Sorry, but going by their standpoint (grouping Paintball markers with actual firearms), thats a total violation of the second amendment...
What makes you think they're grouping paintball markers with actual firearms?
Well considering if you read the 2nd link it stated that anybody under 21 isn't allowed to posses a paintball gun in places accessable to the public unless they have a sporting or hunting lisence or a FIREARM Identification Card from the chief of police in the city.
So by there standpoint it would be illegal to ban paintball guns, but it wouldn't be illegal to limit them to people who are older than 18.
First off, I haven't heard anything back, so I assume this died in committee.
Second, the proposed law does NOT link paintball guns with firearms. Check out M.G.L., Chapter 140, Section 121, Part 1, Title XX, which defines a firearm as:
""Firearm", a pistol, revolver or other weapon of any description, loaded or unloaded, from which a shot or bullet can be discharged and of which the length of the barrel or barrels is less than 16 inches or 18 inches in the case of a shotgun as originally manufactured; provided, however, that the term firearm shall not include any weapon that is: (i) constructed in a shape that does not resemble a handgun, short-barreled rifle or short-barreled shotgun including, but not limited to, covert weapons that resemble key-chains, pens, cigarette-lighters or cigarette-packages; or (ii) not detectable as a weapon or potential weapon by x-ray machines commonly used at airports or walk- through metal detectors. " http://www.mass.gov/...mgl/140-121.htm
Yes, it's a vague definition since there is currently no definition in state law (or at least in Section Chapter 140, Section 121) for a "shot or bullet", but the current state law is NOT
interpreted as covering firearms. If it did cover firearms, you'd already need a Class-A License to Carry Firearms just to own a paintball gun. I believe you could ask for an official interpretation by writing the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Firearm Records Bureau (previously the"Criminal History Systems Board"), 200 Arlington Street, Chelsea, MA 02150-2375.
Neither of the proposed laws touch anything in Chapter 140; they just change Chapter 269.
Currently FID cards are required for chemical sprays (mace). They are just looking at adding one more thing to the list of items that require FID's.
As for this being a second amendment issue, the second amendment, like large portions of the Constitution, are basically ignored. Even with the 2008 Supreme Court ruling in D.C. vs Heller http://en.wikipedia....umbia_v._Heller
, it's been ruled that requiring licenses with age restrictions is perfectly legal for real firearms (thus current MA laws are unaffected). Also, since I don't think anyone is arguing that paintball gear is "arms", the second amendment wouldn't apply. Also, the ruling in Heller vs DC doesn't state that the 2nd even applies to states, just to the federal government which controls DC. Until there is a more solid decition about incorporation (which I believe is being tried in Chicago), all sorts of state restrictions are still perfectly legal.
Edited by Iram, 25 February 2010 - 06:02 AM.