Clark Bill Would Keep Guns From Those Convicted of Animal Cruelty

Win

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
2,439
Likes
751
Location
Melrose, MA
Clark said her bill would close an existing loophole and cited a study from the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and Northeastern University linking animal abuse and future violence, MassLive reported.
Clark said the loophole exists because while federal law prohibits people with felony convictions from accessing guns, states often prosecute animal cruelty as a misdemeanor.
Clark Bill Would Keep Guns From Those Convicted of Animal Cruelty

Is it me or is everything that hasn't yet been legislated a "loophole?"
 

snax

NES Member
Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
4,236
Likes
3,103
Location
LA - lowell area
You'll soon have PETA pushing to have all hunters and owners of livestock for slaughter prosecuted for "animal cruelty".
Also anyone that kills a mosquito.
I think that covers everybody.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lip

amm5061

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Jun 20, 2016
Messages
6,426
Likes
4,012
Location
Holliston, MA
These a**h***s got two big wins in a row after the bump stock ban and ERPO bills went through. Now they're pushing for anything and everything.
 

allen-1

NES Member
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
6,437
Likes
6,186
Location
GA; (CT escapee)
I don't hit or kick my dog and I think less of anyone who would do so;
but -
"Massachusetts Democrat cites study linking animal abuse and future violence"

Future violence huh? So, you're going to take away someone's constitutional rights based upon a PREDICTION of what they MIGHT do in the future?

No. Just No. GTFO.
 

HorizontalHunter

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
4,321
Likes
2,092
Location
Western Massachusetts
I don't hit or kick my dog and I think less of anyone who would do so;
but -
"Massachusetts Democrat cites study linking animal abuse and future violence"

Future violence huh? So, you're going to take away someone's constitutional rights based upon a PREDICTION of what they MIGHT do in the future?

No. Just No. GTFO.
Erpo does the same thing. It's no different.

Bob
 
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
Joined
Dec 29, 2011
Messages
1,835
Likes
850
Location
Sheltering in place!
An animal cruelty conviction is a misdafelony, so the defendant will end up a fed PP anyway. Even if they CWOF out, most LOs will just deny based on “suitability.”

Do these politicians even research the laws before introducing bills? Rhetorical question.
 

BUMPA01603

NES Member
Rating - 100%
59   0   0
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
2,902
Likes
6,200
The gun owners in MA all feel like Dogs that are being kicked every day, and it sucks!

PS: I love my dog...
 

swatgig

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
May 26, 2011
Messages
4,987
Likes
4,188
Location
In the shallow end of the gene pool
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Nov 8, 2005
Messages
23,921
Likes
2,858
Totally missed this was a federal thing, and Mass. is already there. (Did I get that right?)
 

Win

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
2,439
Likes
751
Location
Melrose, MA
Some here truly take exception to this proposal in cases of true animal abuse?-if it were up to me these mutants would be deprived of much more than their guns.
I do. Criminals who are a danger to society need to stay in jail. If they are not a danger to society they need to be released and have their rights fully restored. It's nonsensical to believe that taking someone's ability to legally purchase a firearm renders them incapable of doing harm.
 

drgrant

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
59   0   0
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
66,776
Likes
23,241
Some here truly take exception to this proposal in cases of true animal abuse?-if it were up to me these mutants would be deprived of much more than their guns.
If animal abuse as defined in the statute can only be a felony, then the entire piece of legislation is redundant because you can't legally own guns as a convicted felon anyways.

So basically this smells like feel good bullshit, unless it's one of these deals where they worded it one way but really mean something
else that's likely far more insidious.

-Mike
 

inkdesigner

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
May 2, 2015
Messages
440
Likes
112
Location
MA/NH Border
This bill was filed in the US Congress, not just in MA, correct? Of course, in MA an animal cruelty conviction makes one a PP. Doesnt pretty much everything in MA you can be convicted of make you a PP? It's for the children, after all,

Is it possible that in some states an animal cruelty conviction can carry a less than 2 year sentence?
 

enbloc

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
40   0   0
Joined
Sep 10, 2009
Messages
18,284
Likes
18,242
Next, they're going to try and pass a Bill the blocks guns from those who stand up to pee...
 

Rob Boudrie

NES Member
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
34,012
Likes
10,394
Future violence huh? So, you're going to take away someone's constitutional rights based upon a PREDICTION of what they MIGHT do in the future?
No, it is being done for what the person has done.

