Image 01 Image 03

While No One Was Looking, Massachusetts Banned “Assault Weapons”

While No One Was Looking, Massachusetts Banned “Assault Weapons”

“The gun industry doesn’t get to decide what’s compliant.”

This week while all eyes were on the Republican National Convention, the Attorney General of Massachusetts took it upon herself to enact a new form of gun control by redefining assault weapons.

Townhall reported:

Mass AG Unilaterally Changes Gun Laws, Redefines Assault Weapon Definition

With most of the media attention on the Republican National Convention (Melania Trump’s speech)—the Massachusetts Attorney General seems to have decided to unilaterally rewrite the state’s gun laws.

The attorney general is targeting so-called copycat assault weapons (their words not mine) and would force manufacturers to stop making them and gun dealers to stop selling them. The law goes into effect on July 20. Those who have bought the firearms being targeted prior to that date will be allowed to keep them (Mass Live):

Gun manufacturers have manufactured these weapons as legal versions of prohibited guns,” Healey said. “These weapons are illegal. They are copies or duplicates of banned weapons, and they cannot be bought or sold in Massachusetts.”

“The gun industry doesn’t get to decide what’s compliant (with state law),” [Attorney General Maura] Healey said. “We do.”

Gun owners, however, said they had no notice of Healey’s interpretation of the law and were still unsure of what would be included.

Naturally, this produced the sort of run on these weapons we see every time a Democrat mentions the word gun.

The Boston Globe reported:

Gun stores see rush of business after Mass. AG plans to close loophole

Gun buyers raced to snap up military-style weapons on Wednesday as Attorney General Maura Healey moved to bar the sale of rifles that have been altered slightly to evade the state’s assault weapon ban.

“Because of this, we’re extremely busy,” said a sales associate at GFA ArmsTec, a gun shop in Natick, who added that she had to hang up to handle the crush of customers rushing to buy the assault rifles banned under Healey’s order.

Mass Firearms School in Holliston went so far as to extend its hours to 11:59 p.m. to accommodate gun enthusiasts who were anxious to make a final purchase.

“Today is your LAST DAY to purchase a semi-automatic rifle in Massachusetts!” the store wrote in an e-mail blast to its customers.

The insanity of this decision was summed up at Bearing Arms:

Massachusetts Attorney General’s Gun Control Logic Summed up in One Pie Chart:

Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey’s gun control logic can be summed up in one amazing pie chart. It shows Ms. Healey is essentially blaming our country’s (and her state’s) violent crime problems on firearms she calls “weapons of war” that, in reality, are responsible for approximately 0.5% of all murders in the state of Massachusetts.

MA gun control chart

It’ll be very interesting to see what is said about gun control at the Democratic National Convention next week.

You know it’s going to come up.

Featured image is a screencap from the Boston Globe.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Another typical Democrat ‘feel good’ action.

Makes them feel good…and annoys everyone else.

Wouldn’t it be easier and less expensive if we just provided bumper stickers and tee shirts for these folks that read, “I am a virtuous person”. This way they can publicly signal their virtue without bothering the rest of us.

Maybe we can add Velcro which will allow them to modify the message according to their mood, feelings and location. Things like “No On GMO” or “Gluten Free Body” and, of course, some version of “Coexist”.

Holding the law abiding culpable for the behaviors of the lawless and infringing on the natural right of self-defense is a pretty pathetic way to solve the violence problem.

They want to ban guns because of how they look rather than how lethal they are. Having a flash supressor has no impact on how many people you can kill with it. Nor does a pistol grip or a bottom rail. A bayonet fix point means you can use your gun as a knife. Is that really a problem?

Democrats – appearance over substance. Feeling good about doing nothing.

    They want to ban guns because guns are a bulwark against their desired encroachments on all of our other rights. Progs want totalitarian control of society, and they know they’ll never get there as long as freedom-lovers are armed. Ergo the constant assault on weapons.

nordic_prince | July 23, 2016 at 11:50 am

Dems: “Guns are eeeeevil!!!! That’s why only we should have them!!!”

casualobserver | July 23, 2016 at 11:51 am

Many in MA think this is more of a political stunt that WILL for sure get traction during the convention. Hence the rush to make it happen.

It probably will not withstand Second Amendment scrutiny. But that will take a long time to fight. Long after the election.

The average U.S. car weighs 4000 pounds.

Every single day I drive to work I see a person who is on their phone or looking at their text messages while driving. Yesterday a woman was looking into the rear view mirror putting on mascara. Her SUV was zig-zagging in front of me.

I try to stay clear of unsafe people.

Millions are given license and powerful vehicles to drive until someone one is killed by their injurious behavior.

Common Sense | July 23, 2016 at 12:48 pm

Fact-less decision! Only silly emotion’s use!

“FBI Uniform Crime Statistics show zero murders were committed in Massachusetts in 2014 using rifles of any sort.”

“Massachusetts’ latest move to expand its assault weapons ban to a new class of rifles is a solution in search of a problem, according to gun rights groups who note the latest annual FBI statistics show not one murder was committed in the Bay State using a rifle of any kind.”

“This is an abuse of power by the Massachusetts attorney general,”

I would love to be there when some dome lawyer says: “Your honor. They say that the gun store owners don’t get to what the laws are, but that they do. That’s simply not true. It’s the legislatures that get to say what the laws are.”

Xenomethean | July 23, 2016 at 1:25 pm

Only slaves do not own guns. Our rights hang by the thread of the second amendment but Leftist want to clip it.

The asasult weapon myth via the NY Times:

“The law that barred the sale of assault weapons from 1994 to 2004 made little difference.”

“It turns out that big, scary military rifles don’t kill the vast majority of the 11,000 Americans murdered with guns each year. Little handguns do.”

