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

A large part of the anti-gun rhetoric is stoked by how batshit #$%^&*ing crazy and evil many of the most vocal and visible advocates of 2A come across. Sorry, but this is true. Constant talk of overthrowing a tyrannical government, prepping for the boogaloo, dog-whistling Nazi-isms, religious extremist viewpoints. All of this scares the $%^& out of the middle and the left and gives them ammunition to sell the idea they must limit our basic rights. (In fact, some among the left have been driven to purchase firearms out of fear of those very pro 2A folks who spew that stuff. The whole dynamic is toxic and polarizing.)

The "pry it from my cold dead hand' firebrand rhetoric may galvanize the base but the base doesn't need more galvanizing and it undermines any mechanism of rational argument. If the Pro 2A folks can't learn to find more palatable spokespeople and make 'Hey, he's kind of like me and my family" arguments, this will not end well. Politics includes (is sometimes primarily) marketing. If we in MA want to successfully advocate against this bill, we must find a way to present ourselves as (and maybe try being) the "cooler heads".

(And, yep, I know I'll get flamed for this and, in that flaming, my point will be proven.)
I used to have a similar viewpoint. Do you know what changed it? The constant, ever increasing push to restrict 2A rights. “Compromise” after compromise that was anything but, in actuality. It is just continuous effort to impose restrictions that only affected the law abiding, all with dishonest claims of intent. Living in GA for a bit and seeing how the rest of the country is around guns helped the shift. Blue state cultures are not most of America.

I’m done playing nice and trying to accommodate feelings. I‘m a very normal family man and bring people into the gun community in a safe and inviting way. But I’m not going to be apologetic for my firm stance on freedom.

It’s all why I am thrilled by the FPC’s mission. The authoritarian plutocrats like Bloomberg and his funded organizations tried so hard to demonize the very moderate NRA. Man, I bet they’re kicking themselves for that now that unapologetic 2A organizations are filling the NRA’s void*.

* I fully realize that the NRA’s downfall is in large part due to their current leadership’s corruption rather than external factors.
 
Last edited:

Our Lives, Our Fortunes, and Our Sacred Honor​

If I were an anti, or a politician who supported 4420, I wouldn’t worry about this bill because most of you are not willing to die over this.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a tough guy and don’t want to die either, but someday it may come to that.
 
I think the best line of questioning would be to ask them specifically which crimes any of the laws they're proposing would have prevented. You can't try logic with them, you're not going to win the feelz battle with them, but if you can stump them when it comes to exactly which actual crimes that have occurred in MA would have been prevented by this law it might make them look foolish and expose them IF we can then get that message out.
 
I think the best line of questioning would be to ask them specifically which crimes any of the laws they're proposing would have prevented. You can't try logic with them, you're not going to win the feelz battle with them, but if you can stump them when it comes to exactly which actual crimes that have occurred in MA would have been prevented by this law it might make them look foolish and expose them IF we can then get that message out.
Agree, but the Bloomberg money runs deep; and now that we all know who Mike Day is the bill has already had its desired effect.
 
you can post up areas with strong gun control like nyc, and you'll see daily stories of assaults with knives, and baseball bats, rocks, and fists. and still, guns. It

you can post up crime stats from vt, nh, and me with very little gun control equal to or better than ours in ma. still, it doesn't seem to make a dent.

at some point you'd think someone would sit up and notice, but i guess actually attempting to solve problems isn't the primary goal.
It has to do with demographic density.
 
Last edited:
Agree, but the Bloomberg money runs deep; and now that we all know who Mike Day is the bill has already had its desired effect.
They did good research on who to pick to put it forward. Can’t have a radical minority, or a nut like Linsky with endless legal problems. You need to have a run of the mill, inoffensive, toe the line white guy who just also happens to be incredibly far left and who will do whatever they say with the promise that they’ll push to get him into a higher office someday. It should be interesting when the dem party decides they don’t want a run of the mill white guy in higher office. That‘s Ed Markey and he’s taking up space that a female minority will take when they’re done with him.
 
