Gun law opponents begin repeal campaign: Gun owners have taken the first step toward putting before Massachusetts voters a proposal to repeal law

Picton said:
This alone is reason enough to do it.

If the time it takes to sign your name is too high a price to help maintain firearms sales as a viable retail sector in a beleaguered state, then your priorities suck.
Click to expand...
I would have phrased that more rudely, a lot more.
Maybe that's why a work with sailors and not school children 🤔
 
HARRYM said:
And we are asking close to 70% of Leftists to over-turn an unconstitutional law that belongs before SCOTUS and not the Communist voters of MA.
Click to expand...

No we're not.

We're using the means available to us to blunt the worst and most irreversible harms of an unconstitutional law.

Do what you want, but when the guy who owns your LGS is out on his ass because writing your name was too big a hurdle for you, I hope you can look him in the eye.
 
Picton said:
No we're not.

We're using the means available to us to blunt the worst and most irreversible harms of an unconstitutional law.

Do what you want, but when the guy who owns your LGS is out on his ass because writing your name was too big a hurdle for you, I hope you can look him in the eye.
Click to expand...
A signature sheet should be front and center at every LGS in the state (along with every club)
 
Picton said:
Do what you want, but when the guy who owns your LGS is out on his ass because writing your name was too big a hurdle for you, I hope you can look him in the eye.
Click to expand...

That’s a good point. I wasn’t thinking about the gun shop owners earlier when I came out swinging against GOAL for doing this. But that may be the only chance many of them have for staying in business. I still don’t know if I’m sold that this is a good idea. But that’s a fair enough point.
 
PappyM3 said:
Again, please provide references so we can all learn.

The text of the MA constituon that I quoted seemed very explicit in that:

- 10 signatures are needed to get it officially started
- 15k signatures are needed to get it suspended and put up for referendum at the next state election.

50% or greater of votes are needed make it null and void at the referendum vote.

Where a percentage of votes from the past election comes into play is that the repeal votes (if I’m reading this correctly) need to be at least 30% of the number of votes in the past election. So we need to not only get 50% of the repeal votes in the referendum, but those 50% need to amount to at least 30% of the past election votes.

This 30% stipulation is with the referendum voting, not with signatures required to suspend.

But really, I don’t think any of us think a repeal is achievable in the referendum. So, it boils down to that 15k number that is very explicitly mentioned as the threshold to suspend the law and get it put up for referrendum.

”Section 3. Mode of Petitioning for the Suspension of a Law and a Referendum Thereon. - A petition asking for a referendum on a law, and requesting that the operation of such law be suspended, shall first be signed by ten qualified voters and shall then be filed with the secretary of the commonwealth not later than thirty days after the law that is the subject of the petition has become law. [The secretary of the commonwealth shall provide blanks for the use of subsequent signers, and shall print at the top of each blank a description of the proposed law as such description will appear on the ballot together with the names and residences of the first ten signers. If such petition is completed by filing with the secretary of the commonwealth not later than ninety days after the law which is the subject of the petition has become law the signatures of not less than fifteen thousand qualified voters of the commonwealth, then the operation of such law shall be suspended, and the secretary of the commonwealth shall submit such law to the people at the next state election, if thirty days intervene between the date when such petition is filed with the secretary of the commonwealth and the date for holding such state election; if thirty days do not so intervene, then such law shall be submitted to the people at the next following state election, unless in the meantime it shall have been repealed; and if it shall be approved by a majority of the qualified voters voting thereon, such law shall, subject to the provisions of the constitution, take effect in thirty days after such election, or at such time after such election as may be provided in such law; if not so approved such law shall be null and void; but no such law shall be held to be disapproved if the negative vote is less than thirty per cent of the total number of ballots cast at such state election.] [Section 3 amended by section 2 of Amendments, Art.LXXIV and section 4 of Amendments, Art. LXXXI]”
Click to expand...
Concur on the 15k threshold
The most I can find for the higher number is that at least 30% of the total voters must cast a vote on the question to even be considered - then 50%+1 of actual cast to win
 
PappyM3 said:
Again, please provide references so we can all learn.

