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.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Why wait and why not make them 3year memberships?
(Just for the record, if it was up to me I'd give an F to half the people on this forum, never mind the legislators).
Are you a GOAL member?
You seem to downplay GOAL's lobbying efforts as a minor thing. They're not.
There are legislators that are ideologically pro-gun, others that are ideologically anti-gun, and others (most maybe) that personally don't care one way or another and will do whatever they need to do so that their constituency will vote them back into office.
Also, like any organization, some members are taken seriously and have influence, while others are clowns that everybody ignores.
Jim Wallace has been on the Hill for a decade now, knows all the players, and has established relationships with both the pro and anti-gun legislators. He can get a meeting with many of them whenever he needs to talk to them, and actually gets them to listen to our side of the debate. Do not underestimate how hard this is to do, and how important it is for us.
Dozens of anti-gun bills are introduced every session, and through his contacts, Jim knows which bills will die in committee, and which ones will be taken seriously. A lot of his job involves educating these people and cutting through the bullshit that is constantly spewed by the media. Jim has even been able to 'convert' some of the fence straddlers.
When a serious threat to our freedom pops up, Jim finds out about it quickly, and is able to rally both the GOAL membership as well as the 'friendly' legislators to stand up against it.
Take point 4 from the MARGO letter I cited in post #7 of this thread:
Why do you think GOAL's comments on the 'deadly' bills were 'tepid'? Do you think GOAL is stupid? Didn't read the bills? Don't care about our gun rights?
or....
Were the so-called 'deadly' bills ones that were introduced for political purposes only, and have no chance of even getting out of committee let alone coming to a vote or passing?
I think you know the answer. By having someone working on the inside, we're able to separate the dangerous wheat from the time-wasting chaff, and focus our limited resources on what's important. In MARGO's defense, they have no way of knowing which bills are dangerous and which ones are political smokescreens, so they have to go screaming off in all directions poking at every potential windmill that pops up.
Because our numbers are small-ish, GOAL has to use relationships and personal influence rather than brute force to stay ahead of harmful legislation. Jim has done an amazing job of this in the face of terrifying odds. How would you like to have been with him on the Hill the day after Newtown? Which brings us to the next topic...
Believe it or not, most legislators don't care about any issue that involves guns. The only time the issue is pushed to the forefront is in the wake of a tragedy, in which case guns are always the 'problem' that needs to be 'solved' with more legislation. For those of you that complain that GOAL is 'doing nothing' because it hasn't gotten the AWB repealed or the AG's list removed, or gotten rid of discretionary licensing, should know that GOAL has helped to pull off a small miracle in keeping things where they are now. Look at what has happened recently in CT, NY, CO, and CA. Is anybody but me surprised that MA has not jumped on the bandwagon? Hell, I'm shocked that MA isn't driving the friggin' bandwagon.
For now, we're forced to play defense. When our numbers reach the tipping point, we can go on offense. In the meantime, we've got our hands full just staying where we're at.
For [STRIKE=MA]MA[/STRIKE] gun owners there are no compromises, only concessions.
The sooner people get this in their head the better we'll be. That's just the first step.
So if you're the "responsible" MA gun owners what does that make the rest of us?
And do you stand by the comment that gun owners need to compromise? If this line is a lie have you gone after the Globe to issue a correction?
The anti-gun people do not know how to compromise, they only know how to force their agenda! The April/May edition of Women & Guns featured an article by Attorney Karen MacNutt on how Massachusetts gun laws evolved. It is the most detailed analysis I have ever read. It is an eye-opener. If the article is still on line, I urge all Massachusetts gun owners to read it.
Best regards.
Funny, I drafted my original response directly from some of your "recommendations" on your own website. Looks like you have now removed those "compromise" positions such as limiting purchases to 15 per year. You then quote your own initial recommendation without acknowledging that you even had a compromise position in the first place.
What else have you edited out are now blaming our reactions as being from bad or mischaracterized information?
How about this. NO MORE COMPROMISES!
We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. - Ben Franklin at the signing of the Declaration of Independence
GOAL is the best we have, they work hard and cleaned things up when they needed too, albeit with a little push. We need to separate concerns about GOAL with fake groups like MARGO.
If you have question or concerns about GOAL, donate an afternoon to help out there and meet the staff and see what they do..
I'm of the opinion that if NES has 38K +/- members so shouldn't GOAL. Fact is being a gun owner in this state has sucked for more than 30 years and it's not going to get any better just because some new group who didn't align with the NRA or GOAL was formed. I'd really like to know just what doesn't make me a responsible gun owner now?
My GOAL renewal just came in this weeks mail. I'll be sure to drop them some extra coin in memory of MARGO.
People on NES belong to states other than MA, want to bring GOALs numbers up? take a non-shooter shooting
lady atilla was spreading the good word in new york city of all places. an unlikely representative, she does her part to share shooting with folks to show that if this cute little girl does it... how bad are these people, REALLY?
I'm of the opinion that if NES has 38K +/- members so shouldn't GOAL. Fact is being a gun owner in this state has sucked for more than 30 years and it's not going to get any better just because some new group who didn't align with the NRA or GOAL was formed. I'd really like to know just what doesn't make me a responsible gun owner now?
My GOAL renewal just came in this weeks mail. I'll be sure to drop them some extra coin in memory of MARGO.
I just want to know how 2 or 3 people make up a funny name and suddenly become an "organization" or "group" worthy of anything more than their own opinions? MARGO = ZERO in my book.The name "MARGO" reminds me of a Bond villain.
Not all of NES lives in MA. While I personally appreciate support from people who don't live in MA, it can't be expected.
you think it is a mere 5 to 10k from outside the PDM (Mass isn't a republic hence I swapped the R for a D)Fair enough but I'm sure my point was made. Perhaps 5-10 K members here are from out of state so that would at least double the ranks for them.
As a board member I wanted to see every applicant be a member of GOAL, the NRA, or both if you were joining the club to shoot.
lady atilla was spreading the good word in new york city of all places. an unlikely representative, she does her part to share shooting with folks to show that if this cute little girl does it... how bad are these people, REALLY?