Foxboro Meeting - David Linsky transcribed - Please read

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 20, 2013
Messages
596
Likes
344
Greetings Folks, Fellow 2A supporters & honored Patriots,

Like you, I am very concerned about the Bills put forth by Representatives of the Massachusetts Legislature. The particular Bill 3253 put forth by Natick Rep David Linsky, seems like a virtual laundry list of measures to control, curtail, and negate our basic rights as Americans. Make no mistake, this is a form of slow and tedious extermination of many of our freedoms… the exact things our wise forefathers warned about and attempted to protect us from, with their Bills of Rights.

Last Monday evening I attended the Foxboro meeting to discuss firearms. I was able to see and hear for myself the thoughts and attitudes of the Reps supporting Bill 3253. I was highly appreciative to see many 2A supporters there, and it was great for the Reps to see and hear our positions. Unfortunately, I don’t think this will even be close to enough to deter the Legislative process from pushing forward with many new and stringent restrictions. Folks, we need everyone to get involved in this one. Ask yourself - Do you value your rights as Americans? Do you want additional and highly stringent restrictions on your abilities to protect yourself or your family? Please make every attempt to attend these meetings and rallies, please let no small excuse deter you from being sure your voice was heard or you were counted as a number in support of your rights.

Below, you will find exactly what Rep. David Linsky himself said in Foxboro on Monday night. I think it is very important for all of you to read for yourselves, and understand what we are facing as law-abiding citizens of Massachusetts. I have very carefully transcribed the opening comments from Rep Linsky, and it is worth the read. (although I am sure a word or two may not be EXACT, it is damn close). Unfortunately, I have not had time to completely transcribe the entire meeting – such as the Q&A segment - but I certainly can take the time to do so if folks here are interested.

Foxboro – Monday, March 18.
…following comments from the Foxboro Police Chief, the Foxboro Republican Representative, and Attleboro Democratic Representative Paul Heroux…

David Linsky: "Thank you, ah thank you Dennis (Moderator), thank you to the Foxboro Democratic Town committee, thank you to the Town of Foxboro, and thank you for all of you coming out tonight to have this discussion. Um, I just want to kind of, put this in context a little bit, so that people understand. First I want to talk a little bit about where we are as a country, and I want to talk to you about how I came to be sitting here tonight. 32,000 people a year die, as a result of firearm violence in this country {inaudible}, that's a fact... 32,000 people. Um, about half of them are suicides, and I'm glad the Chief (Foxboro Police Chief) brought that up. Umm, another percentage of them are accidental shootings... and then about 11,000 a year are firearm homicides. Those are the stats. So, let me put this in context... when you take 32,000 people a year, that's 83 a day. The stats also show that out of those 83, 8 or 9 of them are children. That's a problem. Like it or not, that's a problem, and it is something that we have to figure out as a society to try to reduce. And if you don't think that's a problem, then we don't have any business talking, because 32,000 lives lost every year is very significant. And it's very significant because we here in the United States of America have the single highest firearm homicide rate of any country in the world, by far, by far."

