Massachusetts in Revolt Over “Assault Weapon” Ban

A week ago, Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey slammed the ban-hammer on sales of “copycat” AR-style rifles in The Bay State. While her interpretation of the existing statute was legal, it sure wasn’t popular. Republican legislators are falling all over themselves trying to show their outraged constituents this will not stand! Rep. Susannah Whipps Lee, R-Athol, for example, wrote a sternly worded letter to the MA AG . . .

“If, in fact, these guns were actually banned under the 1998 law, then why has there been no prosecutorial action taken by your office or your two predecessors as Attorney General over the last two decades? What, exactly, has changed that led to your determination that these weapons were banned and being sold illegally all these years?”

Maybe that’s not the best question to ask; it’s daring Healey to outlaw previously sold “copycat assault rifles” — not just prevent their future sale.

Meanwhile, Healey’s midnight raid on Massachusetts’ residents’ gun rights set off a frenzy of buying of the very rifles she claims are so dangerous. Dealers have reported record sales.


According to data from the state Firearms Records Bureau, gun enthusiasts bought 2,549 rifles on Wednesday, the same day Healey announced that her office would rigidly enforce a 1998 law that prohibits the sale of specific semi-automatic guns such as AK-47s and AR-15s, as well as “copies or duplicates of the weapons.” By contrast, 132 of the guns were sold on Tuesday and just 51 on Monday. About 10,000 of the guns were sold in 2015.

The purchases were in defiance of an order issued by Healey that none of the guns could be sold in Massachusetts after Tuesday. Now Healey, whose intent was to get rid of the weapons, finds herself in the awkward position of trying to undo a run on what she has called “weapons of war” after they’ve already been sold.

Somehow I don’t think she’s feeling awkward. Anyway, Republican Governor Charlie Baker has written a letter of his own to Ms. Healey asking for “clarification.” (Click here to read.)

Long story short, Governor Baker suddenly woke up and realized that his previous statement of support for Healey’s immediate blanket ban on AR-style rifles had created a voter backlash destined to terminate his political career.

To forestall that event, Governor Baker’s Director of Public Safety rips Healey’s a new one, asking important questions about the technical definitions under the directive. (Click here to read.)

There is legislation afoot to modify the AG’s enforcement directive, but there’s next to no chance it will lead to a repeal of Massachusetts’ “assault weapon” ban. That train has left the station and the Democrat Party owns the railroad. Make no mistake: Healey’s lightning-like assault on “assault weapons” has generated plenty of home-state attaboys.


Statements of support for Healey came from Boston Mayor Marty Walsh, Holyoke Mayor Alex Morse, U.S. Rep. Joe Kennedy III, U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Suffolk County District Attorney Dan Conley, Middlesex District Attorney Marian Ryan and others.

“These types of assault weapons have no place on our streets. We have tough gun laws in our state, and this notice will make them even tougher. I applaud AG Healey and her efforts to help make our state and all our cities safer,” said Boston Police Commissioner William Evans.

This from the birthplace of the American Revolution, an event predicated on excessive taxation, lack of political representation and…gun control. The more things change?


  1. avatar tjlarson2k says:

    Why is there an Oath of Office?

    There needs to be determination by the People to either remove it completely or enforce it.

    Elected officials are a joke today and there is no accountability.

    I mean what will it take? A million man/woman march for the 2nd amendment in front of the White House? Lawmakers and politicians have been out of hand for decades.

    1. avatar peirsonb says:

      If POTUS is home. It might be more effective to march on a golf course…

    2. avatar Next Pres picks the Supreme Court says:

      I was part of a 10,000 man march around the capitol building in the wake of the IRS targeting conservative groups. didn’t even make local news. Believe me, they OWN the media. Until that is rectified, nothing short of forcible removal from office (recall vote or revolution) is going to stop them.

      1. avatar Rokurota says:

        Yes. The long game is to get more conservatives or at least fair-minded moderates in media. The middle game is to keep calling them on their malfeasance over and over again. The short game would be to wage open revolt against the fourth estate as it exists now, but I’m not going there.

