***ALERT!! IT'S TIME TO RALLY***STATEHOUSE HEARING AND RALLY SEPTEMBER 13TH***

WILL YOU BE ATTENDING THE RALLY?

  • I'll be there. HOORAH!

    Votes: 135 66.2%
  • Nope, I can't make it.

    Votes: 58 28.4%
  • I give up, not worth it anymore

    Votes: 11 5.4%

  • Total voters
    204
That totally made 9 hours of sitting on concrete steps worth it. They literally stormed out of there. Melanie from MDA was taping it-bet that wont be making it to the website anytime soon :)
FYI, we have at LEAST two proponents on the committee on our side. Quite possibly 3. There is a VERY good chance this all works out for us in the end.
 
I made it until 5pm, and unfortunately didn't get to hear many pro-2a speakers (despite being there for 8 hours), but thank you to all that spoke.

Morning shot, while the "important people" speak:
morning.jpg


2pm:
2pm.jpg

What a crock that the "activists" were given all the front row seating.
 
Despite the naysaying on this board, and yes, we always could use more of a presence on the ground, I still count yesterday as a success. We were heard and remember, we were heard at every hearing.

I'm not scared, I'm proud and confident we will have come out of this with some damage, but dammit it's not over, we aren't out. The bills proposed in many cases were too extreme to support- I think even leftist types like Chang Diaz get that.

The key is this, no matter what happens, we don't collectively sigh because the outcome isn't terrible. We take stock of what we have, work with our people to recover what we lost. It's not impossible and its not Armageddon.

I'll take some time later and post my own reflection later. Keep your chins up everybody, yes the opposition played dirty but I think that showed us to be the adults in the room.
 
In case you weren't there. My testimony:

I don't like the term gun rights. guns dont have rights. people do. so i am for peoples rights. like the right to life. I live my life according to the non aggression principle. and I agree. We need to stop gun violence. And I'm a mom demanding action.


You see, I lost a brother due to a firearm accident and i have experienced the pain of losing my own child. So I hold my life and my sons life precious.


Several years ago when my son was almost 3 and my husband was traveling for work we had spent the day and early evening at a friends house. my son and i arrived home to a beautiful sight. Picture perfect, 4 inches of fresh snow just a few days before Christmas. My joy turned rapidly to trepidation when I realized my front door was wide open and all my lights had been turned on. Someone had gained entry to my home. Fortunately for me they were not still there.

But This incident made me realize that my world was not as secure as one would hope. I started doing things like double checking my doors and windows at my home to ensure they are always locked and being more careful and aware of my surroundings when not at home. It also led me to look for other ways to defend myself if necessary. I quickly realized that the best way to defend myself from a determined attacker, and especially multiple attackers, would be to employ a weapon of some sort.


But how could I, a responsible parent, even consider bringing a firearm into my home in an attempt to keep myself and my child safe? I started educating myself. My husband and I learned how to safely and properly handle firearms and we have taught these skills to our son. We became legal gun owners.

I now carry a gun for self defense whenever and wherever it is legal for me to do so.

Passing more restrictions on the number of bullets I am allowed to have in my gun or the number of magazines i have is putting my life and the life of my child in danger.

Why would anyone wish to reduce my ability to defend myself and to protect my remaining child? Why?

We are told These laws have been proposed in an effort to end gun violence. However, these laws will not meet that objective. To pretend that they will is outright lying!

So I am here to demand honesty. Lets be honest about what these restrictions will really do to combat gun violence. Nothing.

This is not just my opinion. Statistics bare it out. Detroit, Chicago, Camden, and DC all lead the way in strict gun laws and yet still have the highest rates of violence. Lets stop lying about the rest of the statistics as well while we are at it. The FBI reports that between 2.5 and 3 million times per year, a gun owner defends them self or another from becoming the victim of a crime. Obviously legal gun ownership prevents more crime than any law ever could. Legal gun ownership saves more lives every year than criminals take.

I demand focus. Focus on the criminal element not on the law abiding. We are not the problem!

I further demand that those who attempt to paint law abiding gun owners with the same brush as criminals - stop! we are not responsible for crimes committed by others. Attacking our rights in response to criminal action is unjust.

Legal gun owners have been asked if they feel any guilt for the tragedy in newtown and other places. My answer is no. I am not the perpetrator of those crimes nor a contributor to them , anymore than I am responsible for drunk drivers simply because I own a vehicle and occasionally indulge in an adult beverage myself. Punishing me for the acts of others is not Reasonable!


And lastly, I demand that those proposing new restrictions first learn and understand the existing laws and enforce THEM instead of trying to impose more restrictions on legal gun owners.

Sen Chang-Diaz asked why 1 gun a month would impose an onerous restriction on legal gun owners. I'm glad she asked. As the mother of a fifteen year old if we wish to explore a sport involving firearms together (and there are many sports other than hunting) I must buy the necessary equipment. Some sports like 3 gun competitions, oddly enough, require 3 different firearms. This would mean for the 2 of us we would need to have 6 firearms plus spare magazines. The 1 gun a month bill could cause us to spend more than a year to obtain all the necessary equipment, guns, magazines, spare parts as they are restricted under this 1 gun per month bill.

ataqa6eq.jpg

Thought you might find a use for this.

