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 June Giveaway ***Keltec SUB2000***
rchap, I don't follow. Your posting seems to support what I said.
read again
122-29 passed
Roll call.... .....it's gonna pass fo sho.
Roll call and its done...off to the others who are ready to voice their own BS and pass it...time for some PBR and a good night sleep
Can't access the live feed. Any updates will be appreciated
...off to the Senate.....they're on recess til 9:05.....prolly waiting for this shit to be run over to them for passage.
I thought I did, and it looked like it said Peterson was correcting some issue with licensing which got broken in 1998. How is that bad?
Who voted against?
I dont know a permanent assault weapons ban is usually considered a loss to most freedom loving Americans.
I dont know a permanent assault weapons ban is usually considered a loss to most freedom loving Americans.
rchap, I don't follow. Your posting seems to support what I said.
I dont know a permanent assault weapons ban is usually considered a loss to most freedom loving Americans.
I dont know a permanent assault weapons ban is usually considered a loss to most freedom loving Americans.
So here's an honest question for the "kill the bill!" crowd here -- given the actual, real-world state of things in Massachusetts, explain how doing that would make things better, and how having GOAL come out against the bill would make things better? In a state like this where the vast majority of the legislators can get easily elected even if they completely blow off the 2nd Amendment how is GOAL walking away from the table or blanketly opposing every politically-possible thing the legislators come up with because it's not constitutional carry going to do gun owners in the state any good? If they do that, legislators will just completely ignore them and I fail to see how that will make gun owners better off.
That said, I will completely agree that the tone of today's GOAL press release was all wrong. It should have expressed reluctant support, not metaphorical high-fiving and going on about how great and historic it was.
Is there a published bill we can read yet? Trying to figure out what else has been changed since the senate version
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's OK.....LE (past, present & future) can still have whatever they want......that's gonna keep us all safe....right? right?
Why couldn't they say "We recognize the positive aspects of this bill, but due to the infringement of the suitability issue on FID, we cannot support the bill in it's current form. While we acknowledge the hard work of the legislature, we feel that the compromise bill that came out of the committee was too much of a compromise for us to support the bill in that form."
I think people gave me the stink eye on the commuter rail today when I was explaining the LE AWB exemption to a friend and told them they're the perfect candidates because how many thousands of bullets did the knuckleheads in Watertown use and hit the shitbag once? But they're trained. At least I keep most of mine on the paper
So here's an honest question for the "kill the bill!" crowd here -- given the actual, real-world state of things in Massachusetts, explain how doing that would make things better, and how having GOAL come out against the bill would make things better? In a state like this where the vast majority of the legislators can get easily elected even if they completely blow off the 2nd Amendment how is GOAL walking away from the table or blanketly opposing every politically-possible thing the legislators come up with because it's not constitutional carry going to do gun owners in the state any good? If they do that, legislators will just completely ignore them and I fail to see how that will make gun owners better off.
That said, I will completely agree that the tone of today's GOAL press release was all wrong. It should have expressed reluctant support, not metaphorical high-fiving and going on about how great and historic it was.
I think people gave me the stink eye on the commuter rail today when I was explaining the LE AWB exemption to a friend and told them they're the perfect candidates because how many thousands of bullets did the knuckleheads in Watertown use and hit the shitbag once? But they're trained. At least I keep most of mine on the paper
Is there a published bill we can read yet? Trying to figure out what else has been changed since the senate version
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk