Gun Violence report in the hands of DeLeo

[pastera]

The only way we could possibly win anything in a comprimise would be the following:

1 - Give up FTF for no more EOPS or AG list
2 - Mental Health to NICS and suicide numbers for SHALL issue LTC with COP ability to present unsuitablility evidence at a hearing (per GOAL)

given 1 &2 the whole lost stolen reporting goes away as there would be no need to fear loss of license for reporting.

Having the suicide hotline listed is BS but does not actually restrict anyone so is a non-issue
Reporting mental health issues to NICS is a done deal - not getting out of this unless there is a very high level senator or rep that would be negatively effected.

 

[W.E.C]

Stand by for a July 3rd sneak attack ramming this bill through like the cowards they are.

 

[jasons]

While I agree defeating every aspect of H.4121 is unrealistic, getting by with only some of the components is still a slow boiling frog and continual erosion of our rights. I feel like we have all been battered so often that we accept the minor abuse as 'not so bad, they only raped me and didn't break any bones this time'. However unlikely, we need to remember a true compromise would be to win back some of the bullshite that is on the books now, and give some with this new bill. Not that we have any leverage though.

I hear you and agree, but there are parts of the bill that actually aren't completely anti-freedom and even a few sections that, at least on their face, are beneficial to gun owners. (Lowering some of the license penalties, extending the grace period on licenses, increasing penalties for car jackers and armed home invaders, etc.) The mental health and school resource stuff is mostly fine, etc. There actually are some parts of the bill that I would support individually, unfortunately they mixed in too much anti-2A stuff for me to support the bill as a whole.

So yes, I agree with the whole boiling frog thing, but not everything in there turns up the gas on legal gun owners. Some of it actually does turn up the heat on criminals. (Shocking, I know.)

 

[Rider]

Stand by for a July 3rd sneak attack ramming this bill through like the cowards they are.

Lots of folks keep saying this, but it doesn't make sense. If/when they pass this, the majority who vote for it will want a lot of publicity so they can bolster their anti-gun bona Fides, especially if they are up for re-election.

In MA, there really isn't a need to sneak when t comes to gun control legislation.

 

[DarthRevan]

Well I better hurry up and find that Gen4 G30 I have a hard on for before it's too late.

 

[W.E.C]

What doesn't make sence is electronic polling from the beach on a Saturday.

 

[Mike S]

What do you mean by "see where it goes"?

It was released by the committee, correct? Are there multiple, equally likely, options as to where it could be going at this point?

The bill will most likely go to another committee, either Ways & Means or Rules. Where it will need to be voted on again. It's highly unlikely that it will go straight to the house or senate floor for debate/vote.

That's why I'm saying, lets wait a few hours, see where it goes, then focus on that.

 

[jasons]

The bill will most likely go to another committee, either Ways & Means or Rules. Where it will need to be voted on again. It's highly unlikely that it will go straight to the house or senate floor for debate/vote.

That's why I'm saying, lets wait a few hours, see where it goes, then focus on that.

Thanks Mike, that makes sense. If I'm not mistaken ways and means would need to reconcile all of the un-funded mandates (and there are a lot of them.)

 

[jefftk]

The bill will most likely go to another committee, either Ways & Means or Rules. Where it will need to be voted on again. It's highly unlikely that it will go straight to the house or senate floor for debate/vote.

That's why I'm saying, lets wait a few hours, see where it goes, then focus on that.

Gotcha, thanks for the clarification.

 

[rwl1955]

My Representative, Dennis Rosa, just answered my email and said when the bill comes up for a vote he will vote NO!

 

[Mike S]

Thanks Mike, that makes sense. If I'm not mistaken ways and means would need to reconcile all of the un-funded mandates (and there are a lot of them.)

Yes it could get stuck there for a while ;-)

On the flip side, if this thing gets fast tracked like the upskirt bill we'll know for sure the fix is in.

 

[mbullism]

Thanks Mike, that makes sense. If I'm not mistaken ways and means would need to reconcile all of the un-funded mandates (and there are a lot of them.)

I thought the opposite, the beauty of the unfunded mandate... since there is no money that need be appropriated to enact it, Ways and Means is taken out of it... and the burden actually gets kicked further down the chain...

Please correct me if I'm full of it-

MB

 

[Quiet]

Maybe we should push to change the FTF at a dealer requirement to both parties must log onto the FA10 system and enter their pins. This would prove that both people have active, valid licenses and nothing has been reported to the police that would cause their licenses to be revoked, effectively the same as a background check.

We're essentially giving up nothing since both parties are supposed to log onto the system anyway; maybe the optics will be "good enough" to allow them to claim they've instituted "universal background checks" and "closed the gun show loophole" and get their 6 points from the Brainy Campaign.

 

[oldsoldier29]

Are they still pushing for a final vote before 4 July?