The text of the MA constituon that I quoted seemed very explicit in that:

- 10 signatures are needed to get it officially started
- 15k signatures are needed to get it suspended and put up for referendum at the next state election.

50% or greater of votes are needed make it null and void at the referendum vote.

Where a percentage of votes from the past election comes into play is that the repeal votes (if I’m reading this correctly) need to be at least 30% of the number of votes in the past election. So we need to not only get 50% of the repeal votes in the referendum, but those 50% need to amount to at least 30% of the past election votes.

This 30% stipulation is with the referendum voting, not with signatures required to suspend.

But really, I don’t think any of us think a repeal is achievable in the referendum. So, it boils down to that 15k number that is very explicitly mentioned as the threshold to suspend the law and get it put up for referrendum.

”Section 3. Mode of Petitioning for the Suspension of a Law and a Referendum Thereon. - A petition asking for a referendum on a law, and requesting that the operation of such law be suspended, shall first be signed by ten qualified voters and shall then be filed with the secretary of the commonwealth not later than thirty days after the law that is the subject of the petition has become law. [The secretary of the commonwealth shall provide blanks for the use of subsequent signers, and shall print at the top of each blank a description of the proposed law as such description will appear on the ballot together with the names and residences of the first ten signers. If such petition is completed by filing with the secretary of the commonwealth not later than ninety days after the law which is the subject of the petition has become law the signatures of not less than fifteen thousand qualified voters of the commonwealth, then the operation of such law shall be suspended, and the secretary of the commonwealth shall submit such law to the people at the next state election, if thirty days intervene between the date when such petition is filed with the secretary of the commonwealth and the date for holding such state election; if thirty days do not so intervene, then such law shall be submitted to the people at the next following state election, unless in the meantime it shall have been repealed; and if it shall be approved by a majority of the qualified voters voting thereon, such law shall, subject to the provisions of the constitution, take effect in thirty days after such election, or at such time after such election as may be provided in such law; if not so approved such law shall be null and void; but no such law shall be held to be disapproved if the negative vote is less than thirty per cent of the total number of ballots cast at such state election.] [Section 3 amended by section 2 of Amendments, Art.LXXIV and section 4 of Amendments, Art. LXXXI]”
Click to expand...
Of course this state makes it harder to figure out what is needed. The votes required for various petitions are found in this doc from the Secretary of State's site. Scroll down to Referendum Petition and on page 12 it shows the signatures required and how derived.

 
Night_solstice said:
A signature sheet should be front and center at every LGS in the state (along with every club)
Click to expand...

That’s going to be the biggest thing. We need to get a list of locations and hours available posted as a sticky once the list is available to sign. This is especially important in the real metro west where there be dragons as locations are usually few and widely dispersed.
 
Picton said:
No we're not.

We're using the means available to us to blunt the worst and most irreversible harms of an unconstitutional law.

Do what you want, but when the guy who owns your LGS is out on his ass because writing your name was too big a hurdle for you, I hope you can look him in the eye.
Click to expand...
I need to be able to look myself in the eye. This will be a mistake on the highest level. I can't go along because some believe its the right cause. I would also not have drank the purple kool aid for the unity of the cause either. Everyone makes choices as to their beliefs, so do I.

Voting has consequences.

Failing to support 2A organizations has consequences.

We are now dying a slow death as a result of consequences.

I have had some, who I know vote for Democrats, tell me I must join the petition.

I told them, you do understand that you are a 2A arsonist so your cries of fire, fire so a serious disconnect between hope and reality of choices.

I will continue to fund 2A organizations as I believe they and SCOTUS are the only ones who have the antidote for the Communist venom we have been bitten with.
 
Personally, I think this effort is a waste of time and effort at best and will be a negative at worst.

I think if this makes it on the ballot, that it will fail miserably. Most people in MA are anti-gun. There is simply no way we will get enough votes to win this. And when it fails miserably, then we have simply provided anti-gun politicians with proof that they are doing the will of the voters.

Our only possible salvation is SCOTUS. We don’t have the votes on Beacon Hill and we don’t have the votes among MA voters.

GOAL is making the fundamental mistake of assuming that most people believe the same things that we believe. But that simply isn’t the case. The average MA suburban soccer mom thinks guns are bad and assault weapons are “weapons of war” that should be banned.
 
jek said:
Of course this state makes it harder to figure out what is needed. The votes required for various petitions are found in this doc from the Secretary of State's site. Scroll down to Referendum Petition and on page 12 it shows the signatures required and how derived.

Click to expand...

Thank you.

It appears that Section 4 of Article LXXXI changes it from 15k votes (as specified in Article XLVIII) to the 2% cast in the past election.

IMG_1709.jpeg
 
it's my understanding that this is just a delay tactic. If GOAL can get the signatures, the law is delayed until 2025, and hopefully, there is some relief from SCOTUS by then. I don't think anyone here expects a referendum like this to pass give the MA electorate.

If this is something that's serious.. getting signatures requires thinking outside the box..

gun stores, fishing stores, archery stores, Bass Pro/Cabelas, hunting/shooting/sportsmans clubs.... all the obvious locations

the not so obvious ones.. Elks lodges, VFWs, American Legions, Republican Town Committees, American Heritage Museum

what are other places that conservatives typically gather?
 
And I will say this. We get relief from SCOTUS to this law if any dealers/FFLs were harmed a lawsuit should be filed for damages and I will be among the first to reach into my pocket and slap a donation on the table for legal support.
 
EMTDAD said:
it's my understanding that this is just a delay tactic. If GOAL can get the signatures, the law is delayed until 2025, and hopefully, there is some relief from SCOTUS by then. I don't think anyone here expects a referendum like this to pass give the MA electorate.

If this is something that's serious.. getting signatures requires thinking outside the box..

gun stores, fishing stores, archery stores, Bass Pro/Cabelas, hunting/shooting/sportsmans clubs.... all the obvious locations

the not so obvious ones.. Elks lodges, VFWs, American Legions, Republican Town Committees, American Heritage Museum

what are other places that conservatives typically gather?
Click to expand...
You ain't getting this question on the 24 ballot. 2025 is an odd numbered year so MAYBE then but my guess is the state will milk it to 2027.
 
Big talk here.

“then the operation of such law shall be suspended, ”

Does this mean that it will be as if the law was never passed? And therefore we just go about business as it has been?

Or does that mean the law is still in place, but just not enforceable?

Assaulty weapons still have the hard coded 8/1 date going forward, but if the interpretation is the latter, then there would be parts of old law that are gone and the new law isn’t yet enforceable. It wouldn’t give us a freedom-period for things like mags, but there may be other considerations.
 
PappyM3 said:
Big talk here.

“then the operation of such law shall be suspended, ”

Does this mean that it will be as if the law was never passed? And therefore we just go about business as it has been?

Or does that mean the law is still in place, but just not enforceable?

Assaulty weapons still have the hard coded 8/1 date going forward, but if the interpretation is the latter, then there would be parts of old law that are gone and the new law isn’t yet enforceable. It wouldn’t give us a freedom-period for things like mags, but there may be other considerations.
Click to expand...
It stalls enactment.
As if the law was never signed.
But that 8/1 date would still hold.
 
HARRYM said:
I need to be able to look myself in the eye.
Click to expand...

Me too. I like knowing I've helped keep a small businessman in business. I doubt I'd be able to look myself in the eye if this failed by one signature and my LGS went out of business, but YMMV.

HARRYM said:
This will be a mistake on the highest level. I can't go along because some believe its the right cause. I would also not have drank the purple kool aid for the unity of the cause either. Everyone makes choices as to their beliefs, so do I.
Click to expand...

NES: "We are stupid because the democrats stoop to the lowest level, but we're too high-minded to do the same!"
also NES: "I care so much about my rights that I won't sign my name to protect them for myself and others."

Whatever.

HARRYM said:
Voting has consequences.
Click to expand...

Not here, apparently. Not for us. So when the law gives us the chance to claw something back, you can piss on it. I won't.

