Massachusetts Ban: Revealing Unintended Consequences

mass

When the Attorney General of Massachusetts decided to reinterpret a two decade-old law, essentially banning the sale and transfer of most semiautomatic rifles in the Commonwealth, law-abiding citizens were made to feel like criminals overnight. Whereas Massachusetts currently has a law that essentially mirrors the now defunct Federal “Assault Weapons” ban that was in place from 1994 to 2004, modern sporting rifles could still be purchased as long as they met the law’s guidelines.

AG Healy’s decree turned the Massachusetts “Assault Weapons” ban from a law that prohibited certain firearm features, to an outright ban on nearly all semi-auto rifles. Items like flash hiders and collapsible stocks that were prohibited on rifles manufactured after a certain date were no longer the issue: now every rifle patterned after a gun on the states ban list was illegal, even if they possessed none of the features listed in the original law.

Since July 20th, organizations like Gun Owners Action League and the Commonwealth Second Amendment have lead the charge in the fight against the AG’s new interpretations – both in the legislature and in the courts.

Recently, a friend of TFB, a manufacturer who will remain nameless, stepped forward with some interesting information regarding repairs of currently held, legal AR15-patterned rifles. Specifically, this manufacturer was curious about the process to repair their rifles owned by citizens of Massachusetts prior to the AG’s cut off date. The manufacturer wrote:

When MA enacted their new definition that banned a bunch of stuff on July 20th, I contacted them regarding warranty repairs and replacement firearms.  We’ve seen issues with replacement firearms in NY & CT for items that got banned, and if a new serial number is required, we typically are not permitted to replace the firearm under the state law level.  So, on July 20th, I contacted the MA AG office with this email:

Hello,

My name is JOHN DOE and I am the compliance officer for ACME, a firearms manufacturer from ANYTOWN, USA.  As a manufacturer, we offer warranty service repairs to consumers who have purchased our firearms from gun dealers in your state.  Occasionally, a firearm will require replacement which involves a new receiver and a different or new serial number.  If a consumer owns one of the firearms that now fall under the copy/duplicates verbiage released by the AG today and we must destroy their receiver/serial number due to failure or under the guns warranty and replace it with a new serial number, is that permitted under this new policy?

Essentially consumer A purchased one of our AR-15 style firearms last year, so that firearm is grandfathered under the new policy per the statements released.  Next week, the consumer contacts us to send the firearm in for repair and when we review it, we discover that there is a defect in it that will require us to replace the gun under our warranty.  This will require transferring a new serial number from our A&D to a dealer who then must transfer the new serial number to the consumer.  Will warranty replacements be exempt from this new rule?  For your reference I have attached the warranty replacement policy offered by Maryland, which allows us to still provide warranty service to our customers there despite us not being able to have any new items in their state. 

Although we may disagree on these new regulations, ACME is committed to complying 100% with all Federal and State level laws.  We do respectfully ask you to consider some means of identifying a way for us to be able to continue to service our customers in your state in the event of a replacement firearm from the manufacturer under warranty.  It does and will happen.  With today’s announcement, we are putting a temporary hold on firearms being shipped into our facility from MA while we await clarification on how MA wishes manufacturers and consumers to handle warranty issues.  Until such information is provided, we will be referring consumers in MA who own our products to contact your office for guidance.

Thank you, I am sure you are receiving a lot of emails, but I hope to hear back from you soon.

A few days later, the large manufacturer received a response from the MA AG’s Office via a phone call:

The gentleman from the AG’s office told me that with the change to the definition of a copy, that a serial number not grandfathered prior to the effective date of the definition change cannot be transferred into the state.  So, if an AR is broken it cannot be replaced with a new AR.  He told me that the only option for us is to replace the firearm with something not banned in MA or to refund the customer.

The company representative explained to the MA AG’s office that, because of the way retail and distributor pricing works, a refund to the customer is not possible. In addition, since the manufacturer doesn’t produce a rifle that is Massachusetts compliant (no manufacturer offers such a product as far as we can tell) a replacement was not an option either. A few days later, the MA AG’s office called the manufacturer back with additional information:

The MA Attorney General’s office called me back today and let me know that they have taken our concern regarding warranty repairs and replacement of broken firearms under advisement and have updated their FAQ to indicate that weapons now tied to the enumerated list CAN be sent by MA residents to us for repair or replacement with a different serial number as long as the firearm was owned by the resident prior to July 20th, 2016. The FAQ can be found on this site:  http://www.mass.gov/ago/public-safety/awbe.html by scrolling down half way and clicking the Q&A button.  Here is the dialogue from the Q&A:

Q: May I return a weapon covered by the Enforcement Notice to a manufacturer after July 20, 2016 for repairs or replacement under warranty?  Any may the manufacturer return it to me thereafter?

Yes. If you purchased the weapon prior to July 20, 2016 you may return the weapon to the manufacturer, who may then return it to you after repairs are complete.

I would call this a small victory, but allowing a MA resident to get a legally-owned rifle repaired should be a no-brainer. Still, thanks and gratitude should be given to that anonymous manufacturer for getting the FAQ changed and following through on behalf of the consumer.

