Politician's Responses to AG Overeach

[MAC2187]

I got a call back and letter from Sen Moore's office. Mat Ritter his Legislative Director said to keep calling that our voices were being heard on Capital Hill. He also stated Sen. Moore was working on some amendments to existing legislation to give us protection. The email he sent is below. Thanks to everyone for doing there part. My 75 year old, Vietnam Veteran Mother is even calling. God Bless her.

It was great speaking with you a moment ago, I’m glad we were able to clear up any confusion about Senator Moore’s position on this issue. I have attached a scanned copy of the letter that he signed, requesting that the AG rescind her Enforcement Notice.



Like I said earlier, I do believe that the public response to the decision is making an impact, and we certainly hope that if the letter and other efforts will lead to some new action being taken. As I mentioned, due to logistical issues, it is highly unlikely Senator Humason’s bill will pass this year, but we will definitely keep an eye out for other legislative ways to address the issue during the next week.



If you have any other questions about this issue (or others), Senator Moore’s position, or how the process is working on our end, please don’t hesitate to shoot me an email or give me a call at any time.



Best,

Matt



Matthew C. Ritter

Legislative Director

Office of State Senator Michael O. Moore

 

[Mr.E]

I did get a reply from Dykema...total silence from Spilka...I've emailed everyday since Wednesday.

Ditto on Dykema and Spilka here.
I've re-read Dykems email a couple times and I get the sense she agrees with the AWB but doesn't agree with the one-side way Maura went about it or the potential for criminal charges to be brought against people due due to their understanding of the law . She also says she gathering info and would like input from firearms owners. Said she monitors gun discussion boards for info too...

 

[Billsail]

Even if we have guarantees of no prosecutions, and hopefully will have free and unfettered use and enjoyment of our rifles, we still have to face the fact that they likely can't be transferred in-state, thus their values will be severely diminished.

 

[JayMcB]

Ditto on Dykema and Spilka here.
I've re-read Dykems email a couple times and I get the sense she agrees with the AWB but doesn't agree with the one-side way Maura went about it or the potential for criminal charges to be brought against people due due to their understanding of the law . She also says she gathering info and would like input from firearms owners. Said she monitors gun discussion boards for info too...

Here's what I got from Dykema:

Thank you for your email. Since learning of the AG's actions mid last week, I've been educating myself on the specifics of her directive and the implications for firearms owners. I'm currently working with colleagues from our MetroWest region on a letter to the Attorney General expressing our concerns, especially with respect to the need for a more public process.

Several of the emails that I've received on this issue have commented on the positive and productive process and conversations prior to the passage of firearms legislation in 2014. I personally spent a lot of time speaking with constituents during that time and I feel strongly that the same type of respectful dialog is needed now. While it appears that the AG has the authority to act as she did, I believe that a more inclusive discussion and process is essential moving forward.


Apart from the concerns over the lack of public process, I would greatly appreciate your thoughts on the substance of the AG's directive relative to the sale of "copycat assault weapons". I'm not an expert on firearms by any means, but I looked at some of the many online firearms discussion groups and some do give the impression that semi-automatic weapons that are explicitly prohibited under current law are being modified in a limited way and sold as compliant. One of the discussions that will occur in the coming weeks, and which I expect may end up in the courts, is whether this practice meets both the letter as well as the intent of current law. I would very much welcome your thoughts.


I'm particularly sensitive to concerns about whether those who own one of the weapons at issue could be charged criminally. As you likely know, the AG has stated that her directive only applies to purchases after July 20, but I do understand the concerns. Please know that while we have the debate about how to move forward, I will be clear in my opposition to any effort that would retroactively impact law abiding firearms owners who were acting within the law as they understood it.


