GOAL's H.1568 An Act Relative to Civil Rights and Public Safety

[copterdoctor]

Section 30 limits non FFL firearm transfers to two in a twelve month period. Why the reduction from four?

 

[neEEGuru]

I just spent some time going through this again. I am really questioning why this bill is adding these massive mandatory minimums to gun crimes (20yr - 25 yr) an adding new punishments/rules etc. ? I am against all forms of mandatory minimums in general, but the focus here should be on expanding gun owners rights, not ADDING regulation, laws, and punishments?

Also that $1 to goal per FID language still looks like it's in there... and having FTF from 4 (already ridiculous) to 2 ?

I don't get it? This bill seems very large, complex, and adds more problems?

 

[Coyote33]

We need to spend more time and effort on individual bills correcting individual flaws. We need to bombard them with bills, and get as many through as possible. They can comprehend small doses of information. To give them a big bill, it just does not compute. I suggest looking here:

Redo MA gun laws!

 

[exo]

I cannot support this bill. There is no legitimate justification for the $1 to GOAL or the private sales reduction. And because of all the plea bargains, adding mandatory minimums to sentencing won't put any criminals away for longer, it will just eventually be used against an otherwise law abiding citizen who got caught in some trap.

WTF is GOAL doing to us?

 

[SSShooter]

I only see 29 sections in H.1568: http://www.malegislature.gov/Bills/187/House/H01568

Is the text above truncated, or are you possibly looking at something older? Further reducing the number of FTF transfers would be absolutely unacceptable.

 

[Dench]

I'm 100% against mandatory minimum sentencing, and if the $1 towards GOAL (which was brutally criticized recently on this forum) is still in there, it starts to get into the land of conflict of interest for GOAL.

 

[MassMark]

I find this 'interesting' coming from a so-called gun rights organization:

"Section 125

(a) Upon revocation or suspension of a firearm identification card, or of any machine gun license, the person whose card was so revoked or suspended shall without delay deliver or surrender to the local licensing agent, all firearms, machine guns and ammunition which he then possesses.

(b) Unless a person is arrested for a crime or proven guilty of committing a violent crime, no entity shall revoke or suspend a firearm identification card unless the entity has obtained a court order.

(c) Upon denial of an application for a firearm identification card, or of any machine gun license, the person whose application was so denied shall without delay deliver or surrender to the local licensing agent, all firearms, machine guns and ammunition which he then possesses."

Let's hand em over to the man... The Constitution requires it after all.... right?

 

[copterdoctor]

I only see 29 sections in H.1568: http://www.malegislature.gov/Bills/187/House/H01568

Is the text above truncated, or are you possibly looking at something older? Further reducing the number of FTF transfers would be absolutely unacceptable.

Look into the text on GOAL's home page. http://www.goal.org/

 

[GOAL C.M.]

Everyone, the 1 dollar language has been removed. If you are still seeing it you are most likely looking at an old web page in your cache, or we might have missed erasing it somewhere, if this is the case please send me a link so I can check.

Once again, the dollar language is NOT IN PLAY on this bill.

Also, as to the language mentioned about transfers, that is section 30 s.10E which covers the penalties for the illegal transfer of firearms, ie a prohibited person selling to another prohibited person. We will clarify this section so that it makes more sense.

Please remember, that this bill is by no means in its final form, there is much work to be done before it becomes law.

Thanks, we hope to see many of you at the state house tomorrow in support of this and other bills to be heard.

 

[BenDover]

Section 129C would seem to make it illegal to shoot in your backyard (within 500ft of a neighbors dwelling) unless your range is somehow recognized......correct me if I am wrong. This would be a downgrade from the current law.

 

[william_munny]

From the language of the bill on GOAL's website:

SECTION 12. Chapter 140 of the General Laws is hereby amended by inserting after section 128B the following section:-

Section 128C:

(a) The colonel of the state police shall, after an investigation, issue a machine gun license to a resident of the Commonwealth, who is the holder of a firearm identification card and who is over 21 years of age or older.

(b) The fee for the machine gun license shall be $40, and it shall be valid for a term of six years. The application shall be standard in form. The licensing authority shall retain $39 of the fee; and $1 of the fee shall be payable to the Gun Owners’ Action League to assist in the funding to provide the general public with firearm safety programs. Upon receiving an application, the colonel shall either issue or deny the license within sixty days. Any such denial shall be in writing and shall clearly state the reasons why the applicant was not considered a collector of machine guns or is a prohibited person.