The question remains: How many other unintended (intended?) consequences await Commonwealth gun owners in a law that was reinterpreted by one individual without warning or recourse?



Pete

LE – Science – OSINT.
On a mission to make all of my guns as quiet as possible.
Pete.M@staff.thefirearmblog.com


Advertisement

  • EzGoingKev

    MA gun owners need to start voting with their feet by leaving the state and taking their tax dollars with them.

    • MacK

      No… they need to start VOTING

      • cwp

        We are voting. We’re just badly outnumbered. It’s not that there’s a silent majority of gun owners in Massachusetts just sitting around doing nothing come election time; the majority either doesn’t oppose, or actually supports, this kind of nonsense.

      • EzGoingKev

        Yeah because that has been working out REALLY well there.

      • Larueminati

        You need a license to own a gun in mass… something like 13% of the total population has such license. We’re vastly outnumbered.

    • Joseph Goins

      Quit paying them to f^^k you…that’s what I did when I left Chicago.

  • Aurélien Morel

    That’s the issue when big pressure groups oppose any kind of law. You end up getting screwed over, because nobody is defending your side when the laws are being reviewed.

    I know it’s guns and no politics, but this has to be said: If you want laws to move in the right direction for everyone, you HAVE to be part of the discussion. That’s how democracy works, by people on opposite sides having a civil chat about what is to be done so everybody ends up happy.

  • cwp

    I don’t think these sorts of consequences were unintended at all. Healey’s interpretation was supposed to make life uncomfortable for gun owners, and it’s working as intended. No doubt the time between those two phone calls was spent consulting with attorneys who assured the AG’s office that even in Massachusetts, they’d lose the resulting lawsuit — that seems like the only plausible reason why they’d bother to reconsider.

  • Amplified Heat

    Victory? More like clear evidence of arbitrary and capricious enforcement. Just another illustration of how the AG makes her determinations up on the fly, without regard to precedent or consequence. It was clear this returns situation was a stark legal vulnerability, so an ad hoc exception was added to avoid it.

    How is it reasonable to ban an entire class of technology on the basis of safety, and yet allow individual examples back in so as to avoid minor fifth amendment issues? We can’t replace our registered machineguns if they break, after all.

    • datimes

      A rely from the AG: We have finally taught those reprehensible gun owners a lesson. Please pass the foie gras and Ill have another glass of that delightful new Merlot.

  • Ambassador Vader

    Translation “Lol we can change the law whenever we feel like it. Deal with it.”

    • QuadGMoto

      “I am altering the deal. Pray I do not alter it further.”

      • dean jones

        If you are trying to win the internet you have my vote.

      • Ken

        Vae victis!

        • Oh in Latin

          • Ken

            Yep, when the Romans were paying the Gauls to leave Rome and complained that the weights on the scale were unfair, Brennus threw his sword onto the scale and said “woe to the conquered.”

      • SP mclaughlin

        YOU WILL JOIN ME OR DIE

      • Michael silva

        Good old robot chicken,and star wars spoof,love it man

  • Joe

    With an AR-15 it should be serviceable down to the bare bones lower. That will thankfully extend the life for a considerable time over other guns on the list unless something catastrophic happens to the lower.

  • datimes

    As a gun owner the elitists in government who enact this garbage could care less about such trifles. You own the unintended consequences because you have chosen to manufacture an evil object. They likely would enjoy seeing you go bankrupt and out of business.

  • TheNotoriousIUD

    The upside is that maybe Ben Affleck wont make anymore horrible bank robber movies set in Boston.

    • Cory C

      You take that back!

      • TheNotoriousIUD

        No way.
        We have reached “peak Affleck”.

        • KestrelBike

          I hate him as Batman. Batman isn’t a leftist stooge.

          • TheNotoriousIUD

            Yeah, him and his dipsh-t buddy Matt Damon who is perfectly willing to glorify a cartoonish robotic killing machine (Jason Bourne) when somebody pulls a dump truck full of money up to his front door.
            These idiots get to hide in their fortified mansions with around the clock armed security but us serfs arent responsible enough to defend ourselves.

  • Rock or Something

    “New England, you’re going back to Old England!”

    -Duke Phillip’s presidential campaign promise

  • Joel

    Recall the final words of the enforcement notice. They tell you what you need to know.

    “The AGO reserves the right to alter or amend this guidance.”

  • Larueminati

    The AG’s response says yes, you can send in for repairs but has no mention what happens if a new serial number is needed. I literally just had this happen, company wanted to replace my lower but couldn’t because the new one needed a new serial number. My dealer told me no way he can transfer in a new replacement. They ended up having to give me a BLEM discount instead.

  • tyrannyofevilmen

    Obviously, the gun owners in Massachusetts don’t really care, otherwise we would have daily reports on the news regarding the progress of the revolution.

    • dean jones

      Pretty clear that you don’t live here nor look for information on the rally the gun owners held at the state house. Since this is Mass the only way this may be changed will be through the courts.

      • tyrannyofevilmen

        Sure. Hold a rally!

