Massachusetts Bill HD.4420 "An act to modernize gun Laws"

Did something I never do because I think it's pointless: Emailed my Rep (A cosponsor of the bill. [puke] ) and my Senator (Spilka). Also emailed my CoP encouraging him to reach out and oppose the legislation.

No response from any of them yet (except an auto-reply from Spilka). Will update if I hear anything back.

None of it will really do any good but at least I've done my part.

Email to my Rep below. A similar version was sent to the Chief and Spilka.
Good morning,

I'm writing to you today to voice my opposition to HD4420. I am extremely disappointed that you are a cosponsor of this travesty of a piece of anti-civil rights legislation.

I have read this legislation and, in its current state, there is practically nothing worth salvaging. I encourage you to withdraw your sponsorship and support.

I have also reviewed the summary provided to the legislature and it does not represent what the bill would actually do to lawful citizens. If passed, around 10% of the residents of the Commonwealth will become felons overnight.

You and the legislature are being intentionally misled by Chairman Day and Speaker Mariano to advance their own political ends.

There has been absolutely zero opportunity for the public to attend hearings or provide testimony in favor of or against this legislation after it was written and presented. It appears that the "listening" tour was a thin excuse to distract the public from the behind-the-scenes effort to railroad this poorly written and conceived law through the Massachusetts legislature.

It's also readily apparent that this proposed law was being worked on WHILE the listening tour was ongoing - Putting the lie to the claims that it was influenced by the feedback received.

If they're proud of this legislation, and believe the process to be above board, why are the meetings surrounding it not open to the public? Why has data, provided to Chairman Day by GOAL, not been cited in support of this law? I'll tell you why: This legislation is not supported by evidence of any kind.

Quoting from a recent GOAL release:
In 2014, GOAL passed a law, via Chapter 284 of the Acts of 2014, to create the Criminal Firearms and Trafficking Unit of the State Police. (see language below) To our knowledge this unit does not exist. After checking with some law enforcement friends, it appears it did for about a year or so and then was disbanded.

During the ... listening tour, even [Mom's Demand Action were] asking: Where is the data from this unit? The answer: It doesn’t exist. They were very upset that the state was not following the law...

One of the only pieces of data we can find in relation to type of guns used is from the FBI. It’s called the Unified Crime Report system (UCR). The latest data from the FBI (2019) on type of weapon, and number of them, used in murders that year:

Handguns: 33
Rifles: 0
Shotguns: 0
Unknown Type of Firearm: 53
Knives: 38
Hands: 8

It is clear that the state has never been interested in the true data. In fact, when GOAL first met with Chairman Day prior to the... listening tour, he became very agitated when we tried to present him with the government’s own data. He was adamant that it was not to be discussed in his office.


It really seems like this is being rammed through contrary to data, doesn't it? I'd like that the legislature would want to have some data indicating that licensed gun owners are the problem before criminalizing 600,000 citizens of the Commonwealth.

This bill has absolutely nothing to do with making Massachusetts safer, and everything to do with punishing gun owners for being a minority in this state and is an attempt to nullify a Supreme Court decision. This is in exact contradiction to what was stated again and again and again at the "listening" tour - That legal gun owners are not the problem and shouldn't be the target of the legislation.

Something like 92% of LTC holders in Massachusetts are already unrestricted. It's not LTC holders causing problems - It's unlicensed individuals (who are already criminals by their simple act of owning a gun without a license) causing the violent crime in the Commonwealth. The guns these individuals are using are not 3D printed. They're stolen from other states with less strict storage laws.

If passed, this law effectively ends the civil right to own common firearms, engage in shooting sports, and carry them for self-defense - in direct contradiction to the Bruen and Heller decisions. The private property ban (even on quasi-public property where all members of the general public are invitees) solves a non-problem and is an attempt to neutralize a Supreme Court decision.

The bill effectively bans hunting on privately owned land - a right and privilege that has been part of Massachusetts' culture and tradition since the foundation of the Commonwealth. It also makes commonly used shotguns for hunting "assault weapons." The Heller decision, in particular, states that individuals can own firearms "typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes" which is in direct contradiction with the text of this proposed legislation.

