Bump stock taking letter

So, we've all rolled over and taken it up the ass, yea?

No protest, no lawsuit, no FU letter sent... No contacting the DOJ... nothing?
 
Granite Guardsman said:
From a huff post article so take it with a grain of salt....
“They’re not used for any sporting purpose, they’re not used in hunting, they would be impractical for self defense. ... They’re toys,” said Brent Carlton, president and co-founder of the Massachusetts-based gun rights group Comm2A. “But the fact of the matter is people spent money on them, they own them, they presumably have a property interest in them.”

What bothers me is the first half of his statement, it almost seems like he’s saying I don’t give a shit if you ban them but I think you should compensate those who turn them in.

I think the stance should’ve been more along the lines of banning them solves nothing and if you get away with it we feel there should be some form of compensation. It’s almost like he went PC on it.
Click to expand...
Good post. This is my point. It has to be a 4A issue because on 2A grounds it’s a loser because gunz. Bump stocks are not guns but in the court of popular opinion they’re evil since Vegas.

Arguing 2A on bumpstocks sets the stage for a loss in the courts.
 
Arguing 4A on bumpstocks can be a winner because it’s a taking without compensation.

What the state was likely worried about was going into the buying bumpstock business. What was to keep people from crossing state lines, buying a bumpstocks only to turn it in to the state thereby putting the state in a position of having purchased a bumpstock.
 
Granite Guardsman said:
From a huff post article so take it with a grain of salt....
“They’re not used for any sporting purpose, they’re not used in hunting, they would be impractical for self defense. ... They’re toys,” said Brent Carlton, president and co-founder of the Massachusetts-based gun rights group Comm2A. “But the fact of the matter is people spent money on them, they own them, they presumably have a property interest in them.”

What bothers me is the first half of his statement, it almost seems like he’s saying I don’t give a shit if you ban them but I think you should compensate those who turn them in.

I think the stance should’ve been more along the lines of banning them solves nothing and if you get away with it we feel there should be some form of compensation. It’s almost like he went PC on it.
Click to expand...

I've had some interesting email with Bent, and it's pretty clear we disagree on some points that are very important to me. But you have to consider that his public comments are for the general public and not gun owners in general, or even the smaller number of those that care about the issue. And he is right, this is not a 2a issue, it's a 4a issue.

I don't think we'll see anything happen in the courts. There is no win to this on the courts. They either side with the state and establish that they can take property in the public interest, or they lose and the state has to pay for the 4 that were turned in. More likely the state just pays for the 4 turned in and the court throws out the claim as not having standing.

Issues I'd like to see Comm2a work on;
Suitability - if you look at the ruling last time it was challenged (pre 2014), the new laws in 2014 practically go out of their way to negate that ruling, and that was in the state court, this should be done in fed court.
Locally imposed additional requirements - This needs to be addressed on a statewide level, not an individual incident which just means they have to keep going back. To be honest, suitability is the hammer that lets them get away with this. Without suitability a person could just file without the extra requirements and wait for the deadline. If they are approved, great, word gets around and the problem is solved. If they are denied, there won't be anything other than an invalid suitability claim, court has no choice but to grant the license, word gets around, problem solved. Or the PD lets the deadline expire, but that just gets it into court same as the denial, problem solved.
You want bang for your buck? Bring suitability to the fed court and take it all the way.
We also need to get the reciprocity bill passed, but that's a fed issue.
 
Channel 22 in Springfield was saying this morning that it's not too late to turn in your bumpstock even though the deadline has passed. It sounds like they know there's many more that people aren't going to turn in so they're giving us the chance to still turn them in without being arrested. (like they're doing a big favor)

Greg
 
deerdad said:
Channel 22 in Springfield was saying this morning that it's not too late to turn in your bumpstock even though the deadline has passed. It sounds like they know there's many more that people aren't going to turn in so they're giving us the chance to still turn them in without being arrested. (like they're doing a big favor)

Greg
Click to expand...

Sounds like a trap. By what authority are they making these exceptions?
 
I have no answer about the specifics, only that they're giving the people a little more time. It was just quick piece on the news this morning. Of course it was brought to you by the bottom feeders of 22 news.

Greg
 
Hmm. 22 is the only outlet reporting it, and they don't have any real facts in the piece. I wonder if they're just a couple of weeks late:

State and local police reminding residents to turn in their bump stocks

And John Mento Jr. of Springfield is an idealistic idiot.

“I think it would be safer to just take guns off the streets period,” John Mento Jr. of Springfield said. “I don’t believe people should have them.”
Click to expand...
 
deerdad said:
Channel 22 in Springfield was saying this morning that it's not too late to turn in your bumpstock even though the deadline has passed. It sounds like they know there's many more that people aren't going to turn in so they're giving us the chance to still turn them in without being arrested. (like they're doing a big favor)

Greg
Click to expand...