        That’ll fix it. 😅

        That’s probably what the founders should’ve done instead.

        Hear Ye! Hear Ye! A rally shall be held in the public square to protest our tyrant King George III for his banning of arms! He won’t be there to hear it (The damn legislature wasn’t even in session when the rally you write of was held) but it will make us feel so much better and there will be cake and coffee. Bring the youngens!

        • Mancave Heywood

          Uhm you’re wrong bud as they were there except for the fuhrer healey, both days they were doing special sessions before they adjourned till later in the year!

          • tyrannyofevilmen

            Uh-huh. So an emergency session of the legislature to right the wrong has been convenied, yes?

            Oh… I guess the peasants don’t rate above summer recess. I see!

            Nothing to see here… Move along, move along…

          • DC

            There are quite a few legislators on our side, likely the majority. Quite the change from past issues.

          • tyrannyofevilmen

            Clearly! 🙄

          • DC

            Legislative leadership blocked the bill.

        • Joseph Goins

          The only thing that the use of arms in Massachusetts will get is a constitutional amendment repealing the Second Amendment Don’t be stupid.

          • tyrannyofevilmen

            Of course you’re right. The puppet masters don’t even NEED to try to repeal it. That would be a constitutional process and therefore too HARD and too much trouble besides.

            So why do it?

            The ruling class seem to be doing a pretty good job getting what they want in MA without going that route.

            As Monty Python said “it’s GOOD to be the king!” – Or the queen, in this case.

          • I M Simpleton

            That would be Mel Brooks that said “its good to be da king.”

            And now for something completely different.

        • dean jones

          Ah, you are right. What we need is you to come down and show us how it’s done. I am sure you would be the first to send a round down range with your Molon Labe flag flapping in the breeze behind you, right tough guy? The internet freedom fighters are always good for a laugh.

          • tyrannyofevilmen

            Nope. I’m not dying for those comfortable slaves in Massachusetts.

            I think they should “turn them all in!”

            For the children!

          • dean jones

            So says all those who get called out. It’s alright Jules , we will try to do our best without you.

          • tyrannyofevilmen

            So far, so good! 😘

          • Cymond

            And if this happened in your state?

            My guess is you would “move to freedom” before ever starting a revolution.

      • Joseph Goins

        Correct me if I am wrong, but you do have a Republican governor. What does he say about this? Have there been any lawsuits filed yet?

        • DC

          “What does he say about this?”

          Pretty much nothing. He has expressed concerns about the potential for people who acted in good faith and been declared felons but not much more.

          Have there been any lawsuits filed yet?

          Not yet. Comm2A is no doubt working up a game plan with I hope all of the resources of national orgs at their disposal.

          • Joseph Goins

            How has anyone “acted in good faith and been declared felons but not much more”? Quit spewing garbage and go read up on Massachusetts law.

          • DC

            “go read up on Massachusetts law.”

            You should take up your own suggestion. The AG has declared all ‘copy cat’ firearms illegal. She has declared that they were ALWAYS illegal and that the only thing protecting us was her prosecutorial discretion with ZERO protection offered from local DAs.

            You have no idea what you are talking about.

          • Joseph Goins

            Yeah, I’m a legal historian specializing in American constitutional law with a Ph.D. from the University of Chicago. I think you should freshen up first.

          • DC

            So GOAL is wrong and you are right? That sure is interesting maybe you should call them?

            Pure fantasy.

          • Joseph Goins

            I didn’t say they were wrong. I said they were biased. #criticalreading

          • DC

            So should we score that as dodged the question?

          • DC

            Part of GOALs statement or are they not a reliable source?

            Literally overnight, a single government official has retroactively created hundreds of thousands of felons. One thing gun owners should be very clear about – there is no “grandfathering” under these new rules.

            While the AG has “graciously” stated that: “… not be applied to possession, ownership or transfer of an Assault weapon obtained prior to July 20, 2016.” It does not mean that she can’t change her mind tomorrow or that some other entity cannot use it against us, such as local licensing authorities that use the new rules to declare an applicant unsuitable for renewal.

            As a result of this chaos, many friendly public officials have offered to file emergency legislation that would offer permanent legal protection for the lawful gun owners who have purchased semi-automatic firearms. While we appreciate these genuine offers to protect our members, GOAL’s message to our government at this time is simple:

            We are not asking to be forgiven for crimes we did not commit!”

          • Joseph Goins

            GOAL is a biased source.

          • DC

            And you are not? Could you name a non-biased source that knows with any certainty what firearms are legal under the AGs decree?

            Have you called the AGs office to ask for definitions?

  • Sarig

    First an open letter to no-gun america, now this.

    How’s that whole “firearms not politics” you’ve got in the banner working out for you?

    • DIR911911 .

      how does clearing up the meaning of a law mean politics? that’s a consumer issue. as for the letter , assuming all gun owners are on one side or the other shows ignorance. these lines of distinction in regards to republicans and democrats are not nearly as clear as you might think. the majority of america find ourselves hopelessly mired somewhere quite distant from both sides of the raging lunacy we call politics here in america.