HARRYM said:
Failing to support 2A organizations has consequences.
Click to expand...

So does failing to support LGSs.

HARRYM said:
We are now dying a slow death as a result of consequences.
Click to expand...

"We" are not. Bruen secures our rights, eventually.

The FFLs who support us don't have that kind of time.

HARRYM said:
I will continue to fund 2A organizations as I believe they and SCOTUS are the only ones who have the antidote for the Communist venom we have been bitten with.
Click to expand...

You are correct in the medium term.

In the short term, LGSs in this state will fail because this law will go into effect. When that happens, it'll partly be on you.
 
Picton said:
Me too. I like knowing I've helped keep a small businessman in business. I doubt I'd be able to look myself in the eye if this failed by one signature and my LGS went out of business, but YMMV.



NES: "We are stupid because the democrats stoop to the lowest level, but we're too high-minded to do the same!"
also NES: "I care so much about my rights that I won't sign my name to protect them for myself and others."

Whatever.



Not here, apparently. Not for us. So when the law gives us the chance to claw something back, you can piss on it. I won't.



So does failing to support LGSs.



"We" are not. Bruen secures our rights, eventually.

The FFLs who support us don't have that kind of time.



You are correct in the medium term.

In the short term, LGSs in this state will fail because this law will go into effect. When that happens, it'll partly be on you.
Click to expand...
Won't be on me. If the majority of gun owners had supported 2A rights organizations for the last 40 or so years as I have, and never voted for ANY Democrat as I never have, we would be in a much different place today.
 
HARRYM said:
Won't be on me. If the majority of gun owners had supported 2A rights organizations for the last 40 or so years as I have, and never voted for ANY Democrat as I never have, we would be in a much different place today.
Click to expand...

Granted.

But unless you have a time machine, you can't do anything about that now.

What you CAN do, you should do. You can sign your name. You choose not to. I'd call that investment minimal. And the LGSs you've purchased from in the past are the ones who are going to pay a lasting price for this long after SCOTUS has affirmed your own rights. Are you going to help them restart their businesses then?

No. At that point, they're the ones who'll be wishing for a time machine, and your failure to act NOW will be what they complain about. They'll have a point. I don't know about you, but I'm a man who doesn't want to be the person future generations curse.
 
Picton said:
Granted.

But unless you have a time machine, you can't do anything about that now.

What you CAN do, you should do. You can sign your name. You choose not to. I'd call that investment minimal. And the LGSs you've purchased from in the past are the ones who are going to pay a lasting price for this long after SCOTUS has affirmed your own rights. Are you going to help them restart their businesses then?

No. At that point, they're the ones who'll be wishing for a time machine, and your failure to act NOW will be what they complain about.
Click to expand...
I will never ask a Communist to return my Constitutional rights.
 
HARRYM said:
I will never ask a Communist to return my Constitutional rights.
Click to expand...

Jesus.

This repeal effort is not about your rights. This repeal effort is about the livelihoods of FFLs.

You can claim not to understand that, but as of now you've been informed. So you can't plead ignorance in the future. Just so you know: when all this state legislative bullshit is gone in five years' time, but there's noplace left to buy guns in the Commonwealth, remember this effort and your failure to support it. Because Maura wants to kill off retail, and she hasn't yet... but if we fail to do our utmost here, she'll succeed.

Again, that won't be on me. That'll be on you. YOU will be the reason she's succeeded. Wear that hat proudly.
 

Similar threads

Legislative push starts to repeal Massachusetts gun law
2 3
Replies
82
Views
3K
Foudre
F
Mass. gun law opponents challenge restrictions on young adults
Replies
1
Views
106
Drix
Drix
Massachusetts High Court Provides Cover for Unconstitutional Gun Laws
Replies
1
Views
49
whatluck
whatluck
AG Bondi Proposes Stronger Gun Confiscation Laws
2
Replies
31
Views
1K
Individualist
Individualist
Arkansas Students to Begin Receiving in-School Gun Safety Training
Replies
3
Views
71
Drix
Drix
Back
Top Bottom