I've been proud of the successful efforts that our legislature has taken, after thoughtful and respectful conversations with you and other members of the community, to enact sensible firearms legislation in the past. We need to continue this collaborative approach. With so much turbulence in our world, and so much attention to the extremes, we need to continue what Massachusetts has always done best: address practical challenges with a collaborative spirit that emphasizes our common ground. I know we can all agree that our shared goal is to leave a bright and more peaceful future to our children and grandchildren.


Thank you for reaching out and I would welcome any additional thoughts you have relative to any of the comments above. I'll be sure to send you a copy of our letter to the AG when it's released.


Sincerely,
Carolyn Dykema

 

[Noreaster]

the substance of the AG's directive relative to the sale of "copycat assault weapons". I'm not an expert on firearms by any means, but I looked at some of the many online firearms discussion groups and some do give the impression that semi-automatic weapons that are explicitly prohibited under current law are being modified in a limited way and sold as compliant.

If you wipe out everything you know about firearms, i can understand her position and appreciate the effort to learn, that more than you get from most of these ass hats.

I have a feeling we get a lot of crap because these folks have no clue about these firearms and have no back knowledge of the original ban in 1994. They have no idea that the list of features were what legislators used to define what an assault weapon should be. Since after all they, made that term up then too. Hell i was in middle school or possible a freshman in high school, i could have this all wrong.

 

[JayMcB]

If you wipe out everything you know about firearms, i can understand her position and appreciate the effort to learn, that more than you get from most of these ass hats.

I have a feeling we get a lot of crap because these folks have no clue about these firearms and have no back knowledge of the original ban in 1994. They have no idea that the list of features were what legislators used to define what an assault weapon should be. Since after all they, made that term up then too. Hell i was in middle school or possible a freshman in high school, i could have this all wrong.

I agree, and here is my answer:

Ms. Dykema:


I appreciate your willingness to become more educated about this very important issue. As regards your comments below about respectful dialog, I hope my email below didn't come on too strong. I was one of the constituents who actually came to your office and spoke with you personally after one of the rallies in '14, and I discussed the issue with you then.


As far as becoming educated on the 'copycat' comment from the AGO, (if you are interested) I would welcome you to a personal meeting where I could literally go over the statute and also the 'copycat' pieces that AG Healey is discussing in regards to the existing statute. I can bring pictures, or some of the actual parts (inert pieces of plastic, not any firearms) so you can be better educated, if it helpful. I'll also invite you and any of your colleagues to a range visit at Southborough Rod and Gun, where I am a member if you'd like to actually see them in action (or try them yourself) and also see that the distinctions AG Healey is drawing are fine ones, and do not comply with the existing law as written and passed by the legislature, and subsequently prosecuted as written for 18 years. I have adequate eye and ear protection for up to half a dozen if they want to try. Bring friends!


I renew my objection that AG Healey did apply this with no public or legislative input, and that it was applied retroactively. It is small solace that she indicated that she is not going to prosecute anyone 'at this time'. It simply makes these firearm owners unindicted felons.


I was also (frankly) disappointed that your signature was not on the letter signed by over 50 of your colleagues in the legislature from.the Saturday session questioning her actions.


I will bring up one final point. This egregious over-reach by the AG's office is just political. Between 2007 and 2014, there were over 1300 murders on the Commonwealth. Of those 1300+ murders, SEVEN were by rifle. That is a statistic from the FBI crime statistics. Of the seven committed with rifles, there isn't even a statistic for how many of the seven rifles were on Ms. Healey's new ban list, but this was a solution in search of a problem. Creating hundreds of thousands of possible felons for 7 crimes doesn't fit. I will leave you with this: I am not a politician, but I'd like the messaging here about 'common sense' and 'reform' to actually be a two-way street. Candidly, 'compromise' needs to mean that some is given from both sides; not just, 'here is the new law, you have less liberty, deal with it.


Thank you for taking the time to review my concerns.

Jay McB

 

[Hardwired]

Whats the Gover-never's email?

I plan to call the turds office tomorrow but want to follow up thru emails also.
This issue will be ALL anyone remembers of him in his one term in office.

