• 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.

Massachusetts: Newly Introduced Anti-Gun Legislation Threatens All Gun Owners and Spo

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jan 15, 2016
Messages
327
Likes
325
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
[h=1]Massachusetts: Newly Introduced Anti-Gun Legislation Threatens All Gun Owners and Sportsmen Statewide![/h]
Senate Docket 1884, legislation combining several egregious anti-gun measures, was recently introduced in the General Court. Sponsored by state Senator Cynthia Creem (D-First Middlesex and Norfolk), SD 1884 would not only impose a higher tax on firearms and ammunition sales but also ban .50 caliber firearms and make restrictions on personal firearm sales. Please contact your state legislators and urge them to oppose SD 1884! Please click the “Take Action” button below to contact your state legislators!
SD 1884 would impose an increased firearm sales tax to fund a grant program for municipal violence prevention programs. The bill would create a 4.75 percent increase to an already imposed 6.25 percent state sales tax on firearms and ammunition. This added tax gives lawful gun owners the distasteful image that they are responsible for all gun violence in the state of Massachusetts. Law-abiding gun owners should not have to pay for a violence prevention program when they are not problem.
Additionally, this legislation would make it illegal to purchase, sell or possess .50 caliber firearms and .50 caliber cartridges in the state of Massachusetts. Violating this ban would result in a fine between $1,000 to $10,000 and imprisonment between one to ten years. Banning .50 caliber firearms would do nothing to stop crime in Massachusetts. This arbitrary ban would limit the options to lawful sportsmen, as .50 caliber rifles are commonly and safely used for big game hunting and target shooting. The ban would simply be a solution in search of a problem.
SD 1884 also includes restrictions on private sales. This legislation would make common firearm transfers illegal unless conducted through a federally licensed firearms dealer for an unnecessary fee. Lastly, SD 1884 calls for adoption of personalized technology to prevent unauthorized users from using a firearm.
[h=2]This bill infringes upon the Second Amendment rights of gun owners and sportsmen across the state by putting unnecessary restrictions and excessive burdens on law-abiding citizens trying to exercise their constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Please contact your state legislators and urge them to oppose SD 1884![/h]
 
This arbitrary ban would limit the options to lawful sportsmen, as .50 caliber rifles are commonly and safely used for big game hunting

in Mass, really?
 
currently 3 threads running on this, maybe somebody could consolidate them into one
 
Lets hope all this stuff is DOA. But more taxes would not surprise me, and be the least of our worries.
 
is a 50 cal really the highest priority to make our streets safer? how about actually punishing the criminals that are caught w/ firearms to the extent allowed by the law.
 
Creem files this crap every year. Don't take it for granted but I think even her own party thinks she's "off the wall."
 
is a 50 cal really the highest priority to make our streets safer? how about actually punishing the criminals that are caught w/ firearms to the extent allowed by the law.

What? Don't you see the news talking about the latest black powder muzzle loader "carriage-by" in Mattapan? We're going to aim to save lives a hundred years in retrospect.
 
Stop being as ignorant as the idiot that wrote the bill, take 2 seconds and READ IT. 50 BMG, not 50 cal

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
 
putting a limit on firearms that you may own lawfully (Glocks, Barrets, Colts....) is like putting a ban on V-8 engines & requiring everybody to drive a Prius or Smartcar... i.e., if they can ban that guy's guns, then they can ban yours next time (like Maura last summer...)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom