"They're Not Going to Take your Guns".: Massachusett's Rogue Attorney General Just Did.

Without any prior notice or public hearings, on Thursday morning, Massachusetts Attorney General, Maura Healey, issued an “Enforcement Notice” to firearm owners that she is unilaterally changing the longstanding definition of so-called “Assault Weapons”.

Healey has come up with her own definition of "assault weapon" which is not the same as the assault weapons ban that was specifically written under statute by Washington 22 years ago and adopted into law by the Massachusetts legislature 18 years ago. The state's assault weapons ban specifically defines such a weapon as a semiautomatic firearm with a certain set features:

a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of the following features--

(i) a folding or telescoping stock;
(ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon ;
(iii) a bayonet mount;
(iv) a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and
(v) a grenade launcher;

According to the law adopted by the Massachusetts legislature, an semi auto rifle is legal to own as long as it has a pinned stock, a pinned muzzle brake, and no grenade launcher or bayonet mount. If it does not have these features, it is not an assault weapon. Over ten thousand AR 15's have been sold in the last year and those that purchased them did so with the blessing of the state.

But no longer. According to attorney general Healey's new "reinterpretation" of the law, features don't matter...

"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."

Since virtually every semi-automatic that utilizes a detachable magazine has the same operating system or firing mechanism, the attorney general has, for all intents and purposes, banned all semi auto rifles in the commonwealth of Massachusetts.

"If a weapon is a copy or duplicate of one of the models enumerated in the law, it is an Assault weapon. But, as a matter of her discretion as a prosecutor, the Attorney General will not enforce the assault weapons ban against those who possess or transfer a copy or duplicate of a listed Assault weapon, if the weapon was obtained prior to July 20, 2016, when she issued the guidance."

The enforcement notice then ends with this statement.

"The AGO reserves the right to alter or amend this guidance"

As a result, attorney general has made it clear that so-called Assault Rifles made after 1998 have always been illegal and that it is merely her power of Prosecutorial Discretion that prevents prosecution at this time.The very last line of the direction letter speaks to the AGs discretion: "The AGO reserves the right to alter or amend this guidance."

Anyone in possession of one of the firearms in question has just been declared to be in violation of the state's assault weapons ban and is currently escaping arrest and prosecution only by the good grace and kindness of her office, though they may be prosecuted in the future. Healey has made felons, ex post facto, out of ​tens if not ​hundreds of thousands of Massachusetts citizens by re-defining what constitutes a prohibited firearm​. According to Healey everyone in the country has been misinterpreting this law for 22 years. This is purely an invented idea by the Attorney General and clearly an over-reach of her authority.

Less than 48 hours later, on Saturday morning, the people decided to exercise their 1st Amendment rights (while they still can) and joined in protest in front of the Massachusetts State House in Boston.

Law-making authority falls to the Massachusetts Legislature, not to the Attorney General. So, what do the elected legislators of Massachusetts have to say about this?

"As recently as 2014 we debated the state's gun laws, and to my best recollection this concern was not expressed by a single member in either branch during that debate or the previous sixteen years the Legislature debated this issue," -State Sen. Don Humason

"This is total BS. I'm working on it Total abuse of power and a political stunt." Rep. Shawn Dooley

"The Attorney General should not have changed this law without any sort of public process or input from gun owners. I learned of this change through the news this week and was not given any information prior to her press conference." -State Sen. Jennifer L. Flanagan

"I am 100% against this move by the Attorney General, and am completely committed to defending your 2nd amendment rights. We’re currently reviewing our options on this to figure out the best way we can stop this."- Rep. Jim Lyons

"I also just became aware of this and I agree that the AG is off base in these enforcements. I fully understand the complexities of our gun laws and will advocate on behalf of all law abiding sportsmen and gun owners." - State Sen. Michael J. Rodrigues

"Like you I am just learning about this abrupt change in interpretation. No advance notice was given and the legislature is in recess this week due to the RNC. My initial take is that a change so sweeping should not have been done without proper communication and public hearings, especially since this law has been on the books for I believe 18 years now." -Rep. Josh Cutler

"This action by the AG is more troubling as we understand the full impacts of it."-Rep. Stephen Kulik

"I was not pleased to hear of her announcement via the press without her consulting the Legislature as to the intent or parameters with which the AG’s authority falls in enforcing the decades old assault weapon ban in Massachusetts. I am hopeful that we can address those concerns in a manner and if there are to be any changes in our gun laws they should come from the Legislature and signed by the Governor." -Rep. Jim Dwyer

"I'm opposed to what the Attorney General is doing and I will oppose any attempts to further gun control in Massachusetts." -Rep. David DeCoste

"I was on the steps of that state house yesterday speaking out against the AG's actions. We're working on legislation now to over turn the AGs decision. I'm going to work hard on this." -Rep. Marc Lombardo

"I was certainly very upset and disappointed to read about the AG's declaration and even more so after reading her interpretation. I share your concerns. " Rep. Joseph McKenna

"We've been getting inundated with calls and emails like yours from a lot of people who are very concerned about the AG's move to re-interpret the AWB. For the record I'm entirely against this action and believe, as you do, that it is little more than political grandstanding. I'm working with a group of other State Representatives that feel as we do and we've written a letter to the AG requesting that she rescind her enforcement order." -Rep. Lenny Mirra

"Thank you for contacting me regarding the recent decision by Attorney General Maura Healey to unilaterally rule on the scope of the Assault Weapons Ban. Please know that I too was disappointed to learn of her actions, especially in light of the fact that she gave no notification to the Legislature in advance. We were informed of it through the media, and had numerous questions as to whether or not she followed protocols and more importantly, had the authority to take such action. Law abiding citizens should not find themselves in such a serious predicament between legality and illegality overnight." State Sen. Richard Ross

"Her actions establish a dangerous precedent." -Rep. Tom Calter

58 Legislators have signed the following letter to the attorney general objecting to her reinterpretation and asking her to rescind it.



drive.google.com...



