H4102 is DEAD Congratulations all and thank you.

lord1234 said:
Bill,
If you want to pass along my email to him [email protected], you can, and I'll gladly call in and speak with them. I dare say I'm a pretty eloquent speaker.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I had to literally run out the door after my last post. I just got back in and settled now. I'm glad that Jay gave Jim a chance to get the word out. Wish I had the chance to hear it.
 
GOAL C.M. said:
Jim is on it, and will be on hold waiting his turn to speak with Jay starting at 4pm. Listen in!
Click to expand...

Good!! I'm glad they were able to get together on this. Even if it was a short talk, better than none at all.[wink]

Just wish I'd thought of getting in touch with TKK earlier than I had. I'm glad they got back to me before I had to run out.[grin]
 
I was still at work and did not realize that Jim would be on. Did anyone hear him?

On my next email I was thinking about calling them out on their shenanigans and telling them the voters are watching them but I don't want to anger them and they vote for it out of spite. Good idea or bad idea?
 
So, they still haven't voted on this? We start calling again tomorrow morning? I was out all day job-hunting so I'm just seeing this now.
 
Got this from my Rep. Jim Fagan.

Dear Mr. Fredette:

As a lifelong gun owner and hunter you can rest assured that I will be voting no on House Bill #4102.

Jim Fagan
 
I was on hold this morning (969 WTKK) to talk about this bill. Unfortunately they didn't get to my call.

I will be walking over to the State House after lunch to talk to my representatives.

Do your part to stop this bill. This is a bad one and we all need to do our part to stop it.
 
Maj. Boom Boom said:
OK I'll admit I'm not sure how this voting works. for the results do they go by just those who voted or does a certain % of the 17 voters have to be met?

missed the radio show and emailed again.

I'm sorry to admit a fault of mine, i don't make these types of calls. it's not for lack of wanting to, it's because of my shyness (i think). I get tongue tied and can't speak clearly, i also can't remember what facts info that i want to make during these calls. I write the info down which helps but it is the tongue tying that stops me. we all have failings and sadly this is one of mine. we can't all be gung ho gangbusters. i'm admitting this in the hope that others like me who read this will at least do as i am doing and send the emails.
Click to expand...

Calls help. Emails do too. Walking into their office and talking to them does as well. You have done your part by supporting GOAL in your own way!

I have decided to implement a policy. I work within sight of the state house. I wear jeans to work every day. However, I have decided to bring in a shirt and tie and leave it in my desk. If need be, I'll be walking over to the state house to sit with any and all reps/senators who are willing to talk to me and hear their opinions on the subject. If this is needed, I will announce it here and give others who work in the downtown boston area time to join me, so we can make a nice group to go speak with them and hear their reasoning all at once. Perhaps with enough people there at once, we can change minds!
 
Everyone, here is a list that I've compiled of which committee members are in favor and which committee members are opposed to H.4102.

Please focus on the committee members that we do not have information on, or are in favor of this bill, (BOLD) also, if you are a constituent of a committee member that is IN FAVOR please contact them and let them know, you vote, this is an election year, and election day is less than 20 weeks away.

Senator Cynthia Stone-Creem 617.722.1639 In Favor GOAL RATED “D”
Senator Steven Baddour 617.722.1604 GOAL RATED “A+”
Senator Gale Candaras 617.722.1291 District Telephone 413.599.4785 GOAL RATED “C”
Senator John Hart 617.722.1150 GOAL RATED “C”
Senator Thomas McGee 617.722.1350 In Favor GOAL RATED “C”
Senator Bruce Tarr 617.722.1600 Opposed
Rep. Eugene O'Flaherty 617.722.2396 District Telephone 617.884.3350 GOAL RATED “B”
Rep. Christopher Speranzo 617.722.2396 District Telephone 413.447.7225 GOAL RATED “A”
Rep. James Fagan 617.722.2430 District Telephone 508.824.7000 Opposed
Rep. Colleen Garry 617.722.2380 Opposed
Rep. Marie St. Fleur 617.722.2030
Rep. John Fernandes 617.722.2396 District Telephone 508.473.3063 GOAL RATED “B”
Rep. Katherine Clark 617.722.2220 GOAL RATED “D”
Rep. Danielle Gregoire 617.722.2080 Opposed
Rep. James Dwyer 617-722-2014 Opposed
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Warning! It's vitally important folks call those opposed too and not blindly focus on the others. You need to stress how important it is for those people to vote when the vote happens.
 
All,

I drafted a letter that you all may want to cut and paste and forward along:

[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
To Members of the Joint Committee on the Judiciary,

I am a law-abiding citizen. I am also a registered gun owner.

I respectfully urge you to vote against House Bill 4102.

H.4102, among other things, would limit firearm purchases to one per 30-day period and require the private transfer of all firearms, even those between family and friends, to be conducted through a federally licensed firearms dealer.

This proposal, in essence, is a repeat of Chapter 180 of the Acts of 1998, statutes that created some of the most confusing and ill-advised set of gun laws in the nation. Per the NRA, the vast majority of those new laws attacked lawful gun owners and did little, if anything, to address violent crime in the Commonwealth. The only result has been a startling 85% decrease in the number of lawfully licensed gun owners in Massachusetts and a dramatic increase in crime.