Baker Ban - unconstitutional overreach of a single executive officer bypassing the intent and the will of the legislature and the people.

 

[amm5061]

Put Tom Sannicandro on the list of turd piles. I'm so pissed right now.

RE: AG Healey's Unconstitutional Assault Weapons Announcement
McAndrews, Caitlin (HOU) <[email protected]> Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 5:05 PM
To: amm5061

Dear Mr. amm5061,

Thank you for your emails regarding Attorney General Maura Healey’s enforcement notice of Massachusetts’ assault weapons ban.

Representative Sannicandro and I understand your concerns regarding preserving the constitutional right to bear arms, and agree that we must protect this right. We feel strongly that we must also protect the lives and security of our community members, particularly in an America that has been plagued by unprecedented levels – and resultant fatality counts – of gun violence. In the face of the Commonwealth’s existing assault weapons ban – which details the functional components that distinguish assault-style weapons and expressly states that “copies or duplicates” of the enumerated weapons are also banned – some manufacturers have continued to produce such weapons with slight modifications to make them appear to be compliant with state law for many years. Despite this approach, these weapons are essentially, for all intents and purposes, no different than those long banned under existing law.

Given the similarities “Massachusetts-Compliant” weapons share with those military-style weapons banned under state law, and their well-documented capacity for unfathomable destruction in our communities, our office supports the Attorney General in her efforts to close a loophole that some manufacturers have knowingly abused. The Attorney General’s notice clarifies what it means to be a “copy” or “duplicate” of a prohibited weapon under G.L. c.140, §§121, 128 and 131M, and it announces the AGO’s intention to enforce the state’s ban on sales of copycat assault rifles for all sales conducted after July 20. The directive does not create a new law, and it does not apply to individuals who purchased one of these weapons before July 20. Our office has fielded concerns voiced by constituents who are troubled by the Attorney General’s decision making process. Chapter 93A of the Massachusetts General Laws entrusts the Attorney General with the independent authority to regulate firearms within the state, as part of the AGO’s responsibility to safeguard Massachusetts citizens, and we believe that her recent directive, which is intended to stop the proliferation of deadly weapons, falls within that power.

Please know that Representative Sannicandro genuinely appreciates and values your input, and respects your concerns. He remains confident that communities across the state will utilize the learning moment offered by this contentious and divisive issue to reflect on our shared values of community and respect for human life. Our office will continue to monitor developments related to the Attorney General’s directive to ensure that her office’s enforcement does not extend beyond what is described in the notice and is commensurate with one’s right to bear arms.

Thank you again for your email. Should you have any more questions related to this, or any other issue, please do not hesitate to contact our office directly at (617) 722-2013. You may also direct further questions or comments on this matter to the Attorney General Office’s Consumer Assistance and Response Division hotline at (617) 727-8400.

Sincerely,

Cait McAndrews
Office of Representative Tom Sannicandro
7th Middlesex District
Chair, Joint Committee on Higher Education
Room 472, State House
Boston, MA 02133-1053
P: (617) 722-2013
F: (617) 722-2239



From: amm5061
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2016 5:29 PM
To: Sannicandro, Tom - Rep. (HOU)
Subject: RE: AG Healey's Unconstitutional Assault Weapons Announcement

Dear Representative Sannicandro,

I have been a resident of Ashland, MA, and registered Massachusetts voter for the past 5 years. I am writing to you this evening to express my severe displeasure over the unconstitutional and questionably legal announcement by Attorney General Maura Healey this morning. AG Healey's decision to reinterpret a long held stature concerning Assault Weapons flies in the face of over 20 years of precedent.

This decision is a clear assault on the civil liberties of citizens of the Commonwealth and a blatant overstepping of her delegated authority. Such a ban should come from, and rightfully only can come from proper legislation from the Massachusetts state house and senate, and then approved by the Governor. The Attorney General should not be allowed to unilaterally reinterpret laws to suit her own agenda.