Audience: {inaudible comments}

David Linsky: "Look... let's not interrupt each other, okay, let's not interrupt each other. I respect your opinion if it's different, I ask you to respect mine, because that's what we, how we do things. Those are the stats, okay. 32,000 people a year, 83 people a day. So that works out to be just under 3,000 a month. Let me put this into context. On September 11th 2001, 3,000 people died... killed, as the result of a terrorist attack like this country had never seen. On September 11th 2001, never seen before, horrible, horrible thing. As a result of those 3,000 deaths, this country entered into 2 wars, and we lost thousands, and thousands, and thousands more lives. We have the equivalent of one September 11th terrorist attack, in terms of lives lost... every 5 weeks in this country. Last December 14th this country, all of us, were shook, were completely horrified by what happened in Newtown, Ct... when those children were murdered in their classrooms. That was horrible. But the reality is that since December 14th, umm, of last year, we lost another 4,000 people as a result of gun violence in this country... okay, more than September 11th, it keeps on happening. And September 11th you know was a, I mean excuse me, ahh December 14th in Newtown, was a terrible, terrible tragedy mass shooting, but the reality is, is that, that isn't what most of the gun violence is in this country. Yeah, we've had other mass shootings, we've had Aurora, we've had Arizona, we've had Wisconsin, we've, we've had these mass shootings, but that's not the majority of gun violence. The majority of gun violence happens in people's houses, and on the streets, on a daily basis in Massachusetts and in every other State, 83 people die. And it is something that {inaudible} for me to do something about. Our opinions, I would think will differ, about what the right result is, but I would hope that everyone in this room, is horrified by those numbers quite frankly, that we're horrified... and we need to figure out the right way. Some people think the answer is more guns, other people think the answer is fewer guns. But let's try to, as a society, put our heads together and try to do something, because I would think that nobody wants us to be the leading country for homi... firearm violence in the world. That's a horrible thing, that's a horrible statistic for any civilized society to have. So let's try to work together and come up with a solution. Let me tell you how I came to be here. I'm not ludicrous, you know I'm not a political grandstander, I'm not someone who just started filing Bills after December 14th. That's not who I am. I've worked on this issue for 30 years, actually over 30 years, when I was a college freshman at Colby College, and I studied Gun Control Laws, throughout the State, throughout the country at that time. And then after Law School, I spent 14 years as a Prosecutor in Middlesex County, and I tried 25 murder cases. I've had the distinct, the distinct experience of something that probably nobody else, although probably the police chief has, of ah experiencing, and that's standing over the dead body of a homicide victim at somebody's house. And then having to go to the family of that homicide victim , and tell them that their loved one is dead. That stays with you. But it wasn't just homicides, it wasn't the homicides that we responded to in the District Attorney's office, it was suicides, it was accidental shootings, it was... it was people who, quite frankly, made a decision to take a handgun, that was available to them, and end their lives. And that's why I'm so happy that the Chief, the Chief brought suicide into this discussion. Because let me tell you something, as I said over half the firearm deaths in this country every year are suicides. But that effects the family, and the community, as much if not more than a homicide does. It rips a family apart, it rips a community apart, and it's a terrible thing. Why is it, why is suicide, why does suicides have to be in the discussion about firearms? This is why. Because when one attempts to commit suicide with a firearm, they are quote "successful", and I put that in quotes, over 90% percent of the time. 90% of the time. If you try to commit suicide with a firearm, you end up ending your life. But if you commit, try to commit suicide in any other respect, the death rate is about 30-40%. People end up in the hospital. And when the researchers interview people, they interview people who attempted to commit suicide, the vast majority of those people are happy that they survived. Okay. If you try to commit suicide with a firearm, 90% of the time you will be successful. That's a crisis. Somebody brought up Japan and suicide, and I'll just address that... that's a very different culture. And I'm glad that Paul (Paul Heroux, Rep from Attleboro), brought umm, brought into, into the discussion the different types of deaths. Because there might be one solution or one answer to try and cut down on mass shootings, there's another solution to try and cut down on the domestic violence solution, there's another solution to try and cut down on suicide, and there's another solution for trying to cut down on accidental shootings. Okay. They're all problems. And if you don't think those are problems, then I... then guess what, I think maybe you have the problem. Okay. We need to try to find solutions. So what'd I do? I filed a Bill, and it's a Bill that's a starting point, there's about 25 different, umm, umm, provisions in it. All dealing with trying, trying in one way or another, to cut down on firearm violence. Okay. In each one of the sections, and this is what, what, what umm, this is what I am thrilled to have an opportunity to talk about. Each one of the sections is designed to try to cut down on the different types of firearm violence. One section goes to accidental shootings, another section goes to mass shootings, another section goes to domestic violence shootings, another section goes to suicides, and, and so on. Because one thing that I've learned in this discussion is that there is not one single solution. You know, I can tell you that banning assault weapons, you know, it won't, it will cut down on a couple of shootings a year. Okay. I know that. I know there is a very small percentage of umm, of shootings and murders in this country are committed by assault weapons. Okay. Umm, because the vast majority of, of homicides are not committed by assault weapons, but are committed by handguns. We know that, everyone in this room knows that. So we need one strategy to deal with that type of shooting, we need another type of strategy to deal with accidental shootings. The accidental shootings, that why in this state, we have a, a Safe Storage Law. Okay. So that, so that as you know, anyone with their license for a gun knows, you need to have you gun locked if it is not within your immediate control. That's the law in Massachusetts. But unfortunately we also know, that that's a law that is virtually impossible to enforce. Okay. It's impossible to enforce because, any time someone ends up getting charged with a violation of that, is after a tragedy happens. Okay. And we all know that. So we need to figure out, that of course is the intent of that law that we have on the books is to cut down on the accidental shootings, and cut down on theft of firearms, because that's a problem. So we need one strategy to deal with that, okay. Umm, so that, as I said I filed a Bill that has about 25 different provisions, But each one, if as a stand alone... you know if we are lucky might cut down on shootings by 1%, 2%, 3%, something like that. And I admit that, but there is no one answer, there's no perfect solution. But my hope is, that if we do a lot of these different things, we do a lot of these different things, that that 2% here, and that 2% there, and that 3% here, when we add it up, we might make a dent in that 32,000 deaths a year. Okay, because as I'm so glad that Representative Heroux brought up the different types of shootings, the different types of homicides, that different types of, of, of incidents that are out there. Because as I've said, this rips apart a community, okay, this rips apart a community. Is my Bill perfect? No. I know that, okay. But I'm trying to make some headway. Just want to try to, you know, let the people know where I am coming from, what I'm coming to do. Do I hate guns? No. Okay. Do I hate guns? No. I've shot, I've had the experience of shooting and firing virtually every single type of gun out there. From the .22 when I was 8 or 9 years old at summer camp, to an actual machine gun. Okay. I've shot every single kind there is. When I was a prosecutor, I had to learn how to handle a gun, because we had guns as evidence. In case... I had to learn to be comfortable about it. Umm, do I know the difference between different types of guns? Yes I do. Okay. I that, umm, a umm, an AR-15 you have to pull the trigger every single time, I know that stuff. I know that you can't fire off 200 rounds a minute, I know that. Okay, so... you know, the reality is... is that, umm... I'm trying to come up with solutions to cut down on what any rational person, any rational person, should see as a significant problem in this country. Umm, yeah we have a Second Amendment in this, in this country, and it's part of the Constitution and I absolutely support it, and it needs to be kept in there. But one thing that we know is, is that every right is not an absolute right. We have a First Amendment, okay, but we know that under, under the, under the umm, under the Constitution you don't have the right to shout, shout fire in a crowded theatre. You don't have a right to have child pornography. There's not an absolute First Amendment. Similarly, the Supreme Court has held in Heller & McDonald, the most recent cases, the most important cases, that there aren't, that there isn't an absolute unfettered Second Amendment. Okay. That the, even Justice Scalia, the most conservative Justice in the US Supreme Court, umm, wrote in the Heller decision, that there are certain types of weapons that the government has the right to ban. Like it or not, that is what the Constitution says. And it's not up to us..."