It has to do do with demographic density.
Solving the problem would take work, and alot of people would not like it as they might not get funds from the government.

The easy thing to do is shot on law abiding citizen, have the problem get worse, then shit on us again.

If an issue was solved, they wouldn't be needed.

Edit -replied to the wrong comment
 
Mass Chief of Police Association Response to HD.4420

A quote from the report:
An everyday common term used in the media and by both Government and Civilian officials is “GUN
VIOLENCE.” The “gun” is always blamed in any horrific act. We lose sight of the fact the “gun” is the tool
of the person who committed the violent crime.


https://www.goal.org/resources/Mass...TxPC_Su11ilWV0syAhC4TmCicTdxjUyDOeC5XUXvk9X20
 
you can post up areas with strong gun control like nyc, and you'll see daily stories of assaults with knives, and baseball bats, rocks, and fists. and still, guns.

you can post up crime stats from vt, nh, and me with very little gun control equal to or better than ours in ma. still, it doesn't seem to make a dent.

at some point you'd think someone would sit up and notice, but i guess actually attempting to solve problems isn't the primary goal.
Solving the problem would take work, and alot of people would not like it as they might not get funds from the government.

The easy thing to do is shit on law abiding citizen, have the problem get worse, then shit on us again.

If an issue was solved, they wouldn't be needed.
 
Maybe someone can take the kid to the range & to a strip club after? Perhaps enlighten him on guns?
Here's one reply from him



Hope you had a nice weekend. Happy to relay any questions to Chair Day's staff if you would like. Hopefully, we will have the public hearing soon so that all sides can be heard on this issue, including GOAL's. For what it is worth, I have actually used a firearm before (multiple times growing up) so I can sympathize with the fact that education and training are an integral part of being a responsible gun owner. Again, thank you for your engagement and feedback.


Thank you,



Adam J. Scanlon
 
Mass Chief of Police Association Response to HD.4420

A quote from the report:
An everyday common term used in the media and by both Government and Civilian officials is “GUN
VIOLENCE.” The “gun” is always blamed in any horrific act. We lose sight of the fact the “gun” is the tool
of the person who committed the violent crime.


https://www.goal.org/resources/Mass...TxPC_Su11ilWV0syAhC4TmCicTdxjUyDOeC5XUXvk9X20
This release should be referenced in every letter to a rep going forward.
 
Last edited:
Kinda I'm young and have only held an ltc for 3 years
When Linsky isn’t dodging state taxes or pushing to de-criminalize bestiality*, he likes to submit bills that are the most flagrant restrictions on gun owners year after year. Well, most flagrant restrictions until this one put forth by Day.

* sadly, I’m serious about this
 
Mass Chief of Police Association Response to HD.4420

A quote from the report:
An everyday common term used in the media and by both Government and Civilian officials is “GUN
VIOLENCE.” The “gun” is always blamed in any horrific act. We lose sight of the fact the “gun” is the tool
of the person who committed the violent crime.


https://www.goal.org/resources/Mass...TxPC_Su11ilWV0syAhC4TmCicTdxjUyDOeC5XUXvk9X20
Sounds like the police realize that the problem is not, and never has been, responsible, legal owners, but fing CRIMINALS.

Gabby Gifford said it in an interview a few weeks back “no guns, no guns, no guns.”
 
When Linsky isn’t dodging state taxes or pushing to de-criminalize bestiality*, he likes to submit bills that are the most flagrant restrictions on gun owners year after year. Well, most flagrant restrictions until this one put forth by Day.

* sadly, I’m serious about this
The dipsh*t should have learned that he was supposed to approach the gun control groups first for the cut and paste bills and the campaign money. They weren’t going to give him a dime, though with the tax evasion charges or that lunatic beasty nonsense.
 
Solving the problem would take work, and alot of people would not like it as they might not get funds from the government.

The easy thing to do is shot on law abiding citizen, have the problem get worse, then shit on us again.

If an issue was solved, they wouldn't be needed.

