Healey on Sevrin show

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 15, 2005
Messages
509
Likes
9
Location
Texas
Healey was interviewed on Sevrin between 5 and 6 PM today. One caller asked her about her stand regarding home-rule versus shall issue. I'm paraphrasing here, she stated outright that the current system is unfair to law-abiding citizens, it should be a shall issue system with oversight by the state and there should be a review board. She also stated that it is a constitutional right to bear firearms. I've not heard her say it before, but there it is. Kerry Healey sounds like she is on our side.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 9, 2005
Messages
13,890
Likes
202
Location
Haverhill, MA
Hubby heard her on his way to work and he called me to tell me. He was leaning towards Christi, but he said after he heard what she said, she now has his vote. And yes, mine now too.

I understand why some folks are voting for Christi, and Ed and I were two of them. But he's got 9% of the poll. Be prepared - if he doesn't bow out, or if people don't vote for Healy, then Duval WILL be our next Gov. It won't take much convincing for the legicritters to make our lives yet more hell. Bank on it.
 
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Jan 16, 2006
Messages
3,452
Likes
148
Location
new hampshire for now
i was listening

I was listening to her on the way home tonight. She is taking a firmer stand
on issues that i am in favor of, including the 2nd ammendment. One certainly
is the illegal immigrants, drivers licenses etc.... Its time to take a stand
and get rid of the Duke and his dumb ass ideas... I really think that the illegals
are sponsoring him... BTW notice the anti ads regarding grocery stores selling
wine, it seems that the liquor stores are the antis, MADD is sponsoring a YES
vote. MY point is that the sponsor in a lot of cases is indirect. the other hilarious thing i heard tonight was that Duval was asking Mike Dukakis for
advice on how to run the state as well as his campaign. I remember well
that Mike Dukakis was the biggest F**k up as a governor and almost bankrupted us. I am pissed or what.

JimB
 
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Mar 28, 2005
Messages
15,838
Likes
2,519
Location
Here and There
Healey was interviewed on Sevrin between 5 and 6 PM today. One caller asked her about her stand regarding home-rule versus shall issue. I'm paraphrasing here, she stated outright that the current system is unfair to law-abiding citizens, it should be a shall issue system with oversight by the state and there should be a review board. She also stated that it is a constitutional right to bear firearms. I've not heard her say it before, but there it is. Kerry Healey sounds like she is on our side.
She did give that answer, but it was a dodge to a firmer statement made by the caller that MA should be a "shall issue" state.
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Nov 8, 2005
Messages
25,669
Likes
4,114
She can answer however it suits her at the time to get more votes. What's her record? What's Romney's record for us? That is what we need to keep an eye on. Didn't Swift promise stuff and not deliver also?


Side note: I wonder if the questioner was from NES.
 
Last edited:
J

JellyFish

Well, in fairness, Romney did try to get more conservatives elected. He failed but that's the fault of the idiot voters in this state not Romney's.

As far as the "shall issue" state-wide system goes, that's something the legislature is going to have to vote on. And the police chiefs do NOT want to lose the power they have to issue licenses. So I do not see it happening any time soon regardless of who is in office but I could be wrong. We will see I guess...
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 9, 2005
Messages
13,890
Likes
202
Location
Haverhill, MA
I'm paraphrasing here, she stated outright that the current system is unfair to law-abiding citizens, it should be a shall issue system with oversight by the state and there should be a review board.
She did give that answer, but it was a dodge to a firmer statement made by the caller that MA should be a "shall issue" state.
From Mike's post, and from what hubby told me on the phone, it didn't sound like she was dodging the question. She said it's unfiar to us and that it should be shall issue. Course, that's not up to her, however, that's not exactly sidestepping the question.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
276
Likes
2
Location
Dorchester
The questioner stressed "shall issue" but Healey did not answer back with a simple support of "shall issue". She said (I'm paraphrasing) the system was grossly unfair, that she was in favor of taking control away from the cheifs of police and establishing a state-wide licensing board and review/appeals panel. BUT she did not simply support "shall issue".

Regardless, far better than D. Patrick on the issue.


I have to congratulate the questioner for putting the question very clearly, and stressing the important points. In the few times I have been on the radio, I've flubbed my lines. He did an excellent job with a fairly complicated, and detailed question.
 
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Mar 28, 2005
Messages
15,838
Likes
2,519
Location
Here and There
From Mike's post, and from what hubby told me on the phone, it didn't sound like she was dodging the question. She said it's unfiar to us and that it should be shall issue. Course, that's not up to her, however, that's not exactly sidestepping the question.
I listened to it. It sounded like a dodge to me. Or at least a "safe answer". I guess it's all in the interpretation. The caller specifically said we need "shall issue", and instead of agreeing, she went into how we need the regulations to be at the state level, so it's fair to everyone. She never mentioned shall issue, or even lowering the standards. She said we should make it consistent.

Not that that's a bad thing, it just wasn't nearly far enough to please me.
 
J

JellyFish

The real issue with "shall issue" is the police chiefs not Healey. They are a powerful lobby and not many legislators want to cross them. I don't know how that battle would play out even if Healey was governor and had sufficient pubbies in the legislature to sustain her veto.
 

Len-2A Training

Instructor
Instructor
NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 98.4%
62   1   0
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
52,734
Likes
11,165
Location
90% in NH
The real issue with "shall issue" is the police chiefs not Healey. They are a powerful lobby and not many legislators want to cross them. I don't know how that battle would play out even if Healey was governor and had sufficient pubbies in the legislature to sustain her veto.
I think that I do!

I've watched the bleating from the MCOPA in person during the legislative hearings. The sky will fall (if you believe them) if the State were to issue LTCs based on MGLs, with no "add ons" or "chief's discretion".

This is purely a legislative issue and the Gov has no say in the matter until a bill reaches his/her desk for signature! Hint: It ain't gonna happen in MA within the next 10 years or so. Those legistraitors want the MCOPA in full dress blues behind them for the photo-ops and election support.
 

ArmedMainer

NES Member
Rating - 100%
15   0   0
Joined
Dec 18, 2005
Messages
4,043
Likes
256
Location
So. Shore and So. ME
I listened to it. It sounded like a dodge to me. Or at least a "safe answer". I guess it's all in the interpretation. The caller specifically said we need "shall issue", and instead of agreeing, she went into how we need the regulations to be at the state level, so it's fair to everyone. She never mentioned shall issue, or even lowering the standards. She said we should make it consistent.

Not that that's a bad thing, it just wasn't nearly far enough to please me.
Good Point !! Put that together with her flip-flopping on the immigration issue and I'm not to thrilled or fooled by her. She is trying to widen her base but all she doing is weakening her stance.[rolleyes]
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 15, 2005
Messages
509
Likes
9
Location
Texas
Healey has, until the Deval/LaGuer item made the news, been on the defense, always responding and not out in front making Deval do damage control. So, it's fair to say she'd pull out all the stops to widen her base, which, as ArmedMainer stated, would weaken her stance.

But, Healey stated flatly on the Sevrin show that we have a constitutional right to bear arms. And, that the current licensing system is unfair. Those words put her much further into our camp than anything she's said in the past, IIRC.

So, it comes down to trust; can we believe her? For me it doesn't matter, she had my vote, anyway.

I just thought it was great to hear the words come out of her mouth. In fact, after hearing how well the question was framed (the caller was very well-spoken), I nearly fell off the step I was sitting on as she responded cooly and matter-of-factly. Which brings me to the point of how I believe she means Shall Issue. She didn't waffle nor mince words. She didn't add anything like, "I believe it should be shall issue, but I think we also need to look at registering handguns," as the true anti- typically does. She sounded quite genuine, unrehearsed.

I don't think she can do anything to change the draconian laws that are in place now (we need Frisoli to help on that). But she's not Deval Patrick who we know would blow us all out of the water if elected.
 

drgrant

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
61   0   0
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
73,206
Likes
39,251
I listened to it. It sounded like a dodge to me. Or at least a "safe answer". I guess it's all in the interpretation. The caller specifically said we need "shall issue", and instead of agreeing, she went into how we need the regulations to be at the state level, so it's fair to everyone. She never mentioned shall issue, or even lowering the standards. She said we should make it consistent.
Either that, or maybe she simply doesn't understand the terminology
being used. Shes probably just regurgitating a talking point about the
issue that she had come up with beforehand.

That specific issue is kind of a moot point anyways.... she could promise
us a free machinegun with every shall-issue LTC-A when the new
program starts, and never have to go back on her promise because there
never will be complete "shall issue" licensing in MA as long as the current
crop of incumbent legislative liberals are still around.

-Mike
 
Top Bottom