The sections regarding the serialization of feeding devices and barrels and requiring modifications to firearms to be reported and approved by the State Police are especially egregious and show an utter lack of understanding of how firearms work and are maintained.

Under the law, if I changed a cosmetic piece of the firearm - replaced the grips for a different color - or mounted a new optic to my .22 target rile, I'd need prior approval from the State Police. First, that's absurd. I shouldn't need a permission slip to maintain something I legally possess. Second, it creates an impossible-to-manage backlog of paperwork that prevents State Troopers from being out on the streets working to improve public safety.

The bill also provides no grandfather clause for firearms owned legally in the state before passage. This means that anyone who was in compliance prior to enactment would be required to submit to gun confiscation which would represent an unjust taking as there's no mechanism included for the Commonwealth to compensate the individual being forced to relinquish their property.

The bill provides an extremely high bar for at-risk individuals to take steps to defend themselves - Groups that have historically been targeted for violence such as the LGBTQ community, Jews, Muslims, and people of color.

Finally, I would encourage you to also review the review and recommendation of the legislative committee of the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police (linked here for your convenience). That committee strongly opposes the legislation. While the entire memorandum is informative, I'd particularly point you to Chief Glidden's summary in the final pages.

Of particular note is the following statement from the Chiefs "Regarding Firearms Safety, Massachusetts is consistently ranked among the lowest states for firearms accidents. In 2021, there were 0 reported firearms accidental deaths. The yearly rate in MA averages at two (2) per year. This demonstrates that our current Firearms Safety Laws, including safe storage and safety training, ARE working...

We applaud the crafters of this Bill for their zeal in attempting to do something about the trend of violence we are seeing by persons illegally using firearms... However, the scope of HD 4420 is so widespread and far-reaching that many of the proposed sections simply cannot be accomplished, or in many cases, enforced. We need to focus on legislation, cooperatively developed... that will truly have a real-world impact on those who would use firearms to commit crimes and acts of violence."

Respectfully,
This Guy
Click to expand...
 
TJ4 said:
This right here. And then you can look forward to your buddy cop at the range (who has 10 years to fully vesting in his pension and whose chief just told his officers that they need a big score under the new law) checking out the best candidates of whose house to raid for suspicion of firearms violations under the new law. the first big “violators” of this law will be peaceful, formerly law-abiding citizens who got snared so that the chief of anytown, MA can Twitter post a picture of the cache of weapons and ammo they got off ”the streets.” Meanwhile a face-tattooed animal who just crossed over the border will be selling drugs laced with fentanyl to teenage girls in that same town.
Click to expand...
Trust me they don't actually care that much there's no extra money in enforcing gun laws. 🤣

Reality is something more along the lines of like some anti-gun cop that happens to steal somebody's s*** while doing a 209a will apply charges as a matter of convenience on top of whatever other made up b******* they invent...


JDL said:
Gavin Newsom will most likely be our next president. I think Joe will drop out do to health reasons and our current VP is a joke and even scares the most liberal Democrat. If the Democratic party was smart and wants to secure a land slide win in the next presidential election they should nominate Gavin Newsom to run for president and Michelle Obama as his running mate for VP. This ticket could never lose.
Click to expand...

Imho only via massive fraud. Those two on a hate scale would render worse than shitlery clinton in swing states. Plus he's not exactly doing a great job in CA. Literally anybody running against him just has to put up pictures of turds on the street in SF and videos of looting and rampant crime, $7 gas etc, and basically say do you really want your state to turn into this under this kind of leadership? Even most left leaning wobblies as a matter of Interest are not on board with all of this rampant crime Etc...
 
Picton said:
They will.

The more egregious this bill is, the faster it'll get smacked down.

View attachment 775607


I believe it will pass, but it'll be in a HIGHLY neutered form by the time it does. And it needn't be complied with; injunctions will come thick and fast if it stays this awful.
Click to expand...

