Healey "closing the loophole" letter to gun dealers

Status
Not open for further replies.
crazymjb said:
Just spoke to a legislative aid who told me that he can't say with any certainty, but this is something he expects to see debated on the floor, and that house members aren't happy about it. What that means, who knows.

Mike
Click to expand...

The only thing the legislature can do is pass a measure clarifying the AWB (which is unlikely) and get the governor to sign it into law (also unlikely).

Am I missing something?
 
Greschner 4 said:
By no means a scientific survey, but I've talked to a few LEO's and they're not pleased. So if Maura decides tomorrow to round up your banned weapons (consider it a felony to retain the firearm), are LEOs going to tell their top cop to **** off?
Click to expand...

We all know the answer to that.
 
Rider said:
There have been no homicides committed by any of these firearms since she became AG, so there is no blood on her hands, at least in MA.
Click to expand...

I realized that while I was typing the post but then went ahead and posted it because I knew someone's response would make another great point.

There's no reason behind her actions aside from grandstanding. No lives have been taken by these rifles, or similar ones in MA.
 
I actually had a preban XM177 I wasn't shooting that I sold last fall, at what I thought was an absurdly high price. Guess I should have hung onto it.
 
Rider said:
There have been no homicides committed by any of these firearms since she became AG, so there is no blood on her hands, at least in MA.
Click to expand...

A little off your point, but I hate the illogic of deciding the evilness of a particular gun, or deciding which class of gun to ban next, based on recent crime stats with that particular gun. Both sides use this argument, just to different ends.

It misses the point that the criminal is the entity at fault, and that any gun can kill, and some killing with a gun is justified, etc.

And it admits that if there is simply some high-enough level of crime with your particular gun, then it needs to be banned.
 
Pinion said:
I realized that while I was typing the post but then went ahead and posted it because I knew someone's response would make another great point.

There's no reason behind her actions aside from grandstanding. No lives have been taken by these rifles, or similar ones in MA.
Click to expand...

And MA is the last place anyone would want to go to buy one of these, because of the red tape and paperwork required.
 
I received this response from my state rep. We do have a few good guys in our corner.

Mark,

Thanks for reaching out. I am 100% against this move by the Attorney General, and am completely committed to defending your 2nd amendment rights. We’re currently reviewing our options on this to figure out the best way we can stop this. I will keep you updated as we move forward.

Regards,
Jim

Representative Jim Lyons
18[SUP]th[/SUP] Essex District
Serving Andover, Boxford, North Andover, and Tewksbury
State House, Room 443
Boston, MA 02133
P: 617-722-2460
 
MarkT said:
I received this response from my state rep. We do have a few good guys in our corner.

Mark,

Thanks for reaching out. I am 100% against this move by the Attorney General, and am completely committed to defending your 2nd amendment rights. We’re currently reviewing our options on this to figure out the best way we can stop this. I will keep you updated as we move forward.

Regards,
Jim

Representative Jim Lyons
18[SUP]th[/SUP] Essex District
Serving Andover, Boxford, North Andover, and Tewksbury
State House, Room 443
Boston, MA 02133
P: 617-722-2460
Click to expand...

Best news I have heard in the past 24 hours
 
What a minute. If it says anything bought before 7-20 is okay. Does that mean any lowers that anyone bought is okay even if they didn't do a fa-10? It doesn't clarify that. If someone has a reciept pre-7-20. Can they fa-10 it at a later date?
 
sixer said:
The only thing the legislature can do is pass a measure clarifying the AWB (which is unlikely) and get the governor to sign it into law (also unlikely).

Am I missing something?
Click to expand...

Danger, the legislature just doesn't like being out of the loop, as they clearly were in this case.

Their "remedy" may just be to add a line to current law to make official the AGs grace period to July 20, 2016. Success, high-5s, go home to you district.

The only way to fight this in the legislature (and get anything new/better than where we now) is to go for massive education of AWB stupidity and seek some level of repeal. Very difficult in MA, look at the principals involved.
 
Ever since high shool I loved history. I Revered the founding of this country and studied it for many decades afterward.

There was one thing that always nagged at me regarding the separation of powers: Executive, Judicial, legislative.

That nagging worry was "who polices the policemen?" In other words it always bothered me that there was very little that could be done if not one but two of the separations were compromised. What is supposed to happen is the remaining two were to clamp down on the wayward third. The president and his minions begin to sound like a tyrant or dictator, ignoring congress and the scotus. What to do? Censure or impeach him/her, etc. What happens, however, if you've got a complicit house, AG, or scotus and a wayward president? What then? They redefine the constitution to mean what they say, not what was intended and who is to stop them?? There is no one to stop them at the top. Then what do we do?

I believe it was Rush who said why this hasn't happened yet. He said it was because the vast majority of people holding office were honorable.....not always the best of people and certainly with their foibles but at their core, they wanted the country to survive and thrive. What happens when you get people in office who don't have the best interest of the country at heart and feel that our country needs to be put into a vulnerable position as it today: totally in debt, stripped military, failing social structure, inner cites at war with the police.

I can see why this election has taken on the importance it has. It's really going to be a crossroads that will be literally impossible to turn back to in 2020. This is it. Hillary will be status quo and Trump won't.

It is this pervasive attitude that has infected state governments like this AG, to brazenly strip it's citizens of their guaranteed federal rights and their own state's rights at the same time and not be the least bit concerned about the fallout. Massachusetts has shown just how infected we all are as the rest of the government says NOTHING.....even if they could do nothing about it, they could show some solidarity with the people being accosted. On the contrary, it's as if she was being cheered on. This portends to be very very bad with a very bad outcome. It's ironic, however, that it should begin there...the cradle of our country's democracy.
 
jerryhipp said:
What a minute. If it says anything bought before 7-20 is okay. Does that mean any lowers that anyone bought is okay even if they didn't do a fa-10? It doesn't clarify that. If someone has a reciept pre-7-20. Can they fa-10 it at a later date?
Click to expand...


