Class A Unrestricted and Large Capacity

[jasons]

I saw that. It only tells me where you are now, not what your goals are and how you plan to get there.

You smell like an AG plant. You may not be, but you're coming off like one. If you're not you may want to chill out a bit.

 

[politenessman]

What I am is a very unhappy gun owner, who is faced with the prospect of moving from north Georgia to Mass, most likely Boston. Its a great move for the family and jobs, but a crappy move for my business and my hobby.

I'm trying to find a silver lining in all of this, but clearly there is none to be found.

As for chilling - how can you be chill, when faced with this?

Also, there is this huge red flag where GOAL are concerned. Having looked over the GOAL web site, I don't see any vested interest in them getting the laws changed. The ultimate goal of GOAL should be constitutional carry - no license or training requirement to purchase, posses or carry any firearm regardless of magazine capacity, type, date of manufacture etc. However, a big part of GOAL seems to be providing the training required to get a license. I am assuming they aren't offering this training for free so where is their incentive to eliminate this?
Until you eliminate the training requirement, the requirement for a permit of some sort stays. See what I am getting at?

 

[jasons]

Also, there is this huge red flag where GOAL are concerned. Having looked over the GOAL web site, I don't see any vested interest in them getting the laws changed. The ultimate goal of GOAL should be constitutional carry - no license or training requirement to purchase, posses or carry any firearm regardless of magazine capacity, type, date of manufacture etc. However, a big part of GOAL seems to be providing the training required to get a license. I am assuming they aren't offering this training for free so where is their incentive to eliminate this?
Until you eliminate the training requirement, the requirement for a permit of some sort stays. See what I am getting at?

They're a non-profit and nobody at GOAL is getting rich. You really should learn a bit about them before you start accusing them of profiteering. Really, that's one of the dumbest things I've read on here in a while.

Anyway, they do a lot more than just training and a lot more than any other org that I'm aware of. Getting a "pro-gun" bill passed in MA is not exactly easy but they keep trying. Lately it's been a slog just to prevent new anti-gun bills from getting passed. We ~almost~ had a "one gun a month" bill (among other things) pass last session and GOAL was instrumental in preventing that.

On a serious note - move to NH instead. Support GOAL anyway.

 

[politenessman]

They're a non-profit and nobody at GOAL is getting rich. You really should learn a bit about them before you start accusing them of profiteering. Really, that's one of the dumbest things I've read on here in a while.

Seriously, thats your answer?
Clearly, I am trying to learn more, hence the questions.
As for accusing them of profiteering, you clearly read more into my question than was actually there.

Look I understand that nothing is accomplished without money and that money has to come from somewhere, I just asked if there was a road-map for getting to a better place. Can anyone give me a straight answer?

 

[pjorg]

What I am is a very unhappy gun owner, who is faced with the prospect of moving from north Georgia to Mass, most likely Boston. Its a great move for the family and jobs, but a crappy move for my business and my hobby.

Do not move to Boston. I live here in the city, and I'm telling you, there's no reason for it. You can move to any number of towns in Eastern Mass that are very commutable (to varying extents) where you will find a much more gun-friendly atmosphere. I believe you've said in the past that NH is not an option, but I would carefully consider this if you are serious about not dealing with the current legal situation in the Commonwealth.

I'm trying to find a silver lining in all of this, but clearly there is none to be found.

As for chilling - how can you be chill, when faced with this?

Everyone here understands and shares your frustration. But dying an early death from stupid-law-induced hypertension is not the answer. That doesn't mean you can't/shouldn't take steps to make things better for the next guy who moves into MA.

Also, there is this huge red flag where GOAL are concerned. Having looked over the GOAL web site, I don't see any vested interest in them getting the laws changed. The ultimate goal of GOAL should be constitutional carry - no license or training requirement to purchase, posses or carry any firearm regardless of magazine capacity, type, date of manufacture etc. However, a big part of GOAL seems to be providing the training required to get a license. I am assuming they aren't offering this training for free so where is their incentive to eliminate this?
Until you eliminate the training requirement, the requirement for a permit of some sort stays. See what I am getting at?

GOAL does a lot of good work, and much of what they do is heavily dependent upon volunteer labor—people aren't getting rich off of donations/training proceeds. This is not the NRA, which whores itself to any and everyone that wants to sell its members something; from what I can tell GOAL lives very much hand-to-mouth.

