S 2265 (aka HB4285, 4278, 4121) out of Senate Ways and Means (FID Suitability)

[GlockJock]

I called Ms. Creem's office this morning and spoke to one of the more professional staffers I've spoken to when calling any politician. I knew that office was heading in the wrong direction when he told me "victim's advocates say that pepper spray is often used against the victim". - the more I've thought about that today I'm more and more disappointed. Having now read some of the insane amendments her office has drafted, I will never call her again - donate and volunteer for whoever runs against her maybe, but not wasting another minute trying to help her office understand the issue

Rick....I laud your efforts at trying to reason with Senator (Egg) Creem, however why even bother?

Wingnuts like Creem spend the better part of each day making appointments for their next Beauty Shop/Hair Salon/Day Spa/Botox treatments. They don't even BOTHER to attempt to listen to the average citizen, women who have to ride the T, or walk to the parking lot alone after working late, etc etc. Nitwits like Creem are complete lunatic, lefty liberal, moonbat wingnuts, period. She's one of the reasons the Administrators of this forum put the "bang head against the wall" icon in the collection of add-ons for our posts.

You'd be better off taking the 30 minutes of the effort you used contacting her and her staffers, and, instead, using it to seek out a potential candidate that could defeat her - or to fill her hopefully vacated seat (once she finally decides to jump on her broom and move to a warmer climate and live permanently with her sister Glinda...)

View attachment 109019

 

[rickinma]

Fair enough - I figured a call from the good guys was harmless because the 3 goal taking points were fairly benign - two asking for due process and a defense spray request that I would say helps women - how could a moonbat argue against those?

 

[rwl1955]

So all the anti legislators are trying to pile on the bill to get all their little grievances made into law. I'm sure these clowns think their constituents will love them for it in the Peoples Republic. Remember, this is the State where the sheeple elected a fake Indian who's main campaign slogan was, "WAR ON WOMEN". This is what happens when you have a one party govt. run by corrupt politicians. I guess tomorrow will be VERY interesting. Just another reason to leave this corrupt State. Unfortunately I think my daughter is going to screw up my escape plan.

 

[Mike S]

Im glad to see my state senator is DOING something. Instead of contacting her office again to express my opposition maybe ill just go piss into the wind. Seems it will have the same effect.

I just called and told her aide that as a constituent and law abiding licensed gun owner, I am completely insulted by her amendments and will do everything in my power to ensure that she is unemployed as soon as possible.

 

[MA_Shooter]

Fair enough - I figured a call from the good guys was harmless because the 3 goal taking points were fairly benign - two asking for due process and a defense spray request that I would say helps women - how could a moonbat argue against those?

Liberals are professional victims that don't want to help themselves or to be helped by others.

 

[mattyw]

******
She hasn't replied to my emails either. with the way these amendments are being added by the anti's I'm sure she's still trying to get a read on this bullshit bill.

she seems level headed so I certainly hope that's what is going on

 

[oldsoldier29]

I went back &forth with senator eldridge yesterday on twitter. Bottom line, his fear of hypothetical crimes is why he wants all sales through a dealer. I asked him straight out barred on study evidence that this would compel criminals to suddenly abide by law, he said it wouldn't, but someone's gun owners go bad. I called him out on that bullshit, and he had 2 yet to respond to me.

 

[JJ4]

This is as close to a cliff's-notes list as anyone has put together so far. Let's work from this and update it to make a call sheet to help others call.

my notes:

amendments to oppose:
#11, why must they take place at a dealer if the information transmitted is the same regardless?
maybe # 20, sounds similiar

#17, would remove the purpose exemption for police officers and retired officers, making the AWB not apply to them, why is this even in here?

[STRIKE]#19, crossbow/bow regulation: more needless regulation, what is the benefit to this?[/STRIKE] Did we decide to support this one because it actually makes crossbows ok now?

#21, need to better understand, is this applying to all purchasers or just after a gun is used in a crime?