Go buy a chicken, gut it, dump entrails in bowl. Stare at entrails while eating mushrooms, smoking dope, and huffing paint.




Tell us what the future holds.





Because we don't ****ing know either.
 
amm5061 said:
Still waiting for my local reps to even bother to read my emails.
Click to expand...

My stat rep responded right away but didn't provide a position. She was not aware of this bullshit anymore than we were.

I have called my State Senator twice in addition to writing him. Still no response to this.
 
Horrible said:
My stat rep responded right away but didn't provide a position. She was not aware of this bullshit anymore than we were.

I have called my State Senator twice in addition to writing him. Still no response to this.
Click to expand...

I am waiting on responses to my calls to my rep and state senator yesterday .... not expecting them to be a very receptive audience when their constituency is Somerville.
 
gunclinger said:
A little off your point, but I hate the illogic of deciding the evilness of a particular gun, or deciding which class of gun to ban next, based on recent crime stats with that particular gun. Both sides use this argument, just to different ends.

It misses the point that the criminal is the entity at fault, and that any gun can kill, and some killing with a gun is justified, etc.

And it admits that if there is simply some high-enough level of crime with your particular gun, then it needs to be banned.
Click to expand...

Fair point. One of my most recent gripes about this - and politics - and life in general - is that I feel like I am constantly playing on someone else's playing field, and by someone else's rules. I try explaining this to people, and it mostly goes over their heads or they think it's irrelevant.

Now, without going on a media/Obama rant, and you almost can't help it, almost all of the big, important issues are being framed by the left, and you can't even make basic logical points because 'you're a racist', or 'guns are evil', or whatever. I grow truly weary of being force-fed the rules by which I live my life, the things I can say, what I am allowed to think and object to, etc. If I think that the entire world should just go f*** off, that is my prerogative. And my right as long as I don't harm anyone.

What has been accomplished in the past 4 or so years is a complete marginalization of the large section of Americans who 5 years ago had viewpoints shared by such conservative bulwarks as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama on issues of abortion and gay marriage, and now those people are bigots who risk government scrutiny simply for stating their opinion on social issues where the public was never given a voice.

Anyway, I have to figure out how to frame this so I don't sound like Elliot during one of his psychotic breaks.
 
Cabinetman said:
Ever since high shool I loved history. I Revered the founding of this country and studied it for many decades afterward.

There was one thing that always nagged at me regarding the separation of powers: Executive, Judicial, legislative.

That nagging worry was "who polices the policemen?" In other words it always bothered me that there was very little that could be done if not one but two of the separations were compromised. What is supposed to happen is the remaining two were to clamp down on the wayward third. The president and his minions begin to sound like a tyrant or dictator, ignoring congress and the scotus. What to do? Censure or impeach him/her, etc. What happens, however, if you've got a complicit house, AG, or scotus and a wayward president? What then? They redefine the constitution to mean what they say, not what was intended and who is to stop them?? There is no one to stop them at the top. Then what do we do?

I believe it was Rush who said why this hasn't happened yet. He said it was because the vast majority of people holding office were honorable.....not always the best of people and certainly with their foibles but at their core, they wanted the country to survive and thrive. What happens when you get people in office who don't have the best interest of the country at heart and feel that our country needs to be put into a vulnerable position as it today: totally in debt, stripped military, failing social structure, inner cites at war with the police.

I can see why this election has taken on the importance it has. It's really going to be a crossroads that will be literally impossible to turn back to in 2020. This is it. Hillary will be status quo and Trump won't.

It is this pervasive attitude that has infected state governments like this AG, to brazenly strip it's citizens of their guaranteed federal rights and their own state's rights at the same time and not be the least bit concerned about the fallout. Massachusetts has shown just how infected we all are as the rest of the government says NOTHING.....even if they could do nothing about it, they could show some solidarity with the people being accosted. On the contrary, it's as if she was being cheered on. This portends to be very very bad with a very bad outcome. It's ironic, however, that it should begin there...the cradle of our country's democracy.
Click to expand...


Welcome to Turkey

- - - Updated - - -

ThePreBanMan said:
Hope everyone plans on attending the FOAL rally this Sat.:
https://twitter.com/GOALupdate
http://blog.goal.org/ra/
Click to expand...

Ditto. BTW, you may have to change your screen name
 
Response from Sen. Ryan Fattman's office:

Hi [sixer]

Thanks for writing. The Senator disagrees with the AG’s actions vehemently. We are researching if she has the authority to do this, and hope to take action with allies like GOAL moving forward. The Senator will be at the rally this weekend at 10 AM in front of the State House. We will keep you updated.

Thanks,

JZ [Joseph Zarella]

Chief of Staff
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Biden Closing "Gun show loophole"
2
Replies
30
Views
884
zboys
zboys
Thousands more gun dealers must run background checks on buyers as Biden administration moves to close 'doggone dangerous' loophole
Replies
4
Views
194
AJK129
AJK129
ATF Report Undermines Left’s Hysteria Over So-Called ‘Gun Show Loophole’
Replies
0
Views
164
Reptile
Reptile
These Are The Worst States To Be A Gun Owner In 2024
Replies
9
Views
591
Zappa
Zappa
Local Dealers who Sell on Consignment Through GunBroker?
2
Replies
49
Views
1K
alan226
alan226
Back
Top Bottom