 

[GOAL C.M.]

Gomer that is the current law, the change to the language is below that in it adds "castle defense" provisions

Here is our proposed change in it's entirety for that section.

Section 129C. Whoever discharges a firearm within five hundred feet of a dwelling or other building in use, except with the consent of the owner or legal occupant thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not less than $50 nor more than $100 dollars.

The provisions of this section shall not apply to (a) the lawful defense of life and property; (b) any law enforcement officer acting in the discharge of his duties; (c) persons using underground or indoor target or test ranges with the consent of the owner or legal occupant thereof; (d) persons using outdoor skeet, trap, target or test ranges with the consent of the owner or legal occupant of the land on which the range is established; (e) persons using shooting galleries, licensed and defined under the provisions of section fifty-six A of chapter one hundred and forty; and (f) the discharge of blank cartridges for theatrical, athletic, ceremonial, firing squad, or other purposes in accordance with section thirty-nine of chapter one hundred and forty-eight.

Also, in regards to the questions about how this legislation affects transfers. This is right at the top, we think it's pretty clear.

SECTION 1. Section one hundred twenty-one of chapter one hundred and forty of the General Laws is hereby amended by deleting the section in its entirety and replacing it with the following:-
Section 121. No county, municipality, township or other community entity within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts may enact, pass or enforce any law, ordinance or regulation concerning the lawful ownership, use, possession, transfer, purchase, receipt or transportation of firearms, antique firearms, ammunition or ammunition components.
The right to keep and bear arms as an individual civil right shall be presumed to exist in all matters regarding the ownership, use, possession, transfer, purchase, receipt or transportation of firearms, antique firearms, ammunition or ammunition components unless expressly prohibited by the laws of this Commonwealth.
Section 6.

(8) A firearm identification card shall be valid for all lawful purposes subject to the following age based conditions:
(a) A firearm identification card holder aged 15 through 17 shall be entitled to borrow, possess, carry, or transport any rifle or shotgun;
(b) A firearm identification card holder aged 18 and older shall be entitled to purchase, own, rent, lease, borrow, possess, carry, transfer or transport any rifle or shotgun;
(c) A firearm identification card holder aged 21 and over shall be entitled to purchase, own, rent, lease, borrow, possess, transport, carry, transfer or carry concealed any firearm;

 

[GOAL C.M.]

William, please send me a link to that page so I can fix it.

edit, never mind, got it.

 

[BenDover]

You are correct, I misread something.

Gomer that is the current law, the change to the language is below that in it adds "castle defense" provisions

 

[neEEGuru]

So GOAL, What's with the addition of additional penalties and mandatory minimums?!?

I am very against that, and fail to see where this helps gun owner rights or gun owners?

As others have said, they will simply use the threat of a 20yr mandatory sentence to pressure or screw someone possibly caught in a trap or something else ridiculous.

Mandatory minimums have NO PLACE in a gun bill, or no place at all for that matter.

Care to comment on that? I noticed you locked on the $1 fee being removed and glanced right over the rest of my points?

 

[atilla]

joe six pack is going to get slammed with a 20 year mandatory minimum sentence while some gang banger in murderpan is going to walk free because he's a good boy turning his life around... this bill won't change jack or sh!t about massachusetts in that respect. we do not need mandatory minimum sentences. period.

I find this 'interesting' coming from a so-called gun rights organization:

"Section 125

(a) Upon revocation or suspension of a firearm identification card, or of any machine gun license, the person whose card was so revoked or suspended shall without delay deliver or surrender to the local licensing agent, all firearms, machine guns and ammunition which he then possesses.

(b) Unless a person is arrested for a crime or proven guilty of committing a violent crime, no entity shall revoke or suspend a firearm identification card unless the entity has obtained a court order.

(c) Upon denial of an application for a firearm identification card, or of any machine gun license, the person whose application was so denied shall without delay deliver or surrender to the local licensing agent, all firearms, machine guns and ammunition which he then possesses."

Let's hand em over to the man... The Constitution requires it after all.... right?

and this... what happens when the state comes up with some BS reason and suspends all of our licenses? hand over our guns? okie-dokey.

