Just received this GOAL alert:EOPS is sending out a letter with bad info.

[WPDC13]

I was talking about handguns. The (now former) chief of Wellfleet PD posts on Glocktalk. I'm guessing there was a server crash or or other problem because a lot of his posts are gone, but I remember him posting something about allowing his officers to carry an approved, personally owned handgun in a serious caliber. I could be wrong on that aspect, but my point still stands about some department's allowing it. I also just remembered Pepperell Aux. PD and North(?) Brookfield Aux. PD allow a personally purchased duty handgun.

The former Chief was very adamant on the specials still carrying dept issued REVOLVERS, and would not sway from this. And maybe someone posting as him wrote it, but from before he became Chief in 99 or 2000, the dept always had issued guns. I was not arguing the fact that some towns allow this, because I know for a fact they do, but the info on the Fleet is wrong. Besides, this was a topic about AWB, not handguns.......just sayin

 

[GSG]

The former Chief was very adamant on the specials still carrying dept issued REVOLVERS, and would not sway from this. And maybe someone posting as him wrote it, but from before he became Chief in 99 or 2000, the dept always had issued guns. I was not arguing the fact that some towns allow this, because I know for a fact they do, but the info on the Fleet is wrong.

Interesting. A cop from NES also remembered reading what I described above, maybe we both read the wrong thing.

Besides, this was a topic about AWB, not handguns.......just sayin

The AWB applies to handguns when it comes to mags, that's why I brought it up.

 

[Smash05]

What's the status of this?

 

[GSG]

The letter was sent, and as far as we know nothing has clarified it. EOPS announced their policy & interpretations, not changes to the law.

 

[glide]

Did anyone ever find out who was responsible for sending this unsigned letter? I haven't heard an update on this one in a while.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Did anyone ever find out who was responsible for sending this unsigned letter? I haven't heard an update on this one in a while.

No, and I don't expect that we ever will!

[WARNING: I'm about to join the conspiracy theorists here on this one.]

I believe that it was issued that way intentionally (no signature, no date) to specifically cause FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) in dealers, LEOs, DAs, the public's minds to further curtail sales of guns and magazines in MA . . . along with the hopes that some DAs would prosecute citizens for these bogus assertions about the law.

Meanwhile EOPS can respond to legislators with "we're investigating where it came from" long enough for them to forget about the matter and never have to answer for it.

Based on some other info, I have a pretty good idea who the authors might have been (but it is speculation on my part, so I will not share those thoughts with others . . . I don't believe in accusing people unjustly).

Now, on the positive side this "advisory memo" has many LEOs upset and if there is enough synergy, just perhaps some LE orgs/unions might get behind GOAL's attempt to kill the AWB/mag ban altogether and make this all a moot point. I can hope, can't I?

 

[Coyote33]

I wonder how much it would cost to send out another letter, with differing information on it.


Hmmmmmm.

 

[Len-2A Training]

I wonder how much it would cost to send out another letter, with differing information on it.

WHY should they?

They were on a mission and accomplished their goal. There is no need or desire on their part to retract what they put in that letter.

The letter was NOT an "accidental" mistake in interpreting the law. It was intentional and if it stops some dealers from selling any hi-cap pre-ban mags or guns because provenance can't be provided that they were "in MA" before 9/13/1994, all the better (from their perspective)! Their lawyers are not stupid . . . they are vehemently anti-gun and that is why they hold those jobs, so they are "doing their jobs" to our detriment. You are very naive if you believe this was accidental!

I can factually tell you that that letter was "successful" in stopping some sales of perfectly legal pre-ban AWs, as I have spoken to two dealers about this.

 

[Coyote33]

Who do you mean by "they"? (-;

There are other people, other groups, with other GOALs to be accomplished. If an alternative letter goes out, saying high capacity magazines are now OK, or some other misinformation, well, oops.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Who do you mean by "they"? (-;

There are other people, other groups, with other GOALs to be accomplished. If an alternative letter goes out, saying high capacity magazines are now OK, or some other misinformation, well, oops.

And just how do you expect dealers who are concerned with having to fund their own legal defense to take a letter contradicting the state agency, issued on the letterhead of an NGO, seriously?

 

[Coyote33]

I thought it was about spreading uncertainty. What NGO letterhead? Contradicting WHAT state agency? The one which won't own up to the letter?

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I thought it was about spreading uncertainty. What NGO letterhead? Contradicting WHAT state agency? The one which won't own up to the letter?

I was referring to the post implying that "other groups" could send out a letter with different information.

 

[WPDC13]

.

 

[glide]

Meanwhile EOPS can respond to legislators with "we're investigating where it came from" long enough for them to forget about the matter and never have to answer for it.

Why isn't someone (GOAL, local reps, or any other pro-gun entity in MA) holding their feet to the fire so it isn't forgotten? They cannot and should not be able to avoid the question. It is unacceptable.

 

[M1911]

Why isn't someone (GOAL, local reps, or any other pro-gun entity in MA) holding their feet to the fire so it isn't forgotten? They cannot and should not be able to avoid the question. It is unacceptable.

What can GOAL do? EOPS doesn't answer to GOAL. EOPS doesn't answer to state reps either. They answer to Patrick, and Patrick approves of anything that screws gun owners.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Why isn't someone (GOAL, local reps, or any other pro-gun entity in MA) holding their feet to the fire so it isn't forgotten? They cannot and should not be able to avoid the question. It is unacceptable.

I guess you don't bother to read what GOAL does??

GOAL has and is doing what it can. It's just like M1911 says below, nobody has to answer to GOAL.

What can GOAL do? EOPS doesn't answer to GOAL. EOPS doesn't answer to state reps either. They answer to Patrick, and Patrick approves of anything that screws gun owners.

 

[MisterHappy]

GOAL is an association of citizens. EOPS is a governmental entity.

You've apparently thinking that the .gov is answerable to the citizens of Mass....

Silly rabbit. "Those that know what's best for us / Must rise and save us from ourselves.

 

[Dirtypacman]

The whole situation with that letter makes me sick. I can believe it because that is just the sort of crap that we deal with here in MA. I have heard some conflicting stances on reasoning/who/why etc. I have heard different stuff about how the PD are handling it. We need to stand strong together on a issue like this. I don't know how/where to put the pressure on for answers but I am awaiting details as to what the best course of action will be. Hopefully there will be answers coming.

 

[Len-2A Training]

The whole situation with that letter makes me sick. I can believe it because that is just the sort of crap that we deal with here in MA. I have heard some conflicting stances on reasoning/who/why etc. I have heard different stuff about how the PD are handling it. We need to stand strong together on a issue like this. I don't know how/where to put the pressure on for answers but I am awaiting details as to what the best course of action will be. Hopefully there will be answers coming.

Think about this . . .

Best course of action is to drum up more support from citizens and LE orgs alike to KILL the AWB/mag ban.

Justification? Look at the confusion generated by that memo. If that isn't proof enough that the law is unworkable and should die, nothing is.

LEOs have been totally bent out of shape over this memo.

This could be a golden opportunity to get rid of it. [And yes, I have discussed this with Jim Wallace and others.]

 

[Dirtypacman]

Lets hope so LenS, just in the discussions I have had I am getting conflicting reports of officers asked to turn in their personal arms. If this stuff starts to actually happen there is no hope for the common citizen. I don't understand why there is no trail as to where this letter was drafted and who was behind it. MA at its worst for sure.

 

[terraformer]

reports of officers asked to turn in their personal arms.

The dreamer in me says that this may make them think twice when asked to do this to others, but the cynic in me says this will only serve as training...

 

[Len-2A Training]

Lets hope so LenS, just in the discussions I have had I am getting conflicting reports of officers asked to turn in their personal arms. If this stuff starts to actually happen there is no hope for the common citizen. I don't understand why there is no trail as to where this letter was drafted and who was behind it. MA at its worst for sure.

I believe that the reports you hear are correct.

Some of us believe that there is a trail to who wrote this letter, but there is no "official trail" (date, name, etc.) and so with "plausible deniability" they can just say that they are "investigating" it and carry on that line forever.

I'm not sure that we can get police union, MCOPA support to kill the AWB/mag ban . . . and I don't think we have anyone with the political clout to approach them successfully . . . but I still hope . . . [TTBOMK, none of the official police orgs can be seen supporting a GOAL position on anything for political reasons, which oftentimes overshadows common sense. ]

 

[glide]

I don't understand why there is no trail as to where this letter was drafted and who was behind it.

This. It's totally unacceptable and ridiculous.

 

[yanici]

If it is true, that the police are required to relinquish ownership of their guns/weapons, which municipalities are forcing them. Their union should be notified and grievances should be filed for unfair practices. Maybe some currently employed officers can enlighten us as to what is going on to prevent this action. I can't see this happening for long without consequeces.

 

[drgrant]

I have a reasonable certainty as to who wrote that letter. He's been caught blowing smoke/lying to people before, and causing trouble, several times. It's not a "crime" but the guy is anything but professional... he's a f**king douchebag.

-Mike

 

[Coyote33]

The theory makes sense but it wouldn't work in practice.

Again, I agree LE support on the "shall carry" issue would carry weight insofar as it's supported by CLEO's, but LE support on the AWB wouldn't do anything. Whether it works or not, the sheeple don't see any benefit to repeal.

Thus if you focus on what is possible to be fixed, the only change that would affect the "shall issue" debate would be the EOPSS handgun compliance restrictions. The problem there is the legislature is only listening to the chiefs on that one. And if it comes down to maintaining their own power in licensing or giving up the EOPSS exemption, they'll suck it up and fill their arsenals with MA-compliant firearms.

Why wouldn't it work in practice?

...The AWB applies to handguns when it comes to mags, that's why I brought it up.

See below for a solution.

I wonder how much it would cost to send out another letter, with differing information on it.

Hmmmmmm.

See below for something better than a letter.

And just how do you expect dealers who are concerned with having to fund their own legal defense to take a letter contradicting the state agency, issued on the letterhead of an NGO, seriously?

See below, for what dealers can get behind.

Why isn't someone (GOAL, local reps, or any other pro-gun entity in MA) holding their feet to the fire so it isn't forgotten? They cannot and should not be able to avoid the question. It is unacceptable.

What can GOAL do? EOPS doesn't answer to GOAL. EOPS doesn't answer to state reps either. They answer to Patrick, and Patrick approves of anything that screws gun owners.

What can they do? With help? See below.

I guess you don't bother to read what GOAL does??

GOAL has and is doing what it can. It's just like M1911 says below, nobody has to answer to GOAL.

Wanna know what GOAL can do? See below. Nobody has to answer to GOAL, but they won't have to answer if the law changes. See below.

...Best course of action is to drum up more support from citizens and LE orgs alike to KILL the AWB/mag ban.

Justification? Look at the confusion generated by that memo. If that isn't proof enough that the law is unworkable and should die, nothing is.

LEOs have been totally bent out of shape over this memo.

This could be a golden opportunity to get rid of it. [And yes, I have discussed this with Jim Wallace and others.]

See below.

If it is true, that the police are required to relinquish ownership of their guns/weapons, which municipalities are forcing them. Their union should be notified and grievances should be filed for unfair practices. Maybe some currently employed officers can enlighten us as to what is going on to prevent this action. I can't see this happening for long without consequeces.

It is time for them to start getting behind the folks who have been supporting them ALL ALONG!



YEEHAW! (See below!)

GOAL to File Legislation To Repeal Ban On Modern Sporting Arms.

Action: Please call your legislators and urge them to sign onto House Minority Leader George Peterson's Bill, "An Act To Repeal The Ban On Modern Sporting Arms".

Here is GOAL's letter to MA Legislators to educate them about this bill.

 

[M1911]

GOAL to File Legislation To Repeal Ban On Modern Sporting Arms.

Action: Please call your legislators and urge them to sign onto House Minority Leader George Peterson's Bill, "An Act To Repeal The Ban On Modern Sporting Arms".

Here is GOAL's letter to MA Legislators to educate them about this bill.

As in previous years, we will call our legislators. And the bills won't make it out of committee. We still don't have the votes. No, I'm not saying it isn't worth the effort -- it is. I'm just saying don't hold your breath.

The only real hope we have is if the correct cases make it to the SCOTUS before one of the conservative judges retires. If Obama gets to appoint another judge, our judicial progress on 2nd Amendment rights will end.

 

[OfficerObie59]

I'm not sure that we can get police union, MCOPA support to kill the AWB/mag ban . . . and I don't think we have anyone with the political clout to approach them successfully . . .

Judging soley by the suggested policy MCOPA put out regarding the new statewide police ID cards, their respect for officer's personal RKBA is just as lacking as it is for the rest of the population.

As for the unions, it's all about numbers. I would say amoungst rank and file that personal gun ownership is greater than the population at large, but still not to the degree that a union will use its resources to enter into that debate. The decision is a tactical one: With all the other issues going on, are the police unions really going to jump head first into the gun debate they have little chance of winning? Right now, unions are on the defensive, focused on maintaining--not being on the offensive.

FWIW, I hear people on here talking about police unions like they're all powerful. If you think our fragmented associations of police unions still have significant political power at the moment, I think you're stuck in 1993.

 

[Coyote33]

As in previous years, we will call our legislators. And the bills won't make it out of committee. We still don't have the votes. No, I'm not saying it isn't worth the effort -- it is. I'm just saying don't hold your breath.

The only real hope we have is if the correct cases make it to the SCOTUS before one of the conservative judges retires. If Obama gets to appoint another judge, our judicial progress on 2nd Amendment rights will end.

... their respect for officer's personal RKBA is just as lacking as it is for the rest of the population.

As for the unions, it's all about numbers. I would say amoungst rank and file that personal gun ownership is greater than the population at large, but still not to the degree that a union will use its resources to enter into that debate. ....

I think it is time GOAL (remember, our lobbying branch?), lobby hard to the police unions and basic officer to come out in support of this bill. This could be a turning point.

 

[Dirtypacman]

I am anxiously awaiting another update from GOAL on this matter. Honestly this should be getting press also, what is stopping GOAL from putting together a press release on this on going matter putting some more pressure on those that could be responsible for it to give some answers.