Massachusetts Legislature Voting on Anti-Civil Rights Bill TODAY!

[Waher]

This thread is glowing

 

[EJFudd]

Is there a list of who voted no?

All the R's and 5 Dims according to the article linked above (and now below).

House passes gun bill as amendment to bond legislation - CommonWealth Magazine

THE MASSACHUSETTS House on Thursday quickly introduced and passed provisions tightening gun licensing standards in response to a recent US Supreme Court decision. With just 10 days to go before the end of formal legislative sessions this year, House Speaker Ron Mariano announced Thursday...

commonwealthmagazine.org

 

[Quantavious G]

uh oh. I may need to send Brad Jones an email of apology. Was all the bad stuff in the amendment to the initial bill? Brad voted no to the amendment, but yes to the initial technology bill. Did he actually do kind of the right thing here?

Let me know, for those of you who are more politically astute. It is just as important to compliment good performance as it is to berate poor performance.

 

[EJFudd]

The difference is that this time it is by their own admission a response in direct contradiction to the Supreme Court's opinion.

"That said, because any permitting scheme can be put toward abusive ends, we do not rule out constitutional challenges to shall-issue regimes where, for example, lengthy wait
times in processing license applications or exorbitant fees deny ordinary citizens their right to public carry."

If the fee structure was self funding at $20/year then doubling it arbitrarily and also purposely overburdening the licensing staff to create longer waits is on its face an attempt to deny ordinary citizens.

I guess the question is: What amount of money constitutes an "exorbitant fee"?

Lengthy wait times? For that aspect, Massachusetts is the undisputed national poster child for lengthy wait times.

 

[Coyote33]

(vii) poses a risk of danger to their self or others by having in their control, ownership or possession a weapon, feeding device or ammunition;

Wait. POSSESSION of a gun or ammo or mag, means one is now a DANGER?????

WTF?

 

[Waher]

Wait. POSSESSION of a gun, ammo, mag, means one is now a DANGER?????

It's the same suitability shit as before with baloney mental health language thrown in to obfuscate the arbitrary and capricious nature of the determination by the licensing official rather than the lawful measure of pointing at mental health disqualifiers such as an involuntary confinement or court finding of mental incompetence/dangerousness.

 

[Coyote33]

Perhaps it is time to have a lifetime LTC like the old FID. One time fee (not that is acceptable for any God given right).
At the very least it would save the dept. time and taxpayers some money by eliminating all the bs.

This isn't a bad idea for here. It is an improvement over what we have now, and still accomplishes their goal of having a license/unlicensed status for people. The procedure for revocation would be the same in the end.

 

[Coyote33]

uh oh. I may need to send Brad Jones an email of apology. Was all the bad stuff in the amendment to the initial bill? Brad voted no to the amendment, but yes to the initial technology bill. Did he actually do kind of the right thing here?

Let me know, for those of you who are more politically astute. It is just as important to compliment good performance as it is to berate poor performance.

If it still contains the bad stuff, he should have STILL voted AGAINST IT! This is just bad legislation. If anything, they should have changed it to lifetime.

I guess the question is: What amount of money constitutes an "exorbitant fee"?

Lengthy wait times? For that aspect, Massachusetts is the undisputed national poster child for lengthy wait times.

They should have changed the LTC to lifetime. This would avoid a LOT of processing for local departments, with no downside.

A better use of their legislative time would have been to clean up the existing laws:

READ ALL OF THIS:

MA gun laws poster

MA gun laws (poster) If I wanted to put all the MA gun laws in one place, how do I find them all? Here is what I quickly found here on NES and on GOAL: http://www.goal.org/legislation/quickoverview.html 940 CMR 16.00: Handgun Sales http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/269-10.htm...

www.northeastshooters.com

 

[Rob Boudrie]

MIRCS provides real time validation of a license at time of a dealer or private transfer in MA.

The fact that someone is licensed shows up in the criminal record report that judges see when sentencing someone, so there is notification to take action on the LTC if appropriate.