Audience: {inaudible}

Moderator: "Excuse me, please don't interrupt. We were doing so well. Okay."

David Linsky: "...that it's not what we think is the Constitution. It's what the Supreme Court of the United States rules is the Constitution. We have a civilized society here, okay, and when we don't like our government, we have something called elections, every 2 years and every 4 years. Where if we don't like what our rulers are doing, our elected officials..."

Audience: "Rulers!? LOL! Who's your King?"

Moderator: "Excuse me, how hard is it to understand civility, alright! We've been here within 2 minutes of an hour, things have gone well, we have 8 minutes and then we will open up the floor to comments, okay? And within reason you can ask any question you want. That doesn't seem unreasonable, because that the way it's going to be."

David Linsky: "...what I was saying is, it's not up to us in this room to decide what's Constitutional or what's not, so let's not have a Constitutional debate. That's called the Supreme Court. Okay. So right now as far as the Second Amendment is concerned with the Heller decision or the McDonald decision, the most recent ones, and... so let's not say the Second Amendment says this and that, that's not a, that's not a constructive discussion. Okay. But what I'm saying is, that we as a society, in my view, first have to recognize that we have a significant gun violence problem in this country. In fact it's the worst gun violence of any country in the world. That the first thing and that's a fact. And the second issue is, we as a society have to decide, what the best way to attack that problem. Do we want to have more guns? We already have 300 million guns in people's houses in this country. Or do you want to have fewer guns? And if we decide, what should be, if any, if any, the type of guns that people should own... the type of people, in terms of what their histories are, and their qualifications, and the length that people should have to go through in order to have access to a gun, or do we just let it be unfettered."

- Transcribe END -

Rep Linsky went on to add the Massachusetts is among only 7 of 50 States that do not do a check with the National Background Check folks, and that should be changed. Also, stated that your NRA Liability Insurance, or Homeowners Insurance would cover the Liability requirement in his Bill.

I spoke with Rep. Linsky following the meeting. He is bound and determined to push all he can to get his ENTIRE Bill through Legislature (please read it), without a single worry for the law-abiding citizens that will ultimately be punished for being good upstanding Americans. And he has a ton of support. We must equal that effort. Every meeting must be like the Westford meeting, a strong, proud showing of AMERICANS.

