S 2265 (aka HB4285, 4278, 4121) out of Senate Ways and Means (FID Suitability)

jasons said:
For the sake of accuracy, I'm going to point out that this amendment only increased the penalties associated with the existing law that's already on the books. (Read it yourself here: https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Chapter269/Section10E)

It only applies to unlawful transfers, lending your kid a shotgun to shoot trap is not an unlawful transfer.
Click to expand...

No problem removing this if that's in fact the case, but I read the wording as "if it's not codified as legal under another section of law, it's illegal." Kind of a reversal of the "what isn't illegal is illegal" thing.
 
Understand this: people complaining about mag limits, awb, etc-that's not part of the current bill. We need to deal with this first. We have shown that we have a voice. Contrary to what some are saying, this is a huge win. We lost, literally, nothing. We stopped the anti gun stuff. The fid? I say, let it ride. Then, we're all in the same boat. And, when someone sues the state for civil rights violation, we have the opportunity for shall issue. A bill WILL pass. We killed the worst parts if it. Those who attended rallies. Hearings. Contacted legislators. GOAL was a huge help in that-without them, we would have had an anti gun bill in January 2013. One thing was proven-we CAN be heard. Let's continue to be so.
 
Garys said:
Any changes to the bill in the Senate mean that it would have to go to a Joint Conference Committee to work out the differences and then back to both houses again. The makes the process longer and I'd take it as a sign that the Senate wants to kill it without actually killing it. Stretching the process out until the end of July would be a way to do that.

Of course that's just tea leaf reading on my part and if both houses really want to pass something, they'll figure out a way to do it.

I'd be more worried about a bill filed after the November elections.
Click to expand...

Meh. They can pass this crap AND THEN FILE A BILL NEXT SESSION, TOO!

Focus right now is to kill this thing or at least get it so no stupid A-Linsky/Rosenturd crap is added.
 
At least the suitability stuff in section 33 survived..putting the burden of proof on the nazi rather than the applicant.
 
BattleSnail said:
At least the suitability stuff in section 33 survived..putting the burden of proof on the nazi rather than the applicant.
Click to expand...
Exactly. We can't get rid of the may issue (yet), but we can shift responsibility. And, thus, begin to burden the system. Then, sue for shall issue. By making the fid may issue, this forces them de facto be with us.
 
Here's a list of Senators with opponents in this year's election, from RedMass Group. It's likely that these few have better constituent services (this year).



http://www.redmassgroup.com/diary/17757/2014-election-massachusetts-candidates-february-edition

Donald Humason (R-Westfield)
Patricia Jehlen (D-Somerville)
Richard Ross (R-Wrentham)
John Keenan (D-Quincy)
Marc Pacheco (D-Taunton)
Thomas Kennedy (D-Brockton)
William Brownsberger (D-Belmont)
Harriette Chandler (D-Worcester)
Richard Moore (D-Uxbridge)
Jason Lewis (D-Winchester)


VACANT-Brewer-D
VACANT-Clark-D
OPEN-Murray-D
(OPEN-Candaras-D)
(OPEN-Finegold-D)
 
Last edited:
oldsoldier29 said:
Understand this: people complaining about mag limits, awb, etc-that's not part of the current bill. We need to deal with this first. We have shown that we have a voice. Contrary to what some are saying, this is a huge win. We lost, literally, nothing. We stopped the anti gun stuff. The fid? I say, let it ride. Then, we're all in the same boat. And, when someone sues the state for civil rights violation, we have the opportunity for shall issue. A bill WILL pass. We killed the worst parts if it. Those who attended rallies. Hearings. Contacted legislators. GOAL was a huge help in that-without them, we would have had an anti gun bill in January 2013. One thing was proven-we CAN be heard. Let's continue to be so.
Click to expand...

I do not disagree with this.
 
cmcgraw2 said:
Here's a list of Senators with opponents in this year's election, from RedMass Group. It's likely that these few have better constituent services (this year).



http://www.redmassgroup.com/diary/17757/2014-election-massachusetts-candidates-february-edition

Donald Humason (R-Westfield)
Patricia Jehlen (D-Somerville)
Richard Ross (R-Wrentham)
John Keenan (D-Quincy)
Marc Pacheco (D-Taunton)
Thomas Kennedy (D-Brockton)
William Brownsberger (D-Belmont)
Harriette Chandler (D-Worcester)
Richard Moore (D-Uxbridge)


VACANT-Brewer-D
VACANT-Clark-D
OPEN-Murray-D
(OPEN-Candaras-D)
(OPEN-Finegold-D)
Click to expand...


I think you're missing Jason Lewis (D - Winchester/Stoneham). Was elected to Clark's vacant seat in special election and the term expires this fall.
 