Also, bear in mind that there is only so much that can be done with Mass Legislature as it is currently composed, and thus GOAL often has to be content with simply preventing things from getting any worse than they already are. I, for one, am grateful for this.

Probably their most important contribution is helping put a responsible, human face on the gun ownership movement for the sheep. We simply do not have the numbers to make change on a macroscopic level in MA, but eventually we might if we continue to show people that the number of gun owners that are bloodthirsty lunatics is very, very small.

As it happens, this is a "good" time to be a gun owner in MA, because there are a lot of reasons to have hope that there will be meaningful change in the medium-term future. Anyone who has been wanting to make a difference, now is their chance to contribute.

The point that I am finally coming to is that the people here on this forum are, as far as I can tell, on your side. I haven't been around for much longer than you have, but that has been evident to me from the get-go. Yes, things are bad and should never have been allowed to get that way, but if you come in here and act like we all fell asleep at the wheel and have no one to blame but ourselves for the current state of affairs, and demand to see the detailed battle plans, things are going to get ugly.

Stick around. Things are about to get interesting.

 

[pjorg]

Look I understand that nothing is accomplished without money and that money has to come from somewhere, I just asked if there was a road-map for getting to a better place. Can anyone give me a straight answer?

The answer is yes.

 

[jasons]

Seriously, thats your answer?
Clearly, I am trying to learn more, hence the questions.
As for accusing them of profiteering, you clearly read more into my question than was actually there.

Look I understand that nothing is accomplished without money and that money has to come from somewhere, I just asked if there was a road-map for getting to a better place. Can anyone give me a straight answer?

You said:

However, a big part of GOAL seems to be providing the training required to get a license. I am assuming they aren't offering this training for free so where is their incentive to eliminate this?

Feel free to clarify, but it sounded like an insinuation to me.

As for the roadmap, HERE is last session's legislative chart that lists the bills that they were tracking. Some they were working to defeat, some they were working to pass. Some of the ones that they were working to pass were largely written by goal. H.2259 for example. (You can read it here.)

And trust me you do not want to live in Boston, and for many reasons besides the fact that Boston has even more stupid gun laws than the rest of the state. If NH is too far (it is for me too,) there are green towns on or very close the T lines. I live in one.

 

[GSG]

The ultimate goal of GOAL should be constitutional carry - no license or training requirement to purchase, posses or carry any firearm regardless of magazine capacity, type, date of manufacture etc.

You cannot imagine just how bad the Mass. gun laws are. They are broken on every level, and even if what you just stated became true tomorrow, GOAL would still have a mountain of laws to fight against.

Do some reading in the legal section of this forum. A lot of reading. That will help get you started on what the common citizen and GOAL are up against. I'll jump start your search with a few links to horror story highlights.

http://www.northeastshooters.com/vb...rested-for-stockpiling-weapons-and-ammunition

http://www.northeastshooters.com/vb...state-law-requiring-trigger-locks-on-firearms

http://billstclair.com/LindaHamilton/index.html

http://www.massnews.com/past_issues/2001/march 2001/martruck.htm

GOAL's fighting a blazing fire with a Dixie cup. Love them or hate them, their motives aren't suspect.

ETA: Check out the links in my sigline for some more info on how bad things are in Mass.

 

[DickWanner]

What I am is a very unhappy gun owner, who is faced with the prospect of moving from north Georgia to Mass, most likely Boston. Its a great move for the family and jobs, but a crappy move for my business and my hobby.

I'm trying to find a silver lining in all of this, but clearly there is none to be found.

As for chilling - how can you be chill, when faced with this?

Also, there is this huge red flag where GOAL are concerned. Having looked over the GOAL web site, I don't see any vested interest in them getting the laws changed. The ultimate goal of GOAL should be constitutional carry - no license or training requirement to purchase, posses or carry any firearm regardless of magazine capacity, type, date of manufacture etc. However, a big part of GOAL seems to be providing the training required to get a license. I am assuming they aren't offering this training for free so where is their incentive to eliminate this?
Until you eliminate the training requirement, the requirement for a permit of some sort stays. See what I am getting at?

