An Update on GOAL, The Foundation, and TOM

[Len-2A Training]

Help me decide to join GOAL.

Name one thing GOAL has accomplished this past year in Mass that makes it easier to obtain an LTC, expands the Roster, ends the harassment of Mail Order Dealers who will not ship me Ammo, etc.

Now I see Comm2A at least filing Legislation. I know a lot of it fails, but they are an ever-present thorn in the side of the Government.

And the NRA is on the news every day.

So explain where my bucks will do more good with GOAL than Comm2A or the NRA.

You do? Please cite Bill #s?

No you have it wrong, Comm2A's charter is to educate and sue in Federal Court.

GOAL's charter is to work on legislation. Due to a lack of sufficient "friends" in the legislature, GOAL ends up spending most of the time PREVENTING worse laws. They did yeomen's work at turning around a terrible bill in the Summer of 2014 and making it more palatable to us. There were some minor wins in it and a major loss (FID discretionary). GOAL does work with friendly legislators to file pro-2A bills, but basically they go nowhere due to lack of legislative support.

 

[jasons]

Help me decide to join GOAL.

Name one thing GOAL has accomplished this past year in Mass that makes it easier to obtain an LTC, expands the Roster, ends the harassment of Mail Order Dealers who will not ship me Ammo, etc.

Now I see Comm2A at least filing Legislation. I know a lot of it fails, but they are an ever-present thorn in the side of the Government.

And the NRA is on the news every day.

So explain where my bucks will do more good with GOAL than Comm2A or the NRA.

GOAL helped kill H.4121 just for one example.



http://www.ammoland.com/2014/07/mas...-force-rewrite-of-h-4121-to-make-bill-neutral

 

[92G]

Just because MA hasn't turned into a constitutional carry state, doesn't mean "GOAL is failing". 2A rights are an uphill battle around here, and thankfully GOAL represents me at the state legislative level. I will continue to support them regardless of outcome.

I just wish GOAL and Comm2A could get a promotional flyer in each gun box, similar to the stupid NRA leaflet. This would help expand membership and drum up $$$.

 

[DecOFlaherty]

great info.

Thanks.

 

[Individualist]

There is no excuse in this day and age for everyone on this forum to NOT join GOAL and Comm2A to fight for us on the local levels. They are synergistic organizations that work very hard for our benefit day in and day out. GOAL does put out a newsletter for members with good info on where they are involved. Additionally, the NRA and SAF do similar things at the National level.

Consider all of the money you spend every year on shooting gear, ammo, clubs, etc. Even for the occasional shooter it amounts to a pretty penny.

So here is the BEST part... for about $100 bucks a year you can join and help support all four - GOAL, Comm2A, NRA and SAF.

Like I said, there really is no excuse given the B.S. we are facing today.

 

[enbloc]

Think of it like AAA. When you need it it doesn't matter how much it costs... When you don't think you need it you could care less..

Good or bad, GOAL is ours. We can make it better if we want. EddieCoyle works hard to improve GOAL, we should too.

 

[M1911]

Help me decide to join GOAL. Name one thing GOAL has accomplished this past year in Mass that makes it easier to obtain an LTC, expands the Roster, ends the harassment of Mail Order Dealers who will not ship me Ammo, etc. Now I see Comm2A at least filing Legislation. I know a lot of it fails, but they are an ever-present thorn in the side of the Government. And the NRA is on the news every day. So explain where my bucks will do more good with GOAL than Comm2A or the NRA.

Comm2A does not file legislation. Comm2a files lawsuits.

GOAL and Comm2a are two sides of a coin. GOAL tries to prevent bad legislation from being passed in the first place. Comm2a tries to get bad laws that have already been passed eliminated via the justice system. Both are needed.

Unfortunately, we don't have the votes on Beacon Hill to pass good gun legislation. That isn't GOAL's fault. As long as most legislators are anti-gun, GOAL will always be fighting a rearguard action.

The NRA defers to GOAL in MA.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

GOAL has done a great job of stopping bad legislation, and limiting that which passes. They occasionally get some small tidbits thrown our way (like changing a 4 year LTC to 6).

GOAL is largely powerless to have bad laws repealed, though id did manage to have pepper spray change from "FID or LTC required" to "FID required if under 18". GOALs inability to reign in the AG is a reflection of the environment in which it operates, rather than a reflection of its capabilities. Remember, this is the state where Cheryl Jacques would win each election in a landslide with a campaign statement of "I do not seek, not do I want, votes from GOAL members" (from memory, but pretty close).

It would be a mistake to consider donations to GOAL or Comm2A to be an either/or decision.

 

[Mike S]

Thanks everyone for the comments.

Remember, over the past two years, Westford, Wayland, Northborough, Harwich, Edgartown, Marblehead, Sheffield and Reading have all tried to pass town level bans of one form or another and lost.

This is due in large part to GOAL getting the message out to the citizens and organizing the resistance.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Thanks everyone for the comments.

Remember, over the past two years, Westford, Wayland, Northborough, Harwich, Edgartown, Marblehead, Sheffield and Reading have all tried to pass town level bans of one form or another and lost.