Now, if they were to say "you are disqualified because diverse people in your age group are at increased risk of committing crime", that would be taking away rights based on what someone might do.
 

jpk

Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
13,689
Likes
7,285
Animal cruelty is a violent act folks. Therefore it should result in loss of guns. Hurt my dog and you'll find that you lost your LTC, when you are discharged from the hospital.
The problem with this is that the definition of animal cruelty is a moving target.

I dont think very many people are going to argue that heinous/violent/cruel acts should not be punished........I cannot however support penalizing people with perrmanent violation of fundamental rights.

Before long everything from hunting to disciplining your dog with a swat to the butt will render you a PP......its no different than the bullshit we see with child services abuse of citizens over dumb shit
 

GM-GUY

NES Member
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
8,998
Likes
4,067
Location
North Central Mass
If you have chickens and 'not enough space' for them (which again is a moving target) - you can get busted for animal cruelty. They will offer you a plea deal or take you to court and make you spend tens of thousands of dollars - and before you know it those four chickens in a 7.5' sqft area instead of 8 sqft cost you big time.
 

Mountain

NES Member
Rating - 100%
16   0   0
Joined
Jan 6, 2013
Messages
9,525
Likes
4,933
If you have chickens and 'not enough space' for them (which again is a moving target) - you can get busted for animal cruelty. They will offer you a plea deal or take you to court and make you spend tens of thousands of dollars - and before you know it those four chickens in a 7.5' sqft area instead of 8 sqft cost you big time.
Seems like that might be the kind of crap they would try to pull. I also think it's possible that they will step by step categorize some standard practices for trapping and hunting as 'cruel'.

Excuse me while I head to the kitchen to go beat some chicken embryos... [smile]
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jun 1, 2018
Messages
805
Likes
987
Not in agreement with this. This smells to me like an end around to apply more limits to gun ownership by the gun grabbers. It's easy to recognize their foul stench!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jpk

M60

NES Member
Rating - 100%
56   0   0
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
5,070
Likes
3,494
Location
Occupied Massachusetts
The problem with this is that the definition of animal cruelty is a moving target.

I dont think very many people are going to argue that heinous/violent/cruel acts should not be punished........I cannot however support penalizing people with perrmanent violation of fundamental rights.

Before long everything from hunting to disciplining your dog with a swat to the butt will render you a PP......its no different than the bullshit we see with child services abuse of citizens over dumb shit
Kinda sounds like another way of saying that if you beat your wife, or your dog, you shouldn't lose your LTC. Is that what you're saying?
 
Rating - 100%
18   0   0
Joined
Dec 21, 2012
Messages
7,276
Likes
1,829
Location
south of Dedham
The problem with this is that the definition of animal cruelty is a moving target.

I dont think very many people are going to argue that heinous/violent/cruel acts should not be punished........I cannot however support penalizing people with perrmanent violation of fundamental rights.

Before long everything from hunting to disciplining your dog with a swat to the butt will render you a PP......its no different than the bullshit we see with child services abuse of citizens over dumb shit
The real animal cruelty is already punishable. Doesn't seem right for taking away a constitutional right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jpk

jpk

Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
13,689
Likes
7,285
Kinda sounds like another way of saying that if you beat your wife, or your dog, you shouldn't lose your LTC. Is that what you're saying?
How about we take a couple steps back

LTC shouldnt exist at all and constitutional carry should be the norm....period.

Furthermore whats the point of prison/punishment at all if after doing time a person is only a "partial" citizen.

If as they say. the "Pen" (1A) is mightier than the "Sword" (2A) then why dont we punish individuals equally for heinous shit like inciting violence/calling for murder/harm to others?
 

W.E.C

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Jul 29, 2012
Messages
7,907
Likes
3,957
Location
Boston
What appears fine in text, is often abused in practice.

My Vote is no.

Thank god she is in Washington,and the bill won’t see the floor.

Stand by for grandstanding linsky to put up a mass version.
 

M60

NES Member
Rating - 100%
56   0   0
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
5,070
Likes
3,494
Location
Occupied Massachusetts
How about we take a couple steps back

LTC shouldnt exist at all and constitutional carry should be the norm....period.

Furthermore whats the point of prison/punishment at all if after doing time a person is only a "partial" citizen.

If as they say. the "Pen" (1A) is mightier than the "Sword" (2A) then why dont we punish individuals equally for heinous shit like inciting violence/calling for murder/harm to others?
This post sure smells like answer avoiding.
 

jpk

Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
13,689
Likes
7,285
This post sure smells like answer avoiding.
ROFL

Avoiding what?

You trying to equate people and critters and draw some sort of moral equivalency between the two?

The line of thinking that you're insinuating is the same one that before long equates killing of insects/pests with same to humans.
 
Top Bottom