Furthermore, her actions have made tens of thousands of previously legal gun owners into felons, simply because they own one of these now prohibited weapons. This sets up a highly dangerous situation whereby law abiding citizens are now subject to arrest and prosecution at any time.

In addition, AG Healey's obviously politically-motivated and intentionally broad directive would appear to outlaw almost all semiautomatic rifles and shotguns of any manufacture, not simply AR- and AK-style "Assault Weapons."

These egregious actions demand a swift response, and I plead with you, Representative Sannicandro, to do the right thing and help restore our civil liberties by working toward rescinding AG Healey's unlawful directive.


Most respectfully,


amm5061

 

[n1oty]

Even if we have guarantees of no prosecutions, and hopefully will have free and unfettered use and enjoyment of our rifles, we still have to face the fact that they likely can't be transferred in-state, thus their values will be severely diminished.

I'm beginning to warm to the idea you've expressed here. There has essentially been a "taking" of property here by the Commonwealth. Even though they may leave these rifles in our hands, they have significantly reduced value because we cannot sell them. Maybe we should start adding this into our letters, emails and conversations with our legislators.

 

[71montess]

Does anyone have any dirt on Dileo ?

 

[warwickben]

Does anyone have any dirt on Dileo ?

Find a watering hole he goes to .
Slip him something . Take photos with hookers and drugs .

 

[Hardwired]

Whats the Gover-never's email?

I plan to call the turds office tomorrow but want to follow up thru emails also.
This issue will be ALL anyone remembers of him in his one term in office.

Baker Ban - unconstitutional overreach of a single executive officer bypassing the intent and the will of the legislature and the people.

Its worth calling Bakers office. There getting a lot of calls.
First call went to voicemail, 2nd an aid picked up.

Phone: 617.725.4005
888.870.7770
Asked what his position was and Aid said he hasn't released a statement yet.
The redefinition and expansion of the law criminalized law abiding citizens for sales or possession of now reclassified SA rifles, shotguns and handguns as AW.

Call it the Baker Ban to send the message home.

 

[rudiewhitebwoy]

Here's my interaction with Rep. Jerry Parisella's office;
Jerry is 6th Essex and has a B rating from GOAL;





View attachment AG Enforcement Letter 7.16.pdf

 

[exo]

From Senator Downing,

Re: Attorney General’s assault weapons ban enforcement notice

Dear Friend,

My records indicate that you have contacted my office with concerns about Attorney General Maura Healey’s recent “Enforcement Notice” on the Massachusetts Assault Weapons Ban. I write with an update on this matter.

In the time since the Attorney General made the announcement, I have researched the statute under which the Attorney General acted, along with other relevant precedent and legal history. Based on that research, I fully support Attorney General Healey’s actions.

The goal of the 1998 Assault Weapons Ban was to restrict access to a certain type of firearm because of the particular lethality of these guns. The legislation also recognized that simple changes to peripheral features of such guns could skirt the law, which is why Chapter 140, Section 121 of the Massachusetts General Laws explicitly prohibits the sale of “copies or duplicates of the weapons, of any caliber”. Given that, I believe the actions of the Attorney General are in line with the original legislation’s intent and are within the office’s statutory authority as the state’s top law enforcement official.

I further understand that the Attorney General’s enforcement notice is a notification of her office’s intention to enforce the law prospectively, and that it will not be used retroactively to prosecute anyone who has bought or sold such weapons prior to July 20th of this year.

I respect the rights of law-abiding sportsmen in my district. I respect the laws of the Commonwealth. Copycat assault weapons marketed as “state compliant” are designed specifically to circumvent the laws of the Commonwealth and are a threat to our public safety. I believe that the Attorney General’s action respects both the letter of the law and the Second Amendment rights of our hunters and sportsmen.

Again, thank you for reaching out to my office on this matter. Should you wish to review additional information regarding the enforcement notice, statements by the Attorney General are available here.

