Comm2A files against the AG on LCIs, Draper v Coakley

[milktree]

Grew up in MA in a super lib family in a super lib town, I know them from the inside. And you?

No, you don't, at least not about things like this.

I grew up in Somerville, went to a Quaker school, and had (and have) anti-gun friends and family.

If you think that "presenting them with facts" is a sure way to change their thinking (which is what needs to change), I'd suggest you go to any church and try to convince the congregation that God is a fiction invented by man to make us feel better about ourselves and control the population.

You come across as naïve: great enthusiasm, great attitude, but a not really aware of the full picture.

 

[drgrant]

They're big on looking fair, and a gov branch/agency/official with no accountability isn't fair.

That's cute that they think that, given that how MA government operates as a generality, is directly contrary to that viewpoint.

They also don't like looking like they lack knowledge.

I've had this conversation, and what they THINK an AW is with a number of people in local politics and have gotten very positive results. The marketing is used to get past the wall they've put up. The antis I've spoken to don't even know about the LCI restriction and think it's ridiculous when they do. Don't judge everyone by the vocal minority. Get the non-vocal majority to think for themselves and get involved.

Do you think the antis/nons will actually care and vote for your cause based on this? No. The "there are more important issues than guns" trope will immediately come out and that's effectively the end of that discussion. They're not going to vote their 128 belt "menotomy moonbats club" rep or senator out of office because of CMR940.

-Mike

 

[M1911]

I grew up in an anti-gun family. I work in Cambridge. I've lived in MA since 1984 (except for 4 years in CA). I'm very familiar with people who have liberal, anti-gun views.

I've also had direct contact with reporters at very large newspapers. I know how they [strike=line]lie[/strike] work.

 

[bfm]

I grew up in Somerville, went to a Quaker school, and had (and have) anti-gun friends and family.

I think my mother regrets taking me to all the Bunker Hill parades and Lexington reenactments. She is very anti, my father less so. My brother and I both very much pro 2A. 1976 was great. I had shirts and hats with the Gadsden flag on it and no one asked about my political leaning. We also ran all over Somerville with toy M16s and .45s, or dual holsters with six gun cap guns and no one thought twice about it.

 

[pastera]

How does this answer make any sense? Right now my only option to get a gen 4 Glock is to cough up $$$$ to an over priced FA-10 sale. That is money a local gun shop will never see. If I could by a Glock brand new at MSRP that money would go to the local shop. Maybe even 2 guns bought from them. Still money they would have never seen.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

And by buying those two glocks you would use a portion of your gun budget that normally would go to other guns, ammunition or accessories - Your are going to spend your budget either way so there isn't a large offset in sales overall.

Where the offset would come is from the lowering of the entry cost of gun ownership - that would bring money that truly would not have been spent otherwise.

 

[Coyote33]

You're thinking too small. You don't do a marketing campaign AGAINST any issue. You PROMOTE knowledge, education, and community. In fact I'd not include any specific rules or legislation actions in an outreach program. This is the long game. Facts about firearms are on our side but people don't want to sit down and listen to a list of facts. Do a history of firearms display at some community event, maybe. Get people comfortable with the idea of firearms as just being part of America. Later focus on the AG lacking oversight etc.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to 42! again

Take a new person who has never shot before to the range every weekend. Also, take or send people to Springfield Armory Museum, Old Sturbridge Village gun display, Waters Mansion, etc.

... BUT.... consider that the case would be heard in a marsupial (state, not federal) court as the AG would bring the case at that level, and it would almost certainly result in a judgement against the dealer. Remember, the AG's position is not so much "the LCI is ineffective" but "this office has the final say and we do not have to explain our reasoning to anyone".
...

OK. How does THIS particular situation get corrected? Can the governor or legislature help at all here? I'm not saying WILL they help, but is it theoretically possible? There must be something which COULD be done. Anyone?