Thanks for speaking.


-Proud to be dad every day, a licensed plumber most days, and wish I was a shoemaker on others.
 
20130913_100835.jpg

Snapped this pic in front of the steps. This lady was arguing with one of our buddies that all guns should require some kind of electronic device that only lets the actual owner of the gun fire it. She said something like, I know we have the technology and so it must be done!!

LOL. Why don't you listen to your friend in the blue sweater and just walk away, fruitcake.
 
View attachment 79216

Snapped this pic in front of the steps. This lady was arguing with one of our buddies that all guns should require some kind of electronic device that only lets the actual owner of the gun fire it. She said something like, I know we have the technology and so it must be done!!

LOL. Why don't you listen to your friend in the blue sweater and just walk away, fruitcake.

If we have the technology why the hell don't we rebuild him?????
 
View attachment 79216

Snapped this pic in front of the steps. This lady was arguing with one of our buddies that all guns should require some kind of electronic device that only lets the actual owner of the gun fire it. She said something like, I know we have the technology and so it must be done!!

LOL. Why don't you listen to your friend in the blue sweater and just walk away, fruitcake.

moonbats
 
oh giggity



Fast forward to the 8:30 mark and listen closely. The awesome


So these people are Harvard profs?

He's arguing that more guns means more crime and this has been prove time and time again? BULLSHIT. His grasp of statistics is pathetic.

MA vs. NH. Gun sales over the last 20 years vs. rates of violent crime nationwide.

Simple as that and there are plenty of other examples.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So these people are Harvard profs?

He's arguing that more guns means more crime and this has been prove time and time again? BULLSHIT. His grasp of statistics is pathetic.

MA vs. NH. Gun sales over the last 20 years vs. rates of violent crime nationwide.

Simple as that and there are plenty of other examples.

He needs to chat with his colleagues at Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy- http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
 
Last edited:
So these people are Harvard profs?

He's arguing that more guns means more crime and this has been prove time and time again? BULLSHIT. His grasp of statistics is pathetic.

MA vs. NH. Gun sales over the last 20 years vs. rates of violent crime nationwide.

Simple as that and there are plenty of other examples.

He claimed he was. I could not locate him on any Harvard website listing faculty. I didn't bother looking for her.
 
I actively engaged them in the morning after I heard one of them refer to us as Neanderthals and that we hated children. I made sure I forced the ITSTime card into her hands, she acted as if it was herpes.

Nice! The key to see how worthless they really are is if they pronounce it "NeanderTALL" or "NeanderTHALL".
 
View attachment 79216

Snapped this pic in front of the steps. This lady was arguing with one of our buddies that all guns should require some kind of electronic device that only lets the actual owner of the gun fire it. She said something like, I know we have the technology and so it must be done!!

LOL. Why don't you listen to your friend in the blue sweater and just walk away, fruitcake.

That lady deserved a brick upside the head (as I had said/yelled there). She also supports Obama arming the "freedom fighters"aka al qaeda in Syria and then says we don't need the stuff she thinks we should indiscriminately hand out to our enemies around the world[banghead]

I actively engaged them in the morning after I heard one of them refer to us as Neanderthals and that we hated children. I made sure I forced the ITSTime card into her hands, she acted as if it was herpes.

They seriously need to just dig a hole and crawl in to it. My bet is they came from Amherst.
 
I spoke with many of the women at the rally and found that the blue hairs with the signs were actual sheep. Ive said before, I intentionally and purposefully went over with ItsTime cards to admittedly, get under their skin and whenever I engaged them, they were like cockroaches under the sudden glare of a fluorescent light - they were big and bad, calling us Neanderthals (and for a deaf bastard like me to hear it is amazing), but when I tried to talk with them, they were scared.

Mind you, my talk was to attempt to shake hands, they refused. To introduce myself by name, they would not do the same. I explained that we have similar goals when it comes to preventing violence but different ways to get there. "well, we're not going to rest until we get MORE regulation."

Fair enough, but know that we don't intend to stop coming out in opposition to fight bills like these - they are mere repetitions in many cases of existing laws and the ones that will affect ME will affect only ME, not the person hell bent on doing harm.

"you don't know what you're talking about and are selfish."

Uh huh, Im selfish. That's why I gave up time I didn't have to be here, to fight for rights and to make my voice heard. I'm selfish because I'm standing up against a wave of knee jerk reactions to tragedies, to politicians too happy to exploit them. But I'm the selfish one.

As has been the experience of many, one of the other geriatrics pulled her away.

I did get to talk to the women on the victims' panel. They were very polite, although a bit annoyed with us because we laughed at the teenager who said he was afraid to be mowed down by an AR15. One in particular indicated she admired what I had to say about working within communities to solve violence. She still pushes for more laws, but at least could be talked to.

I think we HAVE TO continue down that path of dialogue and realize that while we probably won't covert all of them to common sense, but we have to TRY and work with them to see that WE DO have the same goals in mind as far as public safety is concerned but that we have to work on ways of achieving this in a manner that doesn't take away civil liberties in any way.
 
Just emailed my written testimony to the committee - it's so much harder to put a well written piece together than to just speak coherently.

Feels good to have done the work though... getting involved feels way better than doing nothing "'cause it doesn't matter anyway".
 
Back
Top Bottom