Sincerely,



BENJAMIN B. DOWNING, State Senator

Berkshire, Hampshire, Franklin and Hampden District

I have of course replied back pointing out how he is wrong, but he's been no friend to us in the past.

 

[Celtics83]

More to come hopefully.

Dear Thomas,

Thank you for your email. I am pleased to report I am cosponsoring this bill, and I agree that the AG is off base in these enforcements. As may you know, in my 20+ years in the Legislature, I have always maintained an A+ rating with GOAL. I fully understand the complexities of our gun laws and will advocate on behalf of all law abiding sportsmen and gun owners.

Thanks again for your email. Please know my office is always open to you.

Sincerely,

Michael J. Rodrigues
STATE SENATOR

 

[sean128]

Crickets from both Ultrino and Lewis. Untrino served on both the School Committee and City Council in my city. Good Guy, had several conversations on a couple issues, but liberal as a liberal can be.

 

[timgreynolds]

From Representative Kocot, Chairman of the Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight. You'd think 'Regulatory Oversight' would express more concern. If you're in First Hampshire be sure you call.


Tim, thank you for your email. You concisely review some of the major
issues involved in this controversy, namely, the "Rule of Law" (due
process and notice requirements), the political and legal role of the
Attorney General (as that office relates to the separation of powers,
regulatory implementation and investigation/prosecution), and the nexus
with the gun laws amendments we previously passed. I will add a few
more important issues which are important to fully analyzing this
controversy and these include the lack of federal action on the
so-called "assault weapon ban" and whether or not the existing law truly
had a loophole allowing gun dealers to market weapons inappropriately.
The final critical issue is to what extent government should limit the
availability of weapons that were intended for (and are are based on)
military applications where high firepower and the ability to fire many
rounds per minute are critical assets for the men and women who bravely
protect our nation, and have been used (illegally and inappropriately)
to kill and wound hundreds of people across the nation in mass
shootings. Although I didn't sign any letters to public officials (which
were quickly sent out) in response to the Attorney General's decision, I
am doing my due diligence on this very complex issue and I am talking
with and listening to a number of well-informed people, including
constituents like you, to determine the best course of action.

I will not pretend to personally know any of the factors leading up to
the Attorney General's decision, as I was not in the room when these
decisions were made. I do know that based on my working with her on
issues such as fighting opioid abuse and reforming the Public Records
Law, she impresses me as a smart, thoughtful and hard working public
servant. Knowing her in this capacity, I would say that her primary
motivation is to uphold her oath of office, which mandates that she
protect the health and safety of the people of Massachusetts. This
phenomena of the lone or small group of radicalized, disgruntled,
disenfranchised or mentally ill persons using an assault weapon to make
their point, no matter how aberrant or unconscionable, has become the
single greatest challenge to the law enforcement community, including
the Attorney General, in my lifetime. As you know, a person with one of
these weapons can kill and maim a lot of innocent people very quickly,
more quickly than even the best law enforcement officers can respond and
stop them. The Massachusetts Legislature took a very lengthy look at
these issues after the Sandy Hook incident. Did we do enough to prevent
that horrible day from happening here? I hope so, but to be honest with
you, I'm not sure. People on the terrorist no fly list can buy guns
under federal law and Congress will not act to change this loophole.
Thousands of these weapons are sold every year in our state. How many
are sold nationally? Quite a few. Are any of these gun owners not
respectable, prudent and safe target shooters and gun owners. I don't
know. As a legislator, how do I keep my constituents safe and balance
that with the rights of people who enjoy shooting sports and/or want to
own a weapon for household protection? I think I've voted to accomplish
that task but after every one of these shooting incidents, I ask myself
if I've done enough.

