Governing By Edict In Massachusetts

The gun prohibitionists and anti-rights forces just love the word “loophole”. They love it so much in Massachusetts that the attorney general has decided to arbitrarily reinterpret the commonwealth’s assault weapons (sic) ban.

Attorney General Maura Healey (D-MA) announced her edict in the Boston Globe today. She says that as of today, if a firearm has either components that are interchangeable with AR-15s and AKs from the free states or an “operating system” that is essentially the same, it is banned.

From the Boston Globe:

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.

Healey claims a “moral obligation” to come out with this edict. Methinks it more political grandstanding that any sort of moral obligation.

It will be interesting to see what is meant in real life terms by having an “operating system (which) is essentially the same as that of a banned weapon.” Does that mean any and all semiautomatic rifles that use direct gas impingement are banned? Or, in the case of an AK, does this mean all firearms with short stroke gas systems are banned?

You have to wonder if Remington will restart their production of their Model 7615P pump action .223 that took AR15 magazines. It would be a nice in your face workaround to Healey’s edict.

14 thoughts on “Governing By Edict In Massachusetts”

  1. So is this going to the courts or to the state house to get this taken care of ASAP? Dealers are going to be closing shop. Gun makers are already going to the AG letter and will stop selling in MA.

  2. I'd like to see a Ronnie Barrett type reaction by manufacturers to anyone in MA, including law enforcement. But I realize there is little hope in correcting these little kings and queens who are willing to conduct their business outside of the law. Courts may or may not resolve this, years down the road. Unacceptable.

    BTW, AKs are long stroke gas systems.

  3. time to move out of massachusetts and move to a pro-gun state,,there is no such thing as a constitutional supporting republican in mass,,just RINO's

  4. "You have to wonder if Remington will restart their production of their Model 7615P pump action .223 that took AR15 magazines. It would be a nice in your face workaround to Healey's edict."

    Why would it be a workaround?

    If it has /any/ parts interchangeable with an AR then it too is banned.

    And then you've got a banned Pump action.

    Which means other pump action guns can be banned.

    1. "If it has /any/ parts interchangeable with an AR then it too is banned."

      That is not true. She cannot make laws but only consider prosecuting people for the laws as written. The law says copies/duplicates of AR15s and AK47s are banned. So she can ban copies of those, such as a Smith and Wesson M&P or Colt LE6920. She cannot ban other guns just because an AR pistol grip fits on it. She can try, but she would lose, knows she would lose, and would not take it to court.

    2. Sounds to me like SHE thinks she can do any bleeding thing she wants to do. What the hell happened to you, Massachusetts? Weren't you one of the original thirteen colonies? Strikes me you went to war over this kind of behavior from King George.


    3. The M-7615P has a straight stock on it and I believe its fire control parts are different. However, it does accept an AR magazine just like the Mossberg MVP bolt actions.

    4. To be fair, it ONLY applies to semi-auto long guns with detachable magazines. So tube-fed guns, guns with fixed magazines, and manual-operation guns are completely exempt.

      That being said, at the time of my typing (likely I suspect some strong political developments early next week) Massachusetts FFLs are refusing to transfer EVERY semi-auto rifle or shotgun that eats from a detachable mag, from the Ruger 10-22 and Mini-14 (the darlings of the 94 AWB) to "Massachusetts Compliant" AR pattern guns. NOTHING.

  5. There has to be something that Governor Baker can do to rein-in Maura Healy. Last I checked, it was the job of the AG to enforce the laws on the books and ensure criminals are prosecuted accordingly. If they wish to change the law, they should petition the legislature with their recommendations like anyone else – not unilaterally take an action on less than a day's notice because their emotions say so.

    Sadly, this is part of a broader movement by the liberals to grab power, and put themselves above the law. What's scary is they're getting bolder and more radical across the spectrum. They need to be stopped, now, before we're all screwed.

Comments are closed.