• 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.

IMPORTANT NOTICE for all gunowners House Bill H2259

GOAL said:
Before I forget to make this post, let me thank everyone on the forum for their support of our efforts to reform the gun laws and Massachusetts through H.2259. A special thanks for those who took the time out of their day to attend the public hearing. I am glad that some of you could see in person some of the legislative process.

I do apologize that I could not stay and hear everyone who testified after us, but I had a speaking engagement down on the Cape to get to.
//
Click to expand...
No problem, we sent you the bar tab anyway.....[laugh2]
 
so if i understood the song correctly, it has to get voted on in the state house, then go to the state senate, then be signed by the Gov. Do we typically have to send more letters and show supports as this plays out?

again, this is my first time participating in the legislative process, so please be gentle ;)
 
daddysuperfly said:
so if i understood the song correctly, it has to get voted on in the state house, then go to the state senate, then be signed by the Gov. Do we typically have to send more letters and show supports as this plays out?

again, this is my first time participating in the legislative process, so please be gentle ;)
Click to expand...
The committee needs to vote to release it from committee with a favorable rec'

From this point on, our "advocacy" is mostly in the form of directly petitioning our reps (letters/phone/email) to support the bill... It can get sent back to start over if the entire process can't be completed but there is still support/sponsorship...

Here's a rundown on how you make sausage in the statehouse:
http://www.mass.gov/legis/lawmkng.htm
 
Here is the response I got from Rep Brownsberger :

Hi Erik,

I got a message that you stopped by regarding House 2259.

I do sense that there is increasing interest among responsible people in doing something to simplify our gun laws.

I haven't yet had a chance to form an opinion on the latest proposals, but I'm certainly open to them.

So, for now, I'll be non-committal, but as the process moves forward and more analysis becomes available, I will be bear in mind your thoughts on the issue. Feel free to be in touch further if you'd like to talk the issue through in more depth.

Best regards,

/w.
 
Thanks everyone for the effort in reaching out to your legislators. This is exactly the correct course of action to follow if we want to ensure a favorable vote by the committee.

Please keep up the great work, keep on them, stay in touch, open a dialogue.

Also, if ANY legislator has any questions please have them contact us at the office. 508-393-5333

Thanks and have a great weekend all!
 
daddysuperfly said:
so if i understood the song correctly, it has to get voted on in the state house, then go to the state senate, then be signed by the Gov. Do we typically have to send more letters and show supports as this plays out?

again, this is my first time participating in the legislative process, so please be gentle ;)
Click to expand...

So far, so good!

We just need to keep writing (paper mail, not email), and calling. Tell everyone you know to write and call. Need to let them know we care about this, and care deeply! The squeaky wheel gets the grease, and following the Brown election, we need to keep their responsiveness in the forefront of their minds.
 
MassMark said:
2259 is a drop of spring water in a very large pail of poo.... S935 to S986 and H 2247, 2249, 2267 and 2287 should be scaring the intestinal contents out of everyone. It's funny (not in a ha-ha way) that much of these mentioned were not even a blip on the radar here....If even one of these goes through, it may just be time for more than attending a hearing....
Click to expand...

I had absolutely no idea that those bills even existed until you referenced them, so thanks for that.

But it begs the question...how the hell is this going on in America today, on the same piece of soil where the Constitution was written? I'm baffled and disgusted. [angry]
 
GSG said:
But it begs the question...how the hell is this going on in America today, on the same piece of soil where the Constitution was written? I'm baffled and disgusted. [angry]
Click to expand...

Because the large majority of American voters have failed the one duty our Founders gave us, to stay vigilant, they've failed to keep an eye on government.

Especially here in Mass, but Scott Brown's election has given me a little hope that maybe we can turn things around.
 
H2259 Coverage at Boston University

From the student run Daily Free Press. Even includes a quote form MFS

http://www.dailyfreepress.com/gun-laws-in-mass-face-reform-1.2164494

Published: Monday, February 22, 2010

Updated: Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Guns

Shannon Young

A sign overlooking the Massachusetts turnpike advertises for changes in gun laws.

A bill that would reform gun laws in Massachusetts is being debated in the state House of Representatives, prompting some local residents to express skepticism as to whether the new laws will actually improve firearm safety in light of recent outbreaks of gun violence all over the country.

Bill H2259, presented by Rep. George Peterson, R-Grafton, on Jan. 27, would prompt a complete overhaul of the current firearm laws in an attempt to simplify them. Measures taken would include decreasing the number of license types available from four to one and creating 13 categories of restraints on gun ownership and handling.

It would also prevent children under the age of 18 from handling a fully automatic weapon and would only allow them to handle a machine gun in the presence of a licensed adult.

School of Law Professor Sean Kealy said the sections of Chapter 140 of Massachusetts General Law that deal with firearm licenses are long overdue for reform.

“The gun laws in the state are very difficult to deal with,” he said. “Chapter 140 is a statute that is very difficult to understand; it isn’t user friendly and could really use some changing to make the process simpler, more predictable and more uniform throughout the state.”

Kealy said acquiring a firearm license under the current system is heavily dependent on local authority, specifically on local police chiefs.

Under the proposed legislation, discretion would be taken out of the of police chiefs’ hands. But Kealy said this could have negative consequences.

“You might have certain situations where the police chief may know the best solution to the problem of whether the person should receive a license,” Kealy said. “Taking away that kind of discretion may be the exact wrong thing to do.”

Kealy said the bill includes some useful features for the simplification of a convoluted set of laws, but he doesn’t think the bill will pass in its current form.

“I’m pretty confident that it will stay in committee at least in this session,” he said.

The age restriction proposed in the bill is a response to a 2008 incident in which an eight-year-old boy was killed while handling a machine gun at a gun show in Westfield.

Steven Hathaway, the director of training at the Massachusetts Firearms School in Framingham, said this component of the bill is an example of “the impulse people have to hastily make new legislation in response to an isolated incident.”

“Nothing like [the 2008 incident] had ever happened before in the Commonwealth and there is no reason to believe it will happen again,” he said, adding that he believes the restriction of minors from using automatic weapons is unnecessary because it affects such a small portion of the firearm-wielding community.

However, Hathaway also said gun law reform is necessary because the current laws are too complicated for residents to understand and follow.

“There are a number of laws in Massachusetts concerning firearms that are contradictory to each other,” he said. “They leave it to the law-abiding citizen in a handicapped situation because there are so many laws that are contradictory.”

College of Arts and Sciences freshman Luke Parlin said he thinks the consolidation of gun legislation is necessary, but that he doubts the long-term effectiveness of the bill.

“I think that no amount of gun legislation will make it easier for police to control [gun-related incidents],” he said. “There is a lot of parallel between gun legislation and anti-piracy measures taken by media distributers. You end up punishing the people who aren’t intending to break the law in the first place. Someone who is going to use the gun for nefarious purposes is going to get one through whatever means necessary, regardless of legislation.”

CAS sophomore Emily Shoov said she would support the legislation if it implements stricter limitations on gun ownership.

“As long as there are still points that people need to clear to own guns, I’m okay with new legislation,” Shoov said. “Those who want to own guns legally won’t have to work so hard.”
Click to expand...
 
RFWAVELENGTH said:
A couple of months ago, I would have thought the same thing. Then, Scott Brown got elected by the voting public in this state. Looks like things are starting to turn around. Who knows, it might just pass. Let's stay optimistic![grin]
Click to expand...
I really think it is less a reflection on the size of the lunatic pool in this state and more a reflection on the size of the apathetic pool in this state...

If the apathetic would just stop accepting the regular steam rolling they get from the lunatics they would realize they have the numbers to force state government into a more sane model of governance.

As it stands - all the legislators hear is the inane babbling and begging for handouts of the liberal lunatics.
 
Knuckle Dragger said:
From the student run Daily Free Press. Even includes a quote form MFS
Published: Monday, February 22, 2010

Updated: Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Guns

Shannon Young

A sign overlooking the Massachusetts turnpike advertises for changes in gun laws.

A bill that would reform gun laws in Massachusetts is being debated in the state House of Representatives, prompting some local residents to express skepticism as to whether the new laws will actually improve firearm safety in light of recent outbreaks of gun violence all over the country.

Bill H2259, presented by Rep. George Peterson, R-Grafton, on Jan. 27, would prompt a complete overhaul of the current firearm laws in an attempt to simplify them. Measures taken would include decreasing the number of license types available from four to one and creating 13 categories of restraints on gun ownership and handling.

It would also prevent children under the age of 18 from handling a fully automatic weapon and would only allow them to handle a machine gun in the presence of a licensed adult.

School of Law Professor Sean Kealy said the sections of Chapter 140 of Massachusetts General Law that deal with firearm licenses are long overdue for reform.

“The gun laws in the state are very difficult to deal with,” he said. “Chapter 140 is a statute that is very difficult to understand; it isn’t user friendly and could really use some changing to make the process simpler, more predictable and more uniform throughout the state.”

Kealy said acquiring a firearm license under the current system is heavily dependent on local authority, specifically on local police chiefs.

Under the proposed legislation, discretion would be taken out of the of police chiefs’ hands. But Kealy said this could have negative consequences.

“You might have certain situations where the police chief may know the best solution to the problem of whether the person should receive a license,” Kealy said. “Taking away that kind of discretion may be the exact wrong thing to do.”

Kealy said the bill includes some useful features for the simplification of a convoluted set of laws, but he doesn’t think the bill will pass in its current form.

“I’m pretty confident that it will stay in committee at least in this session,” he said.

The age restriction proposed in the bill is a response to a 2008 incident in which an eight-year-old boy was killed while handling a machine gun at a gun show in Westfield.

Steven Hathaway, the director of training at the Massachusetts Firearms School in Framingham, said this component of the bill is an example of “the impulse people have to hastily make new legislation in response to an isolated incident.”

“Nothing like [the 2008 incident] had ever happened before in the Commonwealth and there is no reason to believe it will happen again,” he said, adding that he believes the restriction of minors from using automatic weapons is unnecessary because it affects such a small portion of the firearm-wielding community.

However, Hathaway also said gun law reform is necessary because the current laws are too complicated for residents to understand and follow.

“There are a number of laws in Massachusetts concerning firearms that are contradictory to each other,” he said. “They leave it to the law-abiding citizen in a handicapped situation because there are so many laws that are contradictory.”

College of Arts and Sciences freshman Luke Parlin said he thinks the consolidation of gun legislation is necessary, but that he doubts the long-term effectiveness of the bill.

“I think that no amount of gun legislation will make it easier for police to control [gun-related incidents],” he said. “There is a lot of parallel between gun legislation and anti-piracy measures taken by media distributers. You end up punishing the people who aren’t intending to break the law in the first place. Someone who is going to use the gun for nefarious purposes is going to get one through whatever means necessary, regardless of legislation.”

CAS sophomore Emily Shoov said she would support the legislation if it implements stricter limitations on gun ownership.

“As long as there are still points that people need to clear to own guns, I’m okay with new legislation,” Shoov said. “Those who want to own guns legally won’t have to work so hard.”
Click to expand...
http://www.dailyfreepress.com/gun-laws-in-mass-face-reform-1.2164494
Click to expand...

Biased much...

A school of law professor advocating blatantly violating equal protection. Lovely...
 
I would like to know what I can do that is most effective to help this legislation pass. Should I write or call or email? My representatives or the members of the committee? When and how often? Can someone familiar with the process post a list of things to do in order of effectiveness? Thanks in advance.
 
"Any misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for more than two years for which a
committed term of imprisonment has been served after sentencing has been carried
out"

This appears to mean that in order for a misdemeanor punishable by more than two years to be a lifetime disqualifier for LTC, as it is today, that you would actually have had to serve time in jail. Good stuff.
 
CAS sophomore Emily Shoov said she would support the legislation if it implements stricter limitations on gun ownership.

“As long as there are still points that people need to clear to own guns, I’m okay with new legislation,” Shoov said. “Those who want to own guns legally won’t have to work so hard.”
Click to expand...

I think the article Author misunderstood what she said. I think this student would be in favor of less restrictive gun laws so long as felons would still be barred.
 
SecondAmdFirst said:
I have written and called all my reps. Of coarse I tell everyone who is even somewhat supportive to back the legislation. Is there any more I can do?
Click to expand...

Thanks, just keep repeating the process, if you actually get a legislature on the phone ask them if they know the status, if not, ask them if they can find out.

Attending the next session would be great as well, our turnout should have been much, much higher than it was.
 
GOAL said:
Before I forget to make this post, let me thank everyone on the forum for their support of our efforts to reform the gun laws and Massachusetts through H.2259. A special thanks for those who took the time out of their day to attend the public hearing. I am glad that some of you could see in person some of the legislative process.

I do apologize that I could not stay and hear everyone who testified after us, but I had a speaking engagement down on the Cape to get to.

Also thanks to the NSSF for sending Jake to testify with GOAL.

Thanks again, now let's see if we can get H.2259 out of committee.
Click to expand...

There is one issue here that bothers me. Please see the following quote:

"The categories include a person indicted of a crime punishable by up to a year in jail..."

"Punishable by" and "indicted" seem like dubious distinctions. Maximum peanalties are usually extremely harsh compared to the offense and are applied for misdemeanors only in very rare circumstances. Today, someone has to be found guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by two years or more in order to be disqualified for life. It seems that there are two new stipulations with this bill. The penalty has been reduced from two years to one, and the violator only has to be "indicted" to be disqualified.

So, to use a silly example, if someone steals a hubcap where they are 18 and the police decide to make an example of them and file charges, even if they aren't found guilty, they can be disqualified for life. Am I reading this correctly?
 
Last edited:
TimMcG74 said:
There is one issue here that bothers me. Please see the following quote:

"The categories include a person indicted of a crime punishable by up to a year in jail..."

"Punishable by" and "indicted" seem like dubious distinctions. Maximum peanalties are usually extremely harsh compared to the offense and are applied for misdemeanors only in very rare circumstances. Today, someone has to be found guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by two years or more in order to be disqualified for life. It seems there there are two new stipulations with this bill. The penalty has been reduced from two years to one, and one only has to be "indicted." So, if someone steals an orange from the cafeteria in college and the campus police decide to make an example of them, even if they aren't found guilty, they can be disqualified for life. Am I reading this correctly?
Click to expand...

It's standard boiler plate from the federal regulations.
 
TimMcG74 said:
I thought the federal regs stipulated 2 years and that there had to be a guilty finding. No?
Click to expand...

I may be wrong but I believe lifetime prohibit is any felony, 5 year hiatus is a conviction of 1 yr misdemeanor punishable by >1 yr and anyone under indictment until lifted or convicted. And ROs, mental health issues, drug addictions, etc...
 
terraformer said:
I may be wrong but I believe lifetime prohibit is any felony, 5 year hiatus is a conviction of 1 yr misdemeanor punishable by >1 yr and anyone under indictment until lifted or convicted. And ROs, mental health issues, drug addictions, etc...
Click to expand...

I didn't realize the federal disqualifier had a 5 year sunset for misdemeanors punishable by 1yr. Makes sense.
 
TimMcG74 said:
I didn't realize the federal disqualifier had a 5 year sunset for misdemeanors punishable by 1yr. Makes sense.
Click to expand...

It was bugging me so I looked it up. I merged MA law with federal. MA has the sunset, the feds do not. And it is 2 years with state convictions, one with federal court convictions. The feds also don't make any distinctions between misdemeanor and felony. That is MA who does. Sorry. There are so many variations of this cap I can't keep them straight.

But the original point I was trying to make is still true. The feds deny on indictments and disregard actual punishment in favor of maximum punishable prison term.
 

Similar threads

Colorado House Democrats Pass Bill Banning AR-15s and 9mm Pistols with Threaded Barrels
2
Replies
49
Views
1K
Amputee Marksman
Amputee Marksman
Florida House Passes Bill to Lower Legal Gun Purchase Age to 18
Replies
0
Views
87
Reptile
Reptile
Bill H.4139
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
Ron Jablonski
R
Nebraska lawmakers pass bill that would allow smaller school districts to arm staff members
Replies
0
Views
43
Reptile
Reptile
House Republicans sell us out
2 3 4
Replies
114
Views
3K
EJFudd
EJFudd
Back
Top Bottom