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

[glide]

There are too many ways for your average, law-abiding, firearms owner to get royally screwed in here.

Section 125 is especially troubling.

(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.


Uhhhh I can get arrested in this state for LOOKING at a cop the wrong way.

 

[glide]

(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

"Unless a person is arrested for a crime or proven guilty of committing a violent crime"

I don't like any of this section to begin with, but why is that an 'OR' as opposed to an 'AND'?

 

[Kicker96FS]

I don't like that either, you can get arrested "for your own protection" as well as other BS reasons in this and any other state. I would want the ability to depose of my firearms as I see fit! Like a FLL for instance that would not, under the law, release them back to me without the proper LTC/FID, I would have a say as to or if they would be sold or not. After all, they are MY property of value, not the God-damned states!

And whats up with the one buck for GOAL's pockets in the bill? WTF!? Someone has been spending too much time rubbing elbows with the scum up on beacon hill. I mean it sounds like something they would come up with and stuff in a bill.

 

[exo]

Like others have said, a simply being arrested doesn't mean you have actually done anything wrong. Allowing the police to suspend or revoke your license before they have proven their case in court is entirely improper. The law should assume that we are innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.

 

[cekim]

I ask one thing of anyone who has a critique of GOAL's bills...

Show up!

While GOAL may or may not agree, I'd rather 100 gun owners stand up and say these bills don't go far enough to addressing the abuse of our civil rights than I would for no one to come...

 

[exo]

I ask one thing of anyone who has a critique of GOAL's bills...

Show up!

While GOAL may or may not agree, I'd rather 100 gun owners stand up and say these bills don't go far enough to addressing the abuse of our civil rights than I would for no one to come...

I would if I could, but I have to make my hours and don't have any time off to spend. They scheduled this thing in the middle of the week, during the work day, quite on purpose.

 

[HTRN]

I wish I were around tomorrow to speak against this bill. Trading 351 licensing standards for whats in this pile is no bargain to the MA gun owner.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk

 

[Madball13]

Why does GOAL bother addressing any issues on NES at all if the ultimate answer is to show up at a hearing in the middle of a work day? I for one think GOAL should use the negative feedback they are getting here from actual gun owners and let that steer the laws they are looking to change.

 

[Coyote33]

I wish I were around tomorrow to speak against this bill. Trading 351 licensing standards for whats in this pile is no bargain to the MA gun owner.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk

Why does GOAL bother addressing any issues on NES at all if the ultimate answer is to show up at a hearing in the middle of a work day? I for one think GOAL should use the negative feedback they are getting here from actual gun owners and let that steer the laws they are looking to change.

So much for building consensus and having a unified approach. GOAL really, REALLY should ask members what they want to see happen, rather than push it out and see what sticks. GOAL needs to realize we are on their side and they do not need to attempt to go it alone. Next time, they should hold meetings and pre-hearing hearings of their own and do some planning and form a real plan on how to get this done, leveraging their membership to do the heavy lifting.

 

[Mike S]

Just wondering. How many of you that are GOAL members that have an issue with GOAL have taken the time to attend a board meeting? Or better yet have run for the board?

Stopped by their office? Called them about it?

 

[cekim]

Why does GOAL bother addressing any issues on NES at all if the ultimate answer is to show up at a hearing in the middle of a work day? I for one think GOAL should use the negative feedback they are getting here from actual gun owners and let that steer the laws they are looking to change.

I for one think people should put up or shut up. It's costing me a lot money to take the time to go tomorrow. I understand its difficult and obviously some people may not be able to make it, but I see more effort going to pissing on this bill than I see people trying to get there and fight bad laws.

As I said, I'd rather see 100 gun owners standing up saying this bill does not go far enough than I would see 5 people show up and sing it's praises.

Our apathy is the weapon they have used against us to reach this point. Yeah it sucks, but either you show up and start talking or we'll be silenced - it's that simple.

 

[terraformer]

I for one think people should put up or shut up. It's costing me a lot money to take the time to go tomorrow. I understand its difficult and obviously some people may not be able to make it, but I see more effort going to pissing on this bill than I see people trying to get there and fight bad laws.