    • Pete – TFB Writer

      Yesterday’s opinion piece had zero to do with politics.

      Today, the actions of politicians directly effect firearms ownership rights of our readers. News.

      Politics in this context means not being partisan. No one here cares if a reader is republican, democrat, independent or otherwise.

  • Robert Silvers

    Obviously not unintended, and should be obvious that you cannot replace a receiver with a new serial number and expect the AG to approve. How can a new and different rifle be grandfathered under her terms? It is the rifle that is grandfathered, not the owner. Remember this is not law – this is her choice to grandfather.

    • raz-0

      Because if you look at what was done, her changes to the law does not target owners, but the sale and transfer of the firearms. She believes she can either win, or bankrupt businesses by pushing the regulatory side of the law. She doesn’t appear to think she can prevail if she interfere’s with people who already own the firearms.

      What she wanted to do was tell the company to cough up money and go bankrupt. She can’t force them to. By them saying no, if she said it could not be returned to them, it would then push the state down the path of having to deal with the taking clause, which would mean that her bullshit would start costing real money to the state.

      • guest

        You appear to believe that the AG is choosing whether to push on one side or push on the other. I expect a full court press by every means available to her, in the coming few years.

        I expect her to “reinterpret” the ban again to say all handguns are illegal, ex post facto, because handguns are “assault weapons” too.

        I expect bolt-action hunting rifles with optical sights to be renamed “baby seeking deadly sniper weapons of war that have no place on Massachusetts streets.”

        I expect .22 caliber firearms used for training and teaching children to shoot to be labeled “child soldier firearms used to perpetuate the systemic violence of the racist gun culture.”

        And on, and on, and on. Everything but BB guns and air rifles will be declared contraband, and then those too. And remember that no one can sue the state, even under the takings clause, if they declare sovereign immunity, which they will.

        There is no truce with people like this, and they are systematically closing off every possible method of legal recourse. If you think this isn’t all carefully planned and intentional, you need to think some more.

  • kit

    What if someone dies? How do you transfer their gun to someone who is, you know, alive?

    • DC

      You don’t.

      • Joseph Goins

        Not been tested yet in Massachusetts. All property (assuming you are married, legal partners, etc.) is jointly owned regardless of whose name was on the background check. It should go to your significant other.

        • DC

          Good luck with getting an FFL to make that transfer. Never gonna happen.

          • Joseph Goins

            Thus the problem lies in the Massachusetts gun culture and it’s lack of concern. If they organized like the BLM, they’d be in good shape.

          • DC

            Yes, because an organized culture will result in FFLs willing to lose their business for a transfer. What world are you living in? No FFL in the state is going to risk their livelihood for that.

          • Joseph Goins

            Criminal court is the best place to try this. It gets the ball rolling since no one has bothered to filed suit yet. Moreover, it forces the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it’s new interpretation of the law is valid.

            The guidance she issued has no legal bearing as she has no authority to create definitions under the law. All her office stated is that her office will pursue people who violate the wording they use. The government then has to prove that the OAG’s definition is legitimate (which it is not) and the person broke the law using the OAG’s definition. What she did is scare dealers from selling based on the threat of 1) a criminal investigation, 2) criminal prosecution, 3) imprisonment, and 4) loss of occupational license (thus income).

          • DC

            “Criminal court is the best place to try this”

            Yea, eff the poor sod who gets his life ruined by the process.

    • Klaus Von Schmitto

      Sounds like an outstanding reason to have a trust.

  • Richard D. Buccelli

    So here’s a question for u I purchased a AR 15 on 7-20-16 so does this new verbiage include us 2700 AR 15 and AK 47 rifles for a repair/replacement that were sold on that day or are we sh.t out of luck ???????

    • DC

      As seems to be the common answer WRT this action, nobody knows.

    • Joseph Goins

      You can move. New Hampshire would love to have you.

  • Joseph Goins

    Another unintended consequence comes from the two part test of whether or not a gun qualifies as a “copy” or “duplicate.” The Attorney General wrote: “if the gun has components that are interchangeable with those of a banned weapon…it is illegal.” What does she consider to be a “component”? Roll pins, washers, screws, springs, and detents are common parts on almost all guns (and machines, in general). Any bolt gun with a threaded barrel (with the right dimensions) can accept flash hiders, compensators, and muzzle brakes that can fit on the “banned weapons.” Will those be banned as duplicates?

    Granted: this could be me reading into something that was never intended.

    ————————————————————————————————————-

    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.

    From Maura Healey, “The Loophole in the Mass. Assault Weapons Ban,” The Boston Globe.

    • DC

      Oh wow! You see the light!

      The statement was vague for a reason. The AG would prefer nobody knows what is legal.

      • Joseph Goins

        This is obvious satire that was apparently lost on you, a conspiracy theorist.

        • DC

          I am a conspiracy theorist because I am pointing out in the current state of things nobody knows what is legal in MA under the AGs new interpretations?

          Call the AG and ask for yourself! The Tavor shares a similair operating system to the AK, is it therefore banned? NOBODY KNOWS!