QQ: If the FID card now requires the same 'suitability' as for an LTC, and the costs are the same, why would anyone ever apply for an FID?

One of the benefits (to the state) was that an FID limited people to only shotguns and low-capacity rifles.

If the applicant has to jump through the same flaming hoops for either an LTC, or an FID, who wouldn't go for the LTC, which would allow purchasing AND CARRYING handguns?

Net-net, we'll have more LTC holders, and fewer FIDs in the future, should this pass. Right?
 
StevieP said:
QQ: If the FID card now requires the same 'suitability' as for an LTC, and the costs are the same, why would anyone ever apply for an FID?

One of the benefits (to the state) was that an FID limited people to only shotguns and low-capacity rifles.

If the applicant has to jump through the same flaming hoops for either an LTC, or an FID, who wouldn't go for the LTC, which would allow purchasing AND CARRYING handguns?

Net-net, we'll have more LTC holders, and fewer FIDs in the future, should this pass. Right?
Click to expand...

Well, age would be one factor I would suppose.
 
StevieP said:
QQ: If the FID card now requires the same 'suitability' as for an LTC, and the costs are the same, why would anyone ever apply for an FID?

One of the benefits (to the state) was that an FID limited people to only shotguns and low-capacity rifles.

If the applicant has to jump through the same flaming hoops for either an LTC, or an FID, who wouldn't go for the LTC, which would allow purchasing AND CARRYING handguns?

Net-net, we'll have more LTC holders, and fewer FIDs in the future, should this pass. Right?
Click to expand...

That is a conundrum I didn't think about, but keen observation. The only thing they could say is I don't want people carrying in my town, but that would mean LTC-A with restrictions.

IF this crap passes, then every training course instructor should be told to encourage people to got to LTC-A. The suitability denial will be on an LTC, and that going to court could be a BIG win for us.

But let's not put the cart before the horse.
 
StevieP said:
QQ: If the FID card now requires the same 'suitability' as for an LTC, and the costs are the same, why would anyone ever apply for an FID?

One of the benefits (to the state) was that an FID limited people to only shotguns and low-capacity rifles.

If the applicant has to jump through the same flaming hoops for either an LTC, or an FID, who wouldn't go for the LTC, which would allow purchasing AND CARRYING handguns?

Net-net, we'll have more LTC holders, and fewer FIDs in the future, should this pass. Right?
Click to expand...

I don't see all the fudds with only fids getting ltc's . Younger people yes, older fid card holders nah. If they wanted to carry or own pistols they would of done it at this pint all ready .
 
cmcgraw2 said:
Here's a list of Senators with opponents in this year's election, from RedMass Group. It's likely that these few have better constituent services (this year).



http://www.redmassgroup.com/diary/17757/2014-election-massachusetts-candidates-february-edition

Donald Humason (R-Westfield)
Patricia Jehlen (D-Somerville)
Richard Ross (R-Wrentham)
John Keenan (D-Quincy)
Marc Pacheco (D-Taunton)
Thomas Kennedy (D-Brockton)
William Brownsberger (D-Belmont)
Harriette Chandler (D-Worcester)
Richard Moore (D-Uxbridge)


VACANT-Brewer-D
VACANT-Clark-D
OPEN-Murray-D
(OPEN-Candaras-D)
(OPEN-Finegold-D)
Click to expand...


In an earlier post I explained that Finegold is running for Treasurer. He still votes as a Senator though and is fair game statewide.
 
StevieP said:
QQ: If the FID card now requires the same 'suitability' as for an LTC, and the costs are the same, why would anyone ever apply for an FID?

One of the benefits (to the state) was that an FID limited people to only shotguns and low-capacity rifles.

If the applicant has to jump through the same flaming hoops for either an LTC, or an FID, who wouldn't go for the LTC, which would allow purchasing AND CARRYING handguns?

Net-net, we'll have more LTC holders, and fewer FIDs in the future, should this pass. Right?
Click to expand...

LTC as far as I know is for 21 year olds and above......so the FID has obviously been quite popular amont the under 21 year old crowd :). When my son turns 16 he'll be applying for an FID.
 
whacko said:
LTC as far as I know is for 21 year olds and above......so the FID has obviously been quite popular amont the under 21 year old crowd :). When my son turns 16 he'll be applying for an FID.
Click to expand...

FYI, he can get an FID at 15. (Or more accurately can apply for a FID at 15, it might take him a year to get it....)
 
OK, so other than the 15 - 20 year olds, and the FUDDs who only need to be licensed for their trap guns, wouldn't just about everyone else go for the LTC, then?

Unintended consequence to the state = more people eligible to own and carry handguns.
 