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          Liberty cannot be restored through a “long game.” That’s simply the nature of the beast. The best that one can do with that plan is to exchange the exercise of rights for government sanctioned privileges (the “middle game”). Only the “short game” can secure true liberty. Governments always grow in power and, except for a few instances in history, they never truly relenquish power voluntarily. By begging government permission to be free, the overall net result will be loss of true liberty. It has been this way since the beginning of civilization. The long game and middle game are to distract the masses into thinking that they have options other than civil war or revolution. They don’t. “Only belligerents have rights.” There is nothing new under the sun.

        2. Point of order!

          By posting on ttag you are waging open war for the 4th estate…

        3. avatar ThomasR says:

          You’re mostly right John in Ohio. That’s what caused our own revolution.

          But there has been the push back of gun control laws that has led to the expansion of gun rights, where we now have 8 states with Constitutional Carry and more coming up while most other states have shall issue CC. This is due to local elections getting more representatives that respect our constituonal rights into office. Local elections matter.But is it too little too late?

          I guess we will see fairly soon if the ballot box is enough.

        4. avatar John in Ohio says:

          Fair enough. I don’t know about everywhere but we got recognition for the right to carry in spite of police chiefs, city leaders, sheriffs, attorneys, etc telling us we couldn’t legally open carry there or it wouldn’t be prudent. We didn’t seek government permission. In some cases, we completely ignored government admonishment to not do so. Contrasted against concealed carry in Ohio… Prior to 2005, many of us just carried concealed. It wasn’t typically a primary charge and there was still the prudent man defense under the law. Other groups in Ohio pushed for concealed carry legislation and we ended up with a regulated licensing system, carrying concealed without a license being a primary charge, and we lost the prudent man defense. When they begged permission from government for something that we had already done for generations, we got back a heavily restricted privilege. Shall issue and the like are not the exercise of a right. They are the exercise of a privilege.

          But whenever I make statements such as my original reply, I am talking about overall liberty. We may get thrown a bone here and there to encourage people to think we’re getting something but usually we lose in a major way in other areas. I’m not just talking about the right to keep and bear arms. Overall, liberty suffers.

          As in my original comment, I contend that it is not possible to restore liberty through long or medium game strategy. Too much has been lost. The time for that to work would have been early on in our constitutional republic. I agree with Jefferson, we ought to have seen at least a rebellion or revolution each generation. It is, indeed, too late.

  2. avatar Anonymous says:

    So is it time for doxxing? Well, I guess it’s not really doxxing if it is all public information.

  3. avatar pg2 says:

    The Governor and the AG need to be recalled.

    1. avatar ButtHurtz says:

      Actually, an example needs to be made. A patriot needs to act like they did 200+ years ago.

      IMO, open armed noncompliance on a massive scale is coming soon.

      1. avatar Next Pres picks the Supreme Court says:

        Why is it that the people in these states never conduct open defiance – say a couple hundred people open carrying the now “illegal” ARs, including non-state compliant ones march around the capitol building?

        What are you going to do – order the arrest and disarmament of several hundred armed men in the town square?
        That’s been tried before. It didn’t end well for the government at that time. In today digital era, the backlash would be instantaneous and nation-wide.

        1. avatar pg2 says:

          Lol, Boston Strong…right? The state was cheered on as militarized police shut down the city looking for just 1 suspect. The bluff you are calling for would end very badly for those underestimating the states reaction. Boston Strong.

        2. avatar dave S says:

          What they would do is photograph everyone, identify them, issue warrants for terrorism activities, have a show trial and put everyone away for 5 years…
          Its been done before to those who thought they were free Americans.

        3. avatar SurfGW says:

          You realize the cops don’t have to arrest any of the armed men. They have weapons in the open… Pose a visible threat… Intimidate citizens….
          That sounds like sufficient reason to not arrest any of them.
          Guarantee cell phones will be blocked and no one will have video.
          That sounds like Suicide for those men and they know it. No one will do this if they have a brain.

      2. avatar ButtHurtz says:

        Really? What if it ended in a gun battle?

        1. avatar neiowa says:

          Perhaps you might recall previous “gun battles” in the area? Didn’t end well for the royalist then.

    2. avatar Klaus says:

      Can the Governor in Ma fire the AG? How does that work up there?

      1. avatar red Sox says:

        No the AG is an elected office and the only hope is recall. Yes we (not me) here in MA elect the person who is promising the most freebies and who panders to entitlement population.

        1. avatar Klaus says:

          Yikes. Drastic times. Good luck.

