Your cell phone has large thumbs? That's odd, my doesn't even have hands.
Sorry, it's been a long day and I couldn't help myself.
-
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***
Comm2A files against the AG on LCIs, Draper v Coakley
- Thread starter BostonBullit
- Start date
Your cell phone has large thumbs? That's odd, my doesn't even have hands.
Sorry, it's been a long day and I couldn't help myself.
Kicker96FS
NES Member
They apparently don't like that, they want a hole like everyone else does maybe? Hence the phrase "Ma$$Hole ". I think the AG's office coined that one........
There is a special election coming up, with clear choices for and against gun rights. It is in Shrewsbury and maybe Northborough. I believe Hannah Kane is the good one. THIS IS AN IMPORTANT AND POSSIBLY EASY WIN THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN!!!
Last edited:
It's fascinating how the AG can argue that two things which are constructively the same are different (LCI's, because they/she says so) while simultaneously arguing that two things which are different are constructively the same (same sex marriage on its way to SCOTUS...)
...fascinating.
Why does this only apply to her personal agenda? How come a patchwork of firearms regulations both in state and out can't hurt legal owners in MA? ...I know, I know... "gun"![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
How about the whole shipping wine is OK, but not ammunition?
Senator Brownsberger had to write a bill to get wine shipping legalized after Coakley unilaterally banned it. Unfortunately convincing him (leans strong anti) to author a bill for ammo would be a much tougher task.
Every semi-auto pistol I've handled had two inherent LCIs. One is always knowing the status of my weapon, the other is called the press check. It may seem a bit excessive but, what I was taught was "check the chamber, check the mag well, check the breach face; then look away for a second or two and check them again."
I'd like to see some data on whether relying on LCIs leads to more accidents than they prevent.
I'd like to see some data on whether relying on LCIs leads to more accidents than they prevent.
Maybe if we get a former New England Patriot to lean on the senate like they did for the wine bill, we can get that through too!
inerlogic
NES Member
f*** these m************
can i file THAT in an amicus brief?
can i file THAT in an amicus brief?
I know, I'm being a smartass.
Fun tidbit for those who didn't know: the next time you chamber a round, look in between the extractor and the barrel on the right side. There's a hole where you can visibly see the cartridge. I honestly thought that was the LCI for the longest time.
MachineHead
NES Member
You mean I really got two LCIs for the price of one?!? Holy smokes! I hope my favorite LGS doesn't find out. (enter: the sarcasm)
http://youtu.be/DKtjBqJ4NxA
http://youtu.be/DKtjBqJ4NxA
Kicker96FS
NES Member
If it's not the LCI, then what is it? My buddie has the same gun I do, made the same year, mine was sold in MA, his bought and resides in Maine. His has no Ma$$hole.
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2014
- Messages
- 24,121
- Likes
- 30,305
Why does California have more available handguns than we do. They have hi points glocks kimbers wilsons..etc just an example of the range they have but their "list" is like 8 times bigger than ours and I just want to know why they get all the ones I want
Due to the AG issue, most of those companies don't bother certifying for MA.
GlockJock
NES Member
Asking "Why _____ (anything)" when it comes to MA is always pretty much a rhetorical question.....
Sort of like "Why can a law abiding citizen of Malden exercise his 2nd Amendment right to bear arms and obtain his LTC-A, no restrictions, when his equally law-abiding, model citizen cousin who lives literally across the street (you could hit a batting practice fastball from one house to the other) - but over the town line and is in Medford - is denied outright, without valid cause/reason/etc by the Medford Chief.
"BECAUSE I SAID SO THAT'S WHY" (his actual quote when asked - politely - by the applicant).
It's a much bigger market in Cali so manufacturers are more willing to work their way through the idiocy to sell there.
- Joined
- May 17, 2008
- Messages
- 16,975
- Likes
- 2,821
This is also true, but the fact that the AG enforced the regs in such a way against Glock was a big factor.
I thought C U Next Tuesday's husband was a Glock fan too. Oh wait he didn't have to abide by the serf's rules, he was a LEO...
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,555
- Likes
- 33,621
Plus, the CA idiocy is objective - once your firm's gun is certified, you don't have to worry abotu a different unit of the govt saying "not compliant" - and, refusing to give an a priori opinion, waiting until you have sold enough that the potential fine is high enough for that unit of government to effectively dictate terms of a consent decree.
Last edited:
Not for long. The California micro stamping requirement will reduce their list to almost nothing.
But, but, but the lawmakers said the manufacturing process costs would be next to nothing...
1.
So if something is vague but the AG says "no, it's not", that is good enough for a court to determine it is not in fact vague? So the court doesn't need to examine the regulation at question or come to any determination of vagueness themselves, they just concede that to the AG, who is the defendant in the suit?
Sort of what I already knew, but we don't have a system of checks and balances, but a system where one branch defends the actions of another.
2.
So a challenge might be valid, but the court doesn't really need to examine it, because they just use a much lower standard. Because who needs real standards, right? Good thing this court took time to make any serious considerations to anything...
3.
Easily my favorite. I knew the second I saw the court reference. That being referencing a quote that is so absurd it hurts when you think about it. That being "“longstanding” restrictions that were “presumptively lawful”. Oh yes, the good old "well if the government infringes on a right long enough, that the fact it has happened for awhile means it is okay". Yep, if they violate your right enough times, who cares!
This logic is basically the definition of the word tyranny.
So if something is vague but the AG says "no, it's not", that is good enough for a court to determine it is not in fact vague? So the court doesn't need to examine the regulation at question or come to any determination of vagueness themselves, they just concede that to the AG, who is the defendant in the suit?
Sort of what I already knew, but we don't have a system of checks and balances, but a system where one branch defends the actions of another.
2.
So a challenge might be valid, but the court doesn't really need to examine it, because they just use a much lower standard. Because who needs real standards, right? Good thing this court took time to make any serious considerations to anything...
3.
Easily my favorite. I knew the second I saw the court reference. That being referencing a quote that is so absurd it hurts when you think about it. That being "“longstanding” restrictions that were “presumptively lawful”. Oh yes, the good old "well if the government infringes on a right long enough, that the fact it has happened for awhile means it is okay". Yep, if they violate your right enough times, who cares!
This logic is basically the definition of the word tyranny.
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2014
- Messages
- 24,121
- Likes
- 30,305
I guess my question was based off fmks marketing around here from an lgs. I was talking and he said they got put through in California and they like to get their guns in all banned states. And the way he made it sound was like if it was safe there it's pretty good here. Now I know lgs guys aren't exactly the be all end all. But looking into it they were saying you have to pay per model on their allowed roster so their turnover is a lot higher unlike ours which has old guns no one has seen in 15 years. Add that to the fact where every review site likens us California and new Jersey to north Korea I was just curious. The bigger market thing makes sense too.
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2014
- Messages
- 24,121
- Likes
- 30,305
I guess another follow up question I had is why don't more politicians suck up to gun owners. Owning a gun is far and away my most expensive hobby and I have a small cheap collection relatively speaking 5 handguns and a rifle. But I mean gun owners have a high disposable income to support their hobby (fix) I can't wrap my head around them not saying let's tap into that instead of buying another new glock I'd happily give that money to a guy/woman this year so I can buy as many Springfields/ glocks / kimbers down the road
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,555
- Likes
- 33,621
We have almost no voting power.
MA is a state where a politician (Jacques before she quit to become an admin law judge) can say "I do not seek votes from gun owners, and consider their opposition to be a badge of honor" .... and be assured of a landslide re-election.
+1
They could call all of you Nazi baby killer's in MA and still get re-elected. Oh wait they already do
And she would have been reelected for life if she hasn't gotten ambitious. She left the state senate to become President of the Human Rights Campaign - an LGBT advocacy group. She only lasted 11 months before being fired. Deval Patrick then saved her from the DPS, appointing her as an administrative judge. She then bit the hand that fed her, suing the state. Deval then didn't reappoint her - such a shame.
Last edited:
Yes and no. Gun owners carry no weight in state-wide elections. Charlie Baker and Maura Healy don't care about us. On the other hand, many local politicians are genuinely not sure what to make of us. Just look at DeLeo's debacle last summer. Ask any member of the legislature how much they enjoyed hearing from their constituents about DeLeo's bill. Look also at Lowell. Lowell gun owners may not get what they want in the end, but they did stir the shit and made a serious impression. Members of the Lowell City Council are taking stock of where they should be on this issue.
Democracy is not entirely dead.
Oh, she's out of the job now? So sad if true. Jacques bother works or did for the Mass Turnpike in marketing making over $100k, 10 years ago. If he's still there, I be he's well over $130k.
Jacques chief of staff was Angus McQuilken, a lifelong state hack. He ran for the senate seat jacques left and lost to scott brown. McQuilken now has some hack job as a PR guy now. He's also a member of the jewish temple in Wellesley, the same one as the Dr. shot at Beth isreal hospital. At the temple, McQuilken is a vocal member of the temples gun control group.
Similar threads