It really depends on how dumb they want to play this..... 🤣 if the temper tantrum crew is ultimately in charge of advancing this legislation I can see it remaining huge and extra dumb, on the other hand if there are a few adults in the room I can see this turd being cut up into smaller turds, possibly even ones coated with frosting.
 
SteelShooter said:
Wonder how tough it is to switch state of residency , this is just crazy.
Click to expand...
As someone who is doing just that in just over a month, just takes fortitude, motivation and maybe some $$$ to do so. Probably less so depending on where NH (or ME) you want to move to.

Peicemaker said:
I wonder if we should start contacting people in the NH government to try and arrange some sort of refugee resettlement program for those of us who dont have the money to relocate if this abomination passes.
Click to expand...
bb2.jpg
 
DEL said:
Or just not comply. Zero chance I end up serializing and reporting all my magazines or getting rid of my AR’s and the like.
Click to expand...

I wonder how many clubs will change rules to follow this if it becomes law?

What are the laws on cops coming onto private property, i.e. private gun ranges to check compliance? Also I would think that is probably a low risk unless some Fudd drops a dime...
 
mothybee said:
I wonder if knowing their base is women voters, are they aware that if they pass a bill to put their husbands, fathers and sons in jail, along with their paychecks, it may not go as expected next election.
Click to expand...
Lol. That’s not broadlogic (c) though. Feel-good laws are for boogeyman, and women are largely insulated from them.

The 19th amendment was the downfall of the country.
 
drgrant said:
Trust me they don't actually care that much there's no extra money in enforcing gun laws. 🤣

Reality is something more along the lines of like some anti-gun cop that happens to steal somebody's s*** while doing a 209a will apply charges as a matter of convenience on top of whatever other made up b******* they invent...




Imho only via massive fraud. Those two on a hate scale would render worse than shitlery clinton in swing states. Plus he's not exactly doing a great job in CA. Literally anybody running against him just has to put up pictures of turds on the street in SF and videos of looting and rampant crime, $7 gas etc, and basically say do you really want your state to turn into this under this kind of leadership? Even most left leaning wobblies as a matter of Interest are not on board with all of this rampant crime Etc...
Click to expand...

Good looks and smooth talking worked for Obama, it can work for Newsome!
 
Reptile said:
What about FFL’s?

I presume they would be exempt?

The government can’t expect everyone to just turn everything in right?

Surely that’s not Constitutional.

This is madness.

The courts need to step in.
Click to expand...
FFL's are not exempt. Any FFL's with a personal collection will be required to dispose of everything, like everyone else. So anyone who got their FFL so they could own cool stuff will have to sell it or surrender it.
Also, they won't be allowed to store firearms outside their business. No storage at home would be allowed.

Oh and they will have to file paperwork for every part they sell. You want a flashlight for your gun? Paperwork with serial #s, background checks, etc.
 
40 Creedmoor fan said:
FFL's are not exempt. Any FFL's with a personal collection will be required to dispose of everything, like everyone else. So anyone who got their FFL so they could own cool stuff will have to sell it or surrender it.
Also, they won't be allowed to store firearms outside their business. No storage at home would be allowed.

Oh and they will have to file paperwork for every part they sell. You want a flashlight for your gun? Paperwork with serial #s, background checks, etc.
Click to expand...
this is so dumb that I cant see it making it through court.
 
Picton said:
That's great and all, but let's be honest: these cops are speaking out because this bill targets them, too.

Once the legislators insert language exempting cops from this law, they'll pipe down. This is how they do their lobbying.
Click to expand...
Did you read the entire letter this chief wrote? He really hits on many of the major flaws associated with this bill which is nothing more than a temper-tantrum reaction to the Bruen decision by a bunch of power hungry communists that are in-charge right now.

“As I enter my third year as your police chief, responsible for overseeing the 123 sworn men and women who serve the more than 60,000 of you day in and day out, my duty compels me to speak up.