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

[rchap36]

Maybe we should push to change the FTF at a dealer requirement to both parties must log onto the FA10 system and enter their pins. This would prove that both people have active, valid licenses and nothing has been reported to the police that would cause their licenses to be revoked, effectively the same as a background check.

We're essentially giving up nothing since both parties are supposed to log onto the system anyway; maybe the optics will be "good enough" to allow them to claim they've instituted "universal background checks" and "closed the gun show loophole" and get their 6 points from the Brainy Campaign.

How about this DON"T give up shit we have this problem because we always give up something

 

[Quiet]

How about this DON"T give up shit we have this problem because we always give up something

OK, then let it pass as is.


Check please

 

[92G]

it is without question that the liberal propanda machine is seeking to disqualify all of us from firearm ownership.
their current approach is to disqualify us on the basis of "mental health".

this is a slippery slope for us to argue. most of us agree that freedoms should not be denied to those with a nonviolent mental health history or nonviolent minor convictions. however, try arguing that point to the current liberal machine of MA and they will turn the argument to "so you want to arm the mentally deranged and dangerous?" in the course of taking this position, the pro-2A community will lose the entire battle and HB4121 will pass in an egregious format.

As this bill moves forward, it will become increasingly important that we pro-2A folks "sing a similar tune." if we attack the entire HB4121 we will undoubtedly fail. the liberals will claim that we "want guns for everyone including the mentally ill".

There are several aspects of HB4121 which are unquestionable infringements with absolutely no benefit to anyone.
We ought to concentrate our efforts on these aspects because they are the achilles heel of HB4121 and the best spots for us to destroy this trash legislation.

At this point I suggest people really choose maybe 1 or 2 areas of the bill that are unacceptable.
for me it is denying the right of FTF transfer and requiring a gun owner to provide a list of owned firearms to anyone. IMO changing FID to shall issue would be right behind these two.

i think we should try to be as concerted as possible with our attacks on HB4121.

 

[Quiet]

MODS:

​

Can we please start a thread dedicated to fleshing out and vetting a good strategy to fighting parts of this bill with a single voice? If we have any chance at success it will be by modifying parts of it.

Otherwise I fear we will wind up with it in it's entirety as presently written.

 

[jasons]

OK, then let it pass as is.


Check please

You're assuming that the only two options are to give up something or let it pass as is. The third option is that we get some (or optimistically all) of the crap amended out and let the stuff that doesn't affect us as law-abiding gun owners pass. I'm all for increasing the penalty for armed home invasion and carjacking, for example.

Can we please start a thread dedicated to fleshing out and vetting a good strategy to fighting parts of this bill with a single voice?

This thread is as good as any IMHO. Flesh away.

 

[DarthRevan]

You're assuming that the only two options are to give up something or let it pass as is. The third option is that we get some (or optimistically all) of the crap amended out and let the stuff that doesn't affect us pass. I'm all for increasing the penalty for armed home invasion and carjacking, for example.




This thread is as good as any IMHO. Flesh away.

Could we bump this to a sticky?

 

[sbi]

How about this DON"T give up shit we have this problem because we always give up something

Exactly right. Compromise=weakness. Give up a finger today and they'll go after your hand tomorrow.
It amazes me how people here on this forum who repeatedly attack people who dare to bring "common sense" to the table, all of a sudden want to compromise on this bill.
Because even if you are successful and the legislature will meet you half way, you know very well that few months from now come another crazy shooting and another bill will surface, and this time it'll take away from you even more than H.4121.

 

[jasons]

Could we bump this to a sticky?

Sure, done.

 

[LoginName]

it is without question that the liberal propanda machine is seeking to disqualify all of us from firearm ownership.
their current approach is to disqualify us on the basis of "mental health".

this is a slippery slope for us to argue. most of us agree that freedoms should not be denied to those with a nonviolent mental health history or nonviolent minor convictions. however, try arguing that point to the current liberal machine of MA and they will turn the argument to "so you want to arm the mentally deranged and dangerous?" in the course of taking this position, the pro-2A community will lose the entire battle and HB4121 will pass in an egregious format.

As this bill moves forward, it will become increasingly important that we pro-2A folks "sing a similar tune." if we attack the entire HB4121 we will undoubtedly fail. the liberals will claim that we "want guns for everyone including the mentally ill".

There are several aspects of HB4121 which are unquestionable infringements with absolutely no benefit to anyone.
We ought to concentrate our efforts on these aspects because they are the achilles heel of HB4121 and the best spots for us to destroy this trash legislation.

At this point I suggest people really choose maybe 1 or 2 areas of the bill that are unacceptable.
for me it is denying the right of FTF transfer and requiring a gun owner to provide a list of owned firearms to anyone. IMO changing FID to shall issue would be right behind these two.

i think we should try to be as concerted as possible with our attacks on HB4121.

The mental health issue is the hardest to address and resolve for the reasons you posted.

The good news is that even a number of Liberals, mental health professionals and privacy advocates oppose
submission and archiving mental health records (although for entirely different reasons).

It could be to our advantage to let them, take up the lead on that particular issue.

 

[JZ1018]

I was thinking along the same lines as Pastera. What if we would give up FTF transfers and in return we get rid of the EOPS list and AG's list. I know a lot of you are concerned about having to go through a FFL for a transfer, but with no lists, anything could be purchased from an FFL. All those Glocks would now be available at non-Mass inflated prices. Ending FTF would be a huge sacrifice, but what we get back in return would be huge as well. I don't think the antis would can too much about the lists, since they are against all guns, but they would look at it as a huge win that all gun sales now require a background check.

The only way we could possibly win anything in a comprimise would be the following:

1 - Give up FTF for no more EOPS or AG list
2 - Mental Health to NICS and suicide numbers for SHALL issue LTC with COP ability to present unsuitablility evidence at a hearing (per GOAL)

given 1 &2 the whole lost stolen reporting goes away as there would be no need to fear loss of license for reporting.

Having the suicide hotline listed is BS but does not actually restrict anyone so is a non-issue
Reporting mental health issues to NICS is a done deal - not getting out of this unless there is a very high level senator or rep that would be negatively effected.

 

[jasons]

I was thinking along the same lines as Pastera. What if we would give up FTF transfers and in return we get rid of the EOPS list and AG's list. I know a lot of you are concerned about having to go through a FFL for a transfer, but with no lists, anything could be purchased from an FFL. All those Glocks would now be available at non-Mass inflated prices. Ending FTF would be a huge sacrifice, but what we get back in return would be huge as well. I don't think the antis would can too much about the lists, since they are against all guns, but they would look at it as a huge win that all gun sales now require a background check.

I personally would not support such a strategy and believe it would be detrimental to the overall cause.

 

[pastera]

I was thinking along the same lines as Pastera. What if we would give up FTF transfers and in return we get rid of the EOPS list and AG's list. I know a lot of you are concerned about having to go through a FFL for a transfer, but with no lists, anything could be purchased from an FFL. All those Glocks would now be available at non-Mass inflated prices. Ending FTF would be a huge sacrifice, but what we get back in return would be huge as well. I don't think the antis would can too much about the lists, since they are against all guns, but they would look at it as a huge win that all gun sales now require a background check.

I was not advocating giving up anything - simply stating what would be the most tolerable infringments, not that any are truely tolerable.

My 1 & 2 positives are items we should enjoy without giving up anything else.

Aaron

 

[rchap36]

Note from my wife
you have 3 choices
1) pack up and we move
2) we stay and fight this crap (maybe run for office)
3) we sell everything and turn in our LTC
pick one

 

[Len-2A Training]

I was thinking along the same lines as Pastera. What if we would give up FTF transfers and in return we get rid of the EOPS list and AG's list. I know a lot of you are concerned about having to go through a FFL for a transfer, but with no lists, anything could be purchased from an FFL. All those Glocks would now be available at non-Mass inflated prices. Ending FTF would be a huge sacrifice, but what we get back in return would be huge as well. I don't think the antis would can too much about the lists, since they are against all guns, but they would look at it as a huge win that all gun sales now require a background check.

Everyone has to understand that the part bolded and red CAN NOT and WILL NOT go away no matter what.

Why? It's called "separation of powers" as we learned in US History class. Legislative and Executive branches are separate for a reason and one can not <legally> force the other to do anything (as in undo the AG Regs).

The EOPS List isn't the biggest challenge out there wrt what can be transferred, it really is the nebulous non-existent AG "non-list"!!

 

[terraformer]

Everyone has to understand that the part bolded and red CAN NOT and WILL NOT go away no matter what.

Don't be so sure...

 

[xcom]

I personally would not support such a strategy and believe it would be detrimental to the overall cause.

This is the rub. I think, no matter what we do, the "guns show loop hole" crowd are convinced that FTF has to go. Maybe one mitigates by saying that a transfer to an FFL (any FFL, including 03) is ok but that screws most gun owners and does not help with the non-C&R guns. FTF is the anti holy grail in this bill.

- - - Updated - - -

Everyone has to understand that the part bolded and red CAN NOT and WILL NOT go away no matter what.

Why? It's called "separation of powers" as we learned in US History class. Legislative and Executive branches are separate for a reason and one can not <legally> force the other to do anything (as in undo the AG Regs).

The EOPS List isn't the biggest challenge out there wrt what can be transferred, it really is the nebulous non-existent AG "non-list"!!

But the AG gets its powers to regulate this from 93A, correct? If 93A were modified, then this could be changed.