Boston Globe Article on Governor's Proposal to Limit Gun Purchases

Jim Wallace, executive director of Gun Owners Action League, a Northborough-based organization opposed to the bill, said the proposal unfairly targeted people licensed to buy guns who have done nothing wrong.

"It blames them for crime," he said. "It's taking a group of citizens that are following the law and placing the blame at their feet for the actions that are taking place in the city."
Click to expand...

Amen brother...
 
LenS said:
I think that he is as anti or perhaps more so than Sarah Brady!
Click to expand...
Interesting position, considering one of his recent articles starts out with:
Douglas Vaughn Lloyd was doing the right thing when he attempted to break up a fight between two Fitchburg High School students, but he paid with his life. All too often we choose not to intervene when witnessing violence, even in situations where there is a legal duty or ethical responsibility to do so. It is easier, and certainly safer, to look the other way and pretend not to notice.
Click to expand...
(source, emphasis added)

So...I ought to intervene, but I ought to do so in the way which he feels is most appropriate? Better get his number and put it on speed dial so I can call him and ask him permission and the best method to proceed the next time I witness violence. [rolleyes]
 
Posted in comments on the James Fox article:

-->
Massachusetts already records every legal gun transfer in the state (The hidden reason other states pass One-Gun-A-Month laws. OGAM cannot be accomplished without statewide registration.)

This means that Massachusetts, with a simple database query, could tells us exactly how many "bulk purchases" have been made over the past years.

Of those bulk purchases, how many investigations and convictions for gun-running have been made?

Could it be that Massachusetts doesn't need a OGAM law, and that is why these easy answers are not forthcoming?

Criminals don't come to Massachusetts to buy guns. Massachusetts is not a "crime gun" source state.
<--
 
38% of just over 1 thousand guns = 380 guns.

How many of those were stolen verse purchased and resold?
How long since those guns where purchased?

1gun / month = 32 people. Does the state really think that fewer than 32 people are involved in obtaining guns for criminals?

It's too bad the pols can't focus on punishing criminals rather than further supressing the rights of law abiding citizens.
 
Pilgrim said:
I've been told that I (we) shouldn't be allowed to have guns because someone might steal them and hurt someone with them.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and you probably shouldn't have any knives, baseball bats or a car either, just to be safe.

Feel free to drop them off at my house.
 
I love this "more urgent" BS. Humans have acted the same since they came about, and will continue to act the same until we die off. People will kill other people. You can ban every object and people will still kill people. Get over it, and focus on catching and punishing those who commit such acts.
 
So you are all going to call and email the members of the committee (again) and urge them to vote against it right?

Senator Cynthia Stone-Creem 617.722.1639
Senator Steven Baddour 617.722.1604
Senator Gale Candaras 617.722.1291 District Telephone 413.599.4785
Senator John Hart 617.722.1150
Senator Thomas McGee 617.722.1350
Senator Bruce Tarr 617.722.1600
Rep. Eugene O'Flaherty 617.722.2396 District Telephone 617.884.3350
Rep. Christopher Speranzo 617.722.2396 District Telephone 413.447.7225
Rep. James Fagan 617.722.2430 District Telephone 508.824.7000
Rep. Colleen Garry 617.722.2380
Rep. Marie St. Fleur 617.722.2030
Rep. John Fernandes 617.722.2396 District Telephone 508.473.3063
Rep. Katherine Clark 617.722.2220
Rep. Danielle Gregoire 617.722.2080
Rep. James Dwyer 617-722-2014


[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
 
TomH said:
I love this "more urgent" BS. Humans have acted the same since they came about, and will continue to act the same until we die off. People will kill other people. You can ban every object and people will still kill people. Get over it, and focus on catching and punishing those who commit such acts.
Click to expand...

I agree, If these fools put half as much effort and diverted 1/4th the monetary resources that they waste passing foolish, useless laws into crime investigation they'd be on the right track to resolving some of the problems in the urban crime areas.
Instead, they put on the phoniest of facades, publicizing their empty rhetorical bullshit statements to the press and the public........meanwhile CRIME marches on and citizens rights are diminished.

NOT ONE MORE INCH!!!!!! You BASTARDS!!!
 
Here is round 2 to Ms. Creem with some of the wording in JCR's post.
Dear Ms. Creem,

I wrote to you yesterday to voice my displeasure of your support for legislation to limit firearm purchases in the state of Massachusetts. I think it is important to note that Massachusetts already records every legal gun transfer in the state. This means that Massachusetts, with a simple database query, could tell us (the voters) exactly how many "bulk purchases" have been made over the past years. Of those bulk purchases, how many investigations and convictions for gunrunning have been made? I ask you, where is this information? How many so called "straw purchases" have put guns on our streets? When weapons used in crimes are recovered who does the serial number trace back to? Maybe if politicians were not wasting so much time on needless regulations we could address the real issues that are at the root of this problem.
• A lack of jobs that pay a livable wage to high school graduates.
• A broken public school system.
• A city where the culture of silence protects the criminals.
• A broken Department of Social Services.

Sincerely,

Jason
 
We keep hearing about the "Iron Pipeline" and the number of guns found with criminals that are traced back to legal gun purchases, but we NEVER hear about convictions of those dealers or straw purchasers.

WHERE THE HELL ARE THE CONVICTIONS?

If a gun used in a crime in MA is traced to a corrupt dealer in ME or NH or to a straw purchaser, why the hell haven't they been tried and convicted for breaking firearms laws? Hell, Menino or Bloomberg or one of the other jackass "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" would LOVE to have the scalp of a dealer on their mantle.

But we never hear about it (outside of Bloomberg's illegal harassment of dealers a couple years back) so I can only surmise their data on traced crime guns is total BS.
 
Pilgrim said:
I've been told that I (we) shouldn't be allowed to have guns because someone might steal them and hurt someone with them.
Click to expand...

And, echoing Coakely's famous statement, I heard one of Martha's Minions declare, "I don't believe in self-help." [puke]
 
Last edited:
jcr said:
Posted in comments on the James Fox article:

-->
Massachusetts already records every legal gun transfer in the state (The hidden reason other states pass One-Gun-A-Month laws. OGAM cannot be accomplished without statewide registration.)

This means that Massachusetts, with a simple database query, could tells us exactly how many "bulk purchases" have been made over the past years.

Of those bulk purchases, how many investigations and convictions for gun-running have been made?

Could it be that Massachusetts doesn't need a OGAM law, and that is why these easy answers are not forthcoming?

Criminals don't come to Massachusetts to buy guns. Massachusetts is not a "crime gun" source state.
<--
Click to expand...

Don't forget that other states have already tried, and repealed, OGAM laws after discovering that they're a huge waste of money and effort, with ZERO effect on crime.

[frown]
 
jasons said:
Broken link. Here's the correct one: http://boston.com/community/blogs/crime_punishment/2010/06/blown_call_on_gun_bill.html
Click to expand...

The comments are overwhelmingly against this bill.

I think this guy sums it up nicely.

somewhereinthemiddle wrote:
The comments on this board are as colorful as ever. We are all on the same side people. There is room for healthy debate, cut out the name calling. None of us are 100% correct all of the time. Some people don't like guns, some people love them. I would not want to live in erinwm's liberal utopia just as much as I would not want to live in a hard line wackjob right wing state. Unfortunately for the people in the middle, we seem to get screwed the most. Right wing does not like stem cell research and thinks Jesus is going to cure all diseases. The left would just assume give up all their rights for their version of a better society. We all need to take a step back and look at the facts, of which there seem to be none of. We seem to have plenty of laws on the books but you never hear about "so and so" laundering guns on the news, so I am wondering why the gov thinks this bill will make a difference. On the other hand, I can understand why someone going in to buy 25 guns needs to be looked at. There needs to be some common sense when it comes to making laws that effect our constitutional rights. If the people on the right are correct and the governor is trying to make this change as a tool in an election year, we are all screwed because the process is very broken. As an aside, it does seem lately that all of the places in the country that have a gun ban also have the highest violent crime rates. Hopefully the Supreme Court will settle most of this in the next few weeks to take the decision making power away from the local officials that don't seem to know how to deal with the big picture.
Click to expand...
 
The problem I see with this siuation:

WE know that it will not be an "effective" law ( in that it will reduce crime).....however....

It sounds good, to someone that's an Anti. It shows that something is being done, and if you don't need any guns, then one a month is more than enough. Actually, it's too many! Either the slippery slope is not an issue to them, or it's a benefit.

Hell, in a state where the legislature can seriously debate the banning of Marshmallow Fluff form school lunches, this sort of reasoning makes sense.

When you hear, "You can't be too safe!" you know it's a problem for all that believe in personal responsibility....remember a couple of years back when the old lady strangled on the escalator, because none of the passers by had a popcket knife? That's because too many people expect that they will be protected and cared for, and any step in that direction is "good."
 
I'm just a newb and new member to this forum but, I ask that you call, please. It takes 25 mins to call all the numbers. It gets easy after the first couple. They really just want your name and location and what side of the issue your on.

it's for the kids...please, I beg you.

Rob said:
So you are all going to call and email the members of the committee (again) and urge them to vote against it right?

Senator Cynthia Stone-Creem 617.722.1639
Senator Steven Baddour 617.722.1604
Senator Gale Candaras 617.722.1291 District Telephone 413.599.4785
Senator John Hart 617.722.1150
Senator Thomas McGee 617.722.1350
Senator Bruce Tarr 617.722.1600
Rep. Eugene O'Flaherty 617.722.2396 District Telephone 617.884.3350
Rep. Christopher Speranzo 617.722.2396 District Telephone 413.447.7225
Rep. James Fagan 617.722.2430 District Telephone 508.824.7000
Rep. Colleen Garry 617.722.2380
Rep. Marie St. Fleur 617.722.2030
Rep. John Fernandes 617.722.2396 District Telephone 508.473.3063
Rep. Katherine Clark 617.722.2220
Rep. Danielle Gregoire 617.722.2080
Rep. James Dwyer 617-722-2014


[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Click to expand...
 
Umm, I saw an article today in the Globe that said the one-gun-a-month bill had been voted in, but the vote was miscounted, and thus the bill
was recorded as losing the vote and was tabled? Did anyone else see that?
can't find the link now.
 
hminsky said:
Umm, I saw an article today in the Globe that said the one-gun-a-month bill had been voted in, but the vote was miscounted, and thus the bill
was recorded as losing the vote and was tabled? Did anyone else see that?
can't find the link now.
Click to expand...

Go back a page to post #45
 
jasons said:
Broken link. Here's the correct one: http://boston.com/community/blogs/crime_punishment/2010/06/blown_call_on_gun_bill.html
Click to expand...

Got to love how that buffoon trivializes one's right to self-preservation to Armando Gallaraga. Something tells me this jerk lives in a gated community where the last crime committed was a jaywalk offense in 1997.

What an ass. He calls this a "blown call". But it's a 'W' the "freedom" column. I like these "blown calls". We need more of them!
 

Similar threads

  • Poll
NH - Governor's race
Replies
17
Views
487
Grendizer138
Grendizer138
Boston gang member who posed with guns on Snapchat goes to prison
2
Replies
31
Views
975
1sern
1
NEW- Gun Grab Bill Six-member conference committee to decide Legislature's gun control proposal
Replies
24
Views
1K
StevieP
StevieP
Interesting Article on the "Notching" of Firearms to Keep Track of "Kills"
Replies
8
Views
400
clampett
clampett
This hurt my brain reading this "article" on an AR-15
Replies
14
Views
564
Broc
Broc
Back
Top Bottom