“I have read the relevant portions of H.D. 4420, a bill proposing a substantial rewrite of Massachusetts’ existing gun laws. Despite claims this bill attempts to stem the flow of illegal firearms into the state while increasing protection from gun violence, I see no language that would lead one to believe this rationale to be true. Instead, it appears the only thing this bill will accomplish is turning thousands of our law-abiding residents into criminals overnight.

“This bill seems more designed to invade the privacy and vandalize and confiscate the property of law-abiding citizens than it does protecting them.

“As we saw all too clearly this week in the State Forest, our issue is with criminals who have guns NOW, not those we stand to make into criminals LATER. Instead of punishing criminals
or those prohibited from possessing firearms, this bill targets lawful gun owners who are some of the most well vetted in both the Commonwealth and the entire nation. There is nothing in this bill that mandates the judicial system enforce the laws currently in full force and effect.

“When was the last time anyone served time under Bartley-Fox? For instance, we now know attempting to shoot and murder seven people, including five police officers, will result in just five to seven years in prison.

“We recently had an incident in our community where a lawfully licensed firearm holder stopped the attempted kidnapping, and potentially worse, of a woman in a domestic violence incident. This gentleman was a contractor working at a residence across the street. Under this bill, if this Samaritan did not have expressed written consent of the victim/homeowner to have his firearm on her premises, he would be subject to a criminal charge. The same goes for an off-duty Plymouth County Sheriff’s deputy who saved countless lives a few years back when he ended a stabbing rampage in a Taunton restaurant.

“Instead of being recognized as the heroes they are, they would be charged with a crime, and recognized at their arraignment.
In nothing else, this bill will make both enforcement and compliance with our laws even more complicated and confusing. As anyone who has had the unfortunate experience of trying to navigate our already-strict gun laws knows, it’s already confusing enough. The firearms law guide used by our officers already clocks in at well over 400 pages. This bill will jostle definitions and provisions all around the books with various changes, placing our laws into an even greater state of misunderstanding and chaos.

“As a licensing authority which consistently ranks within the top ten municipalities in the entire Commonwealth for the number of firearms licenses, this is of grave concern to me.

“As a law enforcement officer first and foremost, I take the duty of protecting persons from any type of violence as my ultimate mission. However, this bill targets the wrong individuals and needs to be reconsidered.

“In closing, I urge our State House delegation to withhold their support from this bill as written.”

Sincerely,
Chief Dana. A. Flynn
 
Picton said:
That's great and all, but let's be honest: these cops are speaking out because this bill targets them, too.

Once the legislators insert language exempting cops from this law, they'll pipe down. This is how they do their lobbying.
Click to expand...
that kind of thing is already backfiring in courts: in california, a judge (maybe even benitez) questioned why all law enforcement was being issued off roster weapons if the state's position was that only on roster was safe.

the myriads of unintended and intended consequences of this bill will produce quite a bit of legal fodder, and i'm not sure it's quite so easy to just exempt the police from it and not draw the obvious constitutional challenge.
 
Reply from my Police Chief(Mattapoisett),

“
Thanks for reaching out. I cannot agree with you more. I am an active member of Mass Chiefs and other Chief associations. You are absolutely correct about the effect of this bill on lawful gun owners. In the form that the bill was presented we cannot support this. We have been and are actively watching this bill and I am sure there will be many changes along its way as it was just presented.

Please do not hesitate to reach out and let your Rep. (Straus) or Senator (Montigny) hear from you. Please encourage others to do the same. Don't be afraid to reach out to Speaker Ron. Mariano or Rep. Michael Day (the bill author) and let them know.

Thanks again
Jason King”
 
Joeldiaz said:
Any other circuit courts? Sure, no shot this survives. In CA1? Strong possibility it lives on.
Click to expand...

