THIS.
-
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.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Charlie Baker on WGBH 11AM call in show
- Thread starter crazymjb
- Start date
warwickben
bubba Kalashnikov
Can't listen at work . Please post cliff notes
strangenh
NES Member
That's it. Asked and answered. He's said she has the ability to interpret the law, and while the problem is confusion over what it applies to in the "short-term" he is hoping there will be "a list" of the banned items.
Not much help from that quarter.
Not much help from that quarter.
Arvin is a bau5
Baker has f&cked us
Listening online via their website @ work.
strangenh
NES Member
Hah. I'd expect broadcast to be on the delay (listening to their Boston signal here - that thing carries if you have a decent antenna).
Anyhow, the question sucked, more or less just asking his opinion without pointing out this is a radical interpretation of a longstanding law with parallel, almost identical legislation federally and throughout many states none of which were ever interpreted that way. And Baker basically just gave his opinion without anyone raising or addressing the big issue.
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2012
- Messages
- 262
- Likes
- 101
I dont imagine the call screener is going to let a bunch of AWB questions on the air. That Indian guy is probably the only one you're going to hear. "Sorry, we already had that question, thanks for calling".
He probably called from the AG's office.
strangenh
NES Member
ANOTHER CALLER.
Good question. About the interpretation making owners into fellons. Gov is just echoing the AG's point, and once again says he thinks there need to be a list and statement of the "rules of the game."
Good question. About the interpretation making owners into fellons. Gov is just echoing the AG's point, and once again says he thinks there need to be a list and statement of the "rules of the game."
strangenh
NES Member
He sounded a little like he was affected by that question, for all he then backed the AG on a wait-and-see basis. It's possible that a really good legal brief sent to the governor from (say) Comm2A could really change his mind from looking at this as a good thing about dealers "skirting" the ban vs. the AG wildly overdriving the law.
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2012
- Messages
- 262
- Likes
- 101
I was kind of shocked.
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2012
- Messages
- 262
- Likes
- 101
good job!
Baker said that if you bought it in good faith that you are legal. That is NOT what the written words say. Big difference between "legal" and "choosing not to prosecute you AT THIS TIME"!!!
He needs to be educated on what she stated as it seems he was fed BS on her stance. I sent in an Email to him to cover that a short time ago.
Dear Gov. Baker,
As a gun owner, former police officer, firearms instructor and law abiding citizen (until yesterday when the AG declared me a felon), this re-write of MGL (and what was Fed Law 1994-2004 and clarified by BATFE many times) is illegal, unjust (she says she won't prosecute me AT THIS TIME for what I've owned for years now). I am very unhappy to read that you support her in this action and wish that you'd give it some more serious thought. I don't believe that you have the power to over-rule her, but steps somewhere should be taken so that guns we bought legally from 1994 to yesterday are still legal to own/buy/sell. There is no loophole and this is not going to prevent the massacres that we've been seeing. We need better intel on potential terrorists and we need stiffer jail terms for criminals and nothing else is really going to work (we've seen trucks are sadly very effective, box cutters, etc. we can't ban everything).
Thank you.
Respectfully,
Lens
He needs to be educated on what she stated as it seems he was fed BS on her stance. I sent in an Email to him to cover that a short time ago.
Dear Gov. Baker,
As a gun owner, former police officer, firearms instructor and law abiding citizen (until yesterday when the AG declared me a felon), this re-write of MGL (and what was Fed Law 1994-2004 and clarified by BATFE many times) is illegal, unjust (she says she won't prosecute me AT THIS TIME for what I've owned for years now). I am very unhappy to read that you support her in this action and wish that you'd give it some more serious thought. I don't believe that you have the power to over-rule her, but steps somewhere should be taken so that guns we bought legally from 1994 to yesterday are still legal to own/buy/sell. There is no loophole and this is not going to prevent the massacres that we've been seeing. We need better intel on potential terrorists and we need stiffer jail terms for criminals and nothing else is really going to work (we've seen trucks are sadly very effective, box cutters, etc. we can't ban everything).
Thank you.
Respectfully,
Lens
