Article: An Act To Strengthen and Enhance Firearms Laws in the Commonwealth

Look at the Bright Side

Look at the bright side, both NY and MA Governors just kicked them self right out of the presidential race. They are not going to caryy the southern or western states-maybe mass, ny, and CA. Only CA is growing, MA and NY shrinking populations and less congressional pull. Nothing like being more extreme that the presidents unpopular gun control measurers. Good luck defending yourself-NRA should of doubled by then with a lot more gun owners out there as evidence by the bare gun stores these days. Keep poking the middle class with higher taxes, liberal policies, and more gun control- Good luck with that. Piss us off and we vote.

You reap what you sow.





Here is what I just sent:

Many of the measures enumerated in Deval Patrick's "An Act To Strengthen and Enhance Firearms Laws in the Commonwealth" bill are far too draconian. Certain items in the bill severely compromise the ability to defend one's self if confronted with grave and serious danger.

In particular:
"Section 18D. Whoever, while in the commission or attempted commission of a misdemeanor that has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of another, has in his possession or under his control a firearm, rifle, or shotgun, shall, in addition to the penalty for such offense, be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than 10 years, or in the house of correction for not more than 2 ½ years, or by a fine of not more than $5,000, or by both such fine and imprisonment."

I have an MA license to carry a concealed weapon (LTC-A). If someone attacks me and puts me and I have genuine fear for my life I am allowed to protect myself. Yet the draconian nature of section 18D would have me thrown in jail for up to 10 years even if someone attacks me unprovoked and I simply have my _concealed_ weapon on me.

Also:
Section 24 banning all high cap mags that: "accept, more than seven rounds but no more than ten rounds of ammunition, where such device contains more than seven rounds of ammunition."

Effectively, those who already own 10 round magazines can keep them but they must only fill them 70%. Criminals will _not_ show the same restraint.

And reducing to 7 rounds goes beyond the new 10 round limit that is being sought on a federal level. MA already imposes a 10 round limit on magazines. Just because NY passed this doesn't mean MA should tolerate such draconian measures by an overzealous Governor who is clearly looking to get away with imposing the most restrictions he can get away with during a political climate that is conducive to excessive gun restrictions.

MA has some of the most restrictive gun laws in all of the United States. There is no reason we need to try to pile on law abiding MA residents with further restrictions. Instead our current laws should be championed as the standard for the new federal laws.

It seems to me that the Governor is an opportunistic and cunning person who doesn't have any real idea of _how_ to stop gun violence. He is merely slapping together his old bill with copy-cat legislation to follow NY and a NY governor who Deval Patrick will compete with in future presidential primaries. Deval Patrick merely wants to be able to say "no no, as Governor _I_ was the toughest on gun control".

What do Deval Patrick's personal political aspirations have to do with what is right for MA? I contend this haphazard feel-good legislation is a violation of my 2nd amendment rights and I will remember all who vote in favor of Deval Patrick's bill the next election cycle.
 
Boy you're slow, Mass isn't part of America and their silly Constitution doesn't apply in our socialist utopia. Just ask the tea part people, they weren't allowed to have a rally in Boston Common without a permit, yet the occupy Boston bums were allowed to live in and destroy a park for months. If the Constitution applied here we wouldn't need to have a useless rally. Wake up and smell reality. [rolleyes]

A permit?


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
 
Contact the Governor's Office: 617.725.4005

I just called Gov. Patrick's office to request, plead, beg that this bill be killed... and asked where the 7 round magazine came from.... she had no idea, but she wrote down my comments and said she'd pass them on. She said she has been getting few calls to complain. I said the minimum has to be 10, not 7.... dammit! It kills me to say even that...