Might I suggest a little more reading and a little less posting? I'll promise you that you will most certainly learn more about what GOAL does in this state and this state in general if you do so. Also, if you have a choice I would consider which city/town you move to very carefully. See the sticky at the top of this forum for a list of red/green/black towns.

 

[Lank]

Ok, everyone please play nicely. As a one time outsider looking in at Ma gun laws, I was once as skeptical as politeness man.

Politenessman- do not move to Boston. I dont know if you plan to rent or buy, but Boston is the least friendly 2nd A place you can be. There are also neighborhoods that may seem appealing pricewise, but border very troubled areas. PM me if you want the scoop on certain areas. I am no expert of course, but I have lived in many areas in and around Boston over the last 8 years. I finally moved outside liberal-land (that is outside 495) and things are much more normal..

Repeat after me- Do not move to Boston, Do not move to Boston, Do not move to Boston

Unless you're a cop, or a Senator's son, you will not be issued a LTC-A (license to carry)

 

[GSG]

Repeat after me- Do not move to Boston, Do not move to Boston, Do not move to Boston

Unless you're a cop, or a Senator's son, you will not be issued a LTC-A (license to carry)

They'll issue one, it'll just be restricted to prohibit carry. They won't even allow you to apply for an unrestricted in most circumstances.

 

[Lank]

They'll issue one, it'll just be restricted to prohibit carry. They won't even allow you to apply for an unrestricted in most circumstances.

Yes, you're probably right. When you think about it, is there much of a difference between an A and a B in this case?

 

[M1911]

Also, there is this huge red flag where GOAL are concerned. Having looked over the GOAL web site, I don't see any vested interest in them getting the laws changed. The ultimate goal of GOAL should be constitutional carry - no license or training requirement to purchase, posses or carry any firearm regardless of magazine capacity, type, date of manufacture etc. However, a big part of GOAL seems to be providing the training required to get a license. I am assuming they aren't offering this training for free so where is their incentive to eliminate this?
Until you eliminate the training requirement, the requirement for a permit of some sort stays. See what I am getting at?

Yes. You are slandering some of the best people in MA, people who work tirelessly against MA gun laws. I know these people. They hate MA gun laws. You don't know them. So stop being a jerk.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

However, a big part of GOAL seems to be providing the training required to get a license. I am assuming they aren't offering this training for free so where is their incentive to eliminate this?

AAARGH!!!!!

GOAL is trying to fill a need, not use it to make $$. It's not always possible to line up the financial incentives to push in the right direction - you sometimes have to rely on the integrity of the person you are dealing with (most doctors won't try to talk you into removing a good gallbladder just to make the fee). Taken to the extreme, you logic would mean GOAL supports gun restrictions because they would be out of business without them.

While I don't always agree with every action taken by GOAL (I do agree with most of it), I absolutely trust the integrity of the org and the staff. They are good people and on our side.

 

[M1911]

Ok, everyone please play nicely.

No, I'm not going to play nicely. I know the folks at GOAL. I know how hard they work. I know how hard they struggle in this uphill fight against our moronic gun laws. And for this jerk to come here and suggest that they secretly support the gun laws pisses me off to no end.

I am assuming they aren't offering this training for free so where is their incentive to eliminate this?
Until you eliminate the training requirement, the requirement for a permit of some sort stays. See what I am getting at?

Like more than a few people here, I'm an NRA certified instructor. Yes, the training requirement has put a few dollars in my pocket. Do I agree with the training requirement? No. Do I agree with the rest of the MA gun laws? No. I've worked for years against them. I've organized talks with legislators. I've visited their offices on Beacon Hill. I've called. I've written letters. I've worked on campaigns for pro-gun candidates. And so have all the people at GOAL.

And you go to the GOAL website expecting to find a "roadmap" to the end of those laws? Like a project plan with deadlines and work breakdown structures?

Dude, do you have a single fricking clue about how the legislative process works? Do you understand that most people in MA are anti-gun and, as a result, so are their legislators? Explain to me how you can get pro-gun legislation passed when most legislators are anti-gun and so is the governor.

 

[M1911]

Yes, you're probably right. When you think about it, is there much of a difference between an A and a B in this case?

Yes. With a B you are very limited in what handguns you can own. With a restricted A, you are not.

 

[Lank]

Right, but in the end, does <10 rounds or >10 rounds matter, when you cannot carry? When I was faced with the reality of a B only, I was content with a 1911A or a nice revolver. I dunno, maybe its just me. The whole A vs B issue in moot when you consider the whole preban nonsense.