        • DC

          Also, flagged.

        • DC

          How about the Troy PAR? Legal? Illegal? NOBODY KNOWS

    • nadnerbus

      You know, California had originally banned all AR and AK type rifles completely, but it was overturned by the courts, even in CALIFORNIA, as unconstitutionally vague.

      This is FAR more vague on its wording, and doesn’t even have the benefit of being duly passed into law by the elected legislature.

  • i_the_jury

    To the people outside of MA – this is coming your way. This has been designed to make its way to the courts(why the MA legislature leadership refused to allow emergency legislation ending this nonsense to reach the floor for a vote this past weekend dispite having bipartisan support), and if Hillary is elected and gets to assign even more activist judges – you too will not be allowed to buy/sell/transfer “copies or duplicates” soon.

    The NRA could care less(except to increase their donation calls/letters), the gun owners outside of MA(and CA, CO, CT etc) don’t care cause “as long as I got mine”. Donations to GOAL and Comm2A should be flooding in from all over the country, but most are too busy filing for another NFA stamp so they can take pictures and post them on social media. It’s embarrassing, and it’s what they are counting on.

    They are coming for you soon.

    • DC

      GOAL while being a solid ORG should be secondary to Comm2A.

    • Joseph Goins

      You are dead ass wrong about To the people outside of MA – this is coming your way…you too will not be allowed to buy/sell/transfer “copies or duplicates” soon.

      1) There is no longer a federal ban. Therefore, any legal action taken about Massachusetts’ ban would not apply to the country as a whole.

      2) The wording in other banned states is different than the wording in Massachusetts. Therefore, any legal action taken about Massachusetts’ ban would not apply to any other state than Massachusetts.

      • DC

        If we lose in court in MA it opens up the door to a federal ban, it opens up the SEE it is constitutional argument. There was a fed ban once, there could be one once again. The best opportunity to kill that ban, is right now and it is in MA.

        • Joseph Goins

          I am disputing the gloom and doom when you say this is coming your way soon and what not. Just because one state bans AR-15 and state-compliant variants (you can still buy Tavors, Sig MCXs, etc.) does not mean that a federal ban is looming. Congress can’t pass a budget. What makes you think they will pass gun legislation?

          Remember TFB’s motto, “guns, not politics.” This isn’t an appropriate forum for this discussion.

          • DC

            “(you can still buy Tavors, Sig MCXs, etc.)” Do me a favor, call the MA AGs office and see if they confirm that. Per the AGs office guns that share the same ‘operating system’ are banned, that may mean all semi auto firearms in the state. Nobody knows what is legal at the moment.

            The best opportunity to kill any future ban is right here right now via the courts. EVERY gun rights advocacy group should have its eyes on MA.

          • Joseph Goins

            What do you mean nobody knows what is legal at the moment? Do they not know how to read English? It is exactly the same as the Clinton ban and it is clearly available on the OAG’s website: http://www . mass . gov/ago/public-safety/awbe.html

            As for the Massachusetts definition of assault weapon:

            1) these specifically banned designs “but not…limited to, any of the weapons, or copies or duplicates of the weapons, of any caliber”:
            —- Avtomat Kalashnikov (AK) (all models)
            —- Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil
            —- Beretta Ar70 (SC-70)
            —- Colt AR-15
            —- Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR and FNC
            —- SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9 and M-12
            —- Steyr AUG
            —- INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22
            —- revolving cylinder shotguns

            2) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of the following:
            —- a folding or telescoping stock;
            —- a pistol grip
            —- a bayonet mount;
            —- a flash suppressor
            —- threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor
            —- a grenade launcher

            3) a semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of the following:
            —- a magazine that doesn’t go in the grip
            —- a threaded barrel capable of accepting attachments
            —- a forward handguard that allows you to grab around the barrel
            —- an unloaded weight of 50 ounces
            —- a semiautomatic version of an fully automatic firearm

            4) a semiautomatic shotgun that has at least 2 of the following:
            —- a folding or telescoping stock;
            —- a pistol grip
            —- a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds
            —- an ability to accept a detachable magazine

            The only thing that the AG did was define what constitutes “copies or duplicates of the weapons” of the enumerated weapons. To do so, she created a two part test consisting of the following:

            —-Similarity Test: A weapon is a Copy or Duplicate if its internal functional components are substantially similar in construction and configuration to those of an Enumerated Weapon. Under this test, a weapon is a Copy or Duplicate, for example, if the operating system and firing mechanism of the weapon are based on or otherwise substantially similar to one of the Enumerated Weapons.

            —-Interchangeability Test: A weapon is a Copy or Duplicate if it has a receiver that is the same as or interchangeable with the receiver of an Enumerated Weapon. A receiver will be treated as the same as or interchangeable with the receiver on an Enumerated Weapon if it includes or accepts two or more operating components that are the same as or interchangeable with those of an Enumerated Weapon. Such operating components may include, but are not limited to: 1) the trigger assembly; 2) the bolt carrier or bolt carrier group; 3) the charging handle; 4) the extractor or extractor assembly; or 5) the magazine port.