So I'm learning more about (and thinking about) this issue more and more
every day. I'm trying to take in everyone's opinions and separate the
emotions from the facts. It seems likely that the Legislature and the
courts will take up this issue in the near future. As you probably
know, the Attorney General has added a number of information pages and
contact numbers on her web page. I have reviewed this information and it
seems clear that she does not intend to take any actions or interfere
with persons who currently own these weapons. I greatly appreciate your
input and please feel free to contact me with additional information or
your thoughts on this complex issue. I've been shooting and hunting
since I was 10 years old and all of the gun owners I know are
responsible people who I trust and respect.

Pete

 

[DirtyMick]

From Senator Downing,



I have of course replied back pointing out how he is wrong, but he's been no friend to us in the past.

I'd point out that the MA AWB was just a way for MA to prevent the federal sunset provision and link that degenerate to this https://www.atf.gov/file/57521/download BATFE document, page 12 footnote 36 which states:

1. 
   Chapter 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(30)(A) states that the term "semiautomatic assault weapon" means "anyof the firearms, or copies or duplicates of the firearms in any caliber, known as -," followed by a list ofnamed firearms. Even though section 921(a)(3) defines "firearm" as used in chapter 18 to mean, in part,"the frame or receiver of any such weapon," the use of "firearm" in section 921(a)(30)(A) has not beeninterpreted to mean a frame or receiver of any of the named weapons, except when the frame or receiveractually is incorporated in one of the named weapons.
   Any other interpretation would be contrary to Congress' intent in enacting the assault weapon ban. In theHouse Report to the assault weapon ban, Congress emphasized that the ban was to be interpreted narrowly.
   For example, the report explained that the present bill was more tightly focused than earlier drafts whichgave ATF authority to ban any weapon which "embodies the same configuration" as the named list of gunsin section 921(a)(30)(A); instead, the present bill "contains a set of specific characteristics that must bepresent in order to ban any additional semiautomatic assault weapons [beyond the listed weapons]." H.Rep. 103-489 at 21.

"

 

[sieveboy]

I just got an email from my rep with a different letter, authored by Rep. Fernandes, this one signed by 82 reps and senators.

 

[amm5061]

I'd point out that the MA AWB was just a way for MA to prevent the federal sunset provision and link that degenerate to this https://www.atf.gov/file/57521/download BATFE document, page 12 footnote 36 which states:

1. 
   Chapter 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(30)(A) states that the term "semiautomatic assault weapon" means "anyof the firearms, or copies or duplicates of the firearms in any caliber, known as -," followed by a list ofnamed firearms. Even though section 921(a)(3) defines "firearm" as used in chapter 18 to mean, in part,"the frame or receiver of any such weapon," the use of "firearm" in section 921(a)(30)(A) has not beeninterpreted to mean a frame or receiver of any of the named weapons, except when the frame or receiveractually is incorporated in one of the named weapons.
   Any other interpretation would be contrary to Congress' intent in enacting the assault weapon ban. In theHouse Report to the assault weapon ban, Congress emphasized that the ban was to be interpreted narrowly.
   For example, the report explained that the present bill was more tightly focused than earlier drafts whichgave ATF authority to ban any weapon which "embodies the same configuration" as the named list of gunsin section 921(a)(30)(A); instead, the present bill "contains a set of specific characteristics that must bepresent in order to ban any additional semiautomatic assault weapons [beyond the listed weapons]." H.Rep. 103-489 at 21.

"

We ought to see about getting a copy of that House Report.

 

[jar]

I just got an email from my rep with a different letter, authored by Rep. Fernandes, this one signed by 82 reps and senators.

Can you post the letter?

 

[Greschner 4]

just got this from Sen Richard Ross-R (Wrentham). He was at the rally today.. Probably one of the most comprehensive responses yet.


Dear Vincent:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the recent decision by Attorney General Maura Healey to unilaterally rule on the scope of the Assault Weapons Ban. Please know that I too was disappointed to learn of her actions, especially in light of the fact that she gave no notification to the Legislature in advance. We were informed of it through the media, and had numerous questions as to whether or not she followed protocols and more importantly, had the authority to take such action.