 

[mark056]

Grew up in MA in a super lib family in a super lib town, I know them from the inside. And you? They're big on looking fair, and a gov branch/agency/official with no accountability isn't fair. They also don't like looking like they lack knowledge. I've had this conversation, and what they THINK an AW is with a number of people in local politics and have gotten very positive results. The marketing is used to get past the wall they've put up. The antis I've spoken to don't even know about the LCI restriction and think it's ridiculous when they do. Don't judge everyone by the vocal minority. Get the non-vocal majority to think for themselves and get involved. BTW my idea is "fantasy", what's your's.

You need to listen more to Rob, 1911 and Dr Grant. You have no grasp of Massachusetts realpolitik and don't bandy about words like fair. You are either under 30, or very naive IMO although well intentioned. I've lived in the Commonwealth since 1982 except for a six year stint in other states and out of the country. I worked in state government for 17 years and in the last couple of years actually had to interface with some of the heavy hitters on Beacon Hill and Ashburton Place (the seat of Admin Govt in Mass) forget everything you learned in high school civics, or college poly sci 101. The pros at Comm 2A know what they are doing in the courts and GOAL knows it's way around the General Court (state legislature). Another thing: don't try to compare how we do things here with any other state. Except for VA we've been doing it longer than anyone else and have evolved into our own unique political animal.

The truth is Mass is not a gun culture state. The general populace attitude runs from hostile to ambivalent. We are beyond winning hearts and minds. We are a minority. Gun rights are civil rights and this is a fight for the recognition of our civil rights just like any other minority fighting for their civil rights.

 

[crazymjb]

You need to listen more to Rob, 1911 and Dr Grant. You have no grasp of Massachusetts realpolitik and don't bandy about words like fair. You are either under 30, or very naive IMO although well intentioned. I've lived in the Commonwealth since 1982 except for a six year stint in other states and out of the country. I worked in state government for 17 years and in the last couple of years actually had to interface with some of the heavy hitters on Beacon Hill and Ashburton Place (the seat of Admin Govt in Mass) forget everything you learned in high school civics, or college poly sci 101. The pros at Comm 2A know what they are doing in the courts and GOAL knows it's way around the General Court (state legislature). Another thing: don't try to compare how we do things here with any other state. Except for VA we've been doing it longer than anyone else and have evolved into our own unique political animal.

The truth is Mass is not a gun culture state. The general populace attitude runs from hostile to ambivalent. We are beyond winning hearts and minds. We are a minority. Gun rights are civil rights and this is a fight for the recognition of our civil rights just like any other minority fighting for their civil rights.

X1000000

Sent from my cell phone with a tiny keyboard and large thumbs...

 

[Gooman24]

And by buying those two glocks you would use a portion of your gun budget that normally would go to other guns, ammunition or accessories - Your are going to spend your budget either way so there isn't a large offset in sales overall.

Where the offset would come is from the lowering of the entry cost of gun ownership - that would bring money that truly would not have been spent otherwise.

No. A portion of my gun buying budget that I would not have given to an FFL would now go to an FFL. There (along with all the other people like me who would run to an FFL to not pay jacked up prices for Glocks) is your offset. I don't know how to explain it more simply than that.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[pastera]

No. A portion of my gun buying budget that I would not have given to an FFL would now go to an FFL. There (along with all the other people like me who would run to an FFL to not pay jacked up prices for Glocks) is your offset. I don't know how to explain it more simply than that.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

I didn't realize every gun person in mass has an unlimited gun budget just waiting for Glocks to be sold at msrp.



Sent from my C6530 using Tapatalk

 

[drgrant]

I didn't realize every gun person in mass has an unlimited gun budget just waiting for Glocks to be sold at msrp.



Sent from my C6530 using Tapatalk

Pure AU

 

[Lank]

Scintillating discussion here.

 

[42!]

