Massachusetts Legislature Voting on Anti-Civil Rights Bill TODAY!

So, what of the three-year licensing?
It appears that part of the legislation did not make it to the bill's final version. So the six years license remains. For now, at least. It also casts a wider net on who is prohibited from getting a license to carry. (e.g., temporary/permanent harassment prevention order). And finally, police will be required to conduct a personal interview.
 

Looks like the 6 -> 3 year renewal did not make it. So we are still at 6 years.
The in person interview did make it, however its worded so its only for initial application and does not seem to apply to renewals. Its on bakers desk now.

provided that upon an initial application for a license to carry firearms, the licensing authority shall conduct a personal interview with the applicant.
 
Priorities
"The decision means the one-time rebates of $250 to eligible individual taxpayers and $500 to married taxpayers who filed jointly, which lawmakers have promoted in recent weeks, will not be issued.'

This would have helped my ammo stockpile
 
Looks like the 6 -> 3 year renewal did not make it. So we are still at 6 years.
The in person interview did make it, however its worded so its only for initial application and does not seem to apply to renewals. Its on bakers desk now.
Thank you for helping us follow that. [cheers]
So... status quo, basically, for most LTC holders...
Looks that way... for now. It does look like the "personal interview" thing is not just a regurgence of SOP as some had speculated, but a new formal requirement. It's been many decades since my initial LTC, so I guess I'm not sure if you can get an initial LTC without something in the way of an interview... but maybe you could up until now? 🤔
 
Thank you for helping us follow that. [cheers]

Looks that way... for now. It does look like the "personal interview" thing is not just a regurgence of SOP as some had speculated, but a new formal requirement. It's been many decades since my initial LTC, so I guess I'm not sure if you can get an initial LTC without something in the way of an interview... but maybe you could up until now? 🤔

I remember prepping for my "LTC interview" when I applied, wondering what kinds of questions the chief would ask, only to find that the "interview" was a bored sergeant, typing things into the computer while I watched.

We did exchange words. And I was actually there in the room with him. And the topic was a license to carry. So I guess that meant it was an in-person LTC interview.
 
It appears that part of the legislation did not make it to the bill's final version. So the six years license remains. For now, at least. It also casts a wider net on who is prohibited from getting a license to carry. (e.g., temporary/permanent harassment prevention order). And finally, police will be required to conduct a personal interview.

So what compromises a personal interview? "Lovely day we're having. Yes it's a beautiful day". The less I talk to police the better.
 
"The decision means the one-time rebates of $250 to eligible individual taxpayers and $500 to married taxpayers who filed jointly, which lawmakers have promoted in recent weeks, will not be issued.'

This would have helped my ammo stockpile
Here’s the not so surprising part. I heard a guy from ma fiscal alliance last week on RKO. The way he described the payout it should be a lot more than 250/500.
 
I remember prepping for my "LTC interview" when I applied, wondering what kinds of questions the chief would ask, only to find that the "interview" was a bored sergeant, typing things into the computer while I watched.

We did exchange words. And I was actually there in the room with him. And the topic was a license to carry. So I guess that meant it was an in-person LTC interview.

So what compromises a personal interview? "Lovely day we're having. Yes it's a beautiful day". The less I talk to police the better.
Yes to both. Since the initial issue requires fingerprints, you have to show up and if a person talks with you for merely 1 minute and says hold your hand this way to roll a print, it will meet the "law". Dumb law but we are talking about Commiechusetts here.
 
I remember prepping for my "LTC interview" when I applied, wondering what kinds of questions the chief would ask, only to find that the "interview" was a bored sergeant, typing things into the computer while I watched.

We did exchange words. And I was actually there in the room with him. And the topic was a license to carry. So I guess that meant it was an in-person LTC interview.

Pretty much exactly how mine went as well
 
Yes to both. Since the initial issue requires fingerprints, you have to show up and if a person talks with you for merely 1 minute and says hold your hand this way to roll a print, it will meet the "law". Dumb law but we are talking about Commiechusetts here.

You know how easy it is to use this as gasoline to pour on democrat politicians?

"Why are you so insensitive to the needs of minority communities? Aren't you aware that some of these people are afraid to call the police to report crimes never mind go to the police station and ask for an LTC? Why are you trying to discourage minorities from obtaining LTCs by putting them in very vulnerable situations at the hands of police? How can you be so racist? Is the minority community aware of what you are trying to do here?"

I'd love to see a democrat talk their way out of that especially with minority people and minority communities watching them.

If we want to have an LTC in this state...you go down...fill out a form, the background check is run, the license is printed out and you go home with the license. But to me I don't see the difference between that and constitutional carry.
 
"The decision means the one-time rebates of $250 to eligible individual taxpayers and $500 to married taxpayers who filed jointly, which lawmakers have promoted in recent weeks, will not be issued.'

This would have helped my ammo stockpile
Yes but if the rebates required by the 1986 law are issued you'll receive a
tax credit that could be much higher, depending on how much state tax you've paid.
 
Yes to both. Since the initial issue requires fingerprints, you have to show up and if a person talks with you for merely 1 minute and says hold your hand this way to roll a print, it will meet the "law". Dumb law but we are talking about Commiechusetts here.
"I do not answer questions"
 
You know how easy it is to use this as gasoline to pour on democrat politicians?

