Update 2/21 Westford Ban

[calsdad]

If what we have now is ' virtually no controls', then we are in trouble.

We have plenty of controls on who can actually get a firearm.

We do NOT have the same controls (Regulation) - in the constitutional meaning of the word.

I'm pretty sure that even in the colonial times - there were certain people who did not have access to weaponry of the militia. Lunatics have always existed - and I'm sure if the town crazy person started shooting up the tavern - somebody would have taken his guns away.

What I'm saying here is - let's be smart about this - take his argument and USE IT GODDAMMIT.

 

[ASHDUMP]

Before you dismiss the idea - maybe you ought to listen to what this guy has to say about what the original militia was and how it directly relates to the 2nd amendment of the Constitution.




If he wants a militia - then maybe we ought to take him up on it - because a true constitutional militia would actually require most people to have firearms at home.

Seriously - you guys need to learn the history a little bit better before you start validating some of these crackpots by disagreeing with them.

I think you may have misunderstood me. I don't disagree with a well regulated militia but I do disagree with the what and why Jefferies wants a well regulated militia. He thinks its a back door to gaining more information on people. I agree, I think everyone should own a fire arm. Did you read my first post? I said lets take him up on it.

 

[calsdad]

I think you may have misunderstood me. I don't disagree with a well regulated militia but I do disagree with the what and why Jefferies wants a well regulated militia. He thinks its a back door to gaining more information on people. I agree, I think everyone should own a fire arm. Did you read my first post? I said lets take him up on it.

I must have missed you previous post. So it sounds like we agree - we SHOULD take him up on it. That's really the problem with the current day society - anything you do potentially feeds the government monster. But we've got to start somewhere - and an ACTUAL militia - that has NO obligation to serve the federal government - is potentially a very big step in the right direction.

Do the research - and then call his bluff.

 

[frenchman]

How many people does it take to set up a militia? Just put in the bylaws that LEOs are not permitted because of a possible conflict of interst, hold a meeting every now and then, have BBQs in the summer and call it training.

 

[FrugalFannie]

I think he is grossly misinterpreting the part about a militia purposely. Militia service was never mandatory and he knows it. While the towns may have had powder, ball and primer centrally located for the defense of the town and possibly some arms as well they never prohibited people from maintaining their own weapons at home and they never created a registry.

 

[TLB]

I think he is grossly misinterpreting the part about a militia purposely. Militia service was never mandatory and he knows it. While the towns may have had powder, ball and primer centrally located for the defense of the town and possibly some arms as well they never prohibited people from maintaining their own weapons at home and they never created a registry.

I agree. He is trying to say this is the only way to justify guns in private hands via the second amendment. The garrison storage would mean no guns at home in his fantasy.

 

[JohnnyViper]

if we get a chance we should say these things to him publicly so everyone can see he is trying manipulating and hold back information about a militia for his own good

 

[DMC2447]

Well... there is a BoS meeting 22-JAN @ 7:30PM...

 

[FrugalFannie]

Well... there is a BoS meeting 22-JAN @ 7:30PM...

That meeting is where they set the warrant for Town Meeting. Any petition he brings as a citizen (or anyone else) with 10 signatures of registered voters who reside in town will be on the warrant. The BoS could decide they do not have enough info to include his desired ban on this warrant. Since last I checked there was no wording for such a ban I would be only slightly surprised if it did not appear on this warrant.

 

[WickedSharp]

I must have missed you previous post. So it sounds like we agree - we SHOULD take him up on it. That's really the problem with the current day society - anything you do potentially feeds the government monster. But we've got to start somewhere - and an ACTUAL militia - that has NO obligation to serve the federal government - is potentially a very big step in the right direction.

Do the research - and then call his bluff.

Anything that is "well regulated" has administrative overhead that costs money, right?

 

[MisterHappy]

Not a Westford resident, and have not watched the video (bad reviews, and all), but from where I sit, the "crazy like a fox" remark seems on target (though he uses the wrong "there", when he meant "their".

It's a clever tactical move - "If you believe in 2A, then you want to be in a Militia. Put up, or shut up." The "well regulated" part is no longer understood in its original context - meaning smooth-running - but the "regulated" part, in its nowadays meaning, makes Antis happy.

Good luck to you Westford people.

 

[calsdad]

I think he is grossly misinterpreting the part about a militia purposely. Militia service was never mandatory and he knows it. While the towns may have had powder, ball and primer centrally located for the defense of the town and possibly some arms as well they never prohibited people from maintaining their own weapons at home and they never created a registry.

This is why I am suggesting that maybe you ought to take his offer and run with it. My understanding of the militias was that they required their members to maintain a firearm in good standing. The whole "regulated" part means something completely different than the common understanding of the word today. Back then it meant TRAINED. He probably thinks regulated back then means the same as it does now - and implementing a militia would be a way to have more government oversight.