StevieP said:
I'm going to lead with how by adding 'suitability' to FID cards, it opens up the Commonwealth to civil rights violations lawsuits, as is being seen in Illinois, where people who aren't prohibited have been denied their gun licenses, and are taking the state to court.

If the state had to pay damages and legal fees to everyone who appeals their denial, it could end up costing millions, which this state just doesn't have.

Q: When was the last time an FID-holder committed a crime with a low-capacity rifle or shotgun in this state? Anyone know if it's EVER happened?
Click to expand...

Money talks. 10,000 cases at $10,000/pop is 100-million-dollars. Unsuitable people who are dangerous or violent, are going to be just as dangerous with or without a gun and this SHOULD NOT ever be an excuse to infringe on the rights of ANYONE - PERIOD -

I have a proposed amendment to this bill: repeal EVERYTHING.
 
StevieP said:
QQ: If the FID card now requires the same 'suitability' as for an LTC, and the costs are the same, why would anyone ever apply for an FID?

One of the benefits (to the state) was that an FID limited people to only shotguns and low-capacity rifles.

If the applicant has to jump through the same flaming hoops for either an LTC, or an FID, who wouldn't go for the LTC, which would allow purchasing AND CARRYING handguns?

Net-net, we'll have more LTC holders, and fewer FIDs in the future, should this pass. Right?
Click to expand...
Chiefs will have the power to shut down all Juniors programs in their city or town and prohibit hunting by youths, if this bill passes. Heck, they could completely disarm their city or town by refusing to issue any LTCs or FIDs to anyone other than police officers. Don't like it? Pony up thousands of $$$$ and take it to a court, whose judge will probably side with the chief's decision anyway. Me? I am just about done here. My girlfriend and I closed on our brand-new home in coastal south Alabama two weeks ago (half the price of a used home of similar size here!). Alabama does not require FIDs or any type of license to own a gun. If you wish to carry concealed, you apply to the local sheriff's department for a CCW permit (easy to get and unrestricted, from what a few of the local gunshop Bubbas told me). I feel sorry for anyone stuck in MA. The pols have all MA gun owners over a barrel and keep twisting the screws ever tighter!
 
jasons said:
FYI, he can get an FID at 15. (Or more accurately can apply for a FID at 15, it might take him a year to get it....)
Click to expand...

Now it will be "If the King says so" If the kid got in to a couple of fights at school, the school informed the PD, the King won't issue him a license.
 
Donald Humason (R-Westfield)
Patricia Jehlen (D-Somerville)
Richard Ross (R-Wrentham)
John Keenan (D-Quincy)
Marc Pacheco (D-Taunton)
Thomas Kennedy (D-Brockton)
William Brownsberger (D-Belmont)
Harriette Chandler (D-Worcester)
Richard Moore (D-Uxbridge) This Rep. was very much against any new gun laws and is GOAL A+ rated.




 
FID requires the same amount of work and dollars as LTC, this entire Bill was a disaster. For Goal to be neutral seems to say the same as a politician saying they vote present. It does nothing to address the problem and only means young hunters etc will have more barriers NOT to get involved in the sport.

Sent from the blind
 
derek said:
Now it will be "If the King says so" If the kid got in to a couple of fights at school, the school informed the PD, the King won't issue him a license.
Click to expand...

Preaching to the choir brother.
 
derek said:
Now it will be "If the King says so" If the kid got in to a couple of fights at school, the school informed the PD, the King won't issue him a license.
Click to expand...

Fights? She got a D in Geometry. He was absent or tardy too many days. He was in the Young Republicans club. She wasn't a cheerleader.
 
derek said:
Now it will be "If the King says so" If the kid got in to a couple of fights at school, the school informed the PD, the King won't issue him a license.
Click to expand...

I love this part

Approved materials shall include training on how to identify appropriate mental health 262 services both within the school and also within the larger community, and when and how to refer 263 students and their families to those services. 264
(3) No person shall have a cause of action for any loss or damage caused by any act or 265 omission resulting from the implementation of the provisions of this section or resulting from 266 any training, or lack thereof, required by this section. 267(4) The training, or lack thereof, required by the provisions of this section shall not be 268 construed to impose any specific duty of care. 269
 

Similar threads

MA Out of state LTC
Replies
19
Views
366
drgrant
drgrant
Fid requirements for minors
2
Replies
58
Views
1K
Ricky_Bobby
Ricky_Bobby
Plus and Minus of buying a Semi Auto Uzi?
2
Replies
46
Views
1K
Road_Clam
R
NEW 2A group comes out SWINGING
Replies
0
Views
225
Gidge
Gidge
Here's a list of states suing the BATFE/FEDS in opposition to the new ruling of who's a dealer and who's not.
Replies
5
Views
308
Tartakovsky
Tartakovsky
Back
Top Bottom