  4. avatar jwm says:

    Hey, Gov, defund her agency.

    1. avatar tdiinva (now in Wisconsin} says:

      And pray tell how does he do that? Is he a dictator. I am sure that he faces a veto proof majority in the legislature. His election was fluke he isn’t getting a second term no matter what he does.

      1. avatar red Sox says:

        You are correct about the Gov. having no real power but his epiphany came when his office was deluged with angry phone calls and if had not been for that he would not have opened his stupid RINO piehole, speaking of pie he’s even worse than Chris Christiekreme re: 2A

        1. avatar neiowa says:

          Governor in MA has line item veto. Can reduce (or zero out) the AG’s next budget appropriation by the legislature. Good test to see if he has a pair or not.

          The Gov of Ma signed the GY17 budget on July 8. So will be a YEAR before he can bend the POS AG over the rail fence. I wonder if the timing of the AG’s pronouncement had anything to do with this???? Nah Demtards aren’t that slimy are they?

  5. avatar Anonymous says:

    So who in Massachusetts is going to make a 30rd Browning bar magazine?

    Picture this rifle:

    With a 30rd mag. MDT can make a chassis for it.

    1. avatar Vhyrus says:

      Just get an RDB-C when they come out

    2. avatar anonymoose says:

      Wouldn’t 20rd FNAR mags mags work in the .308 version? They’re basically the same rifle, and they even sold them under the Winchester brand as “SX-ARs” until a couple years ago.

      1. avatar anonymoose says:

        After taking a closer look, it appears the FNAR has some sort of detachable mag adapter thing that takes FN’s goofy, expensive proprietary mags (but at least they come in multiple capacities), whereas the BAR uses a pivoting floorplate-thingy with a 3-4 round magazine hidden inside.

  6. avatar Dave says:

    Wait and see: Dianne Frankenstein will add these definitions to her next senate bill.

    Hopefully that b***h will die of old age soon.

    1. avatar Mk10108 says:

      One can only hope. I’ll go back to church if she does.

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        ” I’ll go back to church if she does.”

        As long as the church doesn’t mind if you set up a reloading press for use during the sermon? 🙂

  7. avatar mark s. says:

    Move out of Mass. boys and girls , same thing for California , give it to them , you are the people making the state function anyway , let these irk have it all and when it implodes and the gun and God haters scatter like rats from a burning grain bin , go back and reclaim the great state of Mass. for us all . Oh , and don’t forget to tell them why your leaving before you wave good-by .

  8. avatar TyrannyOfEvilMen says:

    Are Massachusetts residents citizens or subjects?

    Stay tuned to find out!

  9. avatar Mark N. says:

    The Massachusetts politicos long ago forgot that the reason for the armed conflicts at Lexington and Concord were due to the British Governor, who had already rounded up all the guns and powder in Boston, ordering the Army to seize stores of arms, powder, and a field cannon. Is there any difference? The precise same condescending excuses were used then as they are being employed not: “public safety.”

  10. avatar LS/HD says:

    “While her interpretation of the existing statute was legal…”

    Not at all sure I would concede that point.

    1. avatar Bob386 says:

      History has often shown that enforcing an unlawful or unconstitutional law or order is a crime. Eventually, the people will elect other leaders or rise up, and that is when the old guard typically pays for their past crimes. We have not gone back to prosecute Progressives for their actions for a number of decades now, so it is a bit past due I think. If I am reading the tea leaves correctly, the old guard will lose in November. Perhaps the new leaders will pursue justice.

  11. avatar Mikele says:

    The anti-gun guy the news interviewed said he didnt see any reason for Assault weapons or any that LOOKED like one. What a moron! These are Constitutionally protected rights.

  12. avatar BLAMMO says:

    This “re-interpretation” of the “assault weapon” ban was already tried. Kathleen Rice, when she was DA of Nassau County, NY, raided several of the local merchants of liberty for selling assault weapons. This was prior to the SAFE Act and under the old NY AWB, which, like MA, mirrored the expired Federal AWB.

    Every case was thrown out and at least one gun shop sued for wrongful prosecution (or som’p’n’ like that). Nassau County settled and Rice was elected to the US Congress. Same district as Carolyn McCarthy, BTW.

