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

robjax said:
Just got an email from GOAL stating Marsha is threatening to file an emergency preamble to 135.
Click to expand...
Go for it.
Shows that the law was not for public safety but to punish gun owners and dealers.
That it is public knowledge that doing so will end the sale of essentially every long gun statewide and she's still willing to do it gives us some strong arguments for injunctions against the roster.
And if she does then FA-10s go away immediately
 
pastera said:
Go for it.
Shows that the law was not for public safety but to punish gun owners and dealers.
That it is public knowledge that doing so will end the sale of essentially every long gun statewide and she's still willing to do it gives us some strong arguments for injunctions against the roster.
And if she does then FA-10s go away immediately
Click to expand...
Cool - You can build what you want from legal lowers for 2 years without any paperwork and unpin your stocks if she does??
 
not new guy said:
So she can't stop the petition process but she can force the law into effect with the emergency preamble at any time prior to the citizens voting on it? What's the point of the petition then? So the citizens can vote on it after it's been in effect for over a year?
Click to expand...
Either way we can still 'vote' on it. Without it, the bill is 'paused' until such a time when it can be voted on in the general election, BUT the emergency preamble blocks the bill/law from being put on 'pause' until it's voted on and allows it go to into effect as scheduled.
 
Picton said:
All of which reinforces what some of us have been saying all along:

This law will never, ever be meaningfully enforced on anyone. All the people here fretting about making sure their Glock 17 has only ten rounds after October are worrying needlessly. The LAST thing the State needs on its plate is an actual criminal case about any aspect of this law.
Click to expand...
I disagree. There are going to be cops with an arrest boner who don't comprehend nor have concern for how that case might impact law in the higher courts. The risk is not limited to 'add on' for worse charges. Have an accident and/or medical emergency with the wrong cop on the scene and find out. We generally have great cops where I live but there's at least one I can see being overzealous in such a case.
 
Mountain said:
I disagree. There are going to be cops with an arrest boner who don't comprehend nor have concern for how that case might impact law in the higher courts. The risk is not limited to 'add on' for worse charges. Have an accident and/or medical emergency with the wrong cop on the scene and find out. We generally have great cops where I live but there's at least one I can see being overzealous in such a case.
Click to expand...

I'm not really talking about the cops. I don't trust them to understand ANY law; I fully expect them to arrest first and ask questions later.

I'm talking about DAs.
 
Dcdr said:
How do we get the average, non-enthusiast gun owner in MA to see this law as a big deal? My Dad and Stepdad are both gun owners in their 70s and neither had any idea about this law. They both don’t see how this really changes things for them. Neither owns an ASF, my Stepdad doesn’t carry and my Dad only carries a j-frame or pocket 380. Stepdad will likely never buy another gun or step foot in a gun shop again, and my Dad seems to only buy old 22’s and shotguns from private face to face sales.
I think many gun owners in MA are in a similar boat, and I think getting those guys to take action and see this as a big deal is going to be a hurdle when it doesn’t seem to change things for them.
Click to expand...
If they are like my dad and are old. They dont give a flying fxck anymore. They are done. They dont buy guns anymore, and they dont shoot much.

They dont want to lose what they have or want their kids to inherit is most important to them now. But they arent going out and registering it either.
 
not new guy said:
So she can't stop the petition process but she can force the law into effect with the emergency preamble at any time prior to the citizens voting on it? What's the point of the petition then? So the citizens can vote on it after it's been in effect for over a year?
Click to expand...
I believe it's been mentioned, she only has 30 days from signing the law to add the emergency preamble.

She's trying to get us to give up and not get the signatures, she knows it will look bad, She's playing the intimidation card, doesn't mean she won't file it, but it would be better for her if she didn't need to.
 
The timing is interesting. Her deadline to file he preamble falls before the signature deadline, right? I guess she can keep an eye on its progress and file at the last minute in any case. Sure, it will look bad (to us), and sure we'll then have a fight in court, but that court fight will cost money and resources. Our side has a finite supply of those.
 
Mark from ? said:
If they are like my dad and are old. They dont give a flying fxck anymore. They are done. They dont buy guns anymore, and they dont shoot much.