Edit -replied to the wrong comment
i could do a long one on this, but this is a gun forum so i'll save you all the pain.

tldr: yup.
 
Interesting read from the mass cheif of police association kinda rejects the new prohibited carry areas among other things
quick scan looks like they dumped all over it, the last conclusion page is pretty good.

one thing stuck out: m1 carbine had a full auto variant? pretty sure that might have been an m2 or m3 ...
 
A database maintained by The Associated Press and USA Today in partnership with Northeastern University tracks this large-scale violence dating back to 2006

Here's the data for MA
View attachment 774425
Winchester is one of the bill’s sponsors towns, along with Stoneham.

That 2010 Winchester incident where 4 people were killed was done by a guy who killed his wife, her mother and his 2 kids. I believe he did it with a knife and he gutted his kids, ages 4 and 2. I’m sorry for being so gruesome. No firearms were present


in 2007 there was a double homicide shooting in winchester Related to drugs and a felon in possession of a firearm.


In 2020 in Winchester there was an incident where a legal holder of a firearm did kill someone:

 
Last edited:
When Linsky isn’t dodging state taxes or pushing to de-criminalize bestiality*, he likes to submit bills that are the most flagrant restrictions on gun owners year after year. Well, most flagrant restrictions until this one put forth by Day.

* sadly, I’m serious about this
Thank you for informing me
 
A large part of the anti-gun rhetoric is stoked by how batshit #$%^&*ing crazy and evil many of the most vocal and visible advocates of 2A come across. Sorry, but this is true. Constant talk of overthrowing a tyrannical government, prepping for the boogaloo, dog-whistling Nazi-isms, religious extremist viewpoints. All of this scares the $%^& out of the middle and the left and gives them ammunition to sell the idea they must limit our basic rights. (In fact, some among the left have been driven to purchase firearms out of fear of those very pro 2A folks who spew that stuff. The whole dynamic is toxic and polarizing.)

The "pry it from my cold dead hand' firebrand rhetoric may galvanize the base but the base doesn't need more galvanizing and it undermines any mechanism of rational argument. If the Pro 2A folks can't learn to find more palatable spokespeople and make 'Hey, he's kind of like me and my family" arguments, this will not end well. Politics includes (is sometimes primarily) marketing. If we in MA want to successfully advocate against this bill, we must find a way to present ourselves as (and maybe try being) the "cooler heads".

(And, yep, I know I'll get flamed for this and, in that flaming, my point will be proven.)


View: https://youtu.be/5hfYJsQAhl0


How to tell someone you are basically 150% tone deaf about US and MA gun politics without actually saying it.... 🤣

Protip: in reality most of that shit doesn't matter. Antis are a severe minority.

The only reason antis get wins at all is they have nons that support them unintentionally by proxy. Unless you can get the nons to "care" they will not pressure politicians based on this topic one way or another.

WRT MA: when talking to mass politicians that aren't already declared one way or another there's no need to get into rhetoric territory in either direction if a constituent sticks to the point of discussing practical implications of this kind of legislation and also the lack of benefit to the public....

You make the retard level assumption that pols or even voters are into pro or anti rhetoric. They're generally not, and most simply don't give a shit. You might as well be talking about crab harvesting regulations on mars or something with the average person. The same thing is almost even true with some politicians and if you get somebody that's receptive it's not hard to just stick to the facts and avoid all the noise.
 
I agree that racial and other diversity in the pro 2A voices (or with any political goal) is important. Pink Pistols, is a good example.

I think we can make an effort to choose by who we promote, who we loudly distance ourselves from and we can choose how we use our voices. I know my interactions with my electeds over this have been very civil and, from the evolving tone during the chats, at least effective in getting them to not assume everyone against this bill is nuts.

Your moonbat gun owner myopia is showing.


View: https://youtube.com/shorts/LbU0ZgcuEjc



I think most people here have been very civil with their legislators at least the ones who bothered to listen. The legislators that actually will listen to people are not really going to be into any of this rhetoric b******* you're talking about they don't even know what it is.....
 
Back
Top Bottom