  13. avatar John Cook says:

    Perhaps we should be looking at a real problem. The problem of ignoring the mentally ill. I would like to see the Commonwealth refund the state facilities that closed back in the eighties from a lack of funding. I’ll say that again, a lack of funding. Why was there a lack of funding for mental health but plenty of money for a corrupt highway department or the fat cats on Capitol Hill?

    The issue isn’t a gun problem, it’s a people problem.

  14. avatar Pwrserge says:

    It’s not a revolt until a politician gets shot.

    1. avatar Vhyrus says:

      It’s not an ‘open’ revolt until a politician gets shot.

      1. avatar Klaus says:

        It’s not an “open revolt” till the person who shot the politician professes to be a revolutionary.

  15. avatar Mikele says:

    This Saturday Gun Owners Action League will be hosting another rally at the Boston State house! This time we will be going in to talk to legislatures about this unconstitutional act! We must be there this Saturday because it’s the last weekend session of the summer! More information here!

    1. avatar ButtHurtz says:

      I hope the plan is to be armed.

  16. avatar peirsonb says:

    Sire, the people are revolting!

    1. avatar Anonymous says:

      Sire: That’s fine. Butler! More Cake!

    2. avatar Minime says:

      King Looie: You said it; they stink on ice.

      Now, count the money! 😀

    3. avatar Vhyrus says:

      They’ve always been revolting, but now they’re rebelling!

  17. Like the clinton gun ban of the 90’s, it will not work.

    1. avatar Next Pres picks the Supreme Court says:

      But the media will claim it as a victory for “common sense gun restrictions” and proceed to whitewash the State’s abysmal crime record from this point forward.

      Mark my words – the only people who are delusional enough to think this has anything to do with reducing crime is US!

  18. avatar Sixpack70 says:

    I’m glad I was only forced to live there for two years. It sucked having guns that I didn’t have the magazines for, because 11+ round mags are scary!

  19. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    Meh. Nothing will come it. Democrats will keep their ban. Republicans will harumph emphatically. The people will just take it. Same as it ever was.

    1. avatar Next Pres picks the Supreme Court says:

      That’s a self-fulfilling prophecy that ultimately ends in slavery. Stop doing that.

      Stop giving up ground. Stop telling gun owners behind enemy lines “you’re on your own!”

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        That’s why we need federal gun law preemption with felony consequences.

        On a side note:

        Go hunt your whale Jean-Luc

    2. avatar pg2 says:

      Agree 100%. People in MA cheered on as families with children were being taken out of their homes in Boston at gunpoint by militarized police with armored vehicles under the pretext of chasing ONE suspect. Boston Strong. Orwell laughs, or cries, in his grave.

  20. avatar Keith Mercer says:

    You guys can still have your pistols. Whats the big deal?

    1. avatar Rick the Bear (now in NH!!) says:

      Only the ones that manage to be on the competing approved firearms lists.

  21. avatar Ben McEwen says:

    Keep poking the sleeping bear.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      The bear might be comatose or dead.

      The governmemt ought to poke its hardest so the truth will be known once and for all.

      1. avatar Burley says:

        “the bear” has too much flouride in his brain…

  22. avatar FormerWaterWalker says:

    To arms! It’s going to be an eventful few years before the apocalypse…

    1. avatar Marcus (Aurelius) Payne says:

      I hear 7 years is the over/under on duration.

  23. avatar Adub says:

    If I’d owned a gun store in MA, I’m not sure what I would have done.

    I could either not rock the boat and hope for Trump to tie federal highway funding to this issue (a legal club often used by Feds), or choose this as my hill to die on. With a Trump win looking likely, there’s every reason to not rock the boat before the election.

    Of course, if Hillary wins, might as well ask for volunteers to sell the weapons illegally and tell the staff to fix bayonets.

  24. avatar NateF says:

    Republicans should un-ban automatic weapons and democrats should re-ban them, and they will have made progress for all anyone will know.

  25. avatar Klaus says:

    Going away in the middle of the night is what should happen to people like the MA AG. Call me crazy, but the Argentine’s knew how to deal with leftists.

  26. avatar Bill R says:

    No one can say for sure where this will lead but there are those among us who see this illegal decree from that statist AG as an opportunity to reset the goal posts.

    As a Massachusetts native and resident I will recommend to those watching from other states: stay tuned, this ain’t over yet.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email