-
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.
STOP ERPO TODAY!!! - Light Up The State House Phones!
- Thread starter Mike S
- Start date
zork51
NES Member
This is what I got as a final message from my "back and forth" our Rep. Stephen Hay's aide in Fitchburg. BTW, I belong to the Fitchburg Sportsmen's Club and just sent a note to the board asking them to be sure to make our members aware of how he voted. He was at the annual club dinner 2 years ago. Glad I missed that one...…………
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 12:41 PM, Anzola, Alberto (HOU) <http://www.wbur.org/news/2018/05/01/police-chiefs-red-flag-gun-bill)
The Washington Post joins The Boston Globe, The Chicago Tribune, The New York Post, as well as numerous other national and Massachusetts newspapers in urging State Legislators to enact state-level ERPO legislation and not wait for Congress to act on gun violence prevention. I have attached a few articles to read.
If you have any further questions regarding Extreme Risk Protective Orders, please do not hesitate to reach out to me.
Best,
Al Anzola
_____________________________
Al Anzola
Legislative Aide
Office of Representative Stephan Hay
(617) 722-2637 x7623
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 3:24 PM
To: Anzola, Alberto (HOU)
Subject: Re: Please oppose the current H. 3610 proposal as written
So please ask Mr. Hay if I break up with my girlfriend and she says I threatened her out of pure spite ( licensed for over 40 years), where is my recourse? Who pays for my lawyer? Is my due process the next day?
Chiefs already have enough power with laws already on the books.
On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 2:10 PM, Anzola, Alberto (HOU) <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello,
Thank you for contacting the Office of Representative Stephan Hay regarding H.3610. We appreciate your concerns.
While Representative Hay has concerns with the proposed bill, he agrees with its intentions. The Representative does not agree with GOAL’s proposition, but he is willing to listen to and consider amendments, especially those concerning mental health aspects.
If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Have a great day.
Best,
Al Anzola
Al Anzola
Legislative Aide
Office of State Representative Stephan Hay
3rd Worcester District
State House, Room 544
Boston, MA 02133
Phone: (617) 722-2637 x7623
May 22 (5 days ago)
to Alberto
Thank you. So just to be clear, Rep. Hay will say YES in spite of the recrafted bill, that pretty much goes against any licensed, lawful permit holder, who may be wrongly accused and not allowing due process, or legal representation?
to Alberto
Thank you. So just to be clear, Rep. Hay will say YES in spite of the recrafted bill, that pretty much goes against any licensed, lawful permit holder, who may be wrongly accused and not allowing due process, or legal representation?
Anzola, Alberto (HOU) <[email protected]>
May 22 (5 days ago)
to me
Brian,
At this time, the Representative intends on voting in favor of H4517.
I truly do understand your concerns. However, Rep. Decker's bill states that an ERPO is granted only when a full evidentiary hearing is held and the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the respondent poses a risk of causing bodily injury to self or others (this is similar to Representative Linsky's bill we have previously discussed). A full, evidentiary hearing is the very essence of due process and a procedure which must take place before any order is signed off on.
Rep. Hay is reviewing additional amendments concerning legal representation and mental health aspects on an individual basis and is preparing for House debate tomorrow.
Al
Al Anzola
Legislative Aide
Office of State Representative Stephan Hay
3rd Worcester District
State House, Room 544
Boston, MA 02133
Phone: (617) 722-2637 x7623
Whutmeworry
NES Member
Apparently Rep Hay didn’t bother to read the section of the bill that said that in “extreme “ circumstances a judge could issue an ERPO WITHOUT - or at least prior to - notifying and/or allowing a respondent to attend a hearing. So sick of lies being repeated over and over again.
So here's what's going to happen in a few years:
Two neighbors who don't get along will have a fight -- loud music from a party, parking in front of the house, barking dog, whatever. Neighbor A gets fed up one night and goes over to neighbor B's house at 1 am because of a noisy graduation party. Neighbor B is a gun owner. Neighbor A has been drinking and pounds on Neighbor B's door. Neighbor B who was sound asleep and thought maybe it was an intruder gets a shotgun and goes downstairs. Neighbor A gets even more agitated when he sees the shotgun and attacks Neighbor B. Neighbor B fires the shotgun, killing Neighbor A. Neighbor B is pegged by liberal media as a dangerous person prone to violence (history of neighborhood disputes). Legislature works itself into a tizzy. ERPO is expanded to include complaints by non-family members so anyone can file an ERPO request.
Several years after that Antifas decide to go after gun owners. They stalk businesses like Four Seasons, taunt the customers and pick fights. Then they file ERPO petitions. Sympathetic liberal judges allow these hearings to take place "due process". If the complaint is sustained you lose your license and your guns. If the complaint is denied and the complaint is found to be false -- guess what? the antifa is indigent. No penalties. Sentence suspended. Fines dismissed.
Pure and total gun confiscation is where were are headed...
Two neighbors who don't get along will have a fight -- loud music from a party, parking in front of the house, barking dog, whatever. Neighbor A gets fed up one night and goes over to neighbor B's house at 1 am because of a noisy graduation party. Neighbor B is a gun owner. Neighbor A has been drinking and pounds on Neighbor B's door. Neighbor B who was sound asleep and thought maybe it was an intruder gets a shotgun and goes downstairs. Neighbor A gets even more agitated when he sees the shotgun and attacks Neighbor B. Neighbor B fires the shotgun, killing Neighbor A. Neighbor B is pegged by liberal media as a dangerous person prone to violence (history of neighborhood disputes). Legislature works itself into a tizzy. ERPO is expanded to include complaints by non-family members so anyone can file an ERPO request.
Several years after that Antifas decide to go after gun owners. They stalk businesses like Four Seasons, taunt the customers and pick fights. Then they file ERPO petitions. Sympathetic liberal judges allow these hearings to take place "due process". If the complaint is sustained you lose your license and your guns. If the complaint is denied and the complaint is found to be false -- guess what? the antifa is indigent. No penalties. Sentence suspended. Fines dismissed.
Pure and total gun confiscation is where were are headed...
Once again come out on the side of the 2A:
Worcester T&G: Local police consider value of armed civilians after Texas church shooting
Worcester Telegram: Local police consider value of armed civilians after Texas church shooting Once again come out on the side of the 2A. https://www.telegram.com/news/20200104/local-police-consider-value-of-armed-civilians-after-texas-church-shooting " ... with the risks faced by people in...
www.northeastshooters.com
Although I agree with you that ERPO's will be intentionally misused to disarm people. Your scenario has me wondering. If there was a graduation party I don't know if Neighbor B would be sound asleep especially if it's at his house and if it's not at his house Neighbor A should be knocking at the door where the party is at unless they're so drunk that they can't tell where the party is at and they've got it in for neighbor B and just want to cause trouble.
Similar threads