They dont want to lose what they have or want their kids to inherit is most important to them now. But they arent going out and registering it either.
Click to expand...
This is not the truth for all old people.
Please do not speak for all of us.
 
Dcdr said:
Stepdad will likely never buy another gun or step foot in a gun shop again, and my Dad seems to only buy old 22’s and shotguns from private face to face sales.
I think many gun owners in MA are in a similar boat, and I think getting those guys to take action and see this as a big deal is going to be a hurdle when it doesn’t seem to change things for them.
Click to expand...

It's been many years since I bought a firearm from an LGS, and I don't really see that changing. I've become an FTF guy, and I long since have my "needs" taken care of along with most of my "wants."

Regardless, I understand that the loss or crippling of LGSs in MA would be a catastrophic blow to RKBA. I'm passionate about wanting them to stay in business, partly because I know newer shooters need them, and partly because the State wants them gone. I don't like the State all that much, so if I can help stymie them, I will.

Fighting this law isn't all about us as individuals. It's about us as a group. Even if you're just fine under this law (like I probably am), that doesn't matter. The law is an egregious and tyrranical overreach, and needs to be fought whether or not our own collections are affected.
 
MAJoe said:
Cool - You can build what you want from legal lowers for 2 years without any paperwork and unpin your stocks if she does??
Click to expand...

Hypothetically, pulling your stock pins should have happened the moment the bill was signed.

I kick myself, now, for ever owning a compliant rifle. At this point, making sure my rifles are compliant would be the furthest thing from my mind.
 
Yummy_SPAM said:
I think all of us finding the need to become internet lawyers has really soured me on GOAL. They need to be more proactive with keeping people up to date on what's happening with some level of analysis. They have a platform where they could put out more information on a daily basis to help interpret what's going on and bringing us lay folk up to speed better. I'll still donate because at this point it's almost a necessity, but they really need to get information flowing better. Especially when the referendum is their idea.
Click to expand...
That is no longer what goal does.

Goal is now a litigious organization like comm2 per their last announcement.
 
center442 said:
I am trying very hard to understand this.

The AG is the chief lawyer for the PRM. That office is where a legal opinion should originate. If the AG can't determine whether a referendum is constitutional on her own, then she should resign or be fired, because this clearly indicates that she is incompetent.

If she does have to do research to determine constitutionality, what the he'll do those anti-gun groups know about constitutional law that she doesn't??? That's like an exterminator asking mice how to build a better mousetrap.

JFC, this state is FUBAR.
Click to expand...
Give her a break, she's new and doesn't even know what a constitution is let alone that the state has its own.
 
Picton said:
Hypothetically, pulling your stock pins should have happened the moment the bill was signed.

I kick myself, now, for ever owning a compliant rifle. At this point, making sure my rifles are compliant would be the furthest thing from my mind.
Click to expand...
Living behind the iron curtain, I’ve told myself I’ve preferred fixed stocks more than adjustable so I have no pins to ceremoniously remove [dance]
 
MAJoe said:
Living behind the iron curtain, I’ve told myself I’ve preferred fixed stocks more than adjustable so I have no pins to ceremoniously remove [dance]
Click to expand...

To be honest, having owned a bunch of preban underfolders over the years, I've never kept those around. I like wooden fixed stocks better in an AK.

Sidefolders, though........

As for ARs? I barely own any, so that's not much of an issue. Even when I was overseas, banging around in and out of vehicles with an M4 while wearing a flak vest, the sliding stock never did anything for me.
 
42! said:
I believe it's been mentioned, she only has 30 days from signing the law to add the emergency preamble.

She's trying to get us to give up and not get the signatures, she knows it will look bad, She's playing the intimidation card, doesn't mean she won't file it, but it would be better for her if she didn't need to.
Click to expand...

That’s not what I read. She can add it anytime before the election for the referendum.


“if the governor, at any time before the election at which it is to be submitted to the people on referendum, files with the secretary of the commonwealth a statement declaring that in his opinion the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, safety or convenience requires that such law should take effect forthwith and that it is an emergency law and setting forth the facts constituting the emergency, then such law, if not previously suspended as hereinafter provided, shall take effect without suspension…”.”

https://www.mass.gov/news/governors-authority-to-make-new-law-effective-immediately
 

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
77
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