Go Back  The Hull Truth - Boating and Fishing Forum > BOATING FORUMS > Dockside Chat
Reload this Page >

MA State to pass new gun law today.

Notices

MA State to pass new gun law today.

Old 07-20-2016, 09:19 AM
  #1  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 9,189
Default MA State to pass new gun law today.

Please keep this clean to keep it from the bilge.

This is more indepth and detailed vs recent gun laws. This truly does take away your guns and ability to buy them/give them to your children.







Orlando. Baton Rouge. Falcon Heights. Dallas. Baton Rouge again.

Five horrific headlines in five weeks. Each story unique in its circumstances, but bound by a common thread: human lives taken by a gun.

There are myriad issues underlying each of these tragedies: fear, racism, mistrust, hate. These are critical issues that we, as a country, have an obligation to honestly and forthrightly address. And they’re issues my office is working hard to tackle alongside our partners in the community, in law enforcement, and in government.

But there’s one issue that can be addressed right now — the proliferation of guns, particularly assault weapons.

Here in Massachusetts, 10,000 assault weapons were sold just in the last year — each one nearly identical to the rifle used to gun down 49 innocent people in Orlando. In the week after the Pulse nightclub massacre, sales of weapons strikingly similar to the Sig Sauer MCX used at Pulse jumped as high as 450 percent over the previous week — just in Massachusetts.

It’s no surprise the Orlando killer chose an AR-15 style assault rifle. It’s a weapon of war, originally created for combat, and designed to kill many people in a short amount of time with incredible accuracy. It’s in the same category as weapons chosen by killers in Newtown, Aurora, and San Bernardino. These are not weapons of self-defense. They are weapons used to commit mass murder. And they have no business being in civilian hands.

How in Massachusetts, then, home to some of the strongest gun laws in the country, do we allow people to buy these guns?

The gun industry has found a way to exploit our laws, a loophole of potentially horrific proportions. And it’s time we act.

The Massachusetts assault weapons ban mirrors the federal ban Congress allowed to expire in 2004. It prohibits the sale of specific weapons like the Colt AR-15 and AK-47 and explicitly bans “copies or duplicates” of those weapons. But gun manufacturers have taken it upon themselves to define what a “copy” or “duplicate” weapon is. They market “state compliant” copycat versions of their assault weapons to Massachusetts buyers. They sell guns without a flash suppressor or folding or telescoping stock, for example, small tweaks that do nothing to limit the lethalness of the weapon.

That will end now. On Wednesday, we are sending a directive to all gun manufacturers and dealers that makes clear that the sale of these copycat assault weapons is illegal in Massachusetts. With this directive, we will ensure we get the full protection intended when lawmakers enacted our assault weapons ban, not the watered-down version of those protections offered by gun manufacturers.

The directive specifically outlines two tests to determine what constitutes a “copy” or “duplicate” of a prohibited weapon. If a gun’s operating system is essentially the same as that of a banned weapon, or if the gun has components that are interchangeable with those of a banned weapon, it’s a “copy” or “duplicate,” and it is illegal. Assault weapons prohibited under our laws cannot be altered in any way to make their sale or possession legal in Massachusetts.

We recognize that most residents who purchased these guns in the past believed they were doing so legally, so this directive will not apply to possession of guns purchased before Wednesday. In the dozen years since the federal assault weapons ban lapsed, only seven states have instituted their own assault weapons ban. Many of those bans have been challenged (unsuccessfully) by the gun industry, and we anticipate our directive may be too. But our job is to enforce state laws and to keep people safe. This directive does both.

In the face of utter inaction by Congress, states have a duty to enact and enforce laws that protect people from gun violence. If Washington won’t use its power to get these guns off our streets, we will. Not only do we have the legal authority to do so, we have a moral obligation to do so.

Maura Healey is the attorney general of Massachusetts.
captbone is offline  
Old 07-20-2016, 09:51 AM
  #2  
Senior MemberCaptains Club MemberPLEDGER
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location:
Posts: 6,935
Default

Why would anyone want to live in a state like that??? And don't say you're trapped unless you have a pic of the chain that's locked around your leg and attached to a telephone pole.....
Bailey Boat is offline  
Old 07-20-2016, 09:56 AM
  #3  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 9,189
Default

This law is game changing in many ways.