Thank you for reading all of this. I hope that enough of us will stand together and push back on those that seek to use rule of law to suppress our rights. PLEASE, support GOAL’s Jim Wallace tomorrow night in Holliston.

God Bless those that served and fought for all of us to be able to make free choices.

PW
 
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
12,974
Likes
12,501
he didn't say anything about ****ing sheep or goats?

Rumor has it he prefers Cows..

 

beaker

NES Member
Rating - 100%
25   0   0
Joined
Jun 30, 2009
Messages
10,586
Likes
5,815
Location
LV-426
I would say he is a douchebag but that would be offensive to douchebags.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
 
Rating - 100%
55   0   0
Joined
Jan 13, 2009
Messages
30,781
Likes
8,663
Location
free hampshire
so um so um let's not talk about the constitution so um so um i dont care what the second amendment says right now u so um let's talk about our rulers

of which. i am one. o'doyle, i mean LINSKY rules!

i wish i wasn't banned from his facebook so i could trash king linsky for this one, too. i have been banned for weeks for calling him a spineless statist coward or something along those lines. you guys know how i roll.
 

Horrible

NES Member
Rating - 100%
16   0   0
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
11,969
Likes
4,181
Location
NOLA
So, was this whole meeting Linsky talking and the mod trying to shut everyone up or was there actually some form of a debate?
 

June4th

NES Member
Rating - 100%
39   0   0
Joined
Feb 17, 2008
Messages
4,428
Likes
4,037
Location
SE MA
Way to go for your first ever post!

Now to answer Horrible's question: the forum was billed as Q&A style. Each of the four hosts get to say their piece and then audience asked questions and hosts answered. There weren't a whole lot of back and forth (debate). As a member of the audience, each of us had to be considerate of other audiences as well because we didn't want to hog up the time. A few times that the audience was so outraged by what was said by Linsky or Hourox so the voice level rose and people all started talking, that's when the moderator played his card.
 

Panama Red

NES Member
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Jun 19, 2007
Messages
153
Likes
7
Location
Not quite Hell, but I can see it from here!
EXCELLENT first post! Thank you. There was a gentleman wearing a tri-corner hat (I assume he was one of the many TeaParty members that were there) to stage-left that was videoing the entire meeting. Anybody know who he is? We need to get that video. I wouldn't trust the video taping that was being done by the woman with 2 cameras.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 20, 2013
Messages
596
Likes
344
Thanks folks. Lots to be concerned about here, and we need to act now before we are really freaking sorry later.

Please get out and support GOAL's Jim Wallace in Holliston tomorrow evening. He will be speaking along with Rep David Linsky. It is important that you attend and hear for yourself, the intentions of our Representatives. We need all the support you can offer. Thank you so much.
 
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Nov 10, 2011
Messages
126
Likes
23
Location
Sandwich, Massachusetts
Such a bumbling idiot, I'm sure the good people of Natick and Sherborn (sp?) are very proud. Thanks for taking the time to transcribe the comments. I have been especially frightened by the insurance clause in his draft bill. It is extremely vague and leaves the details up to the State Insurance Commissioner, who is a huge douche just like Linsky. Linsky is on record stating that he intentionally left the wording vague, so I'm surprised to hear he is now claiming that homeowner's liability (assuming a policy covers firearms, which mine does) will suffice. I don't think the moron understands that no insurance company will EVER cover you for nefarious acts by a third party!
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 20, 2013
Messages
596
Likes
344
Just bumping this thread to the top - so damn important!

PLEASE, consider attending this meeting -

The Holliston Democratic Town Committee will hold a round table discussion about gun violence, gun safety and gun ownership on Thursday, March 21, from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. at Robert Adams Middle School, 323 Woodland St.
Panelists, including Holliston Police Chief John Moore, state Rep. David Linsky, D-Natick, and Jim Wallace of Gun Owners Action League, will be on hand to discuss gun safety, responsible gun ownership and violence prevention.

Barbara Gardner will serve as moderator.
Additional panelists may be added.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 9, 2005
Messages
8,704
Likes
1,495
Location
Central Ma.
And why would his stance surprise anyone here? These anti-gun pols have no experience w/firearms but write and pass bills legislating gun laws. We know these pols have no respect for our rights and that is why I show them no respect.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 10, 2013
Messages
839
Likes
597
That is a rockin' first post.

I hear a noise... it, it is... the founders shouting TREASON! from the grave!
 
Top Bottom