As I said, I'd rather see 100 gun owners standing up saying this bill does not go far enough than I would see 5 people show up and sing it's praises.

Our apathy is the weapon they have used against us to reach this point. Yeah it sucks, but either you show up and start talking or we'll be silenced - it's that simple.

Amen brother. I lose a ton of billable time on Comm2A and I am STILL going to show tomorrow. Not only *should* someone do it, we all *need* to do it.

 

[neEEGuru]

"...(b) Unless a person is arrested for a crime ..."

That's a low standard... as others have pointed out.

Do you not understand how this state works? It's great to sit here and say, "mandatory minimums are not for law abiding gun owners". You really don't see how these will be used as threats to pressure "law abiding gun owners" to do things?

WHY would you include in your bill additional rules/restrictions and jail time when we should be focusing solely on increasing our rights?

GOAL - Please address this.

 

[HTRN]

It's called horse trading. Or buying votes. I just am shocked that it could get this out of hand. I really, really wish I were any where near mass tomorrow so I could attend the hearing.

"...(b) Unless a person is arrested for a crime ..."

That's a low standard... as others have pointed out.

Do you not understand how this state works? It's great to sit here and say, "mandatory minimums are not for law abiding gun owners". You really don't see how these will be used as threats to pressure "law abiding gun owners" to do things?

WHY would you include in your bill additional rules/restrictions and jail time when we should be focusing solely on increasing our rights?

GOAL - Please address this.

 

[MassMark]

While it would be ideal to have every one of us pack the halls on Beacon Hill, the reality is that most of us simply cannot be there. To those of you who can represent the gun owners of Massachusetts, you have my thanks and kudos. This however, should not preclude discourse from those of us who cannot make the trek - no matter the reason.

The Internet is a magical place - once can place information, absorb, formulate opinion and express, all at the speed of light - seemingly at the speed of thought itself. GOAL has used this medium somewhat effectively to spread their message, but seems to crumple into the "attend a meeting, run for the board, run for office" fallback when challenged on a position. This bill has been flawed in my opinion and challenged from it's announcement. From the buck off the backs of gun owners - forced to pony up for an unconstitutional license by an unconstitutional law - to the entirety of section 125, which I quoted completely, after being accused of not understanding its context. Anyone who reads section 125 as some sort of a progression for law abiding, constitutionally sound citizens has some serious need for constitutional reflection...H1568 is an abomination to the 2nd Amendment and my attendance, (or lack) at a public hearing, does not change that one iota. This bill should have never been presented in the first place....

 

[Tara]

Just to clear a few things up, GOAL didn't set the schedule as to when the hearing takes place.
The $1 thing is no longer even in the bill. Mike addressed that earlier.

 

[terraformer]

While it would be ideal to have every one of us pack the halls on Beacon Hill, the reality is that most of us simply cannot be there. To those of you who can represent the gun owners of Massachusetts, you have my thanks and kudos. This however, should not preclude discourse from those of us who cannot make the trek - no matter the reason.

The Internet is a magical place - once can place information, absorb, formulate opinion and express, all at the speed of light - seemingly at the speed of thought itself. GOAL has used this medium somewhat effectively to spread their message, but seems to crumple into the "attend a meeting, run for the board, run for office" fallback when challenged on a position. This bill has been flawed in my opinion and challenged from it's announcement. From the buck off the backs of gun owners - forced to pony up for an unconstitutional license by an unconstitutional law - to the entirety of section 125, which I quoted completely, after being accused of not understanding its context. Anyone who reads section 125 as some sort of a progression for law abiding, constitutionally sound citizens has some serious need for constitutional reflection...H1568 is an abomination to the 2nd Amendment and my attendance, (or lack) at a public hearing, does not change that one iota. This bill should have never been presented in the first place....

The problem is a weak showing on this opens the door for the other side to shove some real crap down our throats. I can't tell you how good it would be for gun owners to walk in and say GOAL didn't go far enough.

 

[PaulD]

GOAL, is it possible to change section 125 so that it reads "convicted" instead of "arrested or convicted"?

Thanks.

 

[neEEGuru]

I obviously understand the general concept of politics and 'horse trading'/getting votes.

My lack of time to formulate long winded eloquent responses and utter frustration might be coming off a bit too harsh.

However, we should be focusing on GUN RIGHTS. Solely. Adding things like Sec 125, 25yr mandatory minimum jail sentences, etc. are not the direction we should be going, no matter how many votes it might persuade because I don't believe the gain is worth the loss/risk/direction that could head.

As others have said here, I believe the best idea is to pass multiple small/directed bills. Highest priority I believe would be to attack and remove the discretionary licensing/may issue crap. Then move onto the many other issues, AG list, confiscations, etc.

I just don't see this bill as actually being passable, and I see it as adding restrictions and laws that are unnecessary to the cause and possibly putting more bad ideas in law makers heads.

I find it frustrating that GOAL doesn't address certain points we make here or ask for more of our input, or present more of their thinking.

We need to be united.

 

[Coyote33]

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?

changed it a little, to provide one further option:
"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 remove from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, or 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 remove from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, deliver or surrender to the local licensing agent, all firearms, machine guns and ammunition which he then possesses."

While it would be ideal to have every one of us pack the halls on Beacon Hill, the reality is that most of us simply cannot be there. To those of you who can represent the gun owners of Massachusetts, you have my thanks and kudos. This however, should not preclude discourse from those of us who cannot make the trek - no matter the reason.

The Internet is a magical place - once can place information, absorb, formulate opinion and express, all at the speed of light - seemingly at the speed of thought itself. GOAL has used this medium somewhat effectively to spread their message, but seems to crumple into the "attend a meeting, run for the board, run for office" fallback when challenged on a position. This bill has been flawed in my opinion and challenged from it's announcement. From the buck off the backs of gun owners - forced to pony up for an unconstitutional license by an unconstitutional law - to the entirety of section 125, which I quoted completely, after being accused of not understanding its context. Anyone who reads section 125 as some sort of a progression for law abiding, constitutionally sound citizens has some serious need for constitutional reflection...H1568 is an abomination to the 2nd Amendment and my attendance, (or lack) at a public hearing, does not change that one iota. This bill should have never been presented in the first place....

Amen brother.

The problem is a weak showing on this opens the door for the other side to shove some real crap down our throats. I can't tell you how good it would be for gun owners to walk in and say GOAL didn't go far enough.

Amen brother.

...My lack of time to formulate long winded eloquent responses and utter frustration might be coming off a bit too harsh.

However, we should be focusing on GUN RIGHTS. Solely. Adding things like Sec 125, 25yr mandatory minimum jail sentences, etc. are not the direction we should be going, no matter how many votes it might persuade because I don't believe the gain is worth the loss/risk/direction that could head.

As others have said here, I believe the best idea is to pass multiple small/directed bills. ...

I just don't see this bill as actually being passable, and I see it as adding restrictions and laws that are unnecessary to the cause and possibly putting more bad ideas in law makers heads.

I find it frustrating that GOAL doesn't address certain points we make here or ask for more of our input, or present more of their thinking.

We need to be united.

Amen and hallelujah!

Too late this time around, but I hear there are more of these hearings next week.

 

[xtry51]

I think it's funny that so much feedback is given on forums like these, yet instead of saying "Yeah we can change that" people need to go to a meeting. Hey, how about you just print out what we're all posting and make the changes?

 

[xtry51]

It's clear from the language of the sections posted that a police officer can simply arrest you and you lose your guns forever. I fail to see how this is helping the current situation. Even if permit become shall issue, cops will just arrest more people for stupid things to get the license yanked and you'll never get it or your guns back.

 

[Coyote33]

in·fringe (n-frnj)
v. in·fringed, in·fring·ing, in·fring·es
v.tr.
1. To transgress or exceed the limits of; violate: infringe a contract; infringe a patent.
2. Obsolete To defeat; invalidate.
v.intr.
To encroach on someone or something; engage in trespassing: an increased workload that infringed on his personal life.


right (rt)
...
n.
1. ...
6.
a. Something that is due to a person or governmental body by law, tradition, or nature.
b. Something, especially humane treatment, claimed to be due to animals by moral principle.

