MA Gun Grab 2024: Senate bill S.2572

They are talking about pre-trial release, as in BEFORE you are convicted. If it's the first time you are not, yet, a criminal, and it would be hard to justify holding them without bail. And since they are talking firearms crimes and not just violent crimes, so a simple possession is included, do you really want them to be able to hold anyone who has been accused, with no past record, without bail?

Consider this.
Guy walks into a post office, forgets that's a no no with a gun. He has no record and has an LTC. But it's still a firearms charge. Do you want them to hold him without bail till trial?
Go ahead and try it and see how you make out. Besides, it's federal if it is the post office, not a state arrest. I am talking about more of a crime then a licensed gun owner in the post office i am talking about gun crimes, ileagle possession, shootings, using a firearm in the commission of a crime having an illegal machine gun.
 
Go ahead and try it and see how you make out. Besides, it's federal if it is the post office, not a state arrest. I am talking about more of a crime then a licensed gun owner in the post office i am talking about gun crimes, ileagle possession, shootings, using a firearm in the commission of a crime having an illegal machine gun.
It's just an example of a "gun crime" that isn't the violent crime people think of when they think "gun crime", same as with an improper storage charge. Sorry I picked a Fed crime, didn't think it would matter as it's just an example of the idea.

The law wouldn't list out every possible gun crime, they will all be grouped together. That means someone charged with a storage violation will be held same as someone charged with robbing a gas station with a machine gun. And since gun crime is the selling point, I wouldn't expect a revision changing it to violent crime.

And so, applying it to first time allegations become very problematic and likely to be abused, used to coerce a confession with the promise of not spending weeks in jail pre-trial. Better to keep it to repeat offenders (those with prior convictions).
 
They are talking about pre-trial release, as in BEFORE you are convicted. If it's the first time you are not, yet, a criminal, and it would be hard to justify holding them without bail. And since they are talking firearms crimes and not just violent crimes, so a simple possession is included, do you really want them to be able to hold anyone who has been accused, with no past record, without bail?

Consider this.
Guy walks into a post office, forgets that's a no no with a gun. He has no record and has an LTC. But it's still a firearms charge. Do you want them to hold him without bail till trial?
Depends, was he so high that he didn't know what he was doing?
 
Funny how the guy who represents the highest violent crime district in the highest violent crime city in all of Massachusetts wants to further restrict our rights to defend ourselves from his high violence constituents. 🤔
“Funny” is not the word I would use. More like “pathetic”. He knows that his leftist beliefs and constituents essentially preclude him from creating and pushing to adoption any meaningful laws that actually will put a dent in the crime rate in his district. So what is he to do? He needs to simulate activity while his hands are essentially tied up. So in an effort to be still electable next elections he adopts a ghetto catering mentality. Cut this man some slack- he has his back against the wall.

/ sarcasm
 
Last edited:
Ghetto catering this is always the way in Springfield. They are all good boys being racial profiled. This is the way and it won't change no matter what laws, or ammendments to laws. It will only applie to those that are not under the protected dome. Special democrats and the other protected classes.
 
So for the House/Senate/Governor to sign some bill this legislative session - isn't there some date by which the monstrosity between house/senate bills must be announced.
IIRC someone said a date in Late July?
Can someone confirm?
If so it's either in the next few weeks (July 4th weekend LOL) or it gets pushed to the next legislative session?
(Separately I was excited to hear that GOAL are ready to file lawsuits almost immediately upon signing 🤞).
 
So for the House/Senate/Governor to sign some bill this legislative session - isn't there some date by which the monstrosity between house/senate bills must be announced.
IIRC someone said a date in Late July?
Can someone confirm?
If so it's either in the next few weeks (July 4th weekend LOL) or it gets pushed to the next legislative session?
(Separately I was excited to hear that GOAL are ready to file lawsuits almost immediately upon signing 🤞).
July 31st, end of session.
 
So for the House/Senate/Governor to sign some bill this legislative session - isn't there some date by which the monstrosity between house/senate bills must be announced.
IIRC someone said a date in Late July?
Can someone confirm?
If so it's either in the next few weeks (July 4th weekend LOL) or it gets pushed to the next legislative session?
(Separately I was excited to hear that GOAL are ready to file lawsuits almost immediately upon signing 🤞).

Remember that the senate and the house have to actually vote on and pass the bill that comes out of the committee before it goes tothe Governor.
 
Remember that the senate and the house have to actually vote on and pass the bill that comes out of the committee before it goes tothe Governor.

Not an issue, they will rush it through last minute in some late night session so no one has any time to react or even read it and Healey will happily sign it a few days later. They pass so much shit in the last couple weeks it would make your head spin.
 
Not an issue, they will rush it through last minute in some late night session so no one has any time to react or even read it and Healey will happily sign it a few days later. They pass so much shit in the last couple weeks it would make your head spin.

the bill could include summary execution of gun owners and it would pass
 
So, they have waited long enough to sneak this by in the dead of night... Anyone care to guess when it will happen?

I asked that question months ago, and none of the pant-shitters had an answer. If they're right, there's literally no reason why the State should be sitting on this.

I think @drgrant has it right: they know this is all crap, they don't want to pay for it, they don't want anyone important to be on the blame line when it goes to court. Those are the things they're hammering out, not "how can we screw gun owners some more."
 
There are times when my school classes in socialism and communism (yeah, I had those) actually prove useful. That included quotes from famous leaders- Lenin, Stalin, Brezhnev, etc). One comes to mind - “there are decades when nothing happens and then there are weeks when decades happen”- Lenin.

I thought that one was somewhat fitting…

I have expressed before in this thread that this bill will be passed with such timing that would minimize our lead time knowing that it is imminent.
 
With the week FPC is having in SCOTUS and one of the AWB cases being briefed, not sure MA is feeling so confident. Last thing in the world Maura wants is to preside over the legislature that caused AWBs and mag bans to be found unconstitutional for everyone.

More likely though - they will pass it in the dark of night on the last day of the session.
 
With the week FPC is having in SCOTUS and one of the AWB cases being briefed, not sure MA is feeling so confident. Last thing in the world Maura wants is to preside over the legislature that caused AWBs and mag bans to be found unconstitutional for everyone.

More likely though - they will pass it in the dark of night on the last day of the session.
They don’t care.

They probably just can’t agree on how bad to screw us.
 
Back
Top Bottom