This is due in large part to GOAL getting the message out to the citizens and organizing the resistance.

What is the chance of GOAL filing a small bill to invoke pre-emption by the state? Thus, avoiding having to put out fires in each city/town across the state? After all the state LOVES "control" so taking that back might be salable to the legistraitors??

 

[MachineHead]

What is the chance of GOAL filing a small bill to invoke pre-emption by the state? Thus, avoiding having to put out fires in each city/town across the state? After all the state LOVES "control" so taking that back might be salable to the legistraitors??

Good idea. A bill that would eventually recognize the 2A in MA would be a good deal as well.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Good idea. A bill that would eventually recognize the 2A in MA would be a good deal as well.

I don't expect MA to EVER recognize the 2A . . . not until Comm2A slams them in a Federal Court and they get their asses kicked by a Constitutionalist judge. I'm not holding my breath.

 

[Mike S]

What is the chance of GOAL filing a small bill to invoke pre-emption by the state? Thus, avoiding having to put out fires in each city/town across the state? After all the state LOVES "control" so taking that back might be salable to the legistraitors??

Good question, GOAL currently has a pre-emption bill filed:

An Act Relative to Constitutional Rights

This legislation creates a new section of law that provides a presumption that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual civil right. For many years the courts and law enforcement entities have been confused due to the state’s poorly written laws. With a clearly defined presumption of rights, lawful citizens will be saved unnecessary harassment. Likewise the courts and law enforcement will no longer waste time and resources on lawful citizens simply exercising their civil rights.

It also provides protections against other government entities in the state from passing laws and regulations restricting that right. This will avoid a potential patchwork of laws across the Commonwealth that causes confusion. Click Here for more information on this bill.

The bill is awaiting a public hearing. Hopefully it will get moving once the legislature is back to work in February.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Good question, GOAL currently has a pre-emption bill filed:

The bill is awaiting a public hearing. Hopefully it will get moving once the legislature is back to work in February.

Mike,

IMNSHO the way the above is worded will make it difficult (more likely impossible) to get passed into law in MA.

You (GOAL) are basically stating that 2A is applicable in MA whereas MA doesn't recognize 2A or most of the US Constitution. That will be too tough a pill for them to swallow IMNSHO.

A much simpler bill that might get thru would be merely stating that the state has the SOLE right to make laws regarding owning, carrying, etc. of guns in MA and that the purpose is to eliminate the confusion of different rules/laws in numerous localities within the state. You aren't forcing them to accept Heller or the 2A in this case (which is against the legistraitors' principles) but instead ego-polishing that they are the only "true arbiters" of law.

 

[M1911]

Good idea. A bill that would eventually recognize the 2A in MA would be a good deal as well.

Once again, we don't have the votes on Beacon Hill. The majority of the state reps and state senators are anti-gun. There are a great many bills that would be "a good deal" in MA, but the reality is that they won't get out of committee, let alone come to the floor, get passed, and get signed.

We need to understand the political reality that GOAL is up against.

 

[Billsail]

Mike,

IMNSHO the way the above is worded will make it difficult (more likely impossible) to get passed into law in MA.

You (GOAL) are basically stating that 2A is applicable in MA whereas MA doesn't recognize 2A or most of the US Constitution. That will be too tough a pill for them to swallow IMNSHO.

A much simpler bill that might get thru would be merely stating that the state has the SOLE right to make laws regarding owning, carrying, etc. of guns in MA and that the purpose is to eliminate the confusion of different rules/laws in numerous localities within the state. You aren't forcing them to accept Heller or the 2A in this case (which is against the legistraitors' principles) but instead ego-polishing that they are the only "true arbiters" of law.

Interesting. What would this mean for the Boston ban? Would it be grandfathered, or given some sort of dispensation? The bill could be a hurdle for some legislators.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Interesting. What would this mean for the Boston ban? Would it be grandfathered, or given some sort of dispensation? The bill could be a hurdle for some legislators.

Since many years ago the City of Boston's Counsel allegedly told Glidden that Counsel didn't think that the Boston AWB was enforceable and had never been prosecuted, I'm not sure Boston would bitch about it.

 

[Riverside]

Interesting. What would this mean for the Boston ban? Would it be grandfathered, or given some sort of dispensation? The bill could be a hurdle for some legislators.

My fear is that the MA legislature might make Boston or Brookline its model for changes in a state wide law. In other words, each LTC carrier would have to prove proficiency upon application and renewal. No Conceal Carry printed as a restriction. No AR firearms allowed state wide. Sometimes, we should be careful what we wish for.
Best regards.

 

[MetalgodZ]

Mike,

IMNSHO the way the above is worded will make it difficult (more likely impossible) to get passed into law in MA.

[...]

A much simpler bill that might get thru would be merely stating that the state has the SOLE right to make laws regarding owning, carrying, etc. of guns in MA and that the purpose is to eliminate the confusion of different rules/laws in numerous localities within the state. You aren't forcing them to accept Heller or the 2A in this case (which is against the legistraitors' principles) but instead ego-polishing that they are the only "true arbiters" of law.