            The guidance she issued has no legal bearing as she has no authority to create definitions under the law. All her office stated is that her office will pursue people who violate the wording they use. The government then has to prove that the OAG’s definition is legitimate (which it is not) and the person broke the law using the OAG’s definition. What she did is scare dealers from selling based on the threat of 1) a criminal investigation, 2) criminal prosecution, 3) imprisonment, and 4) loss of occupational license (thus income).

          • DC

            The Clinton ban has never been interpreted the way the MA AG is. The MA ag has declared that if the firearms share an ‘operating sytem’ with a named ban firearm they are illegal, features be damned. Again, you have no idea what is going on here in the ground in MA.

          • DC

            Define an operating system for all of us. Is it gas impingement, blow back etc? If so pretty much every semi auto firearm is illegal in MA. Of course the AG refuses to define her new term and thus nobody knows what is legal.

            You have quite literally no idea what you are talking about.

          • Joseph Goins

            By default, it cannot mean that all semiautomatics are banned. Get your head out of your ass.

            If you do live in Massachusetts (as you imply), why are you just shooting off angry posts on gun forums? Get yourself an attorney and sue the state or shut the hell up because you aren’t doing anything positive.

          • DC

            ” Get yourself an attorney and sue the state or shut the hell up because you aren’t doing anything positive.”

            This is atrocious advice. Overzealous attorneys have wrecked opportunities before. This is a fight for Comm2A and national orgs. I am a standing member of Comm2A, that is how I will make a difference.

            “By default, it cannot mean that all semiautomatics are banned.”

            Why is that? The AK operates by oprod, the Tavor does. Does that mean they share the same operating system and are therefore banned?

            Without definitions on these terms NOBODY has any authority to state anything is legal.

          • DC

            While you are the horn with the MA AGs office ask them what an operating system is. Perhaps you will get an answer, but I doubt it.

          • OBlamo Binlyen

            Dispute all you want, this nonsense is happening in Kommieforniastan, in spades.

            This coming election isn’t about fences, ISIS, the Economy, it’s about the Supreme Court and the salvation of or the destruction of our Constitution and Rights. IMHO the rest beyond that is gravy

          • jay

            Have you looked at anything going on in kalifornia, at all?

          • Joseph Goins

            There is no proof _this is coming your way soon_ to the 40 states that don’t have assault weapon bans. I have always said that the “compliant weapons” were not legal under those bans as they are copies of enumerated weapons. (I have also said that the bans themselves were unlawful.)

          • jay

            ??? It’s already in my state. The law makers are already making gun control laws. All we need is for the inclusion of clones or similar operating systems to be added.

          • Joseph Goins

            What state is that?

          • jay

            See my previous post.

      • i_the_jury

        I was thinking bigger picture, not being specific about MA —> US. This “reinterpretation” if allowed to stand would apply to anyone who bought “copies/duplicates” during 94-04, because the MA ban is based on federal ban.

        But obviously that situation is unlikely. What’s more likely is that other states will take a similar approach. And think of Hillary’s cabinet featuring the woman who “stood up to the NRA and didn’t back down”, US AG Maura Healy. The executive actions, the reinterpretations of federal laws, all with a Supreme Court ready to back them up.

        • Joseph Goins

          To me, Healey did this to be on Hillary’s cabinet or be a Supreme Court nominee. However, she has already stated that she would not go after people who bought the “copies” in good faith.

          • DC

            That statement is not worth the paper it is written on.

            Local DAs are under no such restraint. Her next sentence in not going after people? “reserve the right to change this guidance” lmfao. Some protection.

            Again, you are operating in la la land.

          • Joseph Goins

            I’d rather be in LaLaLand than Yeager-ville.

          • DC

            The protection only exists in your own mind. GOAL concurs with this opinion. The AG holds zero authority to stop a DA from pressing charges /investigations based on the FA10 system.

            Call the MA AGs office. Ask if a 1911 is legal in MA. Let me know how that goes. I tried, no answer.

            “The AGO reserves the right to alter or amend this guidance.”

            “The AGO reserves the right to alter or amend this guidance.”

            “The AGO reserves the right to alter or amend this guidance.”

            “The AGO reserves the right to alter or amend this guidance.”

            “The AGO reserves the right to alter or amend this guidance.”

    • Aldo1887

      California is screwed like you wouldn’t believe, but I still tell folks from out of state the same thing you are saying, you won’t be able to hide behind “that’s why I moved out of California” because this insanity will be coming to you, if you don’t fight it hard NOW. Join every organization you possibly can, NRA is a MUST, even if you don’t like them, hold your nose and join, at the very least to get the NRA-ILA newsletters. GOA is a MUST, they are no-compromise bulldogs. From then just google gun owners organizations and start sending them money. The cost of a box of ammo is often more than an annual membership and waaaaay more worth it. JOIN!!

  • Anna Nicole

    So anyone who purchased ON 7/20/16 that has a problem with their weapon is screwed. Despite the weapon still being under warranty.

    • Joseph Goins

      Hope you bought quality.

    • DC

      Probably.