How nice of them! Did they throw in the asterisk after the story that reads “the police are allowed to lie to you and there’s nothing saying they can’t.” ? [rofl]

They should call that “legal taqqiya”
 
42! said:
Issues I'd like to see Comm2a work on;
Suitability - if you look at the ruling last time it was challenged (pre 2014), the new laws in 2014 practically go out of their way to negate that ruling, and that was in the state court, this should be done in fed court.
Locally imposed additional requirements - This needs to be addressed on a statewide level, not an individual incident which just means they have to keep going back. To be honest, suitability is the hammer that lets them get away with this. Without suitability a person could just file without the extra requirements and wait for the deadline. If they are approved, great, word gets around and the problem is solved. If they are denied, there won't be anything other than an invalid suitability claim, court has no choice but to grant the license, word gets around, problem solved. Or the PD lets the deadline expire, but that just gets it into court same as the denial, problem solved.
You want bang for your buck? Bring suitability to the fed court and take it all the way.
We also need to get the reciprocity bill passed, but that's a fed issue.
Click to expand...

I have recently been thinking about this topic (suitability) and the bigger picture of fighting for our 2A rights in this state.

Prior to 2014 when the FID was shall issue and LTCs were may issue, the suitability question was tested in court and if I am not mistaken, the ruling was that since the FID was shall issue and that with an FID you could have some sort of a firearm, the 2A was not infringed. The whole ruling pivoted on the FID being shall issue.

In 2014, we lost shall issue on the FID.

So now all licenses to purchase or possess a firearm in MA are may issue and subject to suitability.

There are no definitions of what makes a person unsuitable. It is completely up to the local licensing authority. So, if I am outspoken in the media and the Chief of Police doesn't like it, there goes my license. If I attempt civil disobedience to protest something, there goes my license. More or less, any public speech or position potentially puts my license at risk and within MA my ability to exercise my 2A rights in any way.

Further, since upon revocation of my permit to exercise my 2A rights, the state will confiscate my property (and not just the firearms, also the ammunition, holsters, scopes, cases, etc), there is a strong financial risk in exercising my 1A rights as well.

All this together produces a strongly chilling effect on our ability to freely speak our minds and to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
 
JackOfAllTrades said:
I have recently been thinking about this topic (suitability) and the bigger picture of fighting for our 2A rights in this state.

Prior to 2014 when the FID was shall issue and LTCs were may issue, the suitability question was tested in court and if I am not mistaken, the ruling was that since the FID was shall issue and that with an FID you could have some sort of a firearm, the 2A was not infringed. The whole ruling pivoted on the FID being shall issue.

In 2014, we lost shall issue on the FID.

So now all licenses to purchase or possess a firearm in MA are may issue and subject to suitability.

There are no definitions of what makes a person unsuitable. It is completely up to the local licensing authority. So, if I am outspoken in the media and the Chief of Police doesn't like it, there goes my license. If I attempt civil disobedience to protest something, there goes my license. More or less, any public speech or position potentially puts my license at risk and within MA my ability to exercise my 2A rights in any way.

Further, since upon revocation of my permit to exercise my 2A rights, the state will confiscate my property (and not just the firearms, also the ammunition, holsters, scopes, cases, etc), there is a strong financial risk in exercising my 1A rights as well.

All this together produces a strongly chilling effect on our ability to freely speak our minds and to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Click to expand...

Sends shivers down your spine doesn't it?

My wife and I were sitting in our living room last night, and I remarked to her that I know that it seems as though every day I'm outraged by our government - I didn't use to care as much. Her response was that our government wasn't as outrageous before - and to be glad we left New England.

California, Oregon, Illinois, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Maryland - these states are in a race to water down the second amendment through regulation so that it's meaningless. And their track record on the first and fourth amendments as you note above is pretty reprehensible also.

I know I've said it before, probably far too many times for some people here - I moved. For several reasons. Weather, the economy and gun laws. I was planning on retiring south eventually, I just relocated before I retired because it was in my best interest.

That's not an option available to everyone. But there are things I do that everyone can do. I'm a lifetime member of the NRA and I sent them periodic donations. I don't agree with everything they do - but they're the big dog in the room - and they're the people that the gungrabbers like Giffords hate and focus on. So support the NRA even if you don't embrace everything that they do.

I send checks to the Second Amendment Foundation. They file court cases - and they win, and they file cases all over the country.

I still spend time in CT, so I'm still a member of CCDL and I send them the occasional check and attend some of the rallies, dinners, etc.

If you're in MA - support GOAL and COMM2A - they're working for you on a state level.
 
JackOfAllTrades said:
I have recently been thinking about this topic (suitability) and the bigger picture of fighting for our 2A rights in this state.