I've been to the State House as well. I too have been told by numerous State Reps that "of course I am pro 2-A", only to see nothing happening.

I also think it is hard for someone to believe how bad the State of Ma interferes with our SA rights.

I've been thinking of a rally on the Commons, or who knows, maybe the Old North Bridge! Is H2259 bound to be reintroduced? A 2-A motorcycle ride in the spring?

 

[M1911]

Right, but in the end, does <10 rounds or >10 rounds matter, when you cannot carry? When I was faced with the reality of a B only, I was content with a 1911A or a nice revolver. I dunno, maybe its just me. The whole A vs B issue in moot when you consider the whole preban nonsense.

I disagree. There are a whole bunch of nice guns that you can't have with a B (e.g., most Glocks).

 

[jasons]

Right, but in the end, does <10 rounds or >10 rounds matter, when you cannot carry? When I was faced with the reality of a B only, I was content with a 1911A or a nice revolver. I dunno, maybe its just me. The whole A vs B issue in moot when you consider the whole preban nonsense.

I like a 1911 or a revolver as much as the next guy, but I like my Sigs more. If I had a B I would not be able to own my P226. That would really piss me off. (The fact that there are Class B licenses at all pisses me off, but you get the idea.)

 

[Blitz1]

Let him move to Boston. Sounds to me like he deserves it.

 

[drgrant]

Also, there is this huge red flag where GOAL are concerned. Having looked over the GOAL web site, I don't see any vested interest in them getting the laws changed. The ultimate goal of GOAL should be constitutional carry - no license or training requirement to purchase, posses or carry any firearm regardless of magazine capacity, type, date of manufacture etc. However, a big part of GOAL seems to be providing the training required to get a license. I am assuming they aren't offering this training for free so where is their incentive to eliminate this?
Until you eliminate the training requirement, the requirement for a permit of some sort stays. See what I am getting at?

This is by far the dumbest thing I've ever read on NES in the past 6 months.

GOAL isn't perfect, but to accuse them of something like this, is absurd.

Training is provided as a service to members and is also there with the key objective being to get more gun owners in MA.

You obviously don't have a clue about the political realities of gun politics in MA, either. Overturning bans, etc, requires votes and political power that gun owners simply don't have in this state. By that virtue alone, GOAL is limited in what it can do legislatively.


-Mike

 

[drgrant]

Yes, you're probably right. When you think about it, is there much of a difference between an A and a B in this case?

There are huge differences between an A and a B, and they extend far beyond what guns you can buy. Nobody should ever suck for an LTC-B, it's not worth it.

-Mike

 

[Lank]

There are huge differences between an A and a B, and they extend far beyond what guns you can buy. Nobody should ever suck for an LTC-B, it's not worth it.

-Mike

What pisses me off the most is the registration of firearms.

 

[HooVooLoo]

Hey politenessman, man...Maybe this will put things into perspective for you.

There is a reason that the Mass law sub-forum is the single busiest topic-specific category on NES, with 3,346 threads and 52,631 posts.

There is a reason the "Guide to gun rights in your Massachusetts town" in General is hands down the most-viewed thread on all of NES, with over 269,000 views.

If you cannot understand why people here are coming down on you for slandering the only regional organization that is attempting to fix the issues that cause the above statistics, then you should just stay the hell away from Mass, because you are going to cause more harm than good to us here.

Or, move to downtown New Bedford while you wait for your LTC. They have great apartments/homes. Cheep, great views.

There's also some parts of family-friendly Somerville that have a vibrant and profitable tax-free local economy. Lots of kids around for your own kids to play with, if you have any.

 

[drgrant]

What pisses me off the most is the registration of firearms.

That doesn't have anything to do with the class of license you have. In MA I don't like it either, but compared to the other crap we deal with, the FA-10 system is small potatoes, especially considering that it's not fully compulsory. Discretionary licensing on the other hand, is a huge problem in MA and many suffer from it. There's no reason anyone not otherwise disqualified in MA should have to accept an LTC-B, for for that matter, a restricted A.