If enacted, H.4102 would have disastrous effects on the Second Amendment rights of Massachusetts’ law-abiding gun owners.

Please share your thoughts on this urgent matter.

Sincerely,
 
PTB1 said:
All,

I drafted a letter that you all may want to cut and paste and forward along:

[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
To Members of the Joint Committee on the Judiciary,

I am a law-abiding citizen. I am also a registered gun owner.

I respectfully urge you to vote against House Bill 4102.

H.4102, among other things, would limit firearm purchases to one per 30-day period and require the private transfer of all firearms, even those between family and friends, to be conducted through a federally licensed firearms dealer.

This proposal, in essence, is a repeat of Chapter 180 of the Acts of 1998, statutes that created some of the most confusing and ill-advised set of gun laws in the nation. Per the NRA, the vast majority of those new laws attacked lawful gun owners and did little, if anything, to address violent crime in the Commonwealth. The only result has been a startling 85% decrease in the number of lawfully licensed gun owners in Massachusetts and a dramatic increase in crime.

If enacted, H.4102 would have disastrous effects on the Second Amendment rights of Massachusetts’ law-abiding gun owners.

Please share your thoughts on this urgent matter.

Sincerely,
Click to expand...

Nice work. Welcome to NES
 
GREAT POST PTB1! I cut and pasted your letter and sent it off after I filled in my info. Some came back with an "out of office" reply but it was still delivered. BRAVO!
 
PTB1 said:
All,

I drafted a letter that you all may want to cut and paste and forward along:

[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
To Members of the Joint Committee on the Judiciary,

I am a law-abiding citizen. I am also a registered gun owner.

I respectfully urge you to vote against House Bill 4102.

H.4102, among other things, would limit firearm purchases to one per 30-day period and require the private transfer of all firearms, even those between family and friends, to be conducted through a federally licensed firearms dealer.

This proposal, in essence, is a repeat of Chapter 180 of the Acts of 1998, statutes that created some of the most confusing and ill-advised set of gun laws in the nation. Per the NRA, the vast majority of those new laws attacked lawful gun owners and did little, if anything, to address violent crime in the Commonwealth. The only result has been a startling 85% decrease in the number of lawfully licensed gun owners in Massachusetts and a dramatic increase in crime.

If enacted, H.4102 would have disastrous effects on the Second Amendment rights of Massachusetts’ law-abiding gun owners.

Please share your thoughts on this urgent matter.

Sincerely,
Click to expand...

Excellent!! Reps to you.
 
I received the following response from Rep. James Dwyer:

Please know that I do not plan to support any legislation that infringes on the 2nd amendment rights of anyone. I think this legislation should be addressing gang violence prevention, community watch resources and increased police patrols in troublesome areas where gun violence is prevalent. We shouldn't be passing legislation that hurts law abiding citizens when most gun violence is from criminals who have illegally purchased guns on the street.

Thanks for contacting me,

Jim Dwyer
 
Here is my letter:

To the Members of the Joint Committee on the Judiciary,

As a law-abiding citizen and a registered gun owner, I urge you to vote against House Bill 4102 “An Act to Reduce Firearm Violence”. This bill is based on the ill conceived notion that limiting law abiding gun owners to purchasing one gun a month will somehow stop ciriminals from obtaining guns through illegal means. This beill will do nothnig to stop the gang bangers from shooting each other. What it will do is turn law-abiding citizens into criminals simply for purchasing more than one firearm or a firearm and a magazine with a capacity greater than 10 rounds in any one month.

Massachusetts already has strict licensing requirements, some of the most strict laws in the nation, and anybody purchasing more than one gun at a time is by law already reported to the ATF. Guns used in crimes come from out of state, or were stolen from their lawful owners in Massachusetts. In-state straw purchases are NOT the problem.

H.4102 is an expensive law that will be impossible to enforce. Anybody inclined to break the law can easily find ways around it. Straw purchases are already illegal, making them more illegal will do nothing to prevent violence.

This proposal will make the already confusing and ill-advised gun laws even more confusing. Just like the laws in Chapter 180 of MGL, this new law will only affect the lawful gun owners and do little, if anything, to address violent crime in the Commonwealth.

Time and time again it is the law-abiding gun oweners who are blamed for the gun-related crimes in the large urban areas. I'm a lawful gun owner, and I resent being blamed for the problems in Boston, Springfied, Lowell, etc.

Please vote against H.4102
Click to expand...
 
I got the same email this morning. I sent emails out to all of the names on the list.

jrbert said:
I received the following response from Rep. James Dwyer:

Please know that I do not plan to support any legislation that infringes on the 2nd amendment rights of anyone. I think this legislation should be addressing gang violence prevention, community watch resources and increased police patrols in troublesome areas where gun violence is prevalent. We shouldn't be passing legislation that hurts law abiding citizens when most gun violence is from criminals who have illegally purchased guns on the street.

Thanks for contacting me,

Jim Dwyer
Click to expand...
 
