First debate question about castle doctrine

[Chuck]

Watching tonights gubernatorial debate. First question asked was about the castle doctrine -- in that MA gives the right to defend yourself, including using deadly force, only in your home while other states apply the doctrine to your car or work. Healey, Patrick, and Mihos all sounded for it at home. Perhaps Mihos was saying he believes in the other locations, he didn't talk much. Healey wants to "study" it.

Patrick used this question to take a shot at Healey on regarding LTC applications. He wants that power to stay with the Chiefs. Healey again said she believes in one law regulated by some state body with input from any interested parties -- including an applicants Chief. Healey also brought in the fact gun crimes are not being prosecuted. Ross wants "cradle to grave" tracking of guns and "bullets"! Patrick claimed guns are flooding over our borders -- he didn't say why that means he wants to make life difficult for legal gun owners. Ross just kept trying to bring the discussion back to domestic violence.

Mihos was pretty much silent while Healey and Patrick yapped back and forth.

Just thought I'd share that,
Chuck

 

[Admin]

sigh

 

[RKG]

I've gone into this before, but the fact of the matter is that "gun crimes," if by that one means violations of Section 10A (so-called Bartley-Fox) are not prosecuted if the defendant is a bad guy charged with other crimes that may have involved the gun. The reason for this is that BF provides for a 1-year sentence; a 1-year sentence cannot be served in prison, but only an HOC; and the system does not provide for sentencing to an HOC term "on and after" a prison term.

As a result, the only people who can be prosecuted for unlawful carrying are those people who aren't guilty of any other offense arising out of the same event.

That is to say, Bartley-Fox is, and was since its enactment several decades ago, a ruse. Both David Bartley, a prominent member of the General Court at the time, and Judge Fox, who presided in the Roxbury District Court, knew this. The public, however, didn't and still doesn't.

Ah, Massachusetts politics.

 

[Finalygotabeltfed]

Is it really that hard to understand or is it just people in political office, lots of police and liberals that think people do not have an inherant right and duty to protect and defend themselves? I just don't get it.

 

[JWalker]

If Christy says "Illegal MEANS Illegal" one more time..I'm going to scream

 

[JWalker]

I'm not a Mihos supporter but he just stood there and said nothing when the gun topic was being bantered about.

 

[Admin]

I'm not a Mihos supporter but he just stood there and said nothing when the gun topic was being bantered about.

He's not in it to win it. He's just there to make sure Deval wins.

 

[Bruce for NH State Rep]

I'm surprised Patrick didn't jump all over that one, arguing against a licensing system that denies constitutionally-protected rights to lower-income people of color.

Not.

God help the Commonwealth.

 

[PistolPete]

All the polls say Patrick is kicking ass!!! We are frigen doomed if this liberal gets in office esp. if he and Coakley win!!!

This whole election is pissing me off. I can see why people don't want to vote for Healey because she isn't very personable. But unfortunately people don't pay attention to the issues they pay attention to the personalities.

 

[JellyFish]

Yep, I agree. Healey should have tried to be warmer earlier on or something.

Well, let's all vote anyway. It's our civic obligation even if Free-Em-All Deval wins.

 

[Martlet]

Ross makes me laugh. It takes a lot of balls to look at someone who donates 300,000+ to charity each year AND pays taxes and tell them they don't pay their fair share.

 

[Admin]

look at someone who donates 300,000+ to charity each year AND pays taxes and tell them they don't pay their fair share.

If that isn't the very definition of Liberal, I don't know what is...

 

[KMaurer]

You need to add one other thing to the definition. Back when Kerry was last running for re-election to the Senate, he released his tax returns for the previous years. Turns out the cheap bastard didn't list a single charitable contribution for the year; when asked about it, he said that he and Theraaaaaaaza had a lot of expenses that year. I'm listening to this "poor me" crap while thinking that I'm paying more in taxes than my wife and I used to earn working full time when we were starting our family, taking care of her mother in our home, and still managing to contribute a decent amount to charities.

Ever wonder why you can't deduct charitable contributions for your Massachusetts income taxes? Liberals don't want people contributing to charities, because that infrignes on what they consider the government's job, just like people defending themselves and their families. If a charity is worth supporting, then they'll demand a government subsidy for it.

Ken

 

[Coyote33]

...Patrick used this question to take a shot at Healey on regarding LTC applications. He wants that power to stay with the Chiefs. ...

Police chiefs back Patrick

Anti-gun group and police chiefs endorse Patrick

 

[ArmedMainer]

He's not in it to win it. He's just there to make sure Deval wins.

Maybe it seems that way at times but I have to disagree. If the Republican party would put up someone that spoke for its base they would'nt have to worry about the likes of Mihos. Did Mihos make Healey say the Second Amendment was about hunting? Did Mihos make Healey flip-flop on her position about illegal immigration after her husband joined the Bush administration ? Healey's numbers would be dropping like a Led Zepplin even if Mihos wasn't running. Don't think for a second that she hasn't wiped the floor with Mihos because shes a lady. She hasn't done it because....she can't.

 

[Coyote33]

...The reason for this is that BF provides for a 1-year sentence; a 1-year sentence cannot be served in prison, but only an HOC; and the system does not provide for sentencing to an HOC term "on and after" a prison term....

OK, what is the difference for those of us who don't know?

 

[RKG]

In Massachusetts, a "felony" is something to which you can be sentenced to 2-1/2 years or more; anything else is a misdemeanor.

The maximumum sentence in a House of Correction (county jail) is one day less than 2-1/2 years.

Therefore, a guy sentenced to, say, 4-6 for armed robbery has to be sent to a "correctional institution" (state prison, usually Walpole or Concord), so what are you going to do? Give him a "concurrent" 1 year on Bartley-Fox? Apart from being meaningless, you can't concurrent a guy on two sentences that, by law, must be served in different institutions. So you let him serve out his time to parole on the first (prison) sentence and then send him committed to the House of Correction? System doesn't permit this.

So the dude who carries illegally AND does something worse gets the former for free.

Since this anomoly is well embedded in the Massachusetts criminal system and was well known when Bartley-Fox was enacted, there are some cyincal folks out there who think that Dave Bartley understood that he was enacting something that could only be used against "good guys."

 

[Coyote33]

I meant, what is the difference between a "prison" and a "house of correction"

 

[dwarven1]

Pay-per-view?

 

[Scrivener]

In Massachusetts, a "felony" is something to which you can be sentenced to 2-1/2 years or more; anything else is a misdemeanor.

Wrong. Note that OUI carries a potential penalty of 2.5 years and remains a misdemeanor. Here's what the law really is:

G.L.c. 274, § 1. Felonies and misdemeanors.

Section 1. A crime punishable by death or imprisonment in the state prison is a felony. All other crimes are misdemeanors.

Real criminals don't do a minute of time for a Bartley-Fox conviction because, as was noted, the sentence is served concurrently with that for the real crime; armed robbery, rape, ADW, murder, whatever.