#24, could possibly be indifferent on, but why no gun owner advocate? who knows more about firearms than enthusiasts?
also, more unfunded commisions is a joke

#57 (creem again), one gun a month, unacceptable, unneccesary, do nothing proposition

support
#29 de novo hearing
#30 collectors can buy relics, etc
#56, fixes the bullshit propsal to confisicate and sell firearms for profit with no recourse to the owner
#58, makes pepper spray more accessible, not treated as ammunition

Edit:
What about #6?

Unsuitability Determination

Messrs. Michael O. Moore, Rodrigues, Richard T. Moore, Tarr and Pacheco moved that the bill be amended in section 28 by striking out lines 491 through 505.

 

[jefftk]

I went back &forth with senator eldridge yesterday on twitter. Bottom line, his fear of hypothetical crimes is why he wants all sales through a dealer. I asked him straight out barred on study evidence that this would compel criminals to suddenly abide by law, he said it wouldn't, but someone's gun owners go bad. I called him out on that bullshit, and he had 2 yet to respond to me.

He is evidently worried about the hypothetical "grey area of gun control". The hypothetical situation evidently being crimes not related to gangs in any way, but rather, the (licensed) person with a previously clean record who then goes and commits some violent crime. How banning currently lawful private transfers supposedly addresses this issue is ... not obvious to me. In fact, its not obvious to me how any law could address such an issue, barring a minority report style pre-crime division.

Also - so far as as I can tell, this "grey area" is perhaps more "off-white" as most reports I've seen, where such data is available, shows that licensed gun owners / CCW permit holders have a significantly lower rate of crime/incarceration than the general population.

 

[GlockJock]

I'm spending my time (and I'm working today while doing this, in my free time) contacting my AND OTHER Senators asking them to vote against the thumbs-down portions of this bill..
WILL YOU JOIN ME AND PLEASE TAKE EVEN 5 MINUTES TODAY AND DO THE SAME??....
Every gun owner and 2A supporter, even the couch potato /keyboard warrior / non-politically-active ones, will thank you. Just PLEASE take 5 minutes and call.. (it's the most effective means. A real - and, please, POLITE - voice sounds more powerful than an email).
Thanks everyone.

 

[mattyw]

This is as close to a cliff's-notes list as anyone has put together so far. Let's work from this and update it to make a call sheet to help others call.



Edit:
What about #6?
[/FONT][/COLOR]

I'll have to look into #6, I also removed the crossbow thing from opposed because I misunderstood (still working on my legalspeak comprehension!)

 

[oldsoldier29]

He is evidently worried about the hypothetical "grey area of gun control". The hypothetical situation evidently being crimes not related to gangs in any way, but rather, the (licensed) person with a previously clean record who then goes and commits some violent crime. How banning currently lawful private transfers supposedly addresses this issue is ... not obvious to me. In fact, its not obvious to me how any law could address such an issue, barring a minority report style pre-crime division.

Also - so far as as I can tell, this "grey area" is perhaps more "off-white" as most reports I've seen, where such data is available, shows that licensed gun owners / CCW permit holders have a significantly lower rate of crime/incarceration than the general population.

You were the other one in that thread . Restricting rights based on hypothetical situations doesn't deter crime. Hell, laws themselves don't deter crime.

 

[mattyw]

This is as close to a cliff's-notes list as anyone has put together so far. Let's work from this and update it to make a call sheet to help others call.



Edit:
What about #6?
[/FONT][/COLOR]

need someone smarter than me to chime in on #6, I don't have the line numbers so it appears the amendment wants to remove the suitability clause but I want to be sure before I update my notes and tell anyone to support it

 

[yanici]

Yeah, I really need a good Cliff Notes list too, before I call. Want to get it right. I'm kinda expecting GOAL to come up with something, or at least I hope they do.

