New bad laws coming!

[Coyote33]

Hardly.

1. IF "the legislature was pretty miffed," it has done NOTHING to act on that alleged anger - unless you call C. 180 an AG beat-down, which I don't.

2. You don't even have the right AG. Coakley came in AFTER the regs in question.

1. You are correct. I was implying and hoping that they may be newly emboldened.

2. I know that. Please indicate where I said it was Coakley.

(If you meant:

Maybe with her senatorial defeat, they will be more bold.

then, that was just a continuity of the position, and the process would carry through to her, and the action would take place with the present occupant of that position.)

 

[PaulD]

I make an effort to keep up with this stuff and, in fact, I sit in front of a computer all day but even I can't keep up with every thread and post on this board. Further, the hearing yesterday covered many bills that I hadn't heard of before Tuesday night when I got an email from Carl at Four Seasons listing all of them out.

Do you really expect people to go to GOAL's web site every single day? Has anyone really claimed to be "a second amendment activist" as opposed to a concerned citizen?

Everyone on this board is concerned about this subject but most here also have other things in their lives they have to spend time on. They don't get to draw a living off of the BS foisted on us by the state government like you do. I would ask you to try having a little empathy for that but it's clearly not in you. I suggest you read the multitude of other posts where long time NES members were caught off guard by the number of firearms related bills heard yesterday.

Finally, please point me to the Outdoor Message article that spoke about the GPS in firearms bill (S978).

I suggest you remember the following:

1. THIS forum had a significant and protracted thread on the subject before AND after the hearings;

2. The GOAL site had equally extensive coverage of them; and

3. The Outdoor Message had the same coverage.

Which is to say, anyone on this forum could - and likely DID - see that coverage and certainly had the opportunity to.

If those complaining about my remarks are such Second Amendment activists, how is it they were - and remain - oblivious to it all?

 

[arlow]

Additional confirmation of complete douchbaggery achieved....

 

[Scrivener]

I make an effort to keep up with this stuff and, in fact, I sit in front of a computer all day but even I can't keep up with every thread and post on this board. Further, the hearing yesterday covered many bills that I hadn't heard of before Tuesday night when I got an email from Carl at Four Seasons listing all of them out.

Do you really expect people to go to GOAL's web site every single day? Has anyone really claimed to be "a second amendment activist" as opposed to a concerned citizen?

The efforts you suggest are needed - aren't. For major threats, such as the "Westfield regs," such Herculean labors are unnecessary. As I stated, those regs got a LOT of publicity; both here and through GOAL. Indeed, many people FROM this forum were AT the hearings and the pictures were posted online.

Everyone on this board is concerned about this subject but most here also have other things in their lives they have to spend time on. They don't get to draw a living off of the BS foisted on us by the state government like you do.

Your ignorance of the subject is exceeded only by the arrogance of your pontification. I don't "draw a living" from this; it costs me money. Time spent attending state board hearings is time I am NOT earning money; time wasted fielding calls, e-mails and pm's from Fudds, newbies and the generally clueless is time NOT making money.

What I get from this board wouldn't cover my match fees for a month.

What I get from those phone calls, e-mails and pm's wouldn't cover my components cost for a month.

Finally, please point me to the Outdoor Message article that spoke about the GPS in firearms bill (S978).

Finally, please point me to how that article is remotely relevant to the proposed REGULATIONS I referred to.

 

[PaulD]

The efforts you suggest are needed - aren't. For major threats, such as the "Westfield regs," such Herculean labors are unnecessary. As I stated, those regs got a LOT of publicity; both here and through GOAL. Indeed, many people FROM this forum were AT the hearings and the pictures were posted online.



Your ignorance of the subject is exceeded only by the arrogance of your pontification. I don't "draw a living" from this; it costs me money. Time spent attending state board hearings is time I am NOT earning money; time wasted fielding calls, e-mails and pm's from Fudds, newbies and the generally clueless is time NOT making money.

What I get from this board wouldn't cover my match fees for a month.

What I get from those phone calls, e-mails and pm's wouldn't cover my components cost for a month.



Finally, please point me to how that article is remotely relevant to the proposed REGULATIONS I referred to.

The subject of this thread is the bills referenced for the hearing, not just some regulations you decide to cherry pick. Many of those bills weren't referred to on here on by GOAL before the hearing.

You specialize in firearms licensing issues in MA. If you're not making money at it, you really ought to find a different line of work.

 

[PaulD]

You're also missing the point, but I'm not surprised.

 

[Scrivener]

The subject of this thread is the bills referenced for the hearing, not just some regulations you decide to cherry pick. Many of those bills weren't referred to on here on by GOAL before the hearing.