You need to listen more to Rob, 1911 and Dr Grant. You have no grasp of Massachusetts realpolitik and don't bandy about words like fair. You are either under 30, or very naive IMO although well intentioned. I've lived in the Commonwealth since 1982 except for a six year stint in other states and out of the country. I worked in state government for 17 years and in the last couple of years actually had to interface with some of the heavy hitters on Beacon Hill and Ashburton Place (the seat of Admin Govt in Mass) forget everything you learned in high school civics, or college poly sci 101. The pros at Comm 2A know what they are doing in the courts and GOAL knows it's way around the General Court (state legislature). Another thing: don't try to compare how we do things here with any other state. Except for VA we've been doing it longer than anyone else and have evolved into our own unique political animal.

The truth is Mass is not a gun culture state. The general populace attitude runs from hostile to ambivalent. We are beyond winning hearts and minds. We are a minority. Gun rights are civil rights and this is a fight for the recognition of our civil rights just like any other minority fighting for their civil rights.

The only time I used "fair" was when I said libs like to look like they are being fair. You may have missed some of my other points

- - - Updated - - -

No, you don't, at least not about things like this.

I grew up in Somerville, went to a Quaker school, and had (and have) anti-gun friends and family.

If you think that "presenting them with facts" is a sure way to change their thinking (which is what needs to change), I'd suggest you go to any church and try to convince the congregation that God is a fiction invented by man to make us feel better about ourselves and control the population.

You come across as naïve: great enthusiasm, great attitude, but a not really aware of the full picture.

So I'm guessing you missed this on post #1347
"Facts about firearms are on our side but people don't want to sit down and listen to a list of facts."

Generally speaking.
I love the guys who dismiss my judgement of things in MA, trust me I got you beat on time in MA, and I do my homework. I just got back from spending some time discussing the issue with some liberals, one was a DNC delegate at one point, so pretty hard core. The consensus was that MA does firearms control right and the problem was guns coming in from other states (in other words Federal). I'm not agreeing, just passing it on. I got a laugh when I went over the definition of AW, thought the cosmetics shouldn't matter, didn't really care about the mag, they all thought it was just for machine guns. No support for the AG's regs, generally didn't like the lack of clearly defined regulations and were downright appalled that there was no oversight or appeal process.

What this tells me is that if you take out the word gun, even the majority of libs will support you. Now someone needs to do some major research. There has to be something else the AG is regulating that they are playing god on that will play better to the general public. If you push for and get better general oversight and an appeal process based on facts, then it will apply to all regs. Leverage that to fight the BS regs. Its strategic not tactical, a frontal assault isn't always best.

 

[Gooman24]

I didn't realize every gun person in mass has an unlimited gun budget just waiting for Glocks to be sold at msrp.



Sent from my C6530 using Tapatalk

A quick google search tells me there are over 375,000 people with LTCs in Massachusetts. If 1 in every 200 of those LTC holders runs out and buys a Glock over this case then that is over $750,000 that would go to FFLs in new revenue. The people following this thread alone could bring a staggering amount of business to FFLs if this case is won. I don't understand what you don't understand. To say there is no potential here for FFLs to make money because gun owners have a fixed budget just makes no sense. But, keep arguing your point till I give up or you learn math or economics.

You are basically saying the end of prohibition didn't make liquor stores any money!??!?

 

[Billsail]

Not everyone is a Glock fan.

 

[browncoat]

Generally speaking.
I love the guys who dismiss my judgement of things in MA, trust me I got you beat on time in MA, and I do my homework. I just got back from spending some time discussing the issue with some liberals, one was a DNC delegate at one point, so pretty hard core. The consensus was that MA does firearms control right and the problem was guns coming in from other states (in other words Federal). I'm not agreeing, just passing it on. I got a laugh when I went over the definition of AW, thought the cosmetics shouldn't matter, didn't really care about the mag, they all thought it was just for machine guns. No support for the AG's regs, generally didn't like the lack of clearly defined regulations and were downright appalled that there was no oversight or appeal process.