What I'm saying is that if true militias were to come into existence again - it would first - give people a real reason to own firearms , it secondly would give an organizational structure in which those people who owned firearms would get to know each other - and it would begin to reinstitute a structure that the founding fathers endorsed as one way to put a brake on tyranny coming from a central government.


Take what he is suggesting and see if it can be twisted into something beneficial for us. The anti's do it all the time - it's time we returned the favor.

 

[FrugalFannie]

This is why I am suggesting that maybe you ought to take his offer and run with it. My understanding of the militias was that they required their members to maintain a firearm in good standing. The whole "regulated" part means something completely different than the common understanding of the word today. Back then it meant TRAINED. He probably thinks regulated back then means the same as it does now - and implementing a militia would be a way to have more government oversight.

What I'm saying is that if true militias were to come into existence again - it would first - give people a real reason to own firearms , it secondly would give an organizational structure in which those people who owned firearms would get to know each other - and it would begin to reinstitute a structure that the founding fathers endorsed as one way to put a brake on tyranny coming from a central government.


Take what he is suggesting and see if it can be twisted into something beneficial for us. The anti's do it all the time - it's time we returned the favor.

I hear you. Very busy. About to head out to a town committee meeting right now.

 

[calsdad]

Not a Westford resident, and have not watched the video (bad reviews, and all), but from where I sit, the "crazy like a fox" remark seems on target (though he uses the wrong "there", when he meant "their".

It's a clever tactical move - "If you believe in 2A, then you want to be in a Militia. Put up, or shut up." The "well regulated" part is no longer understood in its original context - meaning smooth-running - but the "regulated" part, in its nowadays meaning, makes Antis happy.

Good luck to you Westford people.

It is a clever move. What I'm suggesting is that a militia might actually be a GOOD thing - if it was instituted in a such a way as to having it's original constitutional purpose.

I see people on NES talking constantly about "how do we get organized at go time?"

A militia is it.

 

[Brad.in.IL]

Where do they train ?

All,

Where do the Westford police go to shoot their periodic qualifications?

In Burlington Vermont, the city council is trying to advance an AWB as well as a magazine capacity limit. The Burlington police shoot their qual's at a local sporting club. Other than the club, facilities for the Burlington police to train are quite limited. In response to the council, the board at the sporting club has voted to ban the police from using club property. If the Westford police shoot their qual's at Westford Sportsmen's, perhaps the club can make a statement to the Westford Chief . . . something like asking the Chief to talk to the BoS or the club might have to consider similar action. Radical to be sure, but hey, the other side gets radical too. Fight fire with fire, an eye for an eye.

- Brad

 

[calsdad]

Deb, others,

Where do the Westford police go to shoot their periodic qualifications?

In Burlington Vermont, the city council is trying to advance an AWB as well as a magazine capacity limit. The Burlington police shoot their qual's at a local sporting club. Other than the club, facilities for the Burlington police to train are quite limited. In response to the council, the board at the sporting club has voted to ban the police from using club property. If the Westford police shoot their qual's at Westford Sportsmen's, perhaps the club can make a statement to the Westford Chief . . . something like asking the Chief to talk to the BoS or the club might have to consider similar action. Radical to be sure, but hey, the other side gets radical too. Fight fire with fire, an eye for an eye.

- Brad

Not a bad suggestion at all.

Maybe it's about time we as citizens start holding the government and it's agencies to the same standards that they expect us to live by. If the government is going to restrict citizens to 7 round magazines - then insist that the police are held to the same standards. If somebody bitches - then find some liberal who is pissed about police shootings of innocent black kids - and point out that the exact logic that they are using to restrict mag capacity: Namely that it would reduce shootings, should apply directly to the police if it was actually true.

We not going to win without exploring every angle on this.

It's supposed to be a government for the people and by the people, and that means the rules should apply equally to everybody. If somebody brings up the stupid argument that the police are always having to go into dangerous situations - they can be gently reminded that the police are the SECOND responders - and that the civilians caught in those dangerous situations are in reality the FIRST responders - and they have just been restricted to 7 rounds in a mag - because nobody should need any more than that.

 

[rocket500]

I'd be willing to join the town militia if they want one. I suspect they do not want one.

 

[FrugalFannie]

I'd be willing to join the town militia if they want one. I suspect they do not want one.

He wants all arms and ammunition stored in a central location and mandate training. Maybe he's thinking someone will make him an officer.

 

[FrugalFannie]

See update post 1

 

[USARifleman]

Hi All,

New member here. I was alerted to this thread by a coworker. I am a Westford resident.

I came into possession of a copy of the bylaw that is being proposed, and will include it below. The Selectman will be attempting to close the warrant for Town Meeting at the BOS meeting tonight. I believe the goal should be to get the Selectmen to reconsider, and not include it in the warrant.

This bylaw was hastily crafted in the immediate wake of Sandy Hook. I've spoken with several Selectmen who confess to not knowing much about the current laws or how this would effect gun owners in town. Nevertheless, they mostly seem to think it's worth pursuing anyway.

They've received a lot of calls from gun owners. In the words of one of the Selectmen, many of these callers come off as "crazy people." Keep in mind when you talk to them in public or private, that many people feel threatened by guns and gun ownership. Making statements that could be construed as threatening, or otherwise coming off as a "crazy person" only confirms their preexisting fears. Stay calm. Present reasoned arguments. Treat them with respect, if you wish them to do the same to you.

Here is the proposed bylaw:

To see if the Town will vote to amend Chapter 95 of the General Bylaws, titled "Firearms", by renumbering section 95.4 to 95.5, and adding new section 95.4, as follows:

95.4. Other Prohibited Activities

The sale, transfer, or possession of assault weapons, large capacity weapons, machine guns or large capacity feeding devices shall be banned within the Town of Westford. The definitions of "assault weapon", "large capacity weapon", "machine gun" and of "large capacity feeding device" shall be the same as defined in Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 140, Section 121.

95.5. Violations and penalties.

Any person violating any of the provisions of this bylaw shall be deemed guilty of misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined $100 for the first offense, $200 for the second, $300 for the third and each subsequent offense.

Or act in relation thereto.

 

[BenDover]

No exemption for LEO's.....

95.4. Other Prohibited Activities

The sale, transfer, or possession of assault weapons, large capacity weapons, machine guns or large capacity feeding devices shall be banned within the Town of Westford. The definitions of "assault weapon", "large capacity weapon", "machine gun" and of "large capacity feeding device" shall be the same as defined in Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 140, Section 121.

95.5. Violations and penalties.

Any person violating any of the provisions of this bylaw shall be deemed guilty of misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined $100 for the first offense, $200 for the second, $300 for the third and each subsequent offense.

 

[jakeroub]

the same as defined in Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 140, Section 121.

So, they basically want to ban everything that's already banned in MA? huh?

 

[BenDover]

No its refering to MGL for the definitaion of the guns they want to ban....

So, they basically want to ban everything that's already banned in MA? huh?

 

[CrackPot]

No LEO exemption. All high capacity guns banned, so other than the right to carry concealed they should be B-Ramming everyone. I can't believe Westford is beating the moonbats in Concord to this...

Hi All,

New member here. I was alerted to this thread by a coworker. I am a Westford resident.

I came into possession of a copy of the bylaw that is being proposed, and will include it below. The Selectman will be attempting to close the warrant for Town Meeting at the BOS meeting tonight. I believe the goal should be to get the Selectmen to reconsider, and not include it in the warrant.

This bylaw was hastily crafted in the immediate wake of Sandy Hook. I've spoken with several Selectmen who confess to not knowing much about the current laws or how this would effect gun owners in town. Nevertheless, they mostly seem to think it's worth pursuing anyway.

They've received a lot of calls from gun owners. In the words of one of the Selectmen, many of these callers come off as "crazy people." Keep in mind when you talk to them in public or private, that many people feel threatened by guns and gun ownership. Making statements that could be construed as threatening, or otherwise coming off as a "crazy person" only confirms their preexisting fears. Stay calm. Present reasoned arguments. Treat them with respect, if you wish them to do the same to you.

Here is the proposed bylaw:

To see if the Town will vote to amend Chapter 95 of the General Bylaws, titled "Firearms", by renumbering section 95.4 to 95.5, and adding new section 95.4, as follows:

95.4. Other Prohibited Activities

The sale, transfer, or possession of assault weapons, large capacity weapons, machine guns or large capacity feeding devices shall be banned within the Town of Westford. The definitions of "assault weapon", "large capacity weapon", "machine gun" and of "large capacity feeding device" shall be the same as defined in Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 140, Section 121.

95.5. Violations and penalties.

Any person violating any of the provisions of this bylaw shall be deemed guilty of misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined $100 for the first offense, $200 for the second, $300 for the third and each subsequent offense.

Or act in relation thereto.

 

[USARifleman]

"No exemption for LEO's....."

No, but it would have been better not to point that out to them. Now they'll just quickly add the exemption.

"ban everything that's already banned in MA?"

Yes, only there's no grandfathering provision in this bylaw, and it includes high capacity firearms, which you can own today if you have a Class A permit. So it goes well beyond the state and federal laws.

My personal opinion is that we should not point out all of the obvious flaws in this law, so they can be corrected before Town Meeting. Better to let them pass a defective bylaw and use the flaws to have it overturned. Hopefully it won't come to that, but it may.