 

[Squire]

Yeah, I really need a good Cliff Notes list too, before I call. Want to get it right. I'm kinda expecting GOAL to come up with something, or at least I hope they do.

They said they were working on it in last nights Facebook/Twitter post. I'm too flat out busy to do amateur legal research, hoping my membership/donations helps them out.

Looking at all these amendements, it's clear all these legilslators are rabid Statists. I'm surprised people are allowed to or able to breathe without a ****ing law in MA.

 

[cmcgraw2]

need someone smarter than me to chime in on #6, I don't have the line numbers so it appears the amendment wants to remove the suitability clause but I want to be sure before I update my notes and tell anyone to support it

Lines 491-505 to be stricken:

491
Notwithstanding paragraph (1) to the contrary, the licensing authority may deny the
492
application or renewal of a firearm identification card, or suspend or revoke a card issued under
493
this section, if in the reasonable exercise of discretion, the licensing authority determines that the
494
applicant or card holder is unsuitable to be issued or to continue to hold a firearm identification
495
card. A determination of unsuitability shall be based on: (i) reliable and credible information that
496
the applicant or card holder has exhibited or engaged in behavior that suggests the applicant or
497
card holder could potentially create a risk to public safety if issued a card; or (ii) existing factors
498
that suggest that the applicant or card holder could potentially create a risk to public safety if
499
issued a card. Upon denying an application or renewal of a card based on a determination of
500
unsuitability, the licensing authority shall notify the applicant in writing the specific reasons for
501
the determination of unsuitability. Upon revoking or suspending a card based on a determination
502
of unsuitability, the licensing authority shall notify, in writing, the holder of that license,
503
including the specific reasons for the determination of unsuitability as set forth in paragraph (4).
504
The determination of unsuitability shall be subject to judicial review as provided in paragraph
505
(5).

(not smart, just reading the bill!)

 

[Rekonn]

Amendments 29 and 37 have been withdrawn. Annoyingly, the link showing what they were or who proposed them is gone.

 

[JayMcB]

Has GOAL digested this and made any edits/suggestions over Matty's list? I have not seen anything in email this morning.

 

[JJ4]

Amendments 29 and 37 have been withdrawn. Annoyingly, the link showing what they were or who proposed them is gone.

Ugh. 29 was good.

29	James E. Timilty	Full and Fair Hearings

 

[Artie]

.

 

[Garden12]

Lines 491-505 to be stricken:

491
Notwithstanding paragraph (1) to the contrary, the licensing authority may deny the
492
application or renewal of a firearm identification card, or suspend or revoke a card issued under
493
this section, if in the reasonable exercise of discretion, the licensing authority determines that the
494
applicant or card holder is unsuitable to be issued or to continue to hold a firearm identification
495
card. A determination of unsuitability shall be based on: (i) reliable and credible information that
496
the applicant or card holder has exhibited or engaged in behavior that suggests the applicant or
497
card holder could potentially create a risk to public safety if issued a card; or (ii) existing factors
498
that suggest that the applicant or card holder could potentially create a risk to public safety if
499
issued a card. Upon denying an application or renewal of a card based on a determination of
500
unsuitability, the licensing authority shall notify the applicant in writing the specific reasons for
501
the determination of unsuitability. Upon revoking or suspending a card based on a determination
502
of unsuitability, the licensing authority shall notify, in writing, the holder of that license,
503
including the specific reasons for the determination of unsuitability as set forth in paragraph (4).
504
The determination of unsuitability shall be subject to judicial review as provided in paragraph
505
(5).

(not smart, just reading the bill!)

Does 494 mean that if you currently have a fid card, and have had a ltc denied based on suitability, then the fid is revoked?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lank]

Where does this text live?

 

[cmcgraw2]

Where does this text live?

when you download it as .pdf

https://malegislature.gov/Bills/188/Senate/S2265

 

[mattyw]

Ugh. 29 was good.

29	James E. Timilty	Full and Fair Hearings

yeah it was... boooo

updated notes

my notes:

amendments to oppose:
#11, why must they take place at a dealer if the information transmitted is the same regardless?
maybe # 20, sounds similiar
#17, would remove the purpose exemption for police officers and retired officers, making the AWB not apply to them, why is this even in here?
#21, need to better understand, is this applying to all purchasers or just after a gun is used in a crime?
#24, could possibly be indifferent on, but why no gun owner advocate? who knows more about firearms than enthusiasts?
also, more unfunded commisions is a joke
#57 (creem again), one gun a month, unacceptable, unneccesary, do nothing proposition
#60

support
#6, removes FID suitability language
#19, crossbow/bow clarification: to the best of my knowledge this is a gain over the way it is currently written
#29 de novo hearing withdrawn
#30 collectors can buy relics, etc
#56, fixes the bullshit propsal to confisicate and sell firearms for profit with no recourse to the owner
#58, makes pepper spray more accessible, not treated as ammunition

 

[LoginName]

On todays Senate calender...

NOTICE SECTION.
SECOND READING MATTERS.

228. [H. 4285] Bill (H.) relative to the reduction of gun violence (House, No. 4285). 2d.
[On House, No. 4121.]
[From the committees on Public Safety and Homeland Security and Rules of the two branches, acting concurrently.]
[The committee on Ways and Means (Brewer) recommends that the bill be amended by striking out all after the enacting clause and inserting in place thereof the text of Senate document numbered 2265.]
[Senator Pacheco dissents.]

https://malegislature.gov/People/ClerksOffice/Senate/Calendar

 

[Lank]

Sooooo would line six semi restore the RKBA in this mess?

 

[Lank]

Awesome, this page is down.

They must know we are following it



https://malegislature.gov/People/ClerksOffice/Senate/Calendar[/QUOTE]

 

[Rekonn]

GOAL's amendments analysis is up: http://goal.org/Documents/S2265Amendents[3].pdf

7/16/14 Alert:

GOAL S.2265 Alert Update.

GOAL has received the full list of amendments made to S.2265, please see below:

Please support - Call your State Senator TODAY and ask them to sign onto and support amendment #'s 6 & 56.

#6 - Removes the FID Suitability clause - Ask Your Senator to sign on and support.

#56 – Fixes the language in sections 39-43 regarding seized firearms – Ask your Senator to sign on and support.


Opposed amendments to note:

There are many amendments that we strongly oppose, some of the most egregious include #11 & #20 which would criminalize the private sale of firearms, #57 which is, among other things a one gun a month bill and #60 which would ban many common use firearms and magazines. (Renewed AWB).

Other opposed amendments:

There are many other amendments that we oppose, please call your State Senator today and ask that they oppose amendment #s: 3, 4, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 25, 28, 40, 46, 48, 57, 59, and 60.

 

[cmcgraw2]

Sooooo would line six semi restore the RKBA in this mess?

If you mean amendment #6 it appears so, though if Cynthia Screem has her way with amendment #14 suitability will be based on whether the applicant or card holder may create [not "could potentially create"] a risk to the applicant [meaning his or herself] or licensee, to another person in the household of the applicant or licensee or to public safety if issued a card.

It's ludicrous how these moonbats think.

 

[mbullism]

Awesome, this page is down.

They must know we are following it

https://malegislature.gov/People/ClerksOffice/Senate/Calendar

That link works for me...

(get the tinfoil out)

what is disconcerting is that the page for S2265 says placed on the orders for the day for 7/17, and a day or two ago a click on the senate sessions link under events showed 7/17 as next scheduled...

Now, clicking the senate sessions shows today at 12:45, and another 7/21... clicking the link for House sessions says in session since 11am, but no video until 1:00 (although they could be lunching)

The senate session starts at 12:45, and a joint session starts at 1:00 ...

WTH are they talking about if there is nothing scheduled for tomorrow?