What this tells me is that if you take out the word gun, even the majority of libs will support you. Now someone needs to do some major research. There has to be something else the AG is regulating that they are playing god on that will play better to the general public. If you push for and get better general oversight and an appeal process based on facts, then it will apply to all regs. Leverage that to fight the BS regs. Its strategic not tactical, a frontal assault isn't always best.

For your first part - I agree, most liberals simply aren't informed enough to know what an AWB is or care to find out.

As to the regs - are there any other things that are done by the MA AG based on the federal stuff and not state?

 

[Gooman24]

Not everyone is a Glock fan.

I agree. However this thread has :

Replies: 1,368
Views: 172,718

Was my 1 in 200 gun owners in MA wanting a Glock too high a number? that was .5% of gun owners.

I wonder how many Glocks 4 seasons moves on a weekend...

This is a high $$$ case for FFLs. If I could go buy a brand new Glock for $500 or even a used one for $400 that is money that would go direct to an FFL over a $700 FA-10 face to face regardless of what my annual budget might be. Also lets say that $700 was part of an "annual budget" now I have $200 to spend on accessories and ammo with that same FFL.

 

[drgrant]

A quick google search tells me there are over 375,000 people with LTCs in Massachusetts. If 1 in every 200 of those LTC holders runs out and buys a Glock over this case then that is over $750,000 that would go to FFLs in new revenue. The people following this thread alone could bring a staggering amount of business to FFLs if this case is won. I don't understand what you don't understand. To say there is no potential here for FFLs to make money because gun owners have a fixed budget just makes no sense. But, keep arguing your point till I give up or you learn math or economics.

You are basically saying the end of prohibition didn't make liquor stores any money!??!?

You say this without knowing facts. Most people in MA that want glocks already have them. This case may be about Glocks, but the actual war, is much bigger than just this one issue. Trust Comm2A on this the hula hoop chicken neck jive turkey unicorn rainbow legal strategy usually doesn't work.

 

[Gooman24]

You say this without knowing facts. Most people in MA that want glocks already have them. This case may be about Glocks, but the actual war, is much bigger than just this one.

I can understand what you are saying. But, I already own Glocks. I would go get more if this AG BS was over. This is why I used the 1 in 200 figure. You honestly don't think there is a huge potential for more revenue for FFLs here?

 

[drgrant]

I can understand what you are saying. But, I already own Glocks. I would go get more if this AG BS was over. This is why I used the 1 in 200 figure. You honestly don't think there is a huge potential for more revenue for FFLs here?

Actually one thing I forgot to mention- this happened once before already. In 2004 for a 3 month period FS (and possibly other dealers) sold what they believed to be MA compliant glocks. A bunch of guns got sold in that interval, but I wouldn't define it as earth shattering... because again, the people who wanted glocks, mostly already had
them. Eventually the AG blocked FS and asked them to try to get the guns back from the buyers. Many got returned but many did not. (because there was no legal requirement by the consumer to do so). I believe there is a huge long term benefit to lifting the regulations, though, I'm not going to disagree with you on that... problem is joe fungohead average everyday normal noob LTC holder with the 1000 bucks in his pocket burning a hole isn't going to "not spend it" because he can't get a glock at retail. He's just going to buy something else that tickles his fancy, or a pre 98 gun (which there are metric tons of) , etc. Most dealers are not going to go out on a limb (and risk their entire business) on a bet that may not even work. It's the kind of thing you can ruminate about when you have powerball type money just laying around, but outside of that it's a very risky proposition and the odds are not good on a return.

ETA: PM incoming your way, let's take this offline, don't really want to crap the thread up anymore with unicorn stuff....

-Mike

 

[vickers]

Wow, the way I see that going down is:

- lots of shops publicly disobey the AG
- the AG fines them each $5k
- the news doesn't care, or reports it as "the AG being tough on gun dealers selling illegal guns"
- people don't care that it's a big crock
- lots of shops pay the $5k, nothing changes.