They are asking for a good chance at a 2A win in a court with this though. Usually they are a little smarter than this and chip away at it, this is everything at once. In the face of Bruen that is one BIG gamble and I can't imagine why they are taking that risk. Because if they F it up they are done for good.
 
freddieMA said:
that kind of thing is already backfiring in courts: in california, a judge (maybe even benitez) questioned why all law enforcement was being issued off roster weapons if the state's position was that only on roster was safe.

the myriads of unintended and intended consequences of this bill will produce quite a bit of legal fodder, and i'm not sure it's quite so easy to just exempt the police from it and not draw the obvious constitutional challenge.
Click to expand...
It wasn’t Benitez, he’s not handling either of the CA handgun roster cases (Boland & Renna). The 2A cases he’s handling are Miller (AWB), Duncan (Mag ban), Rhode (Ammo background checks) & Fouts (Billy club ban).
 
FrankNA said:
Did you read the entire letter this chief wrote? He really hits on many of the major flaws associated with this bill which is nothing more than a temper-tantrum reaction to the Bruen decision by a bunch of power hungry communists that are in-charge right now.

“As I enter my third year as your police chief, responsible for overseeing the 123 sworn men and women who serve the more than 60,000 of you day in and day out, my duty compels me to speak up.

“I have read the relevant portions of H.D. 4420, a bill proposing a substantial rewrite of Massachusetts’ existing gun laws. Despite claims this bill attempts to stem the flow of illegal firearms into the state while increasing protection from gun violence, I see no language that would lead one to believe this rationale to be true. Instead, it appears the only thing this bill will accomplish is turning thousands of our law-abiding residents into criminals overnight.

“This bill seems more designed to invade the privacy and vandalize and confiscate the property of law-abiding citizens than it does protecting them.

“As we saw all too clearly this week in the State Forest, our issue is with criminals who have guns NOW, not those we stand to make into criminals LATER. Instead of punishing criminals
or those prohibited from possessing firearms, this bill targets lawful gun owners who are some of the most well vetted in both the Commonwealth and the entire nation. There is nothing in this bill that mandates the judicial system enforce the laws currently in full force and effect.

“When was the last time anyone served time under Bartley-Fox? For instance, we now know attempting to shoot and murder seven people, including five police officers, will result in just five to seven years in prison.

“We recently had an incident in our community where a lawfully licensed firearm holder stopped the attempted kidnapping, and potentially worse, of a woman in a domestic violence incident. This gentleman was a contractor working at a residence across the street. Under this bill, if this Samaritan did not have expressed written consent of the victim/homeowner to have his firearm on her premises, he would be subject to a criminal charge. The same goes for an off-duty Plymouth County Sheriff’s deputy who saved countless lives a few years back when he ended a stabbing rampage in a Taunton restaurant.

“Instead of being recognized as the heroes they are, they would be charged with a crime, and recognized at their arraignment.
In nothing else, this bill will make both enforcement and compliance with our laws even more complicated and confusing. As anyone who has had the unfortunate experience of trying to navigate our already-strict gun laws knows, it’s already confusing enough. The firearms law guide used by our officers already clocks in at well over 400 pages. This bill will jostle definitions and provisions all around the books with various changes, placing our laws into an even greater state of misunderstanding and chaos.

“As a licensing authority which consistently ranks within the top ten municipalities in the entire Commonwealth for the number of firearms licenses, this is of grave concern to me.

“As a law enforcement officer first and foremost, I take the duty of protecting persons from any type of violence as my ultimate mission. However, this bill targets the wrong individuals and needs to be reconsidered.

“In closing, I urge our State House delegation to withhold their support from this bill as written.”

Sincerely,
Chief Dana. A. Flynn
Click to expand...
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. I’ll believe when they throw their badges on the table and walk off the job.
 

Similar threads

California is set to track gun shop credit card sales as 17 other states pass laws that prohibit it
Replies
0
Views
11
Reptile
Reptile
Mexico is suing US gun manufacturers because its strict gun laws don’t deter crime.
Replies
7
Views
328
akma
A
3 House Democrats file bill to ban 50 caliber rifles
2
Replies
42
Views
1K
T-Unit
T
Scott signs VT Suppressor Hunting Bill into law
Replies
23
Views
899
1sern
1
Gatling Gun. Need another safe
Replies
19
Views
693
Asaltweapon
Asaltweapon
Back
Top Bottom