Paul In Sweden | July 23, 2016 at 2:36 pm


Your NRA-ILA will be working tirelessly to protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners in Massachusetts by looking into the legal options available to fight this egregious attack.”

Hey, legal insurrection, this is a law blog, right? How about giving us an opinion on what this ADG did.

Outlaw bodyguards (public and private – that’s for you bloomberg) for all but the President and the top 5 people in the line of succession. Protection ends two years after leaving office for the President and doesn’t extend beyond the terms of the other 5. And no politician can live in a gated community or have a fence/wall around their house.
Now let us see how secure they feel when passing laws and spending on programs that are outlandish.

Is this even legal for her to change the law?

    Paul in reply to gwsjr425. | July 23, 2016 at 8:12 pm

    No, but the progs love this tactic… they brazenly pull shit they know is illegal, but also know that it will take years for the courts to adjudicate so in the meantime they ram their prog (@($ down our throats.

    Exhibit A: The Obama Administration.

    Milhouse in reply to gwsjr425. | July 26, 2016 at 12:03 pm

    She hasn’t changed the law. The law already bans copies or duplicates of banned weapons. She’s just changed her department’s policy on how to decide whether a weapon is a copy or duplicate. Of course her department’s policy is not binding on anyone else, but it will prosecute anyone who sells such a weapon, and then a court will have to decide whether it’s close enough to count as a copy or duplicate.

Several thousand of us today stood out in the withering heat to protest this reinterpretation of existing law in front of the Mass statehouse. None of our politicians seemed to care. There are now tens of thousands of new unindicted felons here in the birthplace of liberty.

Democrats – the best marketing tool the NRA ever had.

I sent this letter to the editor of the Boston Herald. I doubt it will be published.

Dear Ms Healey,

On January 21, 2015, you took the oath of office to become the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. You said, among other pledges, and I quote, “I, Maura Healey, do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States.” A generation earlier, my father swore a similar oath. In his case, however, he meant it, and lived by it. In your case, you seemed to have treated your oath as a suggestion, subject to the fickle winds of politics, and to be interpreted in whatever way may best support your political ambitions. My dad would never have suggested that you didn’t have the right to choose whom to marry, or what political positions you could support, regardless of his personal beliefs. He laid his life on the line for your freedom to make those decisions.
On July 20th, you used the power of your office to try to solve a problem that does not exist and declared tens of thousands of your fellow Massachusetts citizens to be unindicted felons, while making it clear that you reserve the right to make them indicted felons at your whim.
I know that you are an educated woman, so I assume that you are familiar with the concept of tyranny of the majority that was well discussed by Alexis de Tocqueville, John Stuart Mill, and of course in Federalist 10. Because you think that you have majority support, you have decided that your position allows you to redefine by fiat laws that have been in common definition for many years, which of course suggests that you have the right, in the future, to redefine any Massachusetts general law.
Two hundred and forty-one years ago our forebears confronted similar tyranny—it began with a little tea, a little tar and a few feathers and resulted in the greatest experiment in freedom that this planet has ever seen. The concept that was self-evident to them seems to have been lost on today’s politicians—you work for the people, not the other way around. Jefferson said, “That government is best which governs least.” Today it seems that our elected officials think that we are sheep to be herded rather than that we are the sheepdogs herding them.
This isn’t about “assault weapons”; we all know that fewer than one person a year is killed by any kind of rifle in Massachusetts. This is about political power and to whom it belongs. If you reread the Constitution and rethink your oath, the answer is clear.

The Mass AG gave an OPINION. It does not carry the weight of law. AGs do this all the time. So, what those who are in disagreement with her should do is set up a test case and get a judicial ruling.

CountMontyC | July 24, 2016 at 1:27 am

Smith and Wesson needs to announce their relocation to a more gun friendly state

Common Sense | July 24, 2016 at 8:54 am

Just another blatant attack on the citizens of the United States. You have the AG of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts making up laws to disarm law abiding citizens of Massachusetts.

Then you have the governor of Virginian, Terry McAuliffe try
a blanket reinstatement of voting rights for convicted felons which the courts rejected. So now he is going disregard the court and individually sign clemency requests for each of the 200,000 convicted felons.

Folks this is again the democratic party proudly standing with their middle finger held high telling every lawful
person. F-You America! And each one of the felons are heading to the gun store to pick up their firearm thanks to the Gov.

The break down of our system continues!

    Milhouse in reply to Common Sense. | July 26, 2016 at 12:14 pm

    You’re full of sh*t on both counts.

    MA law already bans all copies and duplicates of so-called “assault weapons”. What makes a weapon a “copy” or a “duplicate” is a matter of opinion, and it’s the AG’s job to form an opinion for her department, and to adjust it from time to time as she sees fit. If someone disagrees with her opinion they’re free to create a test case, wait for her department to prosecute, and see what the court says, just as happens with any other law.

    McAuliffe is not disregarding the court, he’s going to comply exactly with the decision. He thought he could just issue one restoration order for all 200,000 people. The court said no, a restoration order must name the individuals to whom it applies, so he’s going to do exactly that. How is that “disregarding” the court?

hollowpoint45 | July 24, 2016 at 9:55 am

This outlawing of assault rifles is ignorant ass hell. Assault weapon is just a catch phrase. This will not keep anyone safe. By definition criminals do not obey laws. If criminals want to kill people they will use what they can get there hands on. For instance, it may be a rock, baseball bat, sharp object, there hands, or maybe even a Truck. Can you imagine that. These people just want to feel good about there self. This is not rocket science!

Your headline is wrong. MA hasn’t banned anything “while no one was looking”. The ban on copies and duplicates of banned weapons is long-standing and was passed in full public view. All that’s happened is that the AG has changed her department’s opinion on what makes something a copy or duplicate.