring the rifle out of state is unlikely to pass muster.

Assuming you don't want to break the law, and you don't want to go through the hassle/cost of trying to fight it in court, here's what I recommend. Find someone here, or go to someone you know out of state and trust. "Sell" this person the rifle for a nominal fee (say $1, plus the transfer/shipping costs). Legally, the rifle will no longer be your property.

Depending on how much you trust this person, sign a contract with this person guaranteeing you the right to buy the rifle back at your discretion for $1. Put in a clause such that you have the right to use of the rifle at your discretion, provided you show up to use it. Build in a penalty for default equal to the market value of the rifle at the time you want to buy it back and are unable to. Build in a penalty for "wear and tear" equal to the cost for a professional gunsmith to put the rifle in proper condition. Whatever else crosses your mind.

This way, if you ever get the chance to own the rifle again, you can have it back. If you're ever in the area of where you're sending it, you get to use it.

I'm no lawyer, and this isn't legal advice, but I'm pretty sure this would all be legal. I'm also pretty sure you'd get plenty of takers right here on THR, since they'd have access to a fairly expensive rifle for the cost of maintenance and storage. I'm guessing you'd get enough takers that you could probably change that "nominal" fee to a real one (nothing like the cost of the rifle, of course), actually.
 
Spiffy had the same thought that I did (only a few minutes sooner :p ).

These days though, where the contract of a handshake has sadly gone away, Control Group's idea isn't a bad one either.
 
The problem with "a contract of a handshake" is that it might leave Rockrivr1 open to prosecution. This is a case where I think the more paper trail involved, the better. A buy-back contract makes perfectly clear that the rifle is no longer Rockrivr1's property, and could be pointed to, if need be, in court.

Now, how strict that contract is in terms of protection for Rockrivr1 and/or the buyer is a function of how well Rockrivr1 knows him, and how much he trusts him. If it were me, I know a couple people that I might sell the gun to with nothing more in the contract than a line saying I've got the right to buy it back, and that only so that the contract exists. Everything else would be trust. On the other hand, if I didn't know those people, and was putting this offer up on THR, I'd include the other clauses about damage, loss, and whatever else seemed prudent.

Either way, though, I think the written contract itself is important for legal reasons. Just like I'd make sure to get a receipt, and whatever paperwork the FFL is willing to give me to prove I sold the gun.
 
What about rechambering it? The folks out in Kalibanfornia dug up an old wildcat that uses 50BMG brass and projectiles in sort of a .50 BMG/Improved, since the law says "...any firearm that chambers the .50 BMG cartridge..."

:banghead:

Why, no, officer, this is the .502 Improved; look, a .50 BMG round won't chamber...


Alex
 
Put in a clause such that you have the right to use of the rifle at your discretion, provided you show up to use it. Build in a penalty for default equal to the market value of the rifle at the time you want to buy it back and are unable to. Build in a penalty for "wear and tear" equal to the cost for a professional gunsmith to put the rifle in proper condition. Whatever else crosses your mind.
Click to expand...
Sure...who'd ever sign on to that? :rolleyes:
So your buddy get to store the rifle as a favor and you make him sign this?
 
If there is more than just a handful of .50-BMG rifles in Massachusetts, I suspect there will be no general confiscation, even if this version of the ban passes. I doubt the authorities are willing to sacrifice the lives of more than one or two police officers enforcing such a ban. A general confiscation would lead at least a couple gun owners to fight back, though most would surrender their weapons peacefully.

~G. Fink
 
Definitely take it to court if this happens.

I do not think this law is ex post facto, as it does not make something you have done a crime, only something you are doing. Ex post facto would be something along the lines of (purely example):

1) Person A buys .50 BMG rifle in 1990.
2) Person A sells rifle in 1991.
3) Law passed in 1992 makes it illegal to own .50 BMG rifle.

Using that law to punish someone that had owned a .50 BMG rifle in the past would be a case of ex post facto, I believe.
 