 

[dwarven1]

It looks like section 125 does away with the bonded storage fees - I believe that it said that the AGENT is liable for fees and not the owner.

I will be there tomorrow with at least one other NESer.

 

[andyc4728]

I'm sorry to say that my previous post that this bill was positive was incorrect

I just took about 30 minutes to read through the full text of the bill. It's unclear that the individuals who wrote this support gun rights as a civil right.

Having only an arrest, with no burden of proof, qualify for the seizure of firearms is not a tenable position for a gun rights organization. There are other sections which back up the purported right of the commonwealth to seize firearms if you're arrested, and also make you a prohibited person for life (in federal terms) if you don't comply.

The sad part about this is that the antis only want more restriction -- they don't care what form it takes. The lack of alignment shown here is only helping them as we are at our weakest when not unified.

 

[cekim]

I'm sorry to say that my previous post that this bill was positive was incorrect

I just took about 30 minutes to read through the full text of the bill. It's unclear that the individuals who wrote this support gun rights as a civil right.

Having only an arrest, with no burden of proof, qualify for the seizure of firearms is not a tenable position for a gun rights organization. There are other sections which back up the purported right of the commonwealth to seize firearms if you're arrested, and also make you a prohibited person for life (in federal terms) if you don't comply.

The sad part about this is that the antis only want more restriction -- they don't care what form it takes. The lack of alignment shown here is only helping them as we are at our weakest when not unified.

No, our silence tomorrow is what helps them.

Show up and tell the committee what you just told us... Innocent until proven guilty!

 

[daveyburt]

I think it's funny that so much feedback is given on forums like these...Hey, how about you just print out what we're all posting and make the changes?

I agree with this. It looks like a lot of valid feedback has been offered here.

 

[andyc4728]

No, our silence tomorrow is what helps them.

Show up and tell the committee what you just told us... Innocent until proven guilty!

I certainly understand wanting to get folks to attend the committee meeting. While I currently have an obligation -- I'm working to free that up and will attend for a few hours if at all possible. I did send a letter to my state rep (who is a sponsor of 1568) expressing my general position and thoughts (adding that I was unable to attend due to the generous 48-hour notice).

What I don't understand, and many others here have expressed in their own posts, is how we ended up with a bill that claims to be about a "civil right" yet requires no burden of proof to "suspend" that right.

I've interacted with lots of the GOAL folks and have nothing but good things to say about them personally -- but something was lost in the construction of this bill. If they are going to talk about firearms as a "civil right" they need to really mean it.

 

[cekim]

I certainly understand wanting to get folks to attend the committee meeting. While I currently have an obligation -- I'm working to free that up and will attend for a few hours if at all possible. I did send a letter to my state rep (who is a sponsor of 1568) expressing my general position and thoughts (adding that I was unable to attend due to the generous 48-hour notice).

What I don't understand, and many others here have expressed in their own posts, is how we ended up with a bill that claims to be about a "civil right" yet requires no burden of proof to "suspend" that right.

I've interacted with lots of the GOAL folks and have nothing but good things to say about them personally -- but something was lost in the construction of this bill. If they are going to talk about firearms as a "civil right" they need to really mean it.

You walk around in this filth long enough and it sticks to even the well intentioned boot...

Not excusing it, just explaining it. We are all neck deep in Kool-Aid sometimes its hard to get a dry breath of air around here.

 

[terraformer]

I just want to make something known that some folks may not know. When a bill is in Committee (which is where this bill is now), the primary sponsor and author has a GREAT deal of latitude to make changes, edits, etc. If you folks have issues with the bill, please make those things known to GOAL in writing, on the phone, etc. They can make sure that the primary sponsor makes changes to solve the problems. More importantly, showing up tomorrow and telling the committee that GOAL is not going far enough is perfectly fine. Make your voices heard. That is what the committee process if for.