Globe Article about 501 CMR 15.00

[Chris]

However, unlike the first 80%, the final four points are missing one crucial piece of information. Facts to back them up.

There is no evidence to suggest any of these would add any measure of safety. There is no evidence of any such rules imposed anywhere in the world have created an environment that is safer than that we have here today.

The fact of the matter is more children are injured or killed playing sports like football, soccer, hockey, and even basketball in one year than have EVER been injured or killed at an organized shooting event.

Westfield was a very tragic event. But the fact remains (although the media wants to ignore it) that the incident was caused by a father handing his son a gun he was not capable of handling and then leaving the boy's side with the gun loaded in his hands. No amount of BS reporting and political grandstanding can change the fact that the incident resulted solely from a parent making a very serious error in judgement. The venue, the location, and the items in question have virtually no relation to the fact that dad was an idiot.

These regulations do nothing more than place onerous mandates on the vast majority of the people who would not, did not, and will not be as careless. Such regulations would be like mandating 'official' escorts down the highway in small groups because there are some people out there that drive in excess of 100mph. The vast majority of people can operate in a safe and prudent manner and to punish them for the actions of a very small minority is neither cost effective or prudent.

You can't legislate away stupidity.

These regulations have ZERO to do with safety and everything to do with the desire to eliminate the use of firearms by any means possible.

 

[Admin]

These regulations have ZERO to do with safety and everything to do with the desire to eliminate the use of firearms by any means possible.

The above is exactly the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

 

[JuergenG]

The above is exactly the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

...and it's exactly what we try to tell our lawmakers on this side of the pond
when they come up with another piece of kneejerk legislation

 

[wf217]

Nice job Jim, I know we had a lot of fun at last years turkey shoot. I would hate to see our rights diminished by a bunch of pin heads.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

I did learn something though... you don't actually shoot turkeys at a turkey shoot. Go figure.

 

[jhblaze1]

remember he's the "authority" on guns because he own "a rifle" and "hunts".

well don't forget, duckhunting is the sole purpose of the second ammendment you know!

 

[Len-2A Training]

Interesting item about this article. It took the reporter (Julie Masis) over 3 weeks to write it, she spent quite a bit of time one day speaking to Jim Wallace our executive director during which he set her straight on the issue and she chose not to use any of what he told her.

It's unfortunate that she missed an opportunity to report all of the facts.

Sorry, but I doubt that was the case. She or her editors INTENTIONALLY mis-reported the "facts" to fit the Glob's political agenda . . . which is ironically the same as Rosenthal's agenda!

 

[Len-2A Training]

These regulations have ZERO to do with safety and everything to do with the desire to eliminate the use of firearms by any means possible.

Bingo! Exactly what the intent is.

. . . And sadly it has already begun to work, even w/o the regs going into effect.

I know that already some gun clubs have "added restrictions" to "fall in line" with the intent of these proposed regulations. I expect even more to do so within the next year or so. So members get screwed over by their own BODs trying to be "politically correct" and "pro-active" <anti-gun> before laws/regs can change.

 

[jcr]

Anybody know if this article was actually printed on newsprint? And if so, what section and page number?

Globe article

 

[K-DUB]

Who's the badass looking guy in the pic?

I'm glad that Shirley R&G got some press, & their concerns were voiced.

I'm shocked that the article wasn't more biased given the source. Rosenthal is a complete & utter jackass, who is treated as "THE AUTHORITY ON GUNS". It's freakin' aggravating.

 

[Bob P]

Nice Eddie!

Rosenthal is basically the Al Sharpton of gun control - he pops out of the woodwork everytime he has the remotest chance of publicity. He's also about as relevant.

 

[the_doctor]

It was a good article up until the end. Typical Globe. This is the way I saw the article laid out:

First 80% of the article: Rational, thoughtful gun owners discussing what will be lost if these new laws pass

Last 20% of the article makes 4 points in quick succession to end the article:

1. An 8 year old boy would be alive today if these laws had been in place
2. These events will still take place, they will just be safer now
3. Other states besides MA have these reasonable laws in place already
4. These laws aren't a knee jerk reaction to Westford, they are simply much needed overdue reforms

The Globe's agenda and bias are clear. I think this piece will result in more support for the new regulations due to the last 4 points the Globe intentionally ended with. Now people that didn't have an opinion before will have the correct talking points and counter-arguments to people protesting the changes.

From Boston Globe

If the regulations are adopted, Massachusetts would not be the first state to prohibit machine guns from firearms exhibitions. Indiana, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Georgia, and Maryland ban them from

Did they check the facts? Which laws are they mentioning?

Machines are permissable in Indiana with no restrictions. Massachusetts has machine gun licensing. Indiana does not! Which thing did I miss? You have to register the machine gun with Massachusetts and prove competency in order to have it. Indiana does not require any of this. If the feds say that you are ok, then you are ok!

Machine gun laws regarding restriction of operation or possion
Indiana - no
Pennslyvannia - no
Ohio - unknown by me
Rhode Island- unknown by me
Georgia - no
Maryland - requires annual registration

Did the BG check any facts?? I guess that they laid off all proof readers.

Bill

 

[Kaos116]

Not much to add that hasn't been said. Rosenthal = Jackass.

A couple questions for EC just out of curiosity. Why did you choose the M1 for the photo? Did the 'reporter' or photographer shoot?