It is very straightforward to do data mining looking for out of state records.

And, since LTCs are 'MIRCS validated' (and can probably be validated in the field by calling dispatch), the issue of "preventing someone from retaining an invalid physical LTC" does not need to be a concern, so lifetime licenses make sense - or a very simply administrative "confirm you are still alive" renewal. Lifetime LTCs make logical sense, but are scary to the system that sees them as a symbol of control over the populace.

 

[Dadstoys]

You have Michael Moore also?

Mirra.

 

[pastera]

I guess the question is: What amount of money constitutes an "exorbitant fee"?

Definition of exorbitant | Dictionary.com

Exorbitant definition, exceeding the bounds of custom, propriety, or reason, especially in amount or extent; highly excessive: to charge an exorbitant price; exorbitant luxury. See more.

www.dictionary.com

adjective
exceeding the bounds of custom, propriety, or reason, especially in amount or extent; highly excessive:

The customary cost of an LTC is $100 for 6 years.
The reason for that timeframe is to balance review period with wait times.

They have doubled the cost per year in direct response to the opinion.
The more frequent review will predictably lengthen times to receive a license.

So their actions fit the definition of exorbitant.

Lengthy wait times? For that aspect, Massachusetts is the undisputed national poster child for lengthy wait times.

When one did not have a right to carry then wait time was irrelevant.
That ship has sailed - the issuance timeframe should be no longer than the time to do a background check and review training certificate. A paper temporary license is enough for the privilege of driving therefore plenty for carry.
An easy argument for CC carry could be made with a caveat of police doing background checks for those found to be carrying secondarily to a lawful stop for other reasons unless they have an optional license.

 

[Fixxah]

Still no list of nay votes to be had?

 

[MGnoob]

Why does it take less time to purchase a gun then it takes to get an LTC? The process is literally the same

 

[Mesatchornug]

Still no list of nay votes to be had?

Pretty sure this post had who voted how

Massachusetts Legislature Voting on Anti-Civil Rights Bill TODAY!

Gee, what a squeaker! 120 to 33, the amendment is adopted. I'm waiting for the Mass Chiefs of Police Association to speak up... "Hey a**h***s we got you to change the law last time to 6 years because we were overworked... WTF are you doing cutting that in half?"

www.northeastshooters.com

 

[MFSP101]

Still no list of nay votes to be had?

Page 3 of this thread

 

[EJFudd]

The customary cost of an LTC is $100 for 6 years.

Some history for us to recall:

In 2003, Governor Romney filed budgetary language to raise firearm license fees from $25 to $75. That year the legislature actually raised them to $100 in the General Appropriations bill (Section 34 of Chapter 140 of the Acts of 2003). At that time a resident license was good for 4 years. In 2004 a law was passed increasing the license term to 6 years.

 

[Dadstoys]

I don't think a lawyer would have a hard time in front of a reasonable judge that this move is purely punitive.

 

[pastera]

Some history for us to recall:

Pre-Heller there was no recognized right to keep or bear for self defense even in the home.

The current change is in direct response to Bruen in contradiction of the warning in the opinion.
The state can't argue that the change was for fiscal reasons nor can it be for safety since they have stated continuously that the current laws made Mass one of the safest states (yes, we know that claim is BS)
The legislature jumped the shark and gave us ammo but we gun owners need to fund the fight through the circuit Court

 

[EJFudd]

I don't think a lawyer would have a hard time in front of a reasonable judge that this move is purely punitive.

A Trump judge or an O'Bammy/Dementia Joe judge?

 

[EJFudd]

Pre-Heller there was no recognized right to keep or bear for self defense even in the home.

The current change is in direct response to Bruen in contradiction of the warning in the opinion.
The state can't argue that the change was for fiscal reasons nor can it be for safety since they have stated continuously that the current laws made Mass one of the safest states (yes, we know that claim is BS)
The legislature jumped the shark and gave us ammo but we gun owners need to fund the fight through the circuit Court

Actually, my main point (in posting the history of our LTC terms & fees above) is to point out that there is no one "customary cost" (or customary term) to fall back on unless you are going to go back to $25 for 4 years pre-2003.

Time will tell if the court feels that the shorter term (and, thus, the higher annual fee) makes the LTC cost "exorbitant" or not. We all know that the purpose was to punish us Ma**h***s with higher cost and extra hassle for Bruen, but will the court agree? We shall find out.

 

[Waher]

Why does it take less time to purchase a gun then it takes to get an LTC? The process is literally the same

Don’t give the legislature ideas.

 

[pastera]

Actually, my main point (in posting the history of our LTC terms & fees above) is to point out that there is no one "customary cost" (or customary term) to fall back on unless you are going to go back to $25 for 4 years pre-2003.
Time will tell if the court feels that the shorter term (and, thus, the higher annual fee) makes the LTC cost "exorbitant" or not. We all know that the purpose was to punish us Ma**h***s with higher cost and extra hassle for Bruen, but will the court agree? We shall find out.

My point is that the change was in response to the Bruen opinion and in direct contradiction to it.
The plain reading of exorbitant is reached when the change was openly done to discourage enjoyment of an enumerated right.
These changes, especially NY's, are ripe for challenge and an immediate stay given there is no historical basis for requiring periodic reinvestigation of one's rights at a cost of time and money.

 

[Coyote33]

His bio reads: "He is one of the leading advocates of civil rights and civil liberties issues..."

Then use this against him (more correctly, FOR 2A).

 

[Rob Boudrie]

The door to adding gun control by amending other bills and bypassing significant advance notice and hearings has been opened.

 

[Coyote33]

I’ve got limited interest from my colleagues on the force both local and state. Most of those I talk to just either don’t care or are buying time until they retire. 3-4 years ago they would have supported the cause. I see that support gone now. Not sure what you arr seeing on your end.

This is the great reset at work. Replace old "good" policemen with new ones on the other side.

They're winning if this happens everywhere.

I don't think most of us are counting on the po-po to kill this bill on moral or constitutional grounds. Lol.

I think most of us are thinking the bill will make them work harder for no good purpose, and they'll object to it for that reason.

See above.

 

[Coyote33]

I would agree with that. However towns will look at this as way to control the masses while pilfering some money off them

I think the state might think that way, but not so much with most towns.

 

[EJFudd]

The door to adding gun control by amending other bills and bypassing significant advance notice and hearings has been opened.

I have to believe that it was inspired by Maura and her surprise July 20, 2016 "Guidance"... instant, no-vote, no-hearing, no legislation, anti-gun law made through creative re-interpretation only.

And now, this second great shocker. If they get away with this... and it looks like they will... the sky's the limit for screwing with us.

 

[Waher]

The door to adding gun control by amending other bills and bypassing significant advance notice and hearings has been opened.

Since this is legislation affecting the practice of a civil right, wouldn't the legislature acting in this manner: bypassing public notice, hearings, and comment periods, be evidence in court of a conspiracy to deny said civil right under color of law?

I hope the legislature in its sloppy bigoted rush to shit on people it doesn't like screwed itself fatally in a future court challenge without knowing it.

 

[pastera]

Actually, my main point (in posting the history of our LTC terms & fees above) is to point out that there is no one "customary cost" (or customary term) to fall back on unless you are going to go back to $25 for 4 years pre-2003.

Time will tell if the court feels that the shorter term (and, thus, the higher annual fee) makes the LTC cost "exorbitant" or not. We all know that the purpose was to punish us Ma**h***s with higher cost and extra hassle for Bruen, but will the court agree? We shall find out.

I understand but the issue isn't that the $100 wasn't enough to support the yearly reoccurring database costs.
The change was made in response to the decision so therefore has no basis in anything other than punishment for enjoying an enumerated right.

 

[rali]

Sena. Straight from kollitch to Eldridge staff to state rep; another lifer in the making. He probably tripped over himself rushing to vote yes on this. And of course “my” senator is that useless shitpile Eldridge.