Furthermore, legislation has already been filed in opposition of enforcement on what Healey has called "copycat" weapons as "unclear" and an "overreaching attempt to reinterpret the intention of the Legislature on this issue." The legislation would strip from Healey's office its authority to issue rules and regulations on firearms sales in Massachusetts.

SECTION 1. Section 2 of Chapter 93A of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2008 Official Edition, is hereby amended by inserting, in line 11, after the word "chapter" the following words: provided that such rules and regulations shall not govern, limit, or otherwise relate to weapons as defined in Section 121 of Chapter 140, the manufacture of weapons or the sale of weapons. Further, that any such rule or regulations having previously being promulgated are hereby repealed."

The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence. All men are born free and equal, and have certain natural, essential, and unalienable rights; among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties; that of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property; in fine, that of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness.

The people of this Commonwealth have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent state; and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not, or may not hereafter, be by them expressly delegated to the United States of America, in Congress assembled. ​​

Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity and happiness of the people; and not for the profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men; Therefore the people alone have an incontestible, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity and happiness require it.

Laws made to punish for actions done before the existence of such laws, and which have not been declared crimes by preceding laws, are unjust, oppressive, and inconsistent with the fundamental principles of a free government.

In the government of this Commonwealth, the legislative department shall never exercise the executive and judicial powers, or either of them: The executive shall never exercise the legislative and judicial powers, or either of them: The judicial shall never exercise the legislative and executive powers, or either of them: to the end it may be a government of laws and not of men.

-Massachusetts Constitution

It's Massachusetts...they do things differently there, and , for the most part, the people let it happen. Let this be a lesson for everybody else.

It does not matter that most crimes and murders are committed with semi-auto pistols in the hands of gangs like Chicago's Latin Kings or MS13 in Houston. "Band rifles" cry the idiots, because they look mean !

THESE LAWYERS are getting all uppiddy aren't they?
Just making laws they choose,because THEY know better ...without legal process.

a reply to: METACOMET

It's great when you fall asleep a law abiding citizen and wake up as a criminal.

a reply to: Vector99

It's worse when they announce you and others who fought for us all to be labeled POTENTIAL TERRORISTS.
So they started it...

AGAIN - death by a thousand cuts.

How is it that a person on the other side of the planet who has never owned a gun nor has any intention to do so can see what the US government and associated agencies are doing to erode the 2nd amendment.

The US government understands that an all out assault on the constitution is tactically unsound but they do understand that relentless propaganda through MSM and social media, even over multiple generations, will wear folks down to capitulation.

# unbelievable that a good portion of yanks are facebookingly oblivious to this.

Why not start in Mass? Especially Boston. Ironic that is where the American Revolution first began.If these oppressors had their way , would it have ended well ? They know what they are doing. Violating the US Constitution and slappin the people and our history in the face at the same time.
Obama care , anyone ?

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: Vector99

It's worse when they announce you and others who fought for us all to be labeled POTENTIAL TERRORISTS.
So they started it...

Yep, the way Vets are treated in this country is disgusting. I'm not necessarily the biggest fan of the military in general, but people that decide to put their life on the line for their country deserve much better.

sound like they need a recall for the AG office in Massachusetts.
this woman has some creative ways of interpretation.

I know a couple guys in Mass that they'll have to shoot in order to get their semi-automatics.

This could be another spark.

originally posted by: thesungod
I know a couple guys in Mass that they'll have to shoot in order to get their semi-automatics.

This could be another spark.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Total intimidation tactic.

Somebody should bring the AG up on charges of high crimes and misdemeanors.

a reply to: METACOMET

nobody took away your guns,fool! They took a few guns off the list that you can buy!! You make it sound like they raided your house!

One of the main reasons why I left NYS. Same crazy laws. After a few years of waiting and no one really putting up a fight other than legal, which is dragging their feet and making criminals by the day of people that just 100 miles away in another state would not be, I saw fighting the issue was a lose lose situation. Not enough people care to make a difference or its a it doesn't effect me because I don't shoot that gun mentality. Or fudds as they are commonly called after elmer fudd.....

originally posted by: Gothmog
Why not start in Mass? Especially Boston. Ironic that is where the American Revolution first began.If these oppressors had their way , would it have ended well ?

I don't really care for the pistol grip anyway.

a reply to: METACOMET

Who the hell has a grenade launcher in the civilian population? Ridiculous legislation.

a reply to: FlyingFox

Yep, not needed.