 

[dougp]

Talk about a moonbat. At least the entire BoS are not with the bearded fellow and the mope thats beside him. Perhaps he needs a hobby other than being an emotionally voting selectman. Looks like little man syndrome to me. Good Luck all and good on PennyPincher for seeing this!

 

[economist]

"No exemption for LEO's....."

No, but it would have been better not to point that out to them. Now they'll just quickly add the exemption.

"ban everything that's already banned in MA?"

Yes, only there's no grandfathering provision in this bylaw, and it includes high capacity firearms, which you can own today if you have a Class A permit. So it goes well beyond the state and federal laws.

My personal opinion is that we should not point out all of the obvious flaws in this law, so they can be corrected before Town Meeting. Better to let them pass a defective bylaw and use the flaws to have it overturned. Hopefully it won't come to that, but it may.

How many selects are we talking about here? Three? One is clearly locked in. The others almost surely have made up their mind one way or the other.

In situations like this I think the biggest mistake you can make is to water down the language. All that does is buy them more votes at town meeting. My advice would be to push them the other way. Get them to propose the most extreme anti-gun plan you can imagine. Play to the crazies. Note how dangerous things would be if they succeeded in their half-way and tentative assault weapons ban. What about "Saturday Night Specials"? What about handguns (most popular for criminals)? Do they know Mass allows a 10-round mag but that the enlightened New Yorkers now only get 7? Are the selects really more pro-gun than the entire state of New York?

I'm serious here. Get them to go all the way. You are then more likely to win at town meeting and, if you lose, more likely to have a clear case against them down the road.

 

[BenDover]

+1 the more crap you stick in it the better. Make a 2 pronged attack one to remove it from the ballot and the other to add things to it (for the children of course). Some ideas:

+ Anyone that owns any guns not covered by the ban must have a *real* gun safe.
+ Anyone that owns guns must store ammo in a different safe
+ The safe that stores ammo must be fire rated
+ No one in town can have more than 100 rounds per firearm stored in their fire rated safe
+ Anyone transporting guns in the town must use durable rifle cases not made from plastic or cloth
+ The town clerk shall make records of all gun ownership inclusing serial numbers in the next town census

When town meeting happens have a large block against the bill and make sure they all speak until the moderator won't let them speak anymore. After an hour or so everyone will be so sick of talking about it they will vote it down.

How many selects are we talking about here? Three? One is clearly locked in. The others almost surely have made up their mind one way or the other.

In situations like this I think the biggest mistake you can make is to water down the language. All that does is buy them more votes at town meeting. My advice would be to push them the other way. Get them to propose the most extreme anti-gun plan you can imagine. Play to the crazies. Note how dangerous things would be if they succeeded in their half-way and tentative assault weapons ban. What about "Saturday Night Specials"? What about handguns (most popular for criminals)? Do they know Mass allows a 10-round mag but that the enlightened New Yorkers now only get 7? Are the selects really more pro-gun than the entire state of New York?

I'm serious here. Get them to go all the way. You are then more likely to win at town meeting and, if you lose, more likely to have a clear case against them down the road.

 

[CrackPot]

Five Selectman
Town of Westford, MA - Board of Selectmen

The above link has each of their email addresses and their phone numbers

How many selects are we talking about here? Three? One is clearly locked in. The others almost surely have made up their mind one way or the other.

In situations like this I think the biggest mistake you can make is to water down the language. All that does is buy them more votes at town meeting. My advice would be to push them the other way. Get them to propose the most extreme anti-gun plan you can imagine. Play to the crazies. Note how dangerous things would be if they succeeded in their half-way and tentative assault weapons ban. What about "Saturday Night Specials"? What about handguns (most popular for criminals)? Do they know Mass allows a 10-round mag but that the enlightened New Yorkers now only get 7? Are the selects really more pro-gun than the entire state of New York?

I'm serious here. Get them to go all the way. You are then more likely to win at town meeting and, if you lose, more likely to have a clear case against them down the road.

 

[jar]

In situations like this I think the biggest mistake you can make is to water down the language. All that does is buy them more votes at town meeting. My advice would be to push them the other way. Get them to propose the most extreme anti-gun plan you can imagine. Play to the crazies. Note how dangerous things would be if they succeeded in their half-way and tentative assault weapons ban. What about "Saturday Night Specials"? What about handguns (most popular for criminals)? Do they know Mass allows a 10-round mag but that the enlightened New Yorkers now only get 7? Are the selects really more pro-gun than the entire state of New York?

I'm serious here. Get them to go all the way. You are then more likely to win at town meeting and, if you lose, more likely to have a clear case against them down the road.

That's a massive risk to take though. I agree on keeping out the police exemption, but I'm not so willing to take the risk of getting stuck with a real ban with teeth.