 

[MassMark]

joe six pack is going to get slammed with a 20 year mandatory minimum sentence while some gang banger in murderpan is going to walk free because he's a good boy turning his life around... this bill won't change jack or sh!t about massachusetts in that respect. we do not need mandatory minimum sentences. period.



and this... what happens when the state comes up with some BS reason and suspends all of our licenses? hand over our guns? okie-dokey.

I'm unsure as to why GOAL would compromise the 2nd Amendment to pass a bill... This entire section is ludicrous...

 

[richc]

As I read it H.1568 would recognize gun ownership as a civil right that can't be infringed. Law abiding gun owners wouldn't have to worry about these sentences. The sentencing is in regards to prohibited people committing crimes with guns, in other words, locking up the damn thugs that keep shooting people and walking 5 years later (if they see any jail time at all).

Anyone read it the same way?

Thanks,

Rich

 

[wolf223]

As I read it H.1568 would recognize gun ownership as a civil right that can't be infringed. Law abiding gun owners wouldn't have to worry about these sentences. The sentencing is in regards to prohibited people committing crimes with guns, in other words, locking up the damn thugs that keep shooting people and walking 5 years later (if they see any jail time at all).

Anyone read it the same way?

Thanks,

Rich

http://www.itemlive.com/articles/2011/05/11/news/news08.txt

like this guy?

 

[MassMark]

As I read it H.1568 would recognize gun ownership as a civil right that can't be infringed. Law abiding gun owners wouldn't have to worry about these sentences. The sentencing is in regards to prohibited people committing crimes with guns, in other words, locking up the damn thugs that keep shooting people and walking 5 years later (if they see any jail time at all).

Anyone read it the same way?

Thanks,

Rich

I'd like to read it this way, but section 125 makes it a bit difficult. A civil right to own firearms does not involve turning them into the police - no matter the reason...Or lack....

 

[neEEGuru]

....
Anyone read it the same way?

Thanks,

Rich

NO, I don't read it that way AT ALL. And pro-gun group has no business adding punishments.

You seem to fail to realize that there is a fine-line between law abiding and not... and that line can get a lot thinner when the state is trying to push an agenda.

Mandatory minimums are NOT the answer...

Anyway, again, pro-gun group has no business adding jail sentences to a gun bill.

 

[BOBKATT]

Section 10E. Whoever, except as provided by law, in a single transaction or occurrence or in a series of transactions within a twelve month period, knowingly or intentionally distributes, sells, or transfers possession of a quantity of firearms, machine guns, or any combination thereof, shall, if the quantity of firearms, machine guns, or any combination thereof is:

(1) Three or more, but less than ten, be punished by a term of imprisonment of not more than ten years in the state prison. No sentence imposed under the provisions of this paragraph shall be for less than a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of three years and a fine of not more than fifty thousand dollars may be imposed but not in lieu of the mandatory minimum term of imprisonment, as established herein.

If my grandfather, who still thinks his LTC that was "good for life" is still indeed good for life, attempts to sell 3 of his guns one day, does that mean that GOAL's new bill would have him thrown in jail for the mandatory minimum of three years, and fine him up to $50,000?

 

[yanici]

You know, I'll bet that even Raquel Welch had a pimple on her ass once.

 

[Dench]

If my grandfather, who still thinks his LTC that was "good for life" is still indeed good for life, attempts to sell 3 of his guns one day, does that mean that GOAL's new bill would have him thrown in jail for the mandatory minimum of three years, and fine him up to $50,000?

A criminal is a criminal. Sorry, pal.

Mandatory minimums, cool!

 

[BOBKATT]

Well, I'm $30.00 per year richer now. Thanks GOAL for coming out of the closet.

 

[yanici]

Well, I'm $30.00 per year richer now. Thanks GOAL for coming out of the closet.

Nice. Spend it wisely.

 

[GOAL C.M.]

Most of the negative comments posted here are not vaild points as they are being taken out of context.

Please remember to read the bill in its entirety as much of what is being pointed out would not apply to a law abiding citizen should this bill be passed.

GOAL invites anybody that would like to discuss this bill to stop by the office, or better yet, come to the public hearing tomorrow to discuss.

We look forward to seeing you there.

 

[andyc4728]

While it's not perfect, I find this bill to be a huge improvement over the current situation. No more suitability. No more restrictions. "SHALL" instead of "MAY".

I did have an issue with the $1 to GOAL thing, but it looks like that is history.

Regardless I can't see any situation where this bill wouldn't make things MUCH better on average for a citizen in the Commonwealth.