"Why are you so insensitive to the needs of minority communities? Aren't you aware that some of these people are afraid to call the police to report crimes never mind go to the police station and ask for an LTC? Why are you trying to discourage minorities from obtaining LTCs by putting them in very vulnerable situations at the hands of police? How can you be so racist? Is the minority community aware of what you are trying to do here?"

I'd love to see a democrat talk their way out of that especially with minority people and minority communities watching them.

If we want to have an LTC in this state...you go down...fill out a form, the background check is run, the license is printed out and you go home with the license. But to me I don't see the difference between that and constitutional carry.
DimocRATS always get a pass when it comes to things which could be seen as hurting minorities (in reality or just imagined). [thinking]
 
Yes but if the rebates required by the 1986 law are issued you'll receive a
tax credit that could be much higher, depending on how much state tax you've paid.

The following is why i am not a politician:
Roll the excess forward to next fiscal year and revert the sales tax back to 5%. Win win for everyone except those that like to excessively spend money (politicians)
 
Somewhere in this mess was an increase of the Estate Tax threshold from $1M to $2M and the elimination of the start of the tax from the first dollar. Don't know if/how/where it ended up
 
DimocRATS always get a pass when it comes to things which could be seen as hurting minorities (in reality or just imagined). [thinking]

What I put in the post needs to be said in a public hearing in front of the press and for everyone to see. Then make sure it gets onto youtube/rumble so it can't get deleted afterwards and no plausible deniability from liberal politicians. If this bill had gone through normal channels to get put in front of the public instead of the dead of night then we could have a discussion. This middle of the night law making is frustrating because no one ever finds out what these creeps are up to until it's too late.
 
What I put in the post needs to be said in a public hearing in front of the press and for everyone to see. Then make sure it gets onto youtube/rumble so it can't get deleted afterwards and no plausible deniability from liberal politicians. If this bill had gone through normal channels to get put in front of the public instead of the dead of night then we could have a discussion. This middle of the night law making is frustrating because no one ever finds out what these creeps are up to until it's too late.
Oh, I understand what you are saying. Putting DimocRAT hypocrisy out there where it can be seen by all is certainly important. But what you are forgetting is that DimocRAT voters include a whole lot of closet racists who absolutely don't want more Black folks walking around legally armed... and that's where the dampening factor of a POLICE INTERVIEW gets a wink and a pass from hypocrite Dims.
 
Oh, I understand what you are saying. Putting DimocRAT hypocrisy out there where it can be seen by all is certainly important. But what you are forgetting is that DimocRAT voters include a whole lot of closet racists who absolutely don't want more Black folks walking around legally armed... and that's where the dampening factor of a POLICE INTERVIEW gets a wink and a pass from hypocrite Dims.

We're totally on the same page. I lived in this state long enough to know that the most racist people I have ever met in my life are white progressive liberals in Massachusetts. I just wished I had a secret recording so that enough people could hear what is actually said when the crowd is all white. There wouldn't be a democrat left in this state.
 
Yes to both. Since the initial issue requires fingerprints, you have to show up and if a person talks with you for merely 1 minute and says hold your hand this way to roll a print, it will meet the "law". Dumb law but we are talking about Commiechusetts here.
Even in Fall River where the motto of the PD is "We'll Try" "the interview" was nothing more than the officer being surprised to learn Ma. was the only state I had ever lived in which required a license to carry. The renewal interview had fewer words passed and was over in a few minutes.
 
I remember prepping for my "LTC interview" when I applied, wondering what kinds of questions the chief would ask, only to find that the "interview" was a bored sergeant, typing things into the computer while I watched.

We did exchange words. And I was actually there in the room with him. And the topic was a license to carry. So I guess that meant it was an in-person LTC interview.

Yes a seemingly mundane interaction, but little did you know that the whole time you were thinking, "this is just a regular dude with donuts on his desk," that licensing officer had in fact been specially chosen for his gift of determining your proclivity toward future crime.

That is right, by using his special ability know as Prophetic Interceptive Sleuthing Sense (PISS) he was able to determine if you would commit crimes in the future.

They can't teach it, you have to be born with it, and it is very taxing on the officer; that is why afterward he has to leave your application on his desk for 5-6 weeks while he rests up.


🐯
 
So, is this legislative session closed yet, or is it still open? This was not yet made totally clear.

If it is closed, what are we left with; and when does the next one start up again?
 
So, is this legislative session closed yet, or is it still open? This was not yet made totally clear.

If it is closed, what are we left with; and when does the next one start up again?
This current legislative session ends in Jan 2023. (started in Jan 2021). Now, what is still left of the FY23 budgets and laws f***fest, I don't know. I think done though.
 
This current legislative session ends in Jan 2023. (started in Jan 2021). Now, what is still left of the FY23 budgets and laws f***fest, I don't know. I think done though.
In 2022, the Massachusetts General Court was scheduled to convene on January 5, 2022, and adjourn on July 31, 2022.

The name "General Court" is a hold-over from the Colonial Era.
 
Last edited:
was scheduled to convene on January 5, 2022, and adjourn on July 31, 2022.
Did it actually follow that schedule, or did it get an extension?

What do they do between August 1, 2022 and January 2023? Not that they did much anyhow, and of what they did, a lot of it was not good.
 
Back
Top Bottom