The title of this thread is "New Bad Laws Coming." Regulations ARE law, however unaware you may be of that fact.

You specialize in firearms licensing issues in MA. If you're not making money at it, you really ought to find a different line of work.

Again, your presumptuousness exceeds even your arrogance. Apparently the concept that people do things because they think they are right; not because they are profitable, is outside the narrow little scope of your comprehension.

 

[PaulD]

The title of this thread is "New Bad Laws Coming." Regulations ARE law, however unaware you may be of that fact.



Again, your presumptuousness exceeds even your arrogance. Apparently the concept that people do things because they think they are right; not because they are profitable, is outside the narrow little scope of your comprehension.

Thanks for martyring yourself.

 

[Scrivener]

Thanks for martyring yourself.

You raised the income issue; YOU eat the loss.

And thanks for revealing the shallowness of your attempted analysis.

 

[Titan]

I suggest you remember the following:

1. THIS forum had a significant and protracted thread on the subject before AND after the hearings;

2. The GOAL site had equally extensive coverage of them; and

3. The Outdoor Message had the same coverage.

Which is to say, anyone on this forum could - and likely DID - see that coverage and certainly had the opportunity to.

If those complaining about my remarks are such Second Amendment activists, how is it they were - and remain - oblivious to it all?

All of which has virtually NOTHING TO DO WITH my original post to you suggesting that the problem with 'watching out for REGULATIONS sneaking up on you', as you suggested, was that there often isn't a damn thing that can be done about regulations. Why else do we have all the regs we have?

 

[Titan]

...Your ignorance of the subject is exceeded only by the arrogance of your pontification. I don't "draw a living" from this; it costs me money. Time spent attending state board hearings is time I am NOT earning money; time wasted fielding calls, e-mails and pm's from Fudds, newbies and the generally clueless is time NOT making money.

What I get from this board wouldn't cover my match fees for a month.

What I get from those phone calls, e-mails and pm's wouldn't cover my components cost for a month.

So, the reason you post here is purely out of the goodness of your heart and the desire to help people understand the issues?

You know there are all sorts of reasons for some folks on here not attending a hearing...

Some work, some have conflicting commitments on a given day, some have health issues that prevent their travelling or attending.

Anyone who fails to act exactly the way you act, isn't automatically a sh*thead who doesn't care about the issues.

 

[Scrivener]

You know there are all sorts of reasons for some folks on here not attending a hearing...

Some work, some have conflicting commitments on a given day, some have health issues that prevent their traveling or attending.

Anyone who fails to act exactly the way you act, isn't automatically a sh*thead who doesn't care about the issues.

Never said they were. Further, your disingenuous misrepresentation ignores the fundamental issue to rationalize the inertia of the willfully ignorant.

Don't have time to go to a hearing? Perfectly understandable. You can write, email or call your state senator and rep.

Of course, that assumes you KNOW about the hearing, which is itself a problem. However, where the proposed statute or regulation has been extensively covered ON THIS FORUM and the GOAL website and The Outdoor Message, those supposedly concerned about firearms rights in MA have little excuse for NOT knowing about said proposals.

 

[garandman]

What happened last June?

Scrivener gave someone a hard time?

Boy needs more exercise or something.....

 

[PaulD]

Never said they were. Further, your disingenuous misrepresentation ignores the fundamental issue to rationalize the inertia of the willfully ignorant.

Don't have time to go to a hearing? Perfectly understandable. You can write, email or call your state senator and rep.

Of course, that assumes you KNOW about the hearing, which is itself a problem. However, where the proposed statute or regulation has been extensively covered ON THIS FORUM and the GOAL website and The Outdoor Message, those supposedly concerned about firearms rights in MA have little excuse for NOT knowing about said proposals.

Speaking of willfully ignorant...

Show me the Outdoor Message that listed all of the bills (not laws) discussed at the hearing on Wednesday. In fact, show me the post on NES that listed all of them more than a day prior to the hearing.

 

[Scrivener]

Speaking of willfully ignorant...

Show me the Outdoor Message that listed all of the bills (not laws) discussed at the hearing on Wednesday. In fact, show me the post on NES that listed all of them more than a day prior to the hearing.

1. That there WAS a hearing on a series of gun bills, including GOAL's own, on Wednesday was heavily covered here, on the GOAL site and TOM.

2. Your repeated attempt at diversion willfully ignores my original reference, which was to the hearings LAST July. For the temporally-challenged, that was SIX months ago. Coverage of the hearings, including the size and conduct of the crowd, received heavy coverage here and from GOAL.