From what we in the Senate Republican Caucus have been able to ascertain, it appears that the AG does have the authority to issue a clarifying statement of guidance on preexisting law. The AG used her authority to notify gun dealers in the state about what qualifies and meets the criteria for legal and illegal firearms. Though the sale of assault weapons have been banned in Massachusetts since 1998, I do believe that there needs to be more clarification on what firearms constitute “copycat” and “duplicate” assault weapons so that citizens and gun dealers are not unknowingly breaking the law. This can be done while we are able to close loopholes and clarify the scope of the law.

Law abiding citizens should not find themselves in such a serious predicament between legality and illegality overnight. The rights of legal gun owners must be protected and therefore it is imperative that the Attorney General clarify what her ruling means for those who believed they were legally purchasing firearms on or before July 20th.

It is unfortunate that there was not more communication between the Attorney General, the legislature and the citizens before this announcement. If there had been I am certain the state would not be facing as much ambiguity as it is now.
The Attorney General’s office has set-up hotlines for anyone who wishes to call and express any concerns or questions. Gun dealers who have questions about compliance can call (617) 963-2775. For all other questions or comments, constituents can call the Consumer Assistance and Response Division hotline at (617) 727-8400. There is a web page where you can find the letter the Attorney General sent, the enforcement notice, and answers to some frequently asked questions: http://www.mass.gov/ago/public-safety/awbe.html.
As always, please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or concerns you may have as well.

Sincerely,
Richard Ross


This just sounds like he wants to codify Healey's new interpretation not roll it back to where it was.

Not overly impressed with that response.

 

[sieveboy]

Can you post the letter?

https://app.box.com/s/c7eyiy8s8p7gk4g6vr8igos1a5yipu81

 

[Billsail]

Can you post the letter?

I predict that just like other requests for clarification, she will simply choose to ignore it.

 

[sean128]

Just got this from Senator Lewis:

Hi sean128,

Thank you very much for reaching out to to share your thoughts on the Attorney General's recent announcement regarding assault weapons. I appreciate your concerns about the process that has been followed here, and I plan to share these concerns that I am receiving from constituents with the Attorney General's office.

I would encourage you to visit this webpage, which includes the AG's letter, enforcement notice, and FAQs: http://www.mass.gov/ago/public-safety/awbe.html. If you would like to contact the Attorney General's office directly to ask questions or express your concerns, you may call Consumer Assistance and Response Division hotline at (617) 727-8400.

Best regards,

Jason


Jason M. Lewis
State Senator
Fifth Middlesex District
State House, Room 511-B
Boston, MA 02133
617 722-1206
[email protected]
http://www.facebook.com/SenJasonLewis
Twitter @senjasonlewis
www.senatorjasonlewis.com

 

[Lank]

Impeach Impeach Impeach Impeachx10*100

 

[Goliathan]

Just got this from Senator Lewis:

Hi sean128,

Thank you very much for reaching out to to share your thoughts on the Attorney General's recent announcement regarding assault weapons. I appreciate your concerns about the process that has been followed here, and I plan to share these concerns that I am receiving from constituents with the Attorney General's office.

I would encourage you to visit this webpage, which includes the AG's letter, enforcement notice, and FAQs: http://www.mass.gov/ago/public-safety/awbe.html. If you would like to contact the Attorney General's office directly to ask questions or express your concerns, you may call Consumer Assistance and Response Division hotline at (617) 727-8400.

Best regards,

Jason


Jason M. Lewis
State Senator
Fifth Middlesex District
State House, Room 511-B
Boston, MA 02133
617 722-1206
[email protected]
http://www.facebook.com/SenJasonLewis
Twitter @senjasonlewis
www.senatorjasonlewis.com

Wow, way to take a strong stance

 

[Rider]

Not overly impressed with that response.