Prior to 2014 when the FID was shall issue and LTCs were may issue, the suitability question was tested in court and if I am not mistaken, the ruling was that since the FID was shall issue and that with an FID you could have some sort of a firearm, the 2A was not infringed. The whole ruling pivoted on the FID being shall issue.

In 2014, we lost shall issue on the FID.

So now all licenses to purchase or possess a firearm in MA are may issue and subject to suitability.

There are no definitions of what makes a person unsuitable. It is completely up to the local licensing authority. So, if I am outspoken in the media and the Chief of Police doesn't like it, there goes my license. If I attempt civil disobedience to protest something, there goes my license. More or less, any public speech or position potentially puts my license at risk and within MA my ability to exercise my 2A rights in any way.

Further, since upon revocation of my permit to exercise my 2A rights, the state will confiscate my property (and not just the firearms, also the ammunition, holsters, scopes, cases, etc), there is a strong financial risk in exercising my 1A rights as well.

All this together produces a strongly chilling effect on our ability to freely speak our minds and to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Click to expand...

Absolute, and all points I've made publically and to Comm2a, but there is little interest in this.

For the record, I support, and encourage others to support Comm2a, They do a lot of good. That doesn't mean I agree with everything they do.
 
So MA sent me a "bump stock" letter. I'm in TX, and yes, it had my TX address. No idea how but they know where I am. Now, what should I do? LOL
 
PennyPincher said:
So MA sent me a "bump stock" letter. I'm in TX, and yes, it had my TX address. No idea how but they know where I am. Now, what should I do? LOL
Click to expand...

Absolutely troll them. write on it and send it back "Thank you for your advice but I'll be keeping mine" "Come and get me suckaaah" [devil]
Be sure to include the little devil emoji
 
You just know it's bugging the crap out of them that they don't have a bin stuffed full of them to photo op.

“I think it would be safer to just take guns off the streets period,” John Mento Jr. of Springfield said. “I don’t believe people should have them.”

Well John, you can get the party started anytime.
Gear up and nut up.
 
new guy said:
Sounds like a trap. By what authority are they making these exceptions?
Click to expand...
I agree that there is risk, but police may exercise discretion in enforcing law. For instance, they see you speeding but do not stop you, or if they do they issue a warning only.
 
Dadstoys said:
You just know it's bugging the crap out of them that they don't have a bin stuffed full of them to photo op.

“I think it would be safer to just take guns off the streets period,” John Mento Jr. of Springfield said. “I don’t believe people should have them.”

Well John, you can get the party started anytime.
Gear up and nut up.
Click to expand...
No. He wants Police (with GUNS) to come and take them away from the law-abiding in stark violation of the COTUS while he sits comfy on his recliner watching the Voice eating his Cheetos.
 
Horrible said:
No. He wants Police (with GUNS) to come and take them away from the law-abiding in stark violation of the COTUS while he sits comfy on his recliner watching the Voice eating his Cheetos.
Click to expand...

Of course he does.
Liberals never have the balls to step up to the plate.
 
If people still can't find a way to get these out of their possession, why not douse them in gasoline and burn them? Or throw them in the garbage? Or throw them in your neighbor's garbage? Or in the garbage at McDonalds? Or at the library? JFC, people are still trying to give them to the police for some reason? Drive to another state and leave it on a picnic table for Christ's sake.

Or do like hundreds/thousands of other people did and just keep them.
 
As soon as the primaries get going, the “SAY NO TO BAKER” plywood goes in the bed of my truck. If he wins the primary, I’ll put 12v chaser lights around it.
 
Just how low have the staties fallen?

“Major Anderson… gave the plaintiff a direct order to commit and participate in multiple felonies, as part of an overarching and far-reaching conspiracy that Major Anderson told the plaintiff extended to… the Secretary of Public Safety of the Commonwealth.”

I was thinking about that accusation against last month when I and 400,000 other firearms license- holders in the Commonwealth got threatening letters from this same Bennett “RE: Notice of Legislation Prohibiting Bump Stocks and Trigger Cranks.”

Basically, this career hack was demanding that law-abiding gun owners hand over these newly prohibited firearm enhancers to the State Police “for destruction. Retention of such a prohibited item beyond the 90-day grace period will expose the owner to criminal prosecution.”
 

Similar threads

Seattle PD taking out the trash
Replies
22
Views
626
MGnoob
MGnoob
Supreme Court Hears Texas Gun Store Owner’s Lawsuit Against Bump Stock Ban
2 3
Replies
87
Views
2K
HorizontalHunter
HorizontalHunter
Bump Stock Suit granted Cert.
2
Replies
39
Views
1K
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
The cause of poor accuracy was the stock? Maybe……..
Replies
7
Views
320
Taipan01
Taipan01
How can I bump my ad and edit the content?
Replies
1
Views
218
Fixxah
Fixxah
Back
Top Bottom