This is exactly what would happen. The average people in Mass who actually paid any attention to it would read about it in the Globe or see the short segments on TV and just think that the gun dealers were breaking the law, and got rightfully caught on it. The social disobedience angle would likely not sway them either because only liberal causes justify social disobedience to them.

I work with some smart, generally reasonable people. However, they are all antis and the "because gun" effect makes them completely irrational. That's the norm in Mass.

 

[pastera]

But, keep arguing your point till I give up or you learn math or economics.

You are basically saying the end of prohibition didn't make liquor stores any money!??!?

Yeah, BSEE can't do math...

S&W, Ruger, and Sig all sell polymer guns that directly compete with Glock and are easy to get - not everyone is a fanboy waiting for the AG to have a change of heart.

And nice strawman on prohibition - you couldn't get ANY alcohol unlike here in Mass where, while a limited selection, there are polymer guns you can buy new from a dealer.

But to your point, there would be a surge in Glock sales if the AG ban fell but it would be short lived and the total sales numbers would level off to where there are now (with adjustment for inflation and Obama scares).

Sent from my C6530 using Tapatalk

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Many got returned but many did not. (because there was no legal requirement by the consumer to do so).

Yup - under the legal theory of the regulations the consumers were victims of an unfair and deceptive trade practice.

This is not hurting FFL's bottoms line, since people buy substitute goods (often of lower quality) if they can't get the real thing.

 

[JohnZ]

Actually one thing I forgot to mention- this happened once before already. In 2004 for a 3 month period FS (and possibly other dealers) sold what they believed to be MA compliant glocks. A bunch of guns got sold in that interval, but I wouldn't define it as earth shattering... because again, the people who wanted glocks, mostly already had
them. Eventually the AG blocked FS and asked them to try to get the guns back from the buyers. Many got returned but many did not. (because there was no legal requirement by the consumer to do so). I believe there is a huge long term benefit to lifting the regulations, though, I'm not going to disagree with you on that... problem is joe fungohead average everyday normal noob LTC holder with the 1000 bucks in his pocket burning a hole isn't going to "not spend it" because he can't get a glock at retail. He's just going to buy something else that tickles his fancy, or a pre 98 gun (which there are metric tons of) , etc. Most dealers are not going to go out on a limb (and risk their entire business) on a bet that may not even work. It's the kind of thing you can ruminate about when you have powerball type money just laying around, but outside of that it's a very risky proposition and the odds are not good on a return.

ETA: PM incoming your way, let's take this offline, don't really want to crap the thread up anymore with unicorn stuff....

-Mike

Comm2A should start up a business. Can they do both at the same time?

 

[M1911]

Comm2A should start up a business. Can they do both at the same time?

Comm2A is a non-profit, charitable organization. It is a 501c3. It has no employees. I don't think running a gun shop would make any sense at all.

 

[MAGA99]

I haven't followed the whole thread but my one month old gen4 glock I can see if there is a round chambered by looking at the back of the barrel. You can see the very bottom (or back, however you're looking at it) of the case between the slide and the barrel. That's a loaded chamber indicator in my book!

 

[jsacco41]

I haven't followed the whole thread but my one month old gen4 glock I can see if there is a round chambered by looking at the back of the barrel. You can see the very bottom (or back, however you're looking at it) of the case between the slide and the barrel. That's a loaded chamber indicator in my book!

The case is not really about whether it has an LCI or not is my understanding. It is more about how it is vaguely written. The AG basically just says we are the ones with the final say. Unfortunately in the wonderful state, the AG has the power to bypass the normal legislative process in the name of "consumer protection"

IANAL, but I did stay at a holiday Inn once.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

The AG basically just says we are the ones with the final say and we do not have to issue any opinion as to what constitutes compliance until we are prosecuting someone

FIFY

 

[jsacco41]

FIFY

Thanks, is my understanding at least somewhat correct?

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Thanks, is my understanding at least somewhat correct?

Absoolootlie.