MA Gun Grab 2024: H.4885 - Passed legislature, headed to the governor

[Cavpilot2k]

I am absolutely free to dissent, then again my CEO doesn't go around publicly taking unconstitutional positions. The analogy is very broken in any case.

Your relationship to your CEO vs a cop's relationship to their Chief is a broken metaphor?
You are letting your outrage over this legislation cloud your simple logic.
It is a VERY apt metaphor.
You saying your CEO doesn't take unconstitutional position is the voice of luxury. What if you got a new CEO who did? You would find yourself in the exact same (metaphorical) shoes as many of the rank-and-file cops whose chief supports policies they don't.
Sure, they are welcome to quit and risk their pensions and livelihoods and family financial security, but that's a big ask of anyone.

 

[kalash]

Can we get back on topic? This BS is why these threads become unreadable and people stop following what's going on on Beacon Hill.

 

[vcman]

Enough of this crap,cops are not your friend.now can people keep their guns at their out of state weekend home So massachusshit cop can not take it in the even massachuset resident have to give up their semiauto rifle?

 

[Mark from ?]

I am absolutely free to dissent, then again my CEO doesn't go around publicly taking unconstitutional positions. The analogy is very broken in any case.

Here is the difference....the CEO in this case (Chief of Police) is a constitutional officer. Meaning....... swore an oath to that same Constitution, and gets paid by the public he swore the oath to.

A privately operated company CEO......not even in the same ballpark.

MACOPA is swearing an oath to the Politicians whims....because they hold the checkbook...not to the people......certainly not the Constitution

Get it?

Back on Topic...I agree.

 

[Grendizer138]

S.2572: How should we hold cops accountable?

Well? For the record, I actively pleaded with everyone here to try to get their PDs to oppose the House bill, and I was pleasantly surprised when the MACOPA unanimously opposed it. But now that Chief Gillis is supporting the Senate version and the chiefs and PDs are silent about it, I think...

www.northeastshooters.com

 

[Cavpilot2k]

If he was out there at press conferences advocating for wildly unconstitutional legislation yeah, I would expect people who know I work at that company to associate me with it. My company isn't in the business of arresting people or taking away their freedoms though, so it's a little different to say the least.

Well, lucky you to not be put in a difficult position with principles on one side and providing for your family on the other. Not everyone is in such a fortunate place.
I, for one, won't vilify a cop who doesn't walk up to his chief and call him a fascist and a communist and quit his job. I doubt many keyboard warriors on this board would have the stones to do it either if push came to shove, much less "1775!".
Again, I live in the real world.

 

[Agnotology]

He spoke for the association of MA police chiefs, genius.

I'm glad we agree he is the President of MCOPA? But he doesn't speak for every Chief of Police in MA. I don't understand what is so hard to get about this? You want public disavowment of a statement of policy from a group you aren't associated with?

Did all of you really assume MCOPA has 100% membership of every police chief in MA?

 

[bigred460]

Took me a few tries to get a live person at Spilka's office, was going to voicemail. Got through the aide took my name and town and put me in the against column.

 

[Roadglide]

My point is that he speaks for your company, so you must agree with him/her and support everything they support, right?
I am guessing probably not, which is why I am suggesting you not apply the same logic to cops.
They have no more say in what their chief supports than you do over what your CEO supports.

You must be joking. They CHOOSE not to speak up. Big difference

 

[Cavpilot2k]

You must be joking. They CHOOSE not to speak up. Big difference

So you think if the rank-and-file cop CHOSE to speak up against his chief if would make a difference? They don't choose their chief and they don't make policy -those are political appointments that have nothing to do with the regular "beat" cop.
Come on, get a grasp on reality.
I'm sure you think every voice of protest makes a difference, but you are wrong. Period. Join me in the REAL world, not some fantasy land where the "good" guys win just because they have right on their side. You don't get to win just because you think you are right. That is fantasy.

 

[RHJJ]

Can we get back on topic? This BS is why these threads become unreadable and people stop following what's going on on Beacon Hill.

Please, most of us just want to know about this bill not this silly bullshit.

 

[Mesatchornug]

I'm glad we agree he is the President of MCOPA? But he doesn't speak for every Chief of Police in MA. I don't understand what is so hard to get about this? You want public disavowment of a statement of policy from a group you aren't associated with?

Did all of you really assume MCOPA has 100% membership of every police chief in MA?

Their rep kind of made exactly that claim in their commentary on the house.

A chief who isn't a member would be free to speak out and say so. A chief who dissented would be free to speak up and say so.

Any who doesn't, having sworn an oath to uphold and defend the constitution, is saying by his continued silence that he supports it.

 

[Cavpilot2k]

Please, most of us just want to know about this bill not your silly bullshit.

Agree, but people like to bicker on discussion threads like a bunch of old women, mostly out of frustration.
But I, for one, will get off the quibble-train, because it is pointless.
Some version of this legislation is going to happen regardless of our manifold disagreements because we are in the minority, and for all of our love of Democracy, at the end of the day, democracy means everyone gets a voice, but the majority get their way.

 

[Agnotology]

Their rep kind of made exactly that claim in their commentary on the house.

A chief who isn't a member would be free to speak out and say so. A chief who dissented would be free to speak up and say so.

Any who doesn't, having sworn an oath to uphold and defend the constitution, is saying by his continued silence that he supports it.

Agree on all points, except I don't expect someone to go out of their way to disavow a point or policy made by a group that doesn't represent them, though I appreciate those that do.

 

[DitchDigger]

Just called and got thru no problem,,,

 

[Agnotology]

Please, most of us just want to know about this bill not this silly bullshit.

Be more than happy to, but I don't sit idly by and let people drag good names through mud because they want to paint with broad strokes.

 

[Rat187]

Never interacted with you, nor have I read your posts. so please keep that in mind.....

Provided everything you say is factual, that is absolute horse shit. But it doesn't reflect on any department that wasn't involved, and even then, it only applies to those involved even if in the same department.

I don't blame the locals that ginned me up on 100% spurious charges, it was an emotional charged 'first strike' by my ex. What I do blame is the presentation of evidence against me which was accepted by the police and the courts BUT 100% provided by my ex, including photoshopped pictures and testimony she supplied. If anyone knows the rules of evidence in court house, this is absolutely absurd as evidence. Nobody saved me, I had to learn and ask questions, and I thank those on NES that help free me and offer of me, support and some really Orwell times

 

[Taipan01]

 

[Rat187]

Well, lucky you to not be put in a difficult position with principles on one side and providing for your family on the other. Not everyone is in such a fortunate place.
I, for one, won't vilify a cop who doesn't walk up to his chief and call him a fascist and a communist and quit his job. I doubt many keyboard warriors on this board would have the stones to do it either if push came to shove, much less "1775!".
Again, I live in the real world.

Bullshit.... I went up against the numerous Chief's achieved during my time in public safety and if I thought I was right, I never backed down and I didn't give two turds about my job. It was about what was right.
And yeah, everybody thought I was crazy, but I was willing to lose my job for the men I represented for their lives and their safety... Sorry if this seems like ego posturing, but it's not

 

[vicorjh]

Be more than happy to, but I don't sit idly by and let people drag good names through mud because they want to paint with broad strokes.

Felons in waiting ...

 

[Mesatchornug]

Agree, but people like to bicker on discussion threads like a bunch of old women, mostly out of frustration.
But I, for one, will get off the quibble-train, because it is pointless.
Some version of this legislation is going to happen regardless of our manifold disagreements because we are in the minority, and for all of our love of Democracy, at the end of the day, democracy means everyone gets a voice, but the majority get their way.

You've been a member here for 7+years. Your first post was in this thread. Most have been taking part in the "quibbl[ing]."

Thank you for your contributions.

Agree on all points, except I don't expect someone to go out of their way to disavow a point or policy made by a group that doesn't represent them, though I appreciate those that do.

If I were a CLEO who doesn't support this bill, my town government would have to handcuff me to the radiator to NOT make a comment on this, precisely because I know conversations like this have to be going on. Doubly so if I was not a member of MCOPA.

 

[pastera]

That would be our asshat politicians, and the dipshit president of MCOPA.

Not my local townie's who speak loudly and plainly the state needs to start reading Bruen and stop listening to Moms Demand Action.

Next thing I'm gonna hear you guys singing is "ACAB" and "Defund the Police". Because they are all the same, right?

Have you met me? If not then how do you know if individual or groups of officers have or have not directly infringed on my rights to keep and bear arms (hint: they have)

But taking it a step up the chain - law enforcement is enforcement arm of the state therefore they are just as guilty as each member of the Great Court and the Governor along with the governor's office.

As individual private citizens, I harbor no ill will against the police but when they not only accept but rather endorse and promote carve outs in unconstitutional laws that create a superior class of citizenry for themselves then they as a group are to be shunned, ostracized and if necessary defunded from enforcement of infringements.

 

[Buck F]

I'm glad we agree he is the President of MCOPA? But he doesn't speak for every Chief of Police in MA. I don't understand what is so hard to get about this? You want public disavowment of a statement of policy from a group you aren't associated with?

Did all of you really assume MCOPA has 100% membership of every police chief in MA?

JFC enough already. He's the President and he speaks for the group. When HD 4420 came out the MCOPA came out against it. During public hearings the President was asked if he spoke for the group. Yes. He was then asked if the chiefs were unanimous in their opposition. Yes. Many here speculated that the opposition was due to the police not being exempt.

This time the MCOPA came out in favor of this abomination of a bill, the answers will be the same and it doesn't make a f*** bit of a difference if they're unanimous or not - the organization supports it now. That's all that matters. How hard is that to understand?

And lest you think I'm anti cop, I train regularly w/ two very close cop friends. Last night I assisted at a Women's Self-Defense seminar one of them gave at his PD, got a tour of the department and everything (was pretty cool). And my sister was a cop, there's a thread about all about that too. Yet I still seem to understand that cops are not our friend in this, despite my personal connections.

Now go shit up another thread.

 

[Reptile]

When do the vote on the amendments?

 

[bigred460]

When do the vote on the amendments?

Tomorrow.

 

[tripper]

 

[Roadglide]

So you think if the rank-and-file cop CHOSE to speak up against his chief if would make a difference? They don't choose their chief and they don't make policy -those are political appointments that have nothing to do with the regular "beat" cop.
Come on, get a grasp on reality.
I'm sure you think every voice of protest makes a difference, but you are wrong. Period. Join me in the REAL world, not some fantasy land where the "good" guys win just because they have right on their side. You don't get to win just because you think you are right. That is fantasy.

integrity
noun
in·teg·ri·ty in-ˈte-grə-tē
Synonyms of integrity
1
: firm adherence to a code of especially moral or artistic values : INCORRUPTIBILITY
2
: an unimpaired condition : SOUNDNESS
3
: the quality or state of being complete or undivided : COMPLETENESS

 

[DW357]

I do not disagree with the roster being a BS infringement issue. There are plenty of firearms, especially handguns (sure I have a few ARs, but I am a handgun guy) I would LOVE to have but I can't purchase here. It is a supreme annoyance, but in 14 years it hasn't forced me to move out of state because I can't get a VP9SK, and I still find plenty to buy.

If you knew who you were responding to (CrackPot) you wouldn’t be annoyed by the stupid roster. JFC

 

[chris_1001]

I do not disagree with the roster being a BS infringement issue. There are plenty of firearms, especially handguns (sure I have a few ARs, but I am a handgun guy) I would LOVE to have but I can't purchase here. It is a supreme annoyance, but in 14 years it hasn't forced me to move out of state because I can't get a VP9SK

Ummm…. You are NESing wrong. And for what, 8 years here?

The secret handshake is pretty out in the open…

Hope you figure it out before it goes away…

 

[Horatio Alger Jr]

Sorry if this has been talked about before, but what are they voting on tomorrow? The house bill, the senate bill, the admendments?