Contact the Governor's Office:
Thank you for your interest in contacting the Governor's Office. We welcome your ideas, comments, questions and requests.
All mailed and web submissions are reviewed by a member of the governor's staff and forwarded on to the appropriate person, department or agency. If your submission requires a response, we will get back to you as soon as possible.
Please include your phone number on any written correspondence to facilitate a prompt response from the Governor's Office.
Boston
Massachusetts State House
Office of the Governor
Office of the Lt. Governor
Room 280
Boston, MA 02133

Phone: 617.725.4005
888.870.7770 (in state)
Fax: 617.727.9725
TTY: 617.727.3666 Springfield
Western Massachusetts Office of the Governor
State Office Building
436 Dwight Street
Suite 300
Springfield, MA 01103

Phone: 413.784.1200
Washington, DC
Office of the Governor
444 N. Capitol Street, Suite 208
Washington, D.C. 20001

Phone: 202.624.7713
Fax: 202.624.7714
 
^ EVERYONE should make a quick call to Gov. Patrick's office asap and take a stand...I find it hard to believe they are only getting a few calls, if so that's disheartening. A 7 round max is tantamount to a gun ban on many arms that we already own...it's unacceptable. I'm about to make a call too....
 
I can't believe they're doing this is, it's as bad as NY, probably worse! Our only hope is a court challenge. I just don't understand it, didn't we f***** win Heller?
 
Anybody from western ma or north central mass want to carpool? We could ride to alewife and take the T. As a side note, accepting 10 rds because its better than 7 is a foolish statement and the reason we are in this mess. Nothing should be accepted because of "It could be worse". What happened to "SHALL not be INFRINGED"
 
YOU ACT SO TOUGH!!!!

YOU ACT SO TOUGH, but when I called the gov's office, (again ;) she said there are hardly any calls into her office. It's easy to complain behind a computer or in a forum. But that's not making a difference.

STAND UP YOU LAZY $#@%KS!!!! i'LL BE THERE SAT....
 
Good work on contacting the Gov's office but the minimum has to be as many as you want, not 10. Geez we can't say 10 is OK with us to the Gov!!!! Lets embarass Deval, by turning up the heat for our rights. If he fails, he fails big. Ill be there on the 19th.

I just called Gov. Patrick's office to request, plead, beg that this bill be killed... and asked where the 7 round magazine came from.... she had no idea, but she wrote down my comments and said she'd pass them on. She said she has been getting few calls to complain. I said the minimum has to be 10, not 7.... dammit! It kills me to say even that...

Contact the Governor's Office:
Thank you for your interest in contacting the Governor's Office. We welcome your ideas, comments, questions and requests.
All mailed and web submissions are reviewed by a member of the governor's staff and forwarded on to the appropriate person, department or agency. If your submission requires a response, we will get back to you as soon as possible.
Please include your phone number on any written correspondence to facilitate a prompt response from the Governor's Office.
Boston
Massachusetts State House
Office of the Governor
Office of the Lt. Governor
Room 280
Boston, MA 02133

Phone: 617.725.4005
888.870.7770 (in state)
Fax: 617.727.9725
TTY: 617.727.3666 Springfield
Western Massachusetts Office of the Governor
State Office Building
436 Dwight Street
Suite 300
Springfield, MA 01103

Phone: 413.784.1200
Washington, DC
Office of the Governor
444 N. Capitol Street, Suite 208
Washington, D.C. 20001

Phone: 202.624.7713
Fax: 202.624.7714
 
YOU ACT SO TOUGH, but when I called the gov's office, (again ;) she said there are hardly any calls into her office. It's easy to complain behind a computer or in a forum. But that's not making a difference.

STAND UP YOU LAZY $#@%KS!!!! i'LL BE THERE SAT....

Probably because there's not much point in calling the governor and asking him to oppose his own bill. He's drunk of the anti-gun kool-aid, and a lost cause. The place to stop this is the state legislature. Outside of Linsky and a few others, there aren't too many true blue gun banners. There are many on our side, and many who would support the gun ban bills due to party affiliation or thinking that their constituents want it. The key is making them realize that a vote for this bill is a vote against their reelection.
 
i just called the govenors office and was told "quote: this is the administrations stance on this subject. but we are passing along all opinions positive or negative" ya i call bullshit. i emailed him and richard neal. they are just gonna let him do as he pleases in this god forsaken liberal state.
 