"The directive specifically outlines two tests to determine what constitutes a “copy” or “duplicate” of a prohibited weapon. If a gun’s operating system is essentially the same as that of a banned weapon, or if the gun has components that are interchangeable with those of a banned weapon, it’s a “copy” or “duplicate,” and it is illegal. Assault weapons prohibited under our laws cannot be altered in any way to make their sale or possession legal in Massachusetts. "

It will affect many semi auto rifles. The other problem is cancer like this spreads to other states as people move and retire.
captbone is offline  
Old 07-20-2016, 10:19 AM
  #4  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 846
Default

It's truly a crackpot approach. A company can manufacture a semi-auto with the nearly identical characteristics to many of these banned guns but never create a version with the banned features to sell elsewhere, and still sell it in MA. What is it they think they are accomplishing?

If I'm a gun maker, since there's a substantial market in nanny states, I design that gun and make the parts not interchangeable as required.

This is pure politics at its worst.
ronp364 is offline  
Old 07-20-2016, 10:25 AM
  #5  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Poquoson, VA - Manteo, NC
Posts: 790
Default

Holly crap.....

Hers the kicker language, "If a gun’s operating system is essentially the same as that of a banned weapon".

This maybe a stretch, but what's to say this dem. woman won't extend this to semi-auto shotguns? It obviously bans all semi-auto rifles, like my BAR .270.

This will be challenged and defeated as being to broad a directive...I hope.
pmichael is offline  
Old 07-20-2016, 10:30 AM
  #6  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Downtown Jax
Posts: 243
Default

Absurdity at its finest.

Hell, it was only a few months ago that SCOTUS basically told MA they're a bunch of massholes. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...n-gun-opinion/
mv rapscallion is offline  
Old 07-20-2016, 10:31 AM
  #7  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: SOUTHEAST LOUISIANA
Posts: 152
Default

Another lib. trying to force their will upon the law abiding citizens of this great nation. We had better pray to God that Hillary doesn't win this election. She wants total control over us. A sad day!
swampmanD is offline  
Old 07-20-2016, 10:33 AM
  #8  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 3,071
Default

Repealed due to vagueness. Upon S. Ct. review.

Aren't all guns operating systems essentially the same? They fire a round out of a chamber through a barrel.

She wants to ban guns that are like fully automatic weapons. This won't do it.
Locke N Load is offline  
Old 07-20-2016, 10:40 AM
  #9  
Senior Member
 
Jack F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cape Cod
Posts: 11,148
Default

Originally Posted by pmichael View Post
Holly crap.....

Hers the kicker language, "If a gun’s operating system is essentially the same as that of a banned weapon".

This maybe a stretch, but what's to say this dem. woman won't extend this to semi-auto shotguns? It obviously bans all semi-auto rifles, like my BAR .270.

This will be challenged and defeated as being to broad a directive...I hope.
I posted this story earlier today in the bilge because it is a political move.

That could be left open to interpretation as semi autos rifles
Jack F is offline  
Old 07-20-2016, 11:16 AM
  #10  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Raleigh/MHC
Posts: 1,598
Default

massholes are everywhere
clt_capt is offline  
Old 07-20-2016, 11:32 AM
  #11  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 1,044
Default

Who would this law be directed at??
castnet is offline  
Old 07-20-2016, 12:02 PM
  #12  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Raleigh/MHC
Posts: 1,598
Default

Originally Posted by Locke N Load View Post
Repealed due to vagueness. Upon S. Ct. review.

Aren't all guns operating systems essentially the same? They fire a round out of a chamber through a barrel.

She wants to ban guns that are like fully automatic weapons. This won't do it.
Pretty much all semi-auto and auto firearms use springs or gas to cycle the action , so this is a pretty broad and non-specific law - pretty much banning anything and everything not a single shot or revolver.

BUT the good news is that a gatling gun does not use a similar operating system, so it should be legal...
clt_capt is offline  
Old 07-20-2016, 12:06 PM
  #13  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Saugus, Ma. USA
Posts: 11,141
Default

New Hampshire says "Live Free or Die". In Mass, we say "Live Free or Here".
jobowker is offline  
Old 07-20-2016, 12:31 PM
  #14  
Senior MemberCaptains Club MemberPLEDGER
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location:
Posts: 6,935
Default

Originally Posted by castnet View Post
Who would this law be directed at??

