Roundtable With Our Representatives

Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
50
Likes
47
Location
Central Massachusetts
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Hey everyone...

Here is the 1st half of the meeting I hosted at the Blackstone Valley Beagle Club with State Representatives Kevin Kuros and Joe McKenna.

Nothing groundbreaking....BUT there will be a NEW lawsuit...

Check out Part 1 here: https://youtu.be/DTxolZVn-r8

Part 2 will be up as soon as it is done processing on YouTube...approaching 12 hours now...really.

Thanks,

Jared
 
Thanks for all your efforts!

Hey everyone...

Here is the 1st half of the meeting I hosted at the Blackstone Valley Beagle Club with State Representatives Kevin Kuros and Joe McKenna.

Nothing groundbreaking....BUT there will be a NEW lawsuit...

Check out Part 1 here: https://youtu.be/DTxolZVn-r8

Part 2 will be up as soon as it is done processing on YouTube...approaching 12 hours now...really.

Thanks,

Jared
 
Hey everyone...

Here is the 1st half of the meeting I hosted at the Blackstone Valley Beagle Club with State Representatives Kevin Kuros and Joe McKenna.

Nothing groundbreaking....BUT there will be a NEW lawsuit...

Check out Part 1 here: https://youtu.be/DTxolZVn-r8

Part 2 will be up as soon as it is done processing on YouTube...approaching 12 hours now...really.

Thanks,

Jared
*********
lawsuit filed by who?
 
I guess the importance of co-equal branches of government/checks and balances is only relevant when you don't agree with the actions of the other branch like when they trip over their dicks to reverse Baker's budget cuts. They act like they can do nothing and need the judicial branch to save us all. They have immense influence over the AG through the budget. They could make her life miserable if they wanted to and the mere threat would be enough to make healy delay her actions. In this case, the legislature either agrees with the outcome or just doesn't care. Checks and balance can't fix that - they have to be willing to use them.

Good thing we have the judiciary branch to save us. We all know they don't agree with this outcome.
 
I watched part one. Thank you very much for hosting and posting this event. I will watch part two tonight.
 
I watched part one. Thank you very much for hosting and posting this event. I will watch part two tonight.
THANKS for watching it! I appreciate the support!!

- - - Updated - - -

*********
lawsuit filed by who?
NRA

- - - Updated - - -

Thanks for all your efforts!
I appreciate that! Thank you for your support!

- - - Updated - - -

I guess the importance of co-equal branches of government/checks and balances is only relevant when you don't agree with the actions of the other branch like when they trip over their dicks to reverse Baker's budget cuts. They act like they can do nothing and need the judicial branch to save us all. They have immense influence over the AG through the budget. They could make her life miserable if they wanted to and the mere threat would be enough to make healy delay her actions. In this case, the legislature either agrees with the outcome or just doesn't care. Checks and balance can't fix that - they have to be willing to use them.

Good thing we have the judiciary branch to save us. We all know they don't agree with this outcome.
So frustrating!!!!!
 
Any NRA filed suit is doomed to failure in the 1st District, period! Just the name "NRA" in front of our legistraitors or judiciary equals the desired conclusion . . . finding for the other side.

Sorry to say. It shouldn't be that way, but it indeed is that way.
 
It's same for the 9th District. A lawsuit has to be kicked up to the USSC to be favorable (and even that's in jeopardy now).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Watched part 2 and saw some discussion about transfers. Bringing rifles in or passing them from parent to child were talked about without any definite answers other than "good luck trying to find a FFL that will do it." It got me thinking: would FA10's on these rifles be considered a 5A violation? Are all the ones from 1998 til now 5A violations?
 
It got me thinking: would FA10's on these rifles be considered a 5A violation? Are all the ones from 1998 til now 5A violations?

I'm going to go out on a limb and say, in my poor lawyerese, the exclusion to the 5th under the militia clause can't be taken both ways because you want to be the militia in the second but not the 5th.
 
I'm going to go out on a limb and say, in my poor lawyerese, the exclusion to the 5th under the militia clause can't be taken both ways because you want to be the militia in the second but not the 5th.

Not sure what this means.

This is what I was referring to. If you're passing on a rifle deemed to be bad, it seems to me that you shouldn't be compelled to incriminate yourself by doing a fa10. Why would you file paperwork that, according to healy, says that you are a felon?

[h=2]Amendment V[/h]No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
 
Not sure what this means.

This is what I was referring to. If you're passing on a rifle deemed to be bad, it seems to me that you shouldn't be compelled to incriminate yourself by doing a fa10. Why would you file paperwork that, according to healy, says that you are a felon?

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
You have the right to remain innocent. Great book FWIW
 
Watched both videos.

Part that baffles me (and probably shouldn't) is you have two members of the legislative branch and obviously a bunch others (based on who signed the letters) who think she overreached and pulled a political stunt and they are just like there's nothing we can do but HOPE the courts rule in our favor.

Edit : Thumbs up to the OP for setting this up. Good to know there are still some good guys on our side.
 
Watched both videos.

Part that baffles me (and probably shouldn't) is you have two members of the legislative branch and obviously a bunch others (based on who signed the letters) who think she overreached and pulled a political stunt and they are just like there's nothing we can do but HOPE the courts rule in our favor.

Its because we don't have the votes. Because its guns many rep's wont even venture out into that territory despite their beliefs on the matter- the politics of votes and re-election > the rules of office. We can hope the courts rule in our favor, but to be honest, the courts are severely stacked against gun owners and only getting worse.

If gun owners weren't a minority? This shit would have been fixed on July 22nd.
 
While I agree we are the minority I thought I heard one of the reps mention that the second letter had over 50% of the state legislature signed on including some Democrats. My takeaway from it was even if we had the numbers the only fix was via courts, which is why someone had introduced a bill to put forward detailed limitations on the AG's office.

Its because we don't have the votes. Because its guns many rep's wont even venture out into that territory despite their beliefs on the matter- the politics of votes and re-election > the rules of office. We can hope the courts rule in our favor, but to be honest, the courts are severely stacked against gun owners and only getting worse.

If gun owners weren't a minority? This shit would have been fixed on July 22nd.
 
Back
Top Bottom