• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Bill - No Possession of a Loaded Firearm w/in 1000 feet of a Dwelling in Use

Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
539
Likes
275
Location
Metrowest
Feedback: 5 / 0 / 0
Is anyone familiar with the proposed bill below (House Bill No. 2188)? This bill is in for review by the Joint Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security. Sponsored by Kathi-Anne Reinstein (D) Revere. Looks like an extension of the existing 500 feet law but with even more restrictions.

SECTION 1. Chapter 131 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2008 Official Edition, is hereby amended by striking out section 58 and inserting in place thereof the following section:-

Section 58. A person shall not discharge any firearm or release any arrow upon or across any state or hard surfaced highway, or within one hundred and fifty feet, of any such highway, or possess a loaded firearm or hunt by any means on the land of another within one thousand feet of any dwelling in use, except as authorized by the owner or occupant thereof. For the purposes of this section, the state or local police, environmental police officers and deputy environmental police officers, in areas over which they have jurisdiction, shall have the power to enforce the provisions of this section.
 
Not that I'm trying to support the bill or anything, but I think the intent was to restrict hunting, effectively doubling the current 500 foot limit. However, the wording is so poor that it could be misused to prevent mere carrying, which means that carrying virtually anywhere in a populated area would be illegal.
 
Not that I'm trying to support the bill or anything, but I think the intent was to restrict hunting, effectively doubling the current 500 foot limit. However, the wording is so poor that it could be misused to prevent mere carrying, which means that carrying virtually anywhere in a populated area would be illegal.

Don't fool yourself, that is the real intent behind this bill.
 
Edit: okay, really bad wording. I guess it limits your right to posses a loaded firearm on someone else's property without permission.
 
The pol proposing this is from revere. I don't think there is a concern with hunting too close to homes in revere.
 
I'll keep donating, and stay active with all you guys....but I'll be honest, I can't wait to move to FL in December. This state is an absolute nightmare.
 
You just gotta love unenforceable laws.

"You fired over here from 500 feet!"
"No, I was over there, way beyond that point."
"But your footprints are here!"
"Prove it."
-Case Closed-
 
Thanks for putting it in perspective. That is insane.

No, it's NOT insane. It's part of a plan, that, if not finely coordinated, has general outlines that mesh together. "Poorly written" is not "poorly written" when the "oops" advances the cause of the writer.

THIS IS NOT AN ACCIDENT! If a poorly written law is enacted....it's still a law. And we're not a particularly sympathetic group.
 
No, it's NOT insane. It's part of a plan, that, if not finely coordinated, has general outlines that mesh together. "Poorly written" is not "poorly written" when the "oops" advances the cause of the writer.

THIS IS NOT AN ACCIDENT! If a poorly written law is enacted....it's still a law. And we're not a particularly sympathetic group.

I should have chosen my words more carefully. You are absolutely right that this is part of a plan. This bullshit just made me join GOAL, even though I'm not rollin' in the dough.
 
1000 feet would make us lose most of the hunting areas in eastern mass. Just another step to screw us.
So what about those ranges that abut a range... I was thinking specifically about Braintree...

- - - Updated - - -

1000 feet would make us lose most of the hunting areas in eastern mass. Just another step to screw us.
So what about those ranges that abut a range... I was thinking specifically about Braintree...

- - - Updated - - -

1000 feet would make us lose most of the hunting areas in eastern mass. Just another step to screw us.
What about those ranges that abut ranges... Thinking specifically about Braintree.
 
So we could not go to your house for a coffee while carrying??? We could if we call ahead??? Suppose you need proof of permission too???
Now that is a bit over the edge!!!!!!!!
Edit: okay, really bad wording. I guess it limits your right to posses a loaded firearm on someone else's property without permission.
 
Back
Top Bottom