Read the update in the start of this thread. It's time to once again push/continue to push for the passage of H2259! [wink]

June 10th 11:15 am update.
Update on H.4102 Judiciary Committee Action.

The vote is in, the bill was sent to the house with an "ought not to pass".

For now we can cease the phone calls/emails/letters to the committee.

This is by no means the end of this legislation however as we now have three possible scenarios that could develop. We will continue to follow this bill and will keep our members updated on the status.

These are the three scenarios that could take place.

* The House of Representatives can vote to accept the committee report, in which case the bill will not continue towards becoming law.
* The report can be subsituted for the actual bill, this would essentially disregard the "ought not to pass" report and put the bill back into play. The House could then vote on it, most likely in a formal session.
* The House and the Senate could vote to send it back to the Judiciary Committee for discussion and another vote. This would take a positive majority vote from both the House and the Senate.

This was a great effort from our members and the entirety of the pro Second Amendment Community here in MA. We would like to thank each and every one of you that took the time out of your day to take a stand for Civil Rights.

Now it's time to start talking about H.2259 and getting it moving before the deadline is reached on July 1st
Click to expand...
 
GOAL C.M. said:
Please focus on the committee members that we do not have information on, or are in favor of this bill, (BOLD) also, if you are a constituent of a committee member that is IN FAVOR please contact them and let them know, you vote, this is an election year, and election day is less than 20 weeks away.

Senator Cynthia Stone-Creem 617.722.1639 In Favor GOAL RATED “D”
Senator Steven Baddour 617.722.1604 GOAL RATED “A+”
Senator Gale Candaras 617.722.1291 District Telephone 413.599.4785 GOAL RATED “C”
Senator John Hart 617.722.1150 GOAL RATED “C”
Senator Thomas McGee 617.722.1350 In Favor GOAL RATED “C”
Senator Bruce Tarr 617.722.1600 Opposed
Rep. Eugene O'Flaherty 617.722.2396 District Telephone 617.884.3350 GOAL RATED “B”
Rep. Christopher Speranzo 617.722.2396 District Telephone 413.447.7225 GOAL RATED “A”
Rep. James Fagan 617.722.2430 District Telephone 508.824.7000 Opposed
Rep. Colleen Garry 617.722.2380 Opposed
Rep. Marie St. Fleur 617.722.2030
Rep. John Fernandes 617.722.2396 District Telephone 508.473.3063 GOAL RATED “B”
Rep. Katherine Clark 617.722.2220 GOAL RATED “D”
Rep. Danielle Gregoire 617.722.2080 Opposed
Rep. James Dwyer 617-722-2014 Opposed
Click to expand...


Is Baddour for this? He is rated A+ and he says this in the Herald:

“The only way to tackle gang violence is by having aggressive law enforcement, not a feel-good piece of legislation,” said Sen. Steve Baddour (D-Methuen), who is vice chair of the legislative judiciary committee that axed the measure.
 
Palladin said:
I thought Baddour was against this thing ?
Click to expand...

He's marked as abstaining in the earlier summary, but the quote in the Herald article sounds like he's on the right side.

I'm also slightly concerned about Dwyer, since his email doesn't actually say he's voting against it. Maybe I'm just paranoid, but it sounds like he's leaving room for later saying "I didn't think this was a real infringement, and it's not the legislation I wanted, but it was important to..." On the other hand, he could just be expressing it as mildly as possible so as not to completely piss off any pro-H4102 constituents.

By comparison, the email from Lew Evangelidis (also quoted above) is awesome.
 
Just got off the phone with Rep Clark's aide. She let me know that Rep Clark decided to abstain from voting on the bill because (I'm paraphrasing here) "There were a lot of things in the bill that she thought would infringe on our rights, BUT the bill did have language that would address the public safety problem and she wants to see that made into law." When I asked what "public safety problem" she was referring to she mentioned the incident with the machine gun at that shoot a couple years back (where the kid shot himself with an Uzi.)
 
jasons said:
Just got off the phone with Rep Clark's aide. She let me know that Rep Clark decided to abstain from voting on the bill because (I'm paraphrasing here) "There were a lot of things in the bill that she thought would infringe on our rights, BUT the bill did have language that would address the public safety problem and she wants to see that made into law." When I asked what "public safety problem" she was referring to she mentioned the incident with the machine gun at that shoot a couple years back (where the kid shot himself with an Uzi.)
Click to expand...

So in other words, she's willing to see her fellow legistraitors infringe on HER constituents' rights because of a one time 100 years occurrence. Real nice.

She needs to be voted out for that.
 

Similar threads

  • Locked
You know college is a waste when your professor’s name is Topher.
Replies
2
Views
253
drgrant
drgrant
Ban em all.
Replies
18
Views
848
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Lucy wants to ban them all.
Replies
18
Views
596
pastera
pastera
Chicago police officer shot dead and has car taken during commute home: Officials
Replies
1
Views
212
gerrycaruso
gerrycaruso
Missouri law being passed: If you home school, your home is now considered a school and you can't own guns
Replies
17
Views
727
Nhusa
N
Back
Top Bottom