Live free or there
The MA AG has released a list of what is not an assault weapon. I guess assume everything else is?
If you’re in MA, do you go by the letter of the law or by the interpretation of some lawyer?
21 Responses to “Live free or there”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
August 19th, 2016 at 5:46 pm
Or, go by the Natural Right of free men that answer to a holy, righteous, and just God and not the institutions of man.
August 19th, 2016 at 6:12 pm
I like how the Mini-14 and Mini-30 and M-1 Carbine are Totally Safe And Nice And OK.
Because logic and stuff.
(I mean, the whole idea of these bans is BS.
But if you’re gonna ban “Assault Weapons” and call the AR-15 one, but not ban the Mini-14, you prove yourself fundamentally un-serious even by the logic you’re proposing yourself …)
August 19th, 2016 at 6:49 pm
Five round limit? I knew Massachusetts was bad, but I did not know it was that bad.
August 19th, 2016 at 6:56 pm
“Any .22 caliber rifle.”
Nothing about rimfire. I guess that means AR-15s are A-OK.
August 19th, 2016 at 7:07 pm
“Any Ruger Mini 14 or substantially-similar model weapon;”
So the whole assault weapon issue has nothing to do with the actual capability of the rifle, it is just politics. Anything an AR-15 can do, a Ruger Mini 14 can do.
Got it. OK, will treat this as it deserves – with ridicule and scorn.
August 19th, 2016 at 7:58 pm
This list seems rather vague. There is no real set criteria for a citizen to know if the weapon they own is legal or not. I am guessing that this is a feature, and not a bug.
Still, it seems ripe for a court challenge.
August 19th, 2016 at 8:08 pm
The stupid, it burns.
August 19th, 2016 at 8:25 pm
She just rolled summon Alan Gura.
August 19th, 2016 at 8:52 pm
As divemedic said, the nebulous nature of the list is intentional, leaving everything open to interpretation…their interpretation.
Whose interpretation do you follow? The one(s) who can sign your warrant.
As I’ve said, this is a test case, model, microcosm, whatever you want to call it, for fedgov interpretations and enforcements to come…all by direct executive order and without all that bothersome legislative nonsense. Court challenge too will be a playbook for the scotus to come under the reign of the bitchbeast.
I would repeat the old joke, “live free or there”, but pretty soon it won’t matter where you are.
Will they come for your guns? No, at least not right away. But they can make you a criminal with the stroke of a pen and fuck you up good.
August 19th, 2016 at 10:01 pm
State attorney general opinions are binding interpretations of statutes, same as if they came from the state’s highest court.
August 19th, 2016 at 10:06 pm
Better even, when they’re in favor of a defendant, because they act as estoppel against the government in a prosecution. If an attorney general says your Uzi AR-47 Glock is illegal, you can still appeal to the state’s courts. If he says it’s legal, you cannot be prosecuted in the first place.
August 19th, 2016 at 10:25 pm
Don’t get me wrong, this stinks to high heaven. It’d be funny, how little she knows about firearms, were it not that she’s deadly serious about it.
On the flip side… I always wanted an excuse to buy a Mini-14. (You know, weapon of choice of the A-Team, and all that.) Since it’s not an “assault weapon” (yet!), I might as well…
August 19th, 2016 at 10:48 pm
“How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the Plain Meaning of Words.” –Samuel Adams This flagrant perversion of the law far beyond delegated powers to destroy the rights of the people by arbitrary government is criminal and treasonous.
August 19th, 2016 at 11:05 pm
I just revised my FAQ decree today banning FFLs from keeping inventory to sell even to LEOs. Special order only now even for you special smurfs.
Oh, I’m just giddy with power!
August 19th, 2016 at 11:23 pm
NK, you are referring to Massachusist only I suppose. In Tennessee the Attorney General opinion is just that, an opinion. While a highly persuasive opinion it has been found wrong many times. The attorney general here also has no power to prosecute an individual. A district attorney would and they cannot begin the process without a sworn warrant or arrest is made.
That said I would never want to live in antsy ate where an attorney general opinion is as binding as the supreme courts. There really isn’t how due process works. Much like this list of approved guns would be a violation of due process. Meh, in Hillary’s Amerika what difference does it make?
August 20th, 2016 at 12:34 am
Remember how $20 “pre-ban” mags went to $100?
Wonder what a mini-14 is worth today in Mass?
August 20th, 2016 at 8:25 am
Well said, Erik! And the SECRET, ARBITRARY “no fly list” is a flagrant violation of the 5th Amendment’s ” due process of law”. The supposed “liberals” who want to use it to selectively violate the 2nd Amendment have morphed into fascist authoritarians.
August 20th, 2016 at 11:17 am
Ron W, you are dead on about a do not fly list. You have a constitutional right to travel as well. I’m not sure how or why the list has been allowed to stand. I truthfully forgot about it till recently when the gun debate got brought up. I remember thinking when it happened that while I think Bush had good intentions, the next guy may not. Can anyone answer why a person can be a a do not fly list yet charter a plane to take them anywhere?
I wish conservatives would stop discouraging people from going to law school. We need conservative lawyers in every aspect of government and society we can get them. They don’t even need to get licensed, just go through the riggers of law school and they’ll forever have that lawyer mentality.
August 20th, 2016 at 11:38 am
@Erik, wen you say Bush had good intentions, perhaps, but it brought to mind this quote by a classical liberal, SCOTUS Justice, Louis Brandeus,
“The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in the insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding.”
You are correct, we need legal conservatives who want to CONSERVE the wording of ALL of the Bill of Rights and RESTRICT the government to its enumerated delegated powers. Speaking of Bush, the Dept of Homeland Security was also created during his tenure and it violates the 10th Amendment ! And re: delegated powers, the Federal Government has NO power re: gun laws EXCEPT for “such part of the (militia” in its EMPLOYED SERVICE. (Article I, Section 8.15-16) That is why the 2nd Amendment references “militia of a Free State”.
August 22nd, 2016 at 1:23 pm
@Erik,
Remember: The road to hell is PAVED with good intentions. May he and all “good intentioned” tyrants line the road with their impaled corpses!
August 22nd, 2016 at 5:19 pm
@ShallNOTBeInfringed, This reminds me of this quote where intentions are deemed necessary for ” the common good” or “public safety”, “common sense”, etc:
“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” –William Pitt