Honest, law abiding citizens are the only ones that follow the law... But I'm afraid I'd draw the line here.....
Bailey Boat is offline  
Old 07-20-2016, 01:09 PM
  #15  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 5,096
Default

This fall is my 10 year anniversary of moving out of MA. It was such a difficult decision at that time.
bjm9818 is offline  
Old 07-22-2016, 05:50 AM
  #16  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Saugus, Ma. USA
Posts: 11,141
Default

It's not a law. It's coming from our AG, who like other despicable AG's that Massachusetts has had in the past, feel the need to overstep their bounds. When the the legislature won't pass additional absurd gun laws, the AG makes up his/her own rules.

Shelves were bare yesterday. Disgusting.
jobowker is offline  
Old 07-22-2016, 07:49 AM
  #17  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 359
Default

Originally Posted by bjm9818 View Post
This fall is my 10 year anniversary of moving out of MA. It was such a difficult decision at that time.
Ya know cause im sure Philly has super relaxed gun control laws these days
Capt.Bryan K is offline  
Old 07-22-2016, 10:35 AM
  #18  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 642
Default

The MA law is a continuation of the 1994 federal AWB, which expired for the rest of the nation in 2004.

In it is a clause that says that "duplicates" or "copies" of listed guns are also banned.

For the last 22 years this has been interpreted to mean that listed guns can't just be renamed and resold as something else, however, she took it upon herself to over-rule 22 years of precedent and say anything remotely similar or that shares functions is also a "copy"or duplicate.

This is an incredibly scary precedent, if her interpretation hold the legal bar, that would make around 400,000 potential felons in MA alone, as she never changed the law, just said "I deem that it means something different than everyone else has for 22 year, so you all broke the law".

Being an election year, I have no doubt this is a political stunt to gain attention and more worrisome, is likely some sort of test case for the Bloomberg-Clinton propoganda machine, I expect to see crap like this nation wide if Hillary gets elected. People need to take this kind of shit seriously and make sure that doesn't happen. I really hate trump, but he is the much lesser of two evils.

Being willing to declare that hundreds of thousand of people retroactively committed felonies and holding that over their head through selective prosecution should scare everyone. DON'T LET THESE PEOPLE TAKE OVER!
m2434 is offline  
Old 07-22-2016, 02:35 PM
  #19  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 9,189
Default

Originally Posted by m2434 View Post
The MA law is a continuation of the 1994 federal AWB, which expired for the rest of the nation in 2004.

In it is a clause that says that "duplicates" or "copies" of listed guns are also banned.

For the last 22 years this has been interpreted to mean that listed guns can't just be renamed and resold as something else, however, she took it upon herself to over-rule 22 years of precedent and say anything remotely similar or that shares functions is also a "copy"or duplicate.

This is an incredibly scary precedent, if her interpretation hold the legal bar, that would make around 400,000 potential felons in MA alone, as she never changed the law, just said "I deem that it means something different than everyone else has for 22 year, so you all broke the law".

Being an election year, I have no doubt this is a political stunt to gain attention and more worrisome, is likely some sort of test case for the Bloomberg-Clinton propoganda machine, I expect to see crap like this nation wide if Hillary gets elected. People need to take this kind of shit seriously and make sure that doesn't happen. I really hate trump, but he is the much lesser of two evils.

Being willing to declare that hundreds of thousand of people retroactively committed felonies and holding that over their head through selective prosecution should scare everyone. DON'T LET THESE PEOPLE TAKE OVER!

You hit the nail on the head. You could have bought a gun 11 years ago and as of Wednesday, it is now illegal and you are a felon.

This is a huge step against us. Many people say that states like MA, NY, CT, NJ, CO and CA are lost causes but these problems spread like cancer and one day will be issues for other states. Most NE people retire down south and bring their vote with them.
captbone is offline  
Old 07-22-2016, 03:10 PM
  #20  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
THT sponsor
 
Schmaltz~Herring's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Cruising Lake Titikacka On My 18' Bayliner Element With 60 HP Optimax's
Posts: 17,345
Default

This from the State that gave us Pokeahontz, aka Elizabeth Warren.
Schmaltz~Herring is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread