• 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.

Healey Protest - New Date 11/2 at State House

I was the guy in the blue tyranny t-shirt.
Nice meeting and talking to you guys.
About eight people showed up.

Now remember we are all set on go time. Secret handshake, where to meet, what to bring.[rofl]

IMG_0208.jpg

GX, we did get to show off your shirts and bumper stickers![grin]
 
Last edited:
nightpoison said:
any chance was the hearing taped?
Click to expand...

I believe the audio is available somewhere. The applicant mentioned listening to prior hearings to prepare.

I could get rid of cable, the way Jubinville is breaking this guy down based on his lack of trial experience and lack of criminal case experience is pure brilliance.
 
Just got home, I'm toast.

There was a gentleman recording the session, apparently he records all the sessions and puts them up at pmmagc.com. I haven't fully checked out the website, and I don't think he's actually affiliated with the government in any way.

He did say that Jubinville's grilling was the same every session. He seemed pretty negative about the system as a whole, that basically this was Jubinville's way of having leverage on the guy in the future somehow ("it's politics").

I wish somebody would have been able to speak in Jim Wallace's place and hope he gets well soon.
 
Drix said:
Will they be allowing more speakers? I dressed for the wrong amendment this morning and couldn't go inside.
Click to expand...

I think they've moved pretty much into the interview with the candidate. It wouldn't hurt to ask, I'd call the guy that GOAL said to call to find out.

Last night I sent an email to the entire council because I wanted to clarify a couple points they brought up. One was during the testimony where one of the council members insisted that "copy-cat" weapons included all ARs and therefore Healey was well within her right. The other was they were wondering why Christopher Barry-Smith is being targeted. Here's my email:

Good evening,

I attended today's hearing, and although I did not speak, I wanted to use this opportunity to thank you all, as well as to provide some clarification that I heard regarding the Assault Weapons Ban. I actively compete in high-power shooting, which uses an AR-15, so this is an issue near and dear to my heart.

First, I want to emphasize that myself and other firearms owners are opposing Mr. Barry-Smith's nomination because it a) it effectively condones the actions of the AG's office, which we believe has acted unconstitutionally, and b) we do not feel that pending lawsuits against the AG's office will get a fair hearing if heard by somebody who was high-ranking in the AG's office when the matter occurred. We have not called into question other nominations from the AG's office because the AG's office didn't overstep their bounds until July 20th. I suspect we will, however, continue to call such nominations into question.

Regarding the comments on the AWB, it was contested during the hearing today that the Federal AWB (from which the Mass AWB is directly adopted), covered this notion of "copy-cat" assault weapons, which made what Maura Healey did "legal". I have to take issue with this statement and would like to clarify.

When the Federal AWB was passed in 1994, the Senate received clarification from the ATF regarding what would be considered and assault weapon and what would not be. Senator Larry Craig provided clarification he had gotten while in correspondence with the ATF Director regarding what would be considered an Assault Weapon under the legislation being proposed, including Senator Feinstein's amendment that specifically named 19 firearms. There was concern about how broadly this list would be interpreted. The AWB would not have passed without this clarification, and it is clear that this is the intent of the AWB.

Specifically Senator Craig asked:
5. To the extent that the criteria for banning focus on
cosmetic features, do you agree that virtually any firearm on
the list could be modified (such as by removing a bayonet lug
or flash suppressor) to remove it from the definition of
banned ``assault weapon''?

His response from the ATF was:

You also asked if virtually any firearm on the list of
assault weapons could be modified by eliminating the bayonet
lug, flash suppressor, or other accessories to remove the
firearm from the definition of a banned or assault weapon.
The vast majority of the firearms meeting the definition of
assault weapon as contained in paragraphs (B), (C), and (D)
of the Feinstein amendment could be modified to remove them
from that definition.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-1994-05-02/html/CREC-1994-05-02-pt1-PgS6.htm

Again, thank you for your time.
 
I sent Jennie Caissie a thank you on facespace yesterday. She actually replied back. Seems like a nice enough person.
 
bill o said:
What idiot at the Herald decided to give these people attention, and why?
Click to expand...

It's a ham-handed attempt to equate support for gun rights with white supremacism and hate politics.

The left has been trying to paint Our Side as a bunch of racists and the 2A as "for whites only" since about forever.
 
Eighteen people were there in support of GOAL at this event.

I guess we all should of just went about our day and not gotten involved.


