Timetable for the apocalypse.

[Executive]

OK so the sh!t has hit the fan politically here in MA. I'm not looking for alarmist speculation, but rather, realistic expectation of potential changes in firearm ownership/possesion laws, and when these changes could take effect. What is the likely scenario along with best and worst cases for us all.

Chris

 

[Skald]

Kiss FTF goodbye.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Timing:

- Swearing in in January I believe.

- Perfunctory hearings on anti-gun bills usually in April/May 2007.

- Passage of said anti-gun bills, after the hearings. Take effect 90 days after signing into law unless written as "emergency legislation" in which case it takes effect almost immediately.

So we have ~6 months to plan and mount our attacks to prevent any anti-gun bills from passage. DON'T GIVE UP!

 

[Rob Boudrie]

The anti-gun bills still need to be passed by the same group, so Deval's influence is mostly symbolic leadership, not stuff he can do directly himself.

Does anyone realy believe Romney or Healey would have vetoed a one gun a month bill, ban on particular types of guns or other bad law? Remember, you're dealing in a state where poltiicians can wear the F rating from GOAL with pride and not even have to waste money on a campaign if they are an incumbent democrat.

The real difference is that any law with positive benefits will probably be vetoed. We recently got 6 year LTCs instead of 4 (but kept the 4x fee increase), free replacement of lost LTCs, and a target gun bill the implementation details of which remain to be worked out. I doubt that any of these would have made it past Deval.

Len had the right term for the hearings - perfunctory. I went once and noticed that: Important people (MDs, politicians, police) are allowed to speak first; the majority of the legislators attending the hearing leave; and then normal people are pemitted to speak ... in that order.

 

[hminsky]

There was a funny editorial by Jeff Jacoby that ends

"Democracy," H. L. Mencken wrote, "is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard." There doesn't seem to be much doubt about what Massachusetts voters want. The question now is, what are they going to get?

 

[LoginName]

The anti-gun bills still need to be passed by the same group, so Deval's influence is mostly symbolic leadership, not stuff he can do directly himself.

Does anyone realy believe Romney or Healey would have vetoed a one gun a month bill, ban on particular types of guns or other bad law? Remember, you're dealing in a state where poltiicians can wear the F rating from GOAL with pride and not even have to waste money on a campaign if they are an incumbent democrat.

The real difference is that any law with positive benefits will probably be vetoed. We recently got 6 year LTCs instead of 4 (but kept the 4x fee increase), free replacement of lost LTCs, and a target gun bill the implementation details of which remain to be worked out. I doubt that any of these would have made it past Deval.

What makes this new situation worse is that both Dem controlled legislative bodies will be obligated to pass (and pass quickly), any legislation submitted by a Dem governor. Whatever debate takes place on the floor
and arguments against any bills, will be ignored.

The voters just handed Patrick a blank check to do pretty much whatever he pleases.

 

[EddieCoyle]

Here's what I'm going to do:

Buy a .50 BMG rifle as soon as I can. These are going to be banned and banned quickly.

Use up my 4 FTF transfers as quickly as I can to sell handguns that are not on the Mass roster. It will become impossible to sell these guns in-state as soon as they ban FTF transfers.