My assessment stands accordingly.

 

[drgrant]

I suggest you remember the following:

1. THIS forum had a significant and protracted thread on the subject before AND after the hearings;

2. The GOAL site had equally extensive coverage of them; and

3. The Outdoor Message had the same coverage.

Which is to say, anyone on this forum could - and likely DID - see that coverage and certainly had the opportunity to.

If those complaining about my remarks are such Second Amendment activists, how is it they were - and remain - oblivious to it all?

Because crap happens? People I know that vote properly 100% of the time are not even always in tune with what has transpired. It's tough to keep track of all this crap. I remember exactly what you are referring to, but had I not told others of the presence of gun owners/trainers at that hearing, I probably would have forgotten it already. Most of us are pretty "hard-core", scriv, but I think it is reasonable to expect that some people have lives outside of RKBA advocacy. All the guy did was ask a question- and if his question frustrated you so much, you had ample opportunity to simply not
answer it. That's what I do when people irritate me, I ignore them... it works better for all parties involved. Let someone else give him the info, if you don't want to. It's that simple. (Like lockwork, someone usually will.... if only to be helpful. )

-Mike

 

[HooVooLoo]

Speaking of willfully ignorant...

Show me the Outdoor Message that listed all of the bills (not laws) discussed at the hearing on Wednesday. In fact, show me the post on NES that listed all of them more than a day prior to the hearing.

Heh, Scrivner is back? Someone contact Entertainment Tonight for Dummies. And Scriv, be sure to heed the sign posted at the entrance..."Please Do Not Feed The Trolls."

I recall beating up Scrivner in one particular thread before his ban last year, and winning the argument. He IS, in fact, human, all other myths notwithstanding.

Anyhoo, I do recall seeing these bills being listed in a previous Outdoor Message, PaulD. I don't let the old copies pile-up on the fireplace mantle, so I could not indicate to you in which issue I saw these bills listed. But GOAL has kept us apprised of the situation for a long time.

Here's where you can find them online. (Click me).

 

[Scrivener]

I recall beating up Scrivner in one particular thread before his ban last year, and winning the argument. He IS, in fact, human, all other myths notwithstanding.

Really? Got a link to that alleged triumph, One Green Square after 20 months?

Or is this another one of your "thought experiments?"

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

Wow, still not closed.

 

[Scrivener]

Wow, still not closed.

Proof that Eternal Vigilance is the Price of Liberty!

And with regulations, a lot of vigilance is required.

 

[namedpipes]

I was going to count how many of Scriv's 8,431 posts are abusive, but I find myself dactylonomically challenged. That and for some reason I can't figure out how to make search list posts instead of threads in this version of the bbs.

Scriv, it is OK to be smart. We get it. You're brighter than most of us. But most of us will go to bed tonight secure in the knowledge that people don't a) sigh b) cringe or c) cry when they think of us.

(not me, mind you, most people that know me don't like me - I'm speaking generally)

 

[Scrivener]

Scriv, it is OK to be smart. We get it. You're brighter than most of us. But most of us will go to bed tonight secure in the knowledge that people don't a) sigh b) cringe or c) cry when they think of us.

(not me, mind you, most people that know me don't like me - I'm speaking generally)

Well, as long as you're living up to your potential!

 

[namedpipes]

Well, as long as you're living up to your potential!

Yup. We're like two peas in a pod, brother from another mother.

Nobody likes us.

Everybody hates us.

Maybe we should just eat worms!

 

[Scrivener]

Together we could rule the world!

But would it even be worth the effort?

 

[PaulD]

Together we could rule the world!

But would it even be worth the effort?

Talk about a justification for the 2nd amendment.

 

[Scrivener]

Talk about ANOTHER justification for the 2nd amendment.

FIFY

 

[jar]

Scriv, it is OK to be smart. We get it. You're brighter than most of us. But most of us will go to bed tonight secure in the knowledge that people don't a) sigh b) cringe or c) cry when they think of us.

Some of us appreciate that Scrivener takes the heat for saying what we're thinking. (Not saying anything about this thread in particular, just speaking generally.)

 

[EddieCoyle]

Some of us appreciate that Scrivener takes the heat for saying what we're thinking. (Not saying anything about this thread in particular, just speaking generally.)

Yeah, but I wish he'd stop trying too hard to be this guy:

​

Like others have said, the act gets friggin' old.

 

[Scrivener]

You come here with a mind full of MUSH and leave thinking like a LAWYER!

 

[HooVooLoo]

Scriv, you remembered! I cannot help but be touched.

I feel all squishy. *chuckle*