  • garymac66

    And in a just and perfect world, the AG of the United States would send federal agents into MA and arrest everybody who is or is conspiring to violate the constitution. But alas, that ain’t gonna happen as long as we keep electing the same type people over and over. We ultimately get what we deserve.

  • Todd

    Hopefully, the manufacturers will stop selling prohibited weapons to police in MA.

    • DC

      FFLs are prohibited from transferring ARs , among all(?) other semi auto firearms. There is no LEO exception written into the AGs decree.

      • Joseph Goins

        Why don’t you take a minute to stop spreading outright lies and start reading up on what upsets you?

        From the OAG’s website (http://www . mass . gov/ago/public-safety/awbe.html):

        Q: I am a law enforcement officer. Does the notice affect me?

        A: No. The notice does not change the law with respect to ownership of Assault weapons by law enforcement officers. Your existing right to buy and possess Assault weapons remains protected under Massachusetts law.

        • DC

          Could you point out where it allows FFLs to transfer them? FFLs have specifically been told they cannot transfer ANY ARs.

          Again, educate yourself on what is going on here in MA.

        • The legal ability of a customer to buy is not the same thing as the legal ability of a vendor to sell; there’s a long and sordid history of using this sort of tactic to deny Constitutional rights through state/local ordinance fiat without benefit of any representative due process. Chicago is famous for rewriting zoning and platting laws to drive out gun shops.

          How many gun owners looked the other way while the right wing used exactly this sort of tactic to deny equal rights to women by writing state laws and local codes to make reproductive health care clinics impossible to legally operate? Did anyone really think the left wing wasn’t going to notice the effectiveness of the tactic and start using it to deprive us of our 2nd Amendment right to defend ourselves? If they can take rights away from any of us, they can take rights away from all of us.

    • Joseph Goins

      And move out in protest.

    • Andrew Miller

      I’ll hold my breath on that one.
      Smith and Wesson for one….
      So much for me buying a “new” J Frame, I’ll have to make due with the one I have.

    • Jason Wallentine

      Yes! What would it take for S&W to step up to that deal and put rights over dollars until there’s a change? Doubt the whole industry would stick together on it, but if the PDs started getting forced to use HiPoints, lawmakers may reconsider…

  • gunsandrockets

    Is it even possible anymore to tell what is still legal in Massachusetts?

    • DC

      Nobody knows with any real certainty. The Tavor like the AK operates via a piston, is it therefore banned? The 1911 operates by blow-back, like the Mac 10. Is it therefore banned? Nobody, not even the head of the Executive Office of Public Safety knows.

      “Bennett, who heads the Executive Office of Public Safety, added: “Depending on how your office is interpreting the two-part test you have articulated for determining whether something is a ‘copy or duplicate’ of a listed assault weapon, a large number of firearms, including pistols that have been sold here legally for decades, may be unintentionally affected.”

      • Cymond

        Sorry to nitpick, but the 1911 operates by short recoil with a tilting barrel.

        Regardless, your point is valid.

  • Kivaari

    Notice the AG said THE firearm can be returned, not that a replacement can be sent.

  • RICH

    AG Healey needs to be ‘recalled, replaced or removed from office’……. immediately ! ! What she has done to the ‘law abiding citizens’ of Massachusetts is a travesty in the law itself ! She will be sued, she will loose, and the taxpayers (state) will pay out a large sum of money for her ‘misdeeds’! ! When this is over and done with the state should hold her ‘accountable’ for her ‘LEGAL MISTAKES’ ! ! IMHO….!

  • D

    The FAQ didn’t mention anything about new serial numbers….

  • Shinypartsup

    I want S&W to move to a pro-2A state. Will they? That is up to them. But I’m not going to support them with my dollars if it means some of that money goes into Massachusetts coffers. Unless I visit my family in Massachusetts, I will not return for the same reason.

  • Fox Hunter

    It is not surprise that one of the most sodomite friendly states is also one of the most anti-gun, liberalism is a mental illness, when you don’t worship the one True God, you will worship anything , whether its anti gun nonsense or the satanic sodomite movement

  • Pontificant

    Hawaii, New York, Connecticut, California, Massachusetts…

    …battle lines are starting to form, Folks.

  • guywb

    This only PROVES that the AG is “Making it up as she goes”. She is Violating her Oath of Office and the U.S. Constitution. She DOES NOT have the authority to create law from whole cloth. THAT is the JOB of the Legislature. The ONLY REASON those COWARDS did not take it up is that the entire Senate is up for reelection. Think about it.

  • Also remember, that people who vote with their feet get two other votes. When the next census comes and congressional maps are redrawn, the blue statist states lose seats in D.C and lose votes in the electoral college.

  • Repoman3737

    2 other problems are 1 you can’t sell your legally owned AR to another mass resident. It should be transferable once it’s grandfathered in. 2 if your AR is stolen you are screwed… no replacing it.

  • Captive in MA

    Just another example of the AG doing what ever they want with no regard to the law or EVEN THEIR OWN POLICIES!!!! I sent a G21 to Glock for repair under their lifetime warranty. THey sent it back with everything rebuilt but with the old cracked frame not replaced. They actually apologized but explained that they had a letter from the MA AG explaining that replacing the serial numbered frame constituted a new sale of a banned weapon and they could not do it.

  • Kafir1911

    Just remember, the Obama-Clinton supporters elected the rulers of Massachusetts. Keep voting Democrat to destroy freedom.

  • Peacefull1

    Resistance is futile you will become one with my laws.

  • Ronald Hollowell

    Meet at the North Bridge.

  • El Rico

    Cannot understand why those who transgress the US Constitution are not prosecuted ??

  • Jay Leonard

    Another BIG SURPRISE from a moron politician in Massachusetts!!!

  • supergun

    Either the citizens have allowed this BS or the system is RIGGED.

    • Max Glazer

      It has been rigged for a VERY long time. You only just noticed? American citizens are being slowly stripped off their rights, their “elected representatives” are neither representatives nor are they elected freely, your original constitution is being spat on and being used as a door mat by those in power, police is their zombie soldiers that enforce unconstitutional laws by force up to and including outright murder and other illegal tactics. Having a squeeze put on guns has a VERY clear objective: make it impossible to do what the second amendment was designed to enable American citizenry to do, and that is fight and overthrow tyrannical government.

      • supergun

        I kinda figured it was rigged. I just did not know how deep the corruption was. Looks like most of them are about as crooked as you can get. They not only have trampled on the Constitution, destroyed most of the Country, and are smiling about it. Look what he has done the last 8 years.

    • Democrats: Just Lies & Hate

      The former.

      • supergun

        It is like a cancer. Once it starts to spread, it become untreatable.

  • 33Charlemagne

    People will comply with laws or regulations to a point but when they become too onerous they will do everything they can to avoid them rather than comply. One need only look at the infamous 55 mph speed limit of the 1970s as an example. This drastic drop in the speed limit fueled a major expansion in the markets for radar detectors and CB radios by those who sought to avoid the new limit. I expect that a lot of those who were ready to buy compliant guns in the past will just get what they want form out of state friends and relatives.

  • Walt Mather

    Theory.

    Maybe it’s not really about guns specifically (although mitigating them is an essential goal) but rather about control of the masses. Across the land there seems a consorted effort to stir up malcontent, get people angry at government and with each other.

    Could secret agreements with outside entities require certain actions by our government against it’s citizens? Maybe time’s running out.

    Who knows, maybe the’re worried about the outcome of this election. Whatever, things seem to be going south fast.

  • Core

    I can’t help but think that the AG is like the head-hunting minute men of the Indian Wars. Sent to purify the savages. But it’s no longer scalps, they’re coming for our guns. They massacred men, women, and children, and buried their bodies in huge piles. Then they erased the details from the history books. Let’s not allow the liberal ideology to gain momentum, because indifference and inaction is the worst of all evils. I can see fascism on the horizon for Massachusetts, and the tyrant sitting in the AG’s office.

  • Eric Blatter

    I’m just curious of how many manufacturers will leave the state of Massachusetts and whether anyone has filed suite for this illegal and unconstitutional interpretation of existing law. And it is the states AG “making law.” Seems a good example of either a re-call election or charges of malfeasance should be levelled and impeachment procedures started.

  • Old Vet

    The Global Cabal is smelling blood in the water with Clinton running. She will be one of the worst people on the planet for the 2nd AD, besides her hero’s, Mao and Lenin.

  • silvestris

    And Massachusetts was the birthplace of the Sons of Liberty. How far we have fallen.

  • Aldo1887

    All of the gun companies supplying Law Enforcement need to stop selling, repairing, warranting firearms that are going to, or used in MA. I know the manufacturers make a lot of money from LEO’s, and I don’t wish any ill on Police, but in the long run, they all stand to lose a LOT more in the long run if these ridiculous utopian laws are allowed to run amok. We need to make the folks that enforce the laws feel the pain and push back with us.

  • AD_Rtr_OS

    I would recommend that AG Healy not visit either Lexington or Concord –
    They Be Dragons There!

  • CountryBoy

    “allowing a MA resident to get a legally-owned rifle repaired should be a no-brainer”.

    Yes, it should be, but please remember with whom we’re dealing.

  • 5ini5ter

    Unfortunately hillary’s supreme court picks will cement these laws.

  • DaveGinOly

    “No State shall…pass any…Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts…”
    US Constitution, Art. I, sec. 10
    In other words, if a contract was legal at the time it was entered, it remains legal even if laws preventing such obligations is passed in the future. Existing legal contracts are “grandfathered.”

  • Mikial

    Bottom line for residents of states like Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York and California.

    MOVE!

  • The Brigadier

    Concerned groups should file for stay for the AGs decision first in the MA Supreme Court and then in a Federal Court. While the Supremes have ruled that the states can regulate certain things regarding the 2nd Amendment this is still an outright ban of a sporting rifle that is in violation of Miller vs. US in a 1931 stare decisis decision. The State of Massachusetts cannot violate the U.S. Constitution where the Supreme Court has already ruled.