...
These I beg, petition, and, in strict justice, in surest mercy, respectfully and with all courtesy, demand you do.
In forma specifica, for the bills under consideration, I offer:
S.1389 – oppose, due to right of commerce, right to protection of papers and property from government control without due process of law, right to keep and bear
S.1388 – oppose, illegal search, right to privacy, the possibility of leaks and doxing people who have committed no wrongdoing for political purposes
S.1387 – oppose, (One could support something like the first section with lots of amendment that, instead of violence prevention programs, the appropriation is for all appropriately aged school children – middle school, I should think - be taught firearms safety by an NRA certified safety instructor, and a campaign of de-hollywoodizing and demystifying firearms through their uses in history. Also, remove the tax on firearms as it is a tax on the exercise of the necessary penumbra of the enumerated right, which is not permissible.) All of section 3 is null and void. Section 4 is unconstitutional prior restraint, the last part of Section 4 violates equal protection under the law. Section 5 is unlawful restraint on free trade in something necessary to a right, equivalent of a ‘tax stamp’ on, say, free speech. Section 6 is highly unlawful restraint on the rights of ownership and keeping arms, and has an intentional chilling effect on the very notion of licenses: this section could not stand up to federal civil rights jurisprudence. A foreseeable administrative error does not rise to the level of a crime, the crime impugned is ab initio void, protected under all manner of the enjoyment of civil rights from both the state and federal constitutional authority, and Federal precedent. Section 9 is an illicit centralized reallocation of powers granted (some of which are defined under federal law) from the cities and respective persons. (The executive and not the legislature may, at best, have this authority.)
H.2040 – oppose except with amendment to just mandate a bit of paint job before use, that’s sufficient.
H.2039 – oppose, but possible amendments: that the firearm, having been acquired illegally, be stored at the states expense, that the state notify the lawful owner of the firearm, and as far as practical returned to its lawful owner within one year, or, if required for evidence, suitable compensation be given. Section 3 – reporting to the federal government may only come after conviction of a felony.
S.1368 – oppose. It’s just another partisan payroll, whose job is, in turns, politically lobbying the government and releasing partisan reports on behalf of the distaff, aimed at getting the state to fund their efforts to further ensconce the violence to the natural and enumerated rights. Stop playing around.
H.2054 – support with amendment: strike the signature requirement, altogether, or make it all deliveries of completed ammunition. In this day and age, it’s adequately onerous, and the requirement is of dubious value in any case: someone intent on committing fraud will do so.
H.2048 – oppose - this is a grave violation of rights without due process, and as such is null ab initio. Someone who is not eligible to own a gun should not be walking around free, they should be institutionalized until they can be restored to sanity. Section 2: this has a chilling effect on actual cases, if your doctor can take away your rights. Being depressed is not a sign that you are suicidal, it is not a judgment of a jury, it does not take away any of your rights. Psychology used in this way, as a means of social control, was Soviet-block stuff, so knock it off. To compel someone to sign a government form under a clinical setting with the implied (even if disavowed) threat of termination of treatment is itself a violation of due process to the vulnerable. Also, procedure: once on the list, how do you get off? What safeguards are in place to prevent fraud or abuse? This is just a hash of legislation.
H.3843 – oppose, except for (g), which I support. Most is null ab initio as it is entirely within the “keep and bear arms” fortress. 11F(c) is insane. 11F(d) is an illegal registry under court precedents. 11F(e). is a violation of property rights. (g) is fine. (h) is wildly disproportionate, and is intended to entrap people engaged in lawful enterprise and exercising lawful freedoms.
H.3576 – oppose. This is an illegal violation of the 5th amendment to the US Constitution, and a compulsion to participate in an illegal exercise of power, I think has already been declared an unconstitutional impingement of the 2nd (maintaining a registry of firearms), and an onerous imposition on natural and enumerated liberty. We already, I believe, have a duty to report when a firearm is stolen, this is just abusive. Also, intentionally violates on of the findings of Heller.
H.2046 – oppose as insane: it criminalizes lawful self-defense, and puts the weight of action on the defender instead of the aggressor. The ‘substantial risk’ is too vague to be tolerable, it could happen at sport shooting events where we already disclaim compensation for liability, it could happen due to malfunctions, but in any case it’s definitely not a felony.( I tried 3 times to make this hash of a bill into something I could at some level support, but I cannot.)
H.2045 – mostly oppose, but possibly support with amend: i. insert ‘non-partisan’, strike ii since it’s ignoratio elenchi, iii not aggregated, but categorized by that list, strike viii as a violation of the right of privacy, add “controlling for poverty rates, compare the effect of Massachusetts’ excessive restrictions with a cohort of similar sized states that has liberalized gun regulations, such as maintaining the right of ‘constitutional carry’”.
H.2044 – oppose, as it inverts justice: the person who stole the device is culpable for the theft and the subsequent use, the person aggressed against is not a moral agent. Many of us have guns we do not utilize often, would not know it was missing for a long time. Inchoate.
H.2052 – support with amendments, no certificate requirements (or if you must, 2 hours training, fee to be paid by the state if the person subsists below the poverty level). These things aren’t rocket science, “don’t shoot at the face” is pretty much the only prohibition. Grandfather clause for extant devices. Use of such a device in furtherance of a felony shall carry a ~2 year additional penalty. Skip that last line, you should still need a warrant, finding it on a stop-and-frisk is not a cause of action. Finally, we should just be giving these out to poor people in the inner cities for free.
H.2051 – support
H.2050 – strongest support
H.2049 – I’d like to support, but the underlying idea is wrong. LEOSA forgets that the LEO derives their power to keep and bear from being citizens in the militia, not because they are or were once paid by government. We have to work to repeal all laws that presume to give ‘more rights’ to LEO, as it inverts the constitutional protections: government is to be restrained, the rights of citizens are not.
S.1395 – oppose – this is the slimy, ratchet-strap burden, where the licensing authority can claim to be perennially backed up, and the person has to keep submitting applications and they keep not getting returned in time, fees returned, and the process starts all over again, but can never claim they have been denied and go on to seek legal recourse. Blatantly unconstitutional, and did I already say slimy?
S.2055 – support. Good job, I had forgotten about this one.