What about going one step broader and make the state the sole arbiter of any restrictions of enumerated rights?

 

[M1911]

What about going one step broader and make the state the sole arbiter of any restrictions of enumerated rights?

the goal is to propose legislation that has a snowballs chance in hell of actually getting passed.

 

[MetalgodZ]

the goal is to propose legislation that has a snowballs chance in hell of actually getting passed.

I get that, completely.

I'm trying to come up with some wording that lets the greedy legislators at the state level take power from the individual towns while leaving out the whole "OMG GUNZZZ" part.

 

[M1911]

I get that, completely.

I'm trying to come up with some wording that lets the greedy legislators at the state level take power from the individual towns while leaving out the whole "OMG GUNZZZ" part.

The wording also has to avoid the whole big-L Libertarian, "stay away from my Constitutional rights, bitches!" thing as well. If the language is broad, then it has the chance of impacting broad parts of the law, and the legislators are much less likely to buy it. If the language is broad, then it is very easy for a committee chairman to say "this needs more study" to justify tabling it.

 

[Mike S]

I had to go through GOAL's old email archive today and accumulated some data over the last few years. These are the towns that have tried to enact some sort of ban over the last few years, all were overwhelmingly defeated.


Lexington – common firearms & magazine ban
Essex – range – legal discharge on private property ban – Nov, 2016
W. Boylston - legal discharge on private property ban at Wayne’s Weaponry – August 2016
Reading - legal discharge on private property ban – July, 2015
Edgartown - legal discharge on private property ban – June, 2015
Berkley - legal discharge on private property ban – May, 2015
Sheffield legal discharge on private property ban – May, 2015
Natick – Legal CCW on town property – September 2014
Northboro - legal discharge on private property ban – April, 2014
Wayland - legal discharge on private property ban – March, 2014
Westford – common firearms & magazine ban – February, 2013

 

[MisterHappy]

Most people have more than one gun, for different purposes.

Same with NRA, GOAL, and Comm2A.

Which one is better, or more useful, is dependent upon the need, at a given moment.

 

[spt_1955]

What is the chance of GOAL filing a small bill to invoke pre-emption by the state? Thus, avoiding having to put out fires in each city/town across the state? After all the state LOVES "control" so taking that back might be salable to the legistraitors??

I think you are all failing to recognize the Progressive Agenda that is being implemented here.

Obama is not the only progressive using executive branch "powers" and local ordinances to push an anti gun agenda. If you want to see the plan look here:

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/guns-crime/report/2015/12/15/127399/framework-for-action/

VA cancelling reciprocity, Seattle passing "guns and ammo taxes ... they are all part of the plan to bypass the legislative process which they feel is under the spell of (or paid off by) The NRA.

This battle is being fought locally now or being dictated by executive branch politicians. THe last thing this state legislature will do is step in front of towns like Lexington who are pushing anti-gun ordinances.

 

[Waher]

My fear is that the MA legislature might make Boston or Brookline its model for changes in a state wide law.

As anti-gun as most of the legislature is, they love their personal fiefdoms. Every rep which doesn't have Boston and Brookline in their district isn't going to be too keen on changing things in their part of the state to kowtow to two cities.

 

[Roy Rogers]

I had to go through GOAL's old email archive today and accumulated some data over the last few years. These are the towns that have tried to enact some sort of ban over the last few years, all were overwhelmingly defeated.


Lexington – common firearms & magazine ban
Essex – range – legal discharge on private property ban – Nov, 2016
W. Boylston - legal discharge on private property ban at Wayne’s Weaponry – August 2016
Reading - legal discharge on private property ban – July, 2015
Edgartown - legal discharge on private property ban – June, 2015
Berkley - legal discharge on private property ban – May, 2015
Sheffield legal discharge on private property ban – May, 2015
Natick – Legal CCW on town property – September 2014
Northboro - legal discharge on private property ban – April, 2014
Wayland - legal discharge on private property ban – March, 2014
Westford – common firearms & magazine ban – February, 2013

Good info, Mike.

 

[Friday]

Mike, great information, and a great job by GOAL in rallying the troops for these encroachments.

Out of curiosity, is there a flip side of this list, where the moonbats have prevailed? Or is the batting record 1.000 against them right now?

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Out of curiosity, is there a flip side of this list, where the moonbats have prevailed? Or is the batting record 1.000 against them right now?

Boston AW ban.

 

[garandman]

Help me decide to join GOAL.

Name one thing GOAL has accomplished this past year in Mass that makes it easier to obtain an LTC, expands the Roster, ends the harassment of Mail Order Dealers who will not ship me Ammo, etc.//

Jim Wallace and GOAL had a very active role throughout the hearings on the new legislation, and participated in meetings with DeLeo. They reminded people often to keep writing over Deval's one gun a month proposal prior to that.

Dude, it's $30 for one year. Getting GOAL numbers up gives them a lot more political clout. If you're going to give more to Comm2A all well and good but there is value in supporting them as well.