PS: To those that showed up. We were "The Hateful Eighteen!".[smile]
 
Last edited:
Typo:
the Senate received clarification from the ATF regarding what would be considered and assault weapon and what would not be.

the Senate received clarification from the ATF regarding what would be considered an assault weapon and what would not be.
 
Funny, MA adopts the Federal AWB as written, word for word.
The firearm manufacturers consulted the ATF to see what would be allowed to be in compliance with the Federal AWB during the ban years.

Firearms are sold in this state followed the same guidance they used when the 1994 AWB took place.
Except our ban will never sunset.

We buy said firearms since 1994 and now as of July 20th of this year.
Our AG determines that it was all wrong and decides to tell us she won't prosecute us at this time.
Anyone that purchased what they thought was a legal non-aw in MA after Sept. 13, 1994 can now be charged with a 10 year felony sentence.

Sorry, but using firearm owners to promote ones self in political office is not what an honest person does.
That is what a tyrant does!

Rewriting law to include a made up test is just the icing on the cake!

The faq on the AG's web page are the candles that will burn the whole thing down in court.
 
Last edited:
oldguy68 said:
Funny, MA adopts the Federal AWB as written, word for word.
The firearm manufacturers consulted the ATF to see what would be allowed to be in compliance with the Federal AWB during the ban years.

Firearms are sold to this state with the same guidance they used when the 1994 AWB took place.
Except our ban will never sunset.

We buy said firearms since 1994 and now as of July 20th of this year.
Our AG determines that it was all wrong and decides to tell us she won't prosecute us at this time.
Anyone that purchased what they thought was a legal non-aw in MA after Sept. 13, 1994 can now be charged with a 10 year felony sentence.

Sorry, but using firearm owners to promote ones self in political office is not what an honest person does.
That is what a tyrant does!

Rewriting law to include a made up test is just the icing on the cake!
The faq on the AG's web page are the candles that will burn the whole thing down in court.
Click to expand...


The Democratic Party has changed the law from as written to it means what we say it means. If Hillary gets in they'll turn the entire country into Massachusetts and make up the laws as they go along and interpret anything as they feel it should be interpreted. I can't imagine what's going to happen to the second amendment in a Hillary presidency.
 
oldguy68 said:
Numbers win people.
Eight people were there in support of GOAL at this event.
Click to expand...

I was there, counted 18 outside, which isn't bad given that they changed the hearing date and ****ed up a bunch of people's day off requests. Furthermore, many people believe that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
 
Last edited:
Hey Drix,
I stand corrected with a count of eighteen.[smile]

So no more protests or trying to get others involved.

Got it![grin]

To the AG's people reading this thread: Congrats the firearm owners of this state will do nothing, again..
 
Last edited:
alpineboard said:
Typo:
the Senate received clarification from the ATF regarding what would be considered and assault weapon and what would not be.

the Senate received clarification from the ATF regarding what would be considered an assault weapon and what would not be.
Click to expand...
Thanks for catching that. After the day I had I'm glad that's the only one.
 
oldguy68 said:
Funny, MA adopts the Federal AWB as written, word for word.
The firearm manufacturers consulted the ATF to see what would be allowed to be in compliance with the Federal AWB during the ban years.
Click to expand...

To be clear, at least from what I cited, it wasn't the manufacturers, it was Congress itself that sought clarification and had that clarification entered into Congressional Record so that this sort of sh!t storm couldn't happen.

FYI, this information is all in the NSSF suit filing.
 
Turns out Barry-Smith was the brainchild of Healey's enforcement notice. Charlie really stepped in it with that nomination.
 
Mike S said:
Turns out Barry-Smith was the brainchild of Healey's enforcement notice. Charlie really stepped in it with that nomination.
Click to expand...

This is documented somewhere, right?

I'd love to point to it when people say, "but he's just a deputy!" or other nonsense.
 
milktree said:
This is documented somewhere, right?

I'd love to point to it when people say, "but he's just a deputy!" or other nonsense.
Click to expand...

From the article, Barry-Smith being quoted:

He told the council that after the June 12 mass shooting at an Orlando, Florida nightclub, Healey assembled a working group among her staff to “assess the risk of military-style assault weapons in Massachusetts and see if there’s anything that we as the chief law enforcement officers should do about it.” He said he did not serve on the working group, but later was part of the team that reviewed that group’s suggestions. “My role in that, with respect to that issue was twofold,” Barry-Smith said. “First, with the government bureau that I oversee, we assessed the attorney general’s authority to interpret and enforce the copies-and-duplicates language in the manner she did, and second, when it came to how to implement that decision, I urged the path that we eventually took which was to rather than interpret and enforce it by way of bringing criminal charges or civil action, to issue a public advisory.”

Criminal charges or civil suits would not have been feasible: the definition had been on the books for years, and hadn't changed. What judge or jury would have convicted? So it appears Barry-Smith conceived the advisory option that Healey chose, which was easy to implement: basically a press conference and a letter to gun dealers. No need for messy, cumbersome trials. How convenient for the AG's office. Bet she stuck a gold star to his forehead that day.
 
Last edited:
GOAL PR on nomination.

ICYMI the GC is voting 11/16/16, please contact your GC member and urge a no vote on Barry-Smith. Let's win one people.

Link with contact info: http://blog.goal.org/governor-baker-rewards-healeys-staff/

GOAL APPLAUDS GOVERNOR’S COUNCIL’S BI-PARTISAN EFFORT TO DISCOVER TRUTH ON JUDICIAL NOMINEE’S INVOLVEMENT IN ILLEGAL ENFORCEMENT ACTION

Renews Request That Baker Withdraw Nomination

NORTHBOROUGH, MA – The Gun Owners’ Action League (GOAL) applauds the bi-partisan Governor’s Council who yesterday grilled Chris Barry-Smith, Gov. Baker’s judicial nominee for the state Superior Court, on his involvement with AG Healey’s July 2016 attack on the civil rights of hundreds of thousands of Massachusetts families that own firearms. Through hours of persistent and fair scrutiny, Barry-Smith admitted under oath to being at the center of the enforcement decision that criminalized the sale of legally sold firearms and rendered thousands of law-abiding, licensed gun owners felons-in-waiting overnight.

“This man admitted under oath to being complicit in a politically motivated attack on the civil rights of over 400,000 gun owning families in Massachusetts,” said Jim Wallace, GOAL’s Executive Director. “On its face, this fact makes it self-evident why he should have never been nominated, let alone confirmed, as a judge for the Commonwealth. As a judge one must respect the civil rights of all citizens, regardless of their political views.”

GOAL has called on the Governor to withdraw his nomination and the Governor’s Council to vote down Barry-Smith’s judicial nomination due to his participation in the office’s action that invented an entirely new definition for so-called “assault” weapons. As AG Healey’s first assistant, GOAL believes that Barry-Smith’s complicity in suppressing the 2nd Amendment civil rights of almost half a million Massachusetts residents, plus his complete lack of trial experience, renders his judicial qualifications highly suspect.

####
Click to expand...
 
Freddy B said:
From the article, Barry-Smith being quoted:

He told the council that after the June 12 mass shooting at an Orlando, Florida nightclub, Healey assembled a working group among her staff to “assess the risk of military-style assault weapons in Massachusetts and see if there’s anything that we as the chief law enforcement officers should do about it.” He said he did not serve on the working group, but later was part of the team that reviewed that group’s suggestions. “My role in that, with respect to that issue was twofold,” Barry-Smith said. “First, with the government bureau that I oversee, we assessed the attorney general’s authority to interpret and enforce the copies-and-duplicates language in the manner she did, and second, when it came to how to implement that decision, I urged the path that we eventually took which was to rather than interpret and enforce it by way of bringing criminal charges or civil action, to issue a public advisory.”

Criminal charges or civil suits would not have been feasible: the definition had been on the books for years, and hadn't changed. What judge or jury would have convicted? So it appears Barry-Smith conceived the advisory option that Healey chose, which was easy to implement: basically a press conference and a letter to gun dealers. No need for messy, cumbersome trials. How convenient for the AG's office. Bet she stuck a gold star to his forehead that day.
Click to expand...
That son of a bitch. And I guess we "felons" simply became collateral damage in their climb to the top rung of leftist tyranny. [angry]
 

Similar threads

The new NES stud club member badge - the blue envelope from state police!
2
Replies
54
Views
1K
headednorth
headednorth
House Republicans sell us out
2 3 4
Replies
114
Views
3K
EJFudd
EJFudd
Where to get out of date / trashed lvl 3 + 3a armor on the cheap?
Replies
13
Views
238
Broc
Broc
Buying ammo at BassPro at Foxboro
2
Replies
33
Views
1K
inerlogic
inerlogic
Bad news LTC holders, can't buy ammo at BassPro
2 3
Replies
66
Views
2K
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Back
Top Bottom