 

[MassMark]

Most of the negative comments posted here are not vaild points as they are being taken out of context.

Please remember to read the bill in its entirety as much of what is being pointed out would not apply to a law abiding citizen should this bill be passed.

GOAL invites anybody that would like to discuss this bill to stop by the office, or better yet, come to the public hearing tomorrow to discuss.

We look forward to seeing you there.

Really? I've taken the liberty of posting Section 125 in its entirety. I'm not sure how surrendering your firearms to a "licensing authority" for any reason - let alone being "arrested" - not even convicted of a crime, can be taken out of context. It slaps the face of the 2nd Amendment and you know it. It's an appeasement - a giveaway of the 2nd Amendment to the legislature.

Section 125

(a) Upon revocation or suspension of a firearm identification card, or of any machine gun license, the person whose card was so revoked or suspended shall without delay deliver or surrender to the local licensing agent, all firearms, machine guns and ammunition which he then possesses.

(b) Unless a person is arrested for a crime or proven guilty of committing a violent crime, no entity shall revoke or suspend a firearm identification card unless the entity has obtained a court order.

(c) Upon denial of an application for a firearm identification card, or of any machine gun license, the person whose application was so denied shall without delay deliver or surrender to the local licensing agent, all firearms, machine guns and ammunition which he then possesses.

Upon such delivery or surrender as described in paragraph (a) or (b) the local licensing agent shall issue an itemized receipt of said property to the owner, or their legal representative, at the time of said delivery or surrender. Due care shall be observed by the local licensing agent in the receipt and holding of any such firearm, rifle, shotgun or machine gun and ammunition.

Any such person as described in paragraph (a) or (b), or his legal representative, having delivered or surrendered any firearms, machine guns and ammunition to the local licensing agent shall have the right to transfer his property to any federally licensed firearms dealer or any other person legally permitted to take possession of such firearms, machine guns and ammunition. Upon written notification by the owner, the local licensing agent shall within ten days deliver such firearms, machine guns and ammunition to the transferee. Any such request for transfer of such property must take place within one year of said delivery or surrender.

The local licensing agent, after taking possession of any firearm, machine gun or ammunition by any means, may transfer possession of such firearm or machine gun for storage purposes to a federally licensed dealer. However, no entity may enter a citizen into a contract for the storage of guns without that citizens written consent. The local licensing agent shall be liable to such dealer for reasonable storage charges. If the property is not transferred as described in this section within one year after such delivery or surrender, the local licensing agent may dispose of any such firearm, machine gun or ammunition as provided under this section. Any such dealer that takes possession of a weapon under the provisions of this section shall: (i) inspect such firearm or machine gun; (ii) issue to the owner a receipt indicating the make, model, caliber, serial number and condition of each firearm or machine gun so received; and (iii) store and maintain all firearms or machine guns so received in accordance with such regulations, rules or guidelines as the secretary of the executive office of public safety may establish under this section.

The local licensing agent shall not transfer any firearm or machine gun that was used or was suspected of being used in the commission of a crime and is evidence in any current or pending criminal case.

Firearms, machine guns and ammunition not transferred at the request of the owner within one year after delivery or surrender according to the provisions of this section shall be sold at public auction by the colonel of the state police to the highest bidding person legally permitted to purchase and possess said firearms, machine guns and ammunition and the proceeds shall be remitted to the state treasurer. Any funds derived from such auction shall be used to fund the Criminal Firearms and Trafficking Division as described in Section 9C of Chapter 269.

The secretary of the executive office of public safety may make and promulgate such rules and regulations as are necessary to carry out the provisions of this section.

 

[GOAL C.M.]

Really? I've taken the liberty of posting Section 125 in its entirety. I'm not sure how surrendering your firearms to a "licensing authority" for any reason - let alone being "arrested" - not even convicted of a crime, can be taken out of context. It slaps the face of the 2nd Amendment and you know it. It's an appeasement - a giveaway of the 2nd Amendment to the legislature.

(b) Unless a person is arrested for a crime or proven guilty of committing a violent crime, no entity shall revoke or suspend a firearm identification card unless the entity has obtained a court order.

Like I said Mark, come by the Hearing tomorrow and discuss, we'd love your input there, as stated earlier, this bill is a work in progress and subject to change.

Better yet, run for office and fight the fight, you seem to have a gift for writing and speaking