Sure...who'd ever sign on to that?
So your buddy get to store the rifle as a favor and you make him sign this?
Click to expand...
As I said in that post and clarified later, exactly what goes into the contract is a matter of how much you trust the guy. I was writing that from the point of view of selling it to someone you don't already know. That being said, even if I was selling it to the best of my friends, I'd still have us both sign a contract saying I had the right to buy it back. As I also clarified in my second post, that's to cover me if the police show up. Having that contract in hand goes to prove that the rifle is no longer owned by me, and that's how I'd present it to my friend: "I'm gonna need you to sign this so I can prove I 'sold' you the rifle." If he's really a friend, he ought to be cool with that. If he's not, maybe he's not such a good friend you should entrust him with an expensive piece of hardware?

As to your first question, I'd sign on to that in a heartbeat. I don't now, nor will I soon, have the disposable funds to buy a .50 cal rifle. If I could get access to one to take to the range now and again for the cost of ammunition, given only that I have to sell it back when the guy wants it, I'd stand in line for the opportunity. I'd sign so fast heat buildup in the pen might scorch the paper.

This, to me, is a lot like me renting a house from a good friend of mine (which I'm currently doing). Does he trust me to pay him every month? Absolutely. Did I sign a lease? Again, absolutely - he needed to be able to prove the income for the mortgage, and I was more than happy to sign. Frankly, I don't see why you would seemingly get so offended if a friend of yours asked for the favor.
 
Frankly, I don't see why you would seemingly get so offended if a friend of yours asked for the favor.
Click to expand...
So your friend asks the "favor" of skirting the law? I got news for you: these $1 contracts don't hold up in court.
 
"Man, I miss our rights."
That's what the founders said, except they didn't move to a new state.
Click to expand...
CLASSIC! I so tire of people from free states telling us to just leave the state. What a beautiful response. It isn't me, but I sure might be tempted to fight this one all the way to the Supreme Court. The key is getting the big gun groups to back you financially.
 
So your friend asks the "favor" of skirting the law? I got news for you: these $1 contracts don't hold up in court.
Click to expand...
Since when? I've made several transfers of cars for $1 within my family, and the DMV hasn't even raised an eyebrow when I pay my $0.06 tax. They've given me the title without question when I was the one buying the car, and my sister the title without question when she was the one buying the car. If I ship a rifle to your FFL, and ownership is transferred, what makes the $1 price at all an issue? As usual, I'm not a lawyer, and I could be wrong, so if you can give me examples of times a sale at a very-below-value price has been deemed void, please do.

If not, you're not "skirting" any law. The law wants you to not own a .50 cal rifle. You don't, you sold it to someone else. Do you somehow think giving the rifle away would also be skirting the law? If he were to give it to his hypothetical out-of-state son, knowing full well his son would let him shoot it/give it back as possible, would that be "skirting the law?"

Let me ask you this: if I sold you a $5,000 cigar for $1 free and clear, then you subsequently smoked the cigar, do you suppose I could take you to court for damaging my property? I've got the sneaking suspicion I would be laughed out of the court room. The only possible claim I could make is that the sale represented a contract, and contracts must include comparable losses to both parties to be valid. But I'd also have to demonstrate that I was somehow coerced, or ignorant of the rifle's true value, or had otherwise been hoodwinked to make that stick.

Besides, I believe (though not completely, I welcome correction on this if I'm wrong) that a sale of property is specifically not a contract for legal purposes, so the equal losses wouldn't apply. But that's based on a business law course I took in '98, so I could be wrong.
 
Yeah, best thing to do is sell it or find someplace to store it. Sounds like a business opportunity for someone in Texas or Arizona--storing guns that have been restricted elsewhere.
Click to expand...

I can think of two such places here in NV that store "illegal" weapons for CA residents.

*When I say illegal, I mean not legal to possess in CA. Everything is legal in NV.*

Nevada Pistol Academy 702-897-1100
Impact Indoor: 775-359-5599

both places will store firearms for unlucky folks in CA. Don't see why it would be a problem for a Mass resident. Give em a call.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
Who in California stores their EBR's out of state?
Replies
8
Views
767
tex_n_cal
T
D
  • Locked
Fellow New Jerseans...question about state AWB
Replies
2
Views
778
Dbl0Kevin
D
G
  • Locked
NY Ban / Moving
Replies
5
Views
414
GiorgioG
G
G
  • Locked
Are only pistols banned in the uk or rifles,too?
Replies
6
Views
559
Calibre44
C
F
  • Locked
Doing business with the enemy.
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
9mmepiphany
9mmepiphany
Back
Top