-Mike

 

[Lank]

That doesn't have anything to do with the class of license you have. In MA I don't like it either, but compared to the other crap we deal with, the FA-10 system is small potatoes, especially considering that it's not fully compulsory. Discretionary licensing on the other hand, is a huge problem in MA and many suffer from it. There's no reason anyone not otherwise disqualified in MA should have to accept an LTC-B, for for that matter, a restricted A.


-Mike

I am totally on board- believe me. I know the FA-10's are probably harmless, and most likely useless, it's just that I fear getting a knock on the door one morning and being forced to surrender private property for no reason.

 

[politenessman]

This is by far the dumbest thing I've ever read on NES in the past 6 months.

Yeah, thanks for that. As a newbie here seeking info, I like the way you guys are 'helping' me.

It was a simple question, and I didn't 'accuse' anyone of anything, I merely asked if there was a conflict of interest, and if getting rid the training requirement was on the agenda. After my experiences with the NRA, you'll have to forgive me if I don't place much stock in gun rights organizations that also offer mandatory training. If you take the time to look at this from my point of view, you will see that (as an outsider) this is not an unreasonable line of thought. Unbunch your panties ladies.

You obviously don't have a clue about the political realities of gun politics in MA, either. Overturning bans, etc, requires votes and political power that gun owners simply don't have in this state. By that virtue alone, GOAL is limited in what it can do legislatively.

Actually I do have a pretty good handle on that, i just don't have much patience with it. I've been active in various political movements for the past 20 years, I know how the system works. However, the older I get, the more impatient I get and the less respect I have for the system, politicians and the Law enforcement agencies that act for them.

You will have to forgive me if I find the prospect of having to beg for the ability to legally exercise my rights extremely distasteful. As for the prospect of choosing between my business and becoming a criminal, I have to really hold my nose on that one.

 

[Len-2A Training]

I am totally on board- believe me. I know the FA-10's are probably harmless, and most likely useless, it's just that I fear getting a knock on the door one morning and being forced to surrender private property for no reason.

If they get a mind to, FA-10s won't matter they still would do it in MA.

 

[M1911]

Yeah, thanks for that. As a newbie here seeking info, I like the way you guys are 'helping' me.

You come on here and accuse the only organization that is helping us of sandbagging. These are our friends. We've been side by side in the political trenches with them.

It was a simple question, and I didn't 'accuse' anyone of anything,

Baloney. You can try that political, weasel word tap dance, but it won't fly here.

you'll have to forgive me if I don't place much stock in gun rights organizations that also offer mandatory training. If you take the time to look at this from my point of view, you will see that (as an outsider) this is not an unreasonable line of thought. Unbunch your panties ladies.

Just as soon as you offer a sincere, written apology to Jon Green and the rest of the staff at GOAL.

You will have to forgive me if I find the prospect of having to beg for the ability to legally exercise my rights extremely distasteful.

And you think we like it?

 

[pjorg]

Yeah, thanks for that. As a newbie here seeking info, I like the way you guys are 'helping' me.

The information you are receiving here is top-notch. The tone that it is being conveyed in is simply matching the tone that you are asking the questions with.

It was a simple question, and I didn't 'accuse' anyone of anything, I merely asked if there was a conflict of interest, and if getting rid the training requirement was on the agenda. After my experiences with the NRA, you'll have to forgive me if I don't place much stock in gun rights organizations that also offer mandatory training. If you take the time to look at this from my point of view, you will see that (as an outsider) this is not an unreasonable line of thought. Unbunch your panties ladies.

While I disagree with this sentiment, I am willing to concede that to an outsider there might be a very superficial semblance of conflict-of-interest. However, as we have assured you, GOAL runs these classes to encourage people to get licensed in spite of the law, not to profiteer off of it. They are not by any means the only game in town, and you are free to go to any of the multitude of other organizations/instructors offering it. This should temper the appearance of a conflict-of-interest.

Actually I do have a pretty good handle on that, i just don't have much patience with it. I've been active in various political movements for the past 20 years, I know how the system works. However, the older I get, the more impatient I get and the less respect I have for the system, politicians and the Law enforcement agencies that act for them.

You will have to forgive me if I find the prospect of having to beg for the ability to legally exercise my rights extremely distasteful. As for the prospect of choosing between my business and becoming a criminal, I have to really hold my nose on that one.

Then you are in good company, because no one here likes it either. Let's try to be more civil so that we can direct everyone's ire in a productive direction.