I hope the sprinklers go off while they are protesting, most of 'em need a good shower.
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
FIFYWe can booby trap the area, surround those clowns, shoot them in the head and gut them like a fish on Good Friday. We can outnumber them. Get to your safe now.
Are you out of your ever loving mind? Please, speak for yourself only. Don't make it sound like I, or the people I know, support this garbage.
I just heard about this on Fox 25 about 15 min ago when that fat POS VB was singing the praises of Ed Davis and current boston overlord Evans. His 2 minutes were filled with lies and BS, no surprise from him. He was saying 'the NRA is happy, police chiefs are not so this is not a good thing' and spouting his complete lack of understanding of anything gun related. What a POS.
How does it matter? It's another baby step towards confiscation. It's like a good stew: every ingredient by itself is lame. But once they come together and cook for a while...What don't you like? What could we have done better (in this state)? I don't really see law-abiding gun owners "losing" much of anything with this bill. But then I haven't read it in its entirety. What are we missing?
If the House votes for Concurrence, did anyone ever really believe that the Gov was going to sign the current version into law?
He will make far more political headlines for himself by saying he is personally standing up to the NRA and not signing it.
He knows full well that will leave Firearm owners still stuck under the foot of the current crap laws, not to mention the AG's office.
If there is not a vote for Concurrence, and the committee adds back one of his BS anti-gun wishes (One A Month or COP Unsuitability), maybe he will use the opportunity to make a small gain for Anti movement. Maybe.
I'll believe it when I see it. Now going back to calling reps.
Honestly, that's not an answer. Do you think that, somehow, we would be getting rid of all the horrible laws in this state? This is what gets me. People here who think that ANY bill that comes out, is us losing. A bill is coming. We've changed it from negatively affecting gun owners, to something that doesn't affect us at all. what did people honestly expect here? This is massachusetts. Our conservatives are more liberal than most other states.How does it matter? It's another baby step towards confiscation. It's like a good stew: every ingredient by itself is lame. But once they come together and cook for a while...
this isn't the Moms, it's Rosenthal and the Chiefs of police.
How does it matter? It's another baby step towards confiscation. It's like a good stew: every ingredient by itself is lame. But once they come together and cook for a while...
Well, if that's not an answer, then what is? ANY new law regarding guns is a loss. Anything people do to alter said law in our favor is just damage control. Even if the damage is minimal, like in this case, it still doesn't help to call minimal damage a "win". It's called "letting your guard down", and that can get you knocked the fugg out like nobody's business.Honestly, that's not an answer. Do you think that, somehow, we would be getting rid of all the horrible laws in this state? This is what gets me. People here who think that ANY bill that comes out, is us losing. A bill is coming. We've changed it from negatively affecting gun owners, to something that doesn't affect us at all. what did people honestly expect here? This is massachusetts. Our conservatives are more liberal than most other states.
But, there's none regarding guns here. The AWB suitability cleans up the existing LEO laws. That doesn't affect us. The FID issue is the ONLY issue that affects gun owners-and currently isn't part of the bill. So, what part are you referring to?Well, if that's not an answer, then what is? ANY new law regarding guns is a loss. Anything people do to alter said law in our favor is just damage control. Even if the damage is minimal, like in this case, it still doesn't help to call minimal damage a "win". It's called "letting your guard down", and that can get you knocked the fugg out like nobody's business.
Should anyone be surprised that leftist, big city cops want total control over everything?I just heard about this on Fox 25 about 15 min ago when that fat POS VB was singing the praises of Ed Davis and current Boston overlord Evans. His 2 minutes were filled with lies and BS, no surprise from him. He was saying 'the NRA is happy, police chiefs are not so this is not a good thing' and spouting his complete lack of understanding of anything gun related. What a POS.
Well, if that's not an answer, then what is? ANY new law regarding guns is a loss. Anything people do to alter said law in our favor is just damage control. Even if the damage is minimal, like in this case, it still doesn't help to call minimal damage a "win". It's called "letting your guard down", and that can get you knocked the fugg out like nobody's business.
Well, if that's not an answer, then what is? ANY new law regarding guns is a loss. Anything people do to alter said law in our favor is just damage control. Even if the damage is minimal, like in this case, it still doesn't help to call minimal damage a "win". It's called "letting your guard down", and that can get you knocked the fugg out like nobody's business.
You really need to get current on the bill, please read the post above with GOAL's breakdown.I haven't read the bill. My English is most likely not sufficient to fully comprehend a legislative document and identify twists and turns. At least not yet. Again:ANY legislation regarding guns is no good. The existing laws are too much already. The only way to chalk up a "win" for the gunowner community would be to get rid of some of the existing laws. Anything but that is a loss, as small as it might be.
They are done asking for an inch and taking a mile. Now, they are asking for 1/32 of an inch, and take a foot. It still gets them closer to their ultimate goal of complete ban. They just changed the pace, not the objective.
The AWB suitability cleans up the existing LEO laws. That doesn't affect us.
If those are all chiefs, it looks like there's maybe 12 or so? Out of 351 ctties/Towns? Pretty poor showing if you ask me....
doesn't affect us? being treated on a separate, lower level than public servants my taxes pay for CERTAINLY affects me
One A Month was never in the original bill (H.4121) and so cannot be "added back in" now. If it was never IN, and then taken OUT, it can't be put back IN. Nor can they add any other new amendments at this point in the process.
You noticed that too. Welcome to one-party, leftist-controlled Massachusetts.COPs get a press conference on a grand staircase. We get 15 feet of concrete between a fence and traffic.
I think this is a foot in the door to get the AWB removed in the courts. There should be no "classes" when it comes to who can own what. Why should "they" get collapsible stocks, flash suppressors, and new 30-round mags, when we can't? I think Comm2A is chomping at the bit to see that get passed.
The only way to chalk up a "win" for the gunowner community would be to get rid of some of the existing laws.
It redefines the current laws. Maybe I was misunderstood. I agree 100% it's creating 2 separate classes. But, it's not granting them anything more than they have now. It just clarifies the current laws.doesn't affect us? being treated on a separate, lower level than public servants my taxes pay for CERTAINLY affects me