 

[greycar]

National Shooting Sports Foundation lte response

September 21, 2009
Letter to the Editor
The Boston Globe P.O. Box 55819 Boston, MA 02205-5819 [email protected]
To the Editor:
Amid the latest push by gun-control activists to require additional regulations restricting the shooting sports in the Bay State, it is important for Governor Patrick and the Massachusetts citizenry to recognize fact over hyperbole (“Local Gun Club Up in Arms,” September 20, 2009).
Firearm-related accidents are at their lowest levels in history, including a 60 percent decrease over the last 20 years. Accidents involving children are even rarer. According to the National Safety Council, children are more likely to die from a fall, a burn, suffocation, over-heating, hypothermia, participation in athletics, riding in an automobile, poisoning and even drowning in a bathtub.
The proposed regulations being trumpeted by gun control groups would require shooting clubs to obtain a special government license and submit a detailed “safety plan” to their local police department 30 days prior to holding any shooting-related event. Additionally, shooting clubs would be forced to hire a police detail and have multiple certified firearms safety instructors in attendance – as many as one for every five attendees.
These draft regulations violate the First Amendment right of shooting ranges to peacefully assembly on private property to engage in a lawful and safe past time; that also happens to be protected by the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The shooting sports is one of the safest activities to participate in. Shooting ranges and gun clubs are family-oriented facilities where people go to learn and practice firearm safety. The proposed regulations would do nothing to enhance the safety of club attendees and only serve to end, through bureaucracy and red tape, a great American heritage and pastime.
Sincerely yours,
Lawrence G. Keane


http://www.nssf.org/media/lte/Boston-Globe-092109.pdf

 

[EddieCoyle]

Nice!

 

[RI_John]

September 21, 2009
Letter to the Editor
The Boston Globe P.O. Box 55819 Boston, MA 02205-5819 [email protected]
To the Editor:
Amid the latest push by gun-control activists to require additional regulations restricting the shooting sports in the Bay State, it is important for Governor Patrick and the Massachusetts citizenry to recognize fact over hyperbole (“Local Gun Club Up in Arms,” September 20, 2009).
Firearm-related accidents are at their lowest levels in history, including a 60 percent decrease over the last 20 years. Accidents involving children are even rarer. According to the National Safety Council, children are more likely to die from a fall, a burn, suffocation, over-heating, hypothermia, participation in athletics, riding in an automobile, poisoning and even drowning in a bathtub.
The proposed regulations being trumpeted by gun control groups would require shooting clubs to obtain a special government license and submit a detailed “safety plan” to their local police department 30 days prior to holding any shooting-related event. Additionally, shooting clubs would be forced to hire a police detail and have multiple certified firearms safety instructors in attendance – as many as one for every five attendees.
These draft regulations violate the First Amendment right of shooting ranges to peacefully assembly on private property to engage in a lawful and safe past time; that also happens to be protected by the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The shooting sports is one of the safest activities to participate in. Shooting ranges and gun clubs are family-oriented facilities where people go to learn and practice firearm safety. The proposed regulations would do nothing to enhance the safety of club attendees and only serve to end, through bureaucracy and red tape, a great American heritage and pastime.
Sincerely yours,
Lawrence G. Keane


http://www.nssf.org/media/lte/Boston-Globe-092109.pdf

+x for you! well written. I like it. I hope it gets published.

 

[namedpipes]

Jim, not to pick nits, but the sign on the wall next to you says "Pistol Range Rules" but you were prepping to use an M1? Shame on you!


As good an article as one could expect from the Globe. Great representation of gun owners on your part!

 

[EddieCoyle]

Jim, not to pick nits, but the sign on the wall next to you says "Pistol Range Rules" but you were prepping to use an M1? Shame on you!

Yeah I know.

I'm going to catch shit from it at the Club because I'm the one that gets pissed and chews people out for doing just that.

I couldn't use the rifle range that day because we were replacing the telephone poles around the 50 and 75 yard bunkers.

 

[EddieCoyle]

Interesting item about this article. It took the reporter (Julie Masis) over 3 weeks to write it, she spent quite a bit of time one day speaking to Jim Wallace our executive director during which he set her straight on the issue and she chose not to use any of what he told her.

It's unfortunate that she missed an opportunity to report all of the facts.

She did quite a bit of research for the article, and it was finished a while ago. The editors at the Globe decide what runs when.

I think she should be commended for coming into such a fiercely debated issue cold, and being as fair as she was. Somebody from the Globe probably gave her Rosenthal's name to get the 'other side' of the story. It's not her fault that she didn't know he's a lie-spewing crap weasel.

 

[JonJ]

You did good, Jim.

 

[EddieCoyle]

I just went back and checked the comments posted to the story. Every one was against the CMRs.

Why did you choose the M1 for the photo? Did the 'reporter' or photographer shoot?

I wanted a rifle without a scope or detachable mag to avoid both the 'sniper rifle' and 'assault weapon' tags. I watched the whole Band Of Brothers series the day before the photos were taken, so I decided to bring the Garand. A photographer came out to take the photos. Nice guy.

 

[cekim]

I just went back and checked the comments posted to the story. Every one was against the CMRs.

Same story at the Public Comment meeting...

Not one speaker in favor of them...

 

[Mike S]

Could it be that the tide is turning? Now if we can just get legislators that are truly representing the people...

 

[Core-Lokt]

.