What about the anti free speech zone that Obummer enacted that prevents picketing?


I wrote my state sen and rep as well.

I am so glad I am moving back west...NV here I come.
 
Last edited:
There is obviously a problem in this country with guns and the wrong people getting their hands on them. Yet instead of acting as "responsible" adults & gun owners, you do not think of what can we do to try and fix this problem. You don't say hey maybe I should be slightly inconvenienced, just a little, in order to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill.


2a is not a problem, it's The Supreme Law of the Land

Start being a responsible voter and not elect a**h***s who ignore laws and shit on Constitution. That is the problem, look in the mirror, look at congress critters you elected.

I am not demanding anything, I'm not giving up my rights.
 
an act to punch the law abiding taxpayers in the balls before I go to Washington so screw you.

is more to the point.
 
@ yarbles
How much more inconvenienced to we have to be? Every time something happens, legit gun owners pay the price, not criminals. Gun owners are one of the only groups punished for pre-crime relative to rights, so.... No... I'm all set with coming to the table to discuss which appendage I'd like removed.
 
I'm in Zurich until next Friday and with you in spirit if not in person... Just took some time to zip off a couple letters but I am fortunate enough to have George Petersen as my State Congressman - Ex-Army, Solid advocate for 2A topics and good partner of GOAL.

... Section 24 banning all high cap mags that: "accept, more than seven rounds but no more than ten rounds of ammunition, where such device contains more than seven rounds of ammunition."

Effectively, those who already own 10 round magazines can keep them but they must only fill them 70%. Criminals will _not_ show the same restraint.

As others have said - measures like this are pure lunacy.

Even if I try to see things from their "Must Protect The Children" point of view, it makes no logical sense. I mean, even given the very improbable assumption that a criminal carries only 1 Mag, Is the shooting of 7 kids/innocent people really any less tragic than 10 ? Or, Any more tragic than shooting / killing of just 1 child or innocent person ?

Its just another pointless reg. that will create accidental felons out of otherwise law abiding people. The only 'Common Sense' involved here is that Criminals WILL Ignore this law too.
 
In several sections this law equates a "large capacity feeding device" to a firearm. Including in the limit of 1 purchase per 30 days:

c) No person, other than an exempt person as defined in this subsection, shall purchase, rent or lease more than 1 rifle, shotgun, firearm, machine gun, large capacity weapon or large capacity feeding device in any 30-day period.

Would the purchase of a firearm that comes with a magazine be a violation? Doesn't sound like a stretch with the way this whole thing is being put together....

BTW - went to Boston today! Great rally with lots of support. CBS reporting 250-300 attendees.....there were well over 1,000 attendees
 
Message sent!

Your message was sent to:
Governor Deval Patrick (D-MA)
Lt. Governor Tim Murray (D-MA)
Senator William Brownsberger (D-MA 28th)
Representative John J. Lawn (D-MA 69th)
 
Last edited:
In several sections this law equates a "large capacity feeding device" to a firearm. Including in the limit of 1 purchase per 30 days:

c) No person, other than an exempt person as defined in this subsection, shall purchase, rent or lease more than 1 rifle, shotgun, firearm, machine gun, large capacity weapon or large capacity feeding device in any 30-day period.

If you cannot rent more than one in 30 days, does that mean if I go to the firing range near me and rent a 9mm for the range to try it out, I can't buy it if I like it until next month? Even worse does the range now have to keep tabs on how many times you come in and rent a gun to shoot? This law is a mess and will leave a lot of people breaking it as you won't know until it's too late. ..
 
DEREK,
I suggest adding some kind of tag to the usernames of people who attend and people who do not. When we arrive we need to have a list of users who attended.
So people can be shamed for not attending.

Scarlet letters. Great idea. [hmmm]

-tapatalk and Devin McCourty blow chunks-
 
I contacted the The Great Deval on On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 9:27 AM: Got the below. READ THE COMPLETE THREAD!!!!

Dear Mike:
>
>
>
> On behalf of Governor Deval L. Patrick, thank you for your recent
> correspondence regarding firearm safety and legislation.
>
>
>
> Governor Patrick believes that successfully deterring gun violence
> requires a multi-faceted approach and should include policies focused on
> guns and at-risk individuals. That is why the Governor has and will
> continue to push for legislation that includes a formal collaboration
> between Massachusetts and the National Mental Health Registry, a ban on
> assault weapons and a limit on the amount of guns one person can buy in a
> given month.
>
>
>
> Once again, thank you for your input on this important issue. Please feel
> free to contact our office again in the future with any additional
> questions or concerns. Your comments are always welcome in this
> administration.
>
>
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Governor Patrick's Constituent Services Office
>
> 617-725-4005
>
> www.mass.gov/governor/contact


I replied back at the same day. Sent: 1/22/2013 3:37:57 PM
To: "Webmail, Gov (GOV)"
<[email protected]>
Cc:
Subject: Re: Your message to Governor Patrick
Governor Patrick's Constituent Services Office,
Thanks for the quick feedback on my last concern about this new misguided firearm path.

I again wanted to write you back today to express my concern and disappointment in the political direction Governor Patrick's office has taken.

It is clear that you and your party in general have no real concern in preventing future tragedies such as this. You know full well that any measures you take to ban or further regulate firearms will in no way prevent these tragedies. Look the city of Chicago and the land of Great Britain provide positive proof that gun control does nothing to prevent crime.

I firmly believe that current NICS background check should include a mental health check. But I can also see the legal battles that will open up due to this issue.

The other issues I have, which were missed on your response, will just hinder law-abiding citizens of this second amendment right in this state. I included the link below for these items.
We already have some of the strictest laws in this US and it's very hard to find firearms that other states have since we have a non-approved list from the attorney general office. So outside of the insane trigger pull requirement and other non-needed safety features, the governor now wants to reduce a magazine count from 10 to 7 rounds. How was this count chosen and
how does this reduce anything? Again, we already have a hard time to get items in this state and this will just hinder (and cost more) for legal law-abiding citizens.

Next, we already have an assault weapons ban (AWB) since 1994 and they do not work. Look at the studies and did not Columbine School shooting happen in 1999? This was during the Federal AWB that expired in 2004.

To close governor, if you and your administration do implement stricter gun laws, under the guise of protecting our children, you will simply be turning your back on the real problem and basically leaving our children in harm's way. I know no other way to express my thoughts except to say that it will be you who is responsible for the next lives that are lost. It will
be you who will falsely give our state hope that your actions in some way make them safer. It will be you who fools the Massachusetts people while promoting a failed agenda that you have long believed in. I pray with all my heart that you, your administration and the legislature see fit to do
the right thing. To protect our children in a meaningful way without infringing on the rights of our citizens.

Ps. This is yet another reason why I want to leave this state.

I thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Mike

Looks what I got back at On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Webmail, Gov (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:--(1 hour later)


January 22, 2013


Dear Mike:

On behalf of Governor Deval L. Patrick, thank you for your recent correspondence regarding firearm safety and legislation.

Governor Patrick believes that successfully deterring gun violence requires a multi-faceted approach and should include policies focused on guns and at-risk individuals. That is why the Governor has and will continue to push for legislation that includes a formal collaboration between Massachusetts and the National Mental Health Registry, a ban on assault weapons and a limit on the amount of guns one person can buy in a given month.

Once again, thank you for your input on this important issue. Please feel free to contact our office again in the future with any additional questions or concerns. Your comments are always welcome in this administration.


Sincerely,
Governor Patrick's Constituent Services Office
617-725-4005
www.mass.gov/governor/contact



THEY ARE NOT EVEN READING THEIR EMAILS!
 
Last edited:
very sad indeed ....

We are doing the right things.We call and write our representatives,our Senators our Congressman our Vice President and our President.We stand and speak on the steps of the State House but they just respond with a generic response to everyone.What is the next step ? Who in the State House supports us ? We need to ask them what else we can do to be heard more clearly.There must be something else politically we can do.
I contacted the The Great Deval on On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 9:27 AM: Got the below. READ THE COMPLETE THREAD!!!!

Dear Mike:
>
>
>
> On behalf of Governor Deval L. Patrick, thank you for your recent
> correspondence regarding firearm safety and legislation.
>
>
>
> Governor Patrick believes that successfully deterring gun violence
> requires a multi-faceted approach and should include policies focused on
> guns and at-risk individuals. That is why the Governor has and will
> continue to push for legislation that includes a formal collaboration
> between Massachusetts and the National Mental Health Registry, a ban on
> assault weapons and a limit on the amount of guns one person can buy in a
> given month.
>
>
>
> Once again, thank you for your input on this important issue. Please feel
> free to contact our office again in the future with any additional
> questions or concerns. Your comments are always welcome in this
> administration.
>
>
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Governor Patrick's Constituent Services Office
>
> 617-725-4005
>
> www.mass.gov/governor/contact


I replied back at the same day. Sent: 1/22/2013 3:37:57 PM
To: "Webmail, Gov (GOV)"
<[email protected]>
Cc:
Subject: Re: Your message to Governor Patrick
Governor Patrick's Constituent Services Office,
Thanks for the quick feedback on my last concern about this new misguided firearm path.

I again wanted to write you back today to express my concern and disappointment in the political direction Governor Patrick's office has taken.

It is clear that you and your party in general have no real concern in preventing future tragedies such as this. You know full well that any measures you take to ban or further regulate firearms will in no way prevent these tragedies. Look the city of Chicago and the land of Great Britain provide positive proof that gun control does nothing to prevent crime.

I firmly believe that current NICS background check should include a mental health check. But I can also see the legal battles that will open up due to this issue.

The other issues I have, which were missed on your response, will just hinder law-abiding citizens of this second amendment right in this state. I included the link below for these items.
We already have some of the strictest laws in this US and it's very hard to find firearms that other states have since we have a non-approved list from the attorney general office. So outside of the insane trigger pull requirement and other non-needed safety features, the governor now wants to reduce a magazine count from 10 to 7 rounds. How was this count chosen and
how does this reduce anything? Again, we already have a hard time to get items in this state and this will just hinder (and cost more) for legal law-abiding citizens.

Next, we already have an assault weapons ban (AWB) since 1994 and they do not work. Look at the studies and did not Columbine School shooting happen in 1999? This was during the Federal AWB that expired in 2004.

To close governor, if you and your administration do implement stricter gun laws, under the guise of protecting our children, you will simply be turning your back on the real problem and basically leaving our children in harm's way. I know no other way to express my thoughts except to say that it will be you who is responsible for the next lives that are lost. It will
be you who will falsely give our state hope that your actions in some way make them safer. It will be you who fools the Massachusetts people while promoting a failed agenda that you have long believed in. I pray with all my heart that you, your administration and the legislature see fit to do
the right thing. To protect our children in a meaningful way without infringing on the rights of our citizens.

Ps. This is yet another reason why I want to leave this state.

I thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Mike

Looks what I got back at On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Webmail, Gov (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:--(1 hour later)


January 22, 2013


Dear Mike:

On behalf of Governor Deval L. Patrick, thank you for your recent correspondence regarding firearm safety and legislation.

Governor Patrick believes that successfully deterring gun violence requires a multi-faceted approach and should include policies focused on guns and at-risk individuals. That is why the Governor has and will continue to push for legislation that includes a formal collaboration between Massachusetts and the National Mental Health Registry, a ban on assault weapons and a limit on the amount of guns one person can buy in a given month.

Once again, thank you for your input on this important issue. Please feel free to contact our office again in the future with any additional questions or concerns. Your comments are always welcome in this administration.


Sincerely,
Governor Patrick's Constituent Services Office
617-725-4005
www.mass.gov/governor/contact



THEY ARE NOT EVEN READING THEIR EMAILS!
 
Back
Top Bottom