It's a total cop out. "I agree with you, but I agree with her, sorry about your guns, I didn't do it, please keep voting for me so I don't have to get a real job."

 

[Coyote33]

Frost and Moore are on top of this.

Spoke with Baker's, DeLeo's, and Rosenberg's offices today. All thought there will be a vote on this. Baker said he sent a letter seeking clarity. I said we need him to do more than that, and demand she rescind her letter, and for him to support pending bills. Aide said he would pass it on.

 

[devldog131]

My letter to Kathleen O'Connor Ives, my state senator. Not expecting much since, from what I can tell based on my research, she is pretty anti-gun.

Dear Mrs. O'Connor Ives,

I am a constituent who is gravely concerned with the recent actions of Attorney General Maura Healey regarding the "re-interpretation" of the Assault Weapons Ban of 1998.

Mrs. Healey's actions clearly go above and beyond the authority of her office. She has effectively bypassed the legislature in order to greatly expand the scope of law with no debate, oversight, review, or input from the General Court. This sets a dangerous precedent that would allow Attorneys General across the nation to reduce or eliminate the need for legislatures by continually "re-interpreting" existing laws to suit their own desires and agendas. If one right can be unilaterally infringed upon by a single individual, so can all of the others.

Per the Constitutions of the United States of America and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the responsibility of creating law lies with the legislative branch of government and the responsibilities of interpreting laws passed by the legislature lies with the judicial branch. As a representative of the executive branch, her authority begins and ends with the enforcement of laws debated and passed by the legislature, as written.

There have been two letters from the General Court to Mrs. Healey regarding her actions, dated 7/23 and 7/25. As your constituent, I am troubled by the fact that your signature does not appear on either of them. I would like to believe that you were unable to sign these letters because another commitment kept you away from the State House on those dates.

If you made a conscious decision to refrain from adding your signature to these letters, I would like to remind you that a great deal of your constituents are ardent supporters of constitutional rights and are very much opposed to this type of unchecked power being flexed by one individual without the representatives of the people being involved. As a senator of the Commonwealth, I'm sure you are aware that the establishment of laws without representation of the people was a significant contributing factor to the American revolution and the birth of our great nation.

I urge you to place your support behind the following bills currently making their way through the legislature:

H.D. 4949 - This bill removes the enumerated list of weapons and "copycat/duplicate" verbiage from the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, basing the definition of an "assault weapon" strictly on features of the weapon. This would give the citizens of Massachusetts a clear and concise law to follow, meaning they no longer have to wonder whether or not they are in compliance with the law or unknowingly committing a felony by violating an unclear, convoluted, strictly subjective interpretation.

This bill does not weaken the assault weapons ban, which is already one of the most thorough and restrictive in the nation. The law remains the same as it was intended upon its creation and several subsequent updates, only becoming clearer and easier to follow. This will bring us back to where we were the day prior to AG Healey's "enforcement notice" and will restore the law as followed for the last 18 years. Please note that of the 800+ homicides committed in the commonwealth since 2010, only two were committed with rifles. Massachusetts clearly does not have a rifle problem.

S.D. 2637 - This bill will strip the Attorney General of any semblance of authority to create law through interpretation, returning the authority of lawmaking to the legislature, where it belongs.

I implore you to put the rights of those you represent and the role of the legislature before party allegiances or political posturing.

You were elected due in part to the vote of law-abiding gun owners, a group that is more active in the political process than most and is currently very motivated and mobilized to protect not just the right to bear arms, but all constitutional rights. This issue will serve as a watershed moment in your legislative career and your actions in response to the heinous and unconstitutional actions of the Attorney General will be a central theme when election time rolls around. If you fail to protect the civil rights of those you represent, you can rest assured that law-abiding citizens in your district will not hesitate to choose another State Senator to represent them on election day.

I look forward to your response and your support moving forward.

Best regards,

I--- S--------
- ----- ---- Rd.
Haverhill, MA 018--
(---)--7-3---

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk