Then why on earth do you suppose that offering concessions will result in any concessions coming back your way?
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/Pioneer Valley Arms February Giveaway ***Smith & Wesson SD9VE 9MM***
Massachusetts Bill HD.4420 "An act to modernize gun Laws"
- Thread starter stinx
- Start date
Then why on earth do you suppose that offering concessions will result in any concessions coming back your way?
Mesatchornug
NES Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 13,285
- Likes
- 27,712
Maybe that should be a post-Bruen case
"joining the harvard institute of politics" when you've completely lost the plot is the punchline to many jokes
I am not sure why you guys continue to try to reason with SIGNES.
btnh6668
NES Member
Why don't we start a new thread for hd4420 since this has turned into feeding trolls.
I'm on vacation. It passes the time.
The left is never gonna stop trying to take guns from people, but that doesn't mean we have to give in to them. You can't give them a little now and expect them to not take more later. Us giving up helps them more then it will ever help us, so its really never an option. At the same time doing nothing wont fix it, we're gonna have to try and remove more of the laws on the books now rather than let them keep introducing more. You wanting to give in just brings us down even more.
ETA:
View: https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ
ETA:
View: https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ
Last edited:
Thought experiment:
Say there was a candidate with "D" after their name, who was pro choice, pro gay/trans/etc. rights, pro social safety net, pro public schools, pro public services, and *ALSO* had a long history of being pro gun rights - like, participated in IDPA, mocked AWBs, openly stated that suppressors were good for everyone and idiotic to regulate, thought the Hughes amendment was bad law, etc. Would you vote for that person?
Or how about this:
Say there was a candidate with "R" after their name, who had a long history of being pro gun rights - like, participated in IDPA, mocked AWBs, openly stated that suppressors were good for everyone and idiotic to regulate, thought the Hughes amendment was bad law, etc- but was also pro choice, pro gay/trans/etc. rights, pro social safety net, pro public schools, pro public services, etc. Would you vote for that person?
If the answer is "no" to either of those, how much do you really care about second amendment rights?
The reality in Mass. is that anyone who isn't "left enough", CAN NOT GET ELECTED. Period.
I'd be absolutely tickled to get a hard-line pro rights candidate elected, no matter what the rest of their positions are.
Horatio Alger Jr
NES Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2023
- Messages
- 2,049
- Likes
- 6,752
Dude, for 40 years we have been incrementally giving them our rights so they can have their press release saying "We did it". The next year we give them a little more.
What have we every gotten from them? What have we gotten in return....an infringement that sucks less than the one they proposed?
EJFudd
NES Member
Even if elected. the second guy would completely fail to advance any of his goals in MA because he'd be dogpiled to silence by the rest of the legislature for his single term and, would therefore, be a futile exercise to vote for.
You also say, correctly, with your 'cannot get elected' comment. So, since that's something we can agree on, what can we extrapolate from this about effectively preserving our 2A rights in the MA political climate?
I don't think that's true. There are already congresscritters that are essential to stopping shit like HD.4420, that counts for a lot.
If the left leaning members can rely on our mythical rep. for support on stuff they really care about, they'll be forced to actually consider (like, understand) legislation that would increase public safety *without* criminalizing gun owners, rather than reflexively voting for every anti-gun bill, no matter how terrible.
My point here is that it's Massachusetts, and it will never be Texas or Alaska. What do you *really* care about? Is it gun rights? Or is it your entire agenda. You'll never get the second one. I'm OK with voting for more gun rights even at the expense of plastic straw bans.
bigbravehog
NES Member
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2013
- Messages
- 7,472
- Likes
- 20,549
when I'm on vacation, I go over to Reddit and piss of the liberals there. They are an angry bunch.
Not to be a pedant but, 4420 by name is dead. I assume we'll have a new thread to discuss the next documents/bills proposed which, as this one mostly was (5 miles an hour under notwithstanding) , be focused on tracking the progress and, news and efforts to block by the community.Yes, PLEASE!!!Leave this one to the Troll and the Troll feeders.
Much as you might prefer not to recall, when 4420 was in play, I wasn't arguing the 'merits of an absolutely unmitigated 100% #$%^show of a bill.
I was maintaining an updated list of the legislators who had shown a willingness to block or dull it and sharing updates with related info from other fora.
Debate isn't trolling.
Put in a request to your superiors. I’m sure she will sign off on it…
I don't think it's anyone's entire agenda. If the same guy who was absolutely to the wall in favor of 2A rights but wanted to raise the sales tax to 50%, I don't think even Ted Nugent would vote for him.
Sorry, I was unclear. "your" didn't mean @SIGNES 's , it meant "one's"
If a solidly pro-gun candidate is unacceptable because they don't pass the hard right purity test on all the social issues you'll (one will) never get your (one's) candidate elected in Mass.
It is the teacher in you.
With what content?
Nothing new is going to come out until the fall. This is what the thread has turned into. That's what happens on forums: threads go their own way.
Dench
NES Member
Since a lot of people here think your account is a sock puppet, a troll account or something similar you might want to adjust your messaging. As its not landing.
"no actually its everyone else here who is wrong and if they were only as smart as me they would understand"
From the outside looking in… I think a lot of you are overlooking a valuable part of Signes being part of the conversation. Most of you are calling him names and claiming he’s a troll.. which may be the case, but I can’t say for certain that he is.
What I CAN say for certain is that, regardless of whether or not you agree or disagree with any of his viewpoints, him playing devils advocate is a good thought exercise for all of us. Living in an echo chamber and surrounding yourself only with like-minded people makes you a weak arguer over time.
Having someone who disagrees with you, either entirely or just on some things, is an excellent way to poke holes in each others arguments.. and that allows both parties to fix and therefore strengthen their arguments.
I’ve been reading a lot of what the regulars here have been posting, and one thing has dawned on me that so many of you gloss over:
1.) “going green” does not make you educated.
2.) having been “using firearms for the last 40+ years” does not make you educated.
The amount of arrogance in this thread is absolutely mind boggling. Some of it might be good-natured inside jokes, some of it might be sheer ignorance. But for SURE it exemplifies how many people here are closed minded and are in no way shape or form good arguers. It’s pretty clear how few of you have actual experience inside a court room, how few of you have actual experience in politics, and how few of you are really even give off a vibe that you care about anything except yourself.
There’s a very evident amount of tribalism in this thread. It’s not welcoming of new members, it’s doesn’t increase knowledge (I’d even argue it lessens knowledge and muddies the waters), and it certainly doesn’t help the image of the 2A community. If I was to try and imagine myself as a liberal looking at this thread, I could somewhat understand some of the stereotypes that have been associated with us.
Do better. All of you. A lot of you are claiming to have decades of experience in shooting sports, so my assumption is that the median age of this thread is in the upper 40s and 50’s, but reading this thread is like listening to a bunch of pubescent school girls trying to gang up against the new, hot girl who has the attention of the popular jock. Honestly grow up.
What I CAN say for certain is that, regardless of whether or not you agree or disagree with any of his viewpoints, him playing devils advocate is a good thought exercise for all of us. Living in an echo chamber and surrounding yourself only with like-minded people makes you a weak arguer over time.
Having someone who disagrees with you, either entirely or just on some things, is an excellent way to poke holes in each others arguments.. and that allows both parties to fix and therefore strengthen their arguments.
I’ve been reading a lot of what the regulars here have been posting, and one thing has dawned on me that so many of you gloss over:
1.) “going green” does not make you educated.
2.) having been “using firearms for the last 40+ years” does not make you educated.
The amount of arrogance in this thread is absolutely mind boggling. Some of it might be good-natured inside jokes, some of it might be sheer ignorance. But for SURE it exemplifies how many people here are closed minded and are in no way shape or form good arguers. It’s pretty clear how few of you have actual experience inside a court room, how few of you have actual experience in politics, and how few of you are really even give off a vibe that you care about anything except yourself.
There’s a very evident amount of tribalism in this thread. It’s not welcoming of new members, it’s doesn’t increase knowledge (I’d even argue it lessens knowledge and muddies the waters), and it certainly doesn’t help the image of the 2A community. If I was to try and imagine myself as a liberal looking at this thread, I could somewhat understand some of the stereotypes that have been associated with us.
Do better. All of you. A lot of you are claiming to have decades of experience in shooting sports, so my assumption is that the median age of this thread is in the upper 40s and 50’s, but reading this thread is like listening to a bunch of pubescent school girls trying to gang up against the new, hot girl who has the attention of the popular jock. Honestly grow up.
Only people ive ever heard use the phrase "do better" when they are trying to make an argument are college aged liberal women
1903Collector
NES Member
We've been scolded, we should all go to our rooms and think about what we have done.
VetteGirlMA
NES Member
D candidate
As a libertarian there are several degrees of overlap on social issues so I would be inclined to vote that way even though it would tick me off that government will continue to grow unabated.
R candidate
Same thing as the D, so I would be inclined to vote that way
But what you just described is fictional. No conservative would get nominated that way and any liberal who made it that far wouldn't get the free Bloomberg bucks.
I learned my lesson with Baker when he was all 'rah rah i support your 2A rights' the next election cycle he took Bloomberg money.
I don't care about far left causes. I would just like to see the democrats remove themselves from Michael Bloombergs dick so that we can have productive conversations. They're too busy looking for quick and easy money. But I fear that in 2023 this is now impossible because of the way in which the parties are funded. So we're screwed no matter which way the pendulum swings.
CatSnoutSoup
NES Member
VetteGirlMA
NES Member
No one is running for office that cares is my take away. It's easier to sit here on the keyboard and complain than give up a nice comfy life for what exactly?
