Upcoming Mass Gun Control hearings...

Mountain said:
Hope to attend the Worcester session.

I scanned through the bills earlier and saw Devolve's manifesto with the mention of restricting certain 'high power' calibers in the summary, but did not see the actual details. Anyone know where I can find the details regarding the Mass proposed ban on 50 BMG?

There are a few good bills on the list, such as provision to make it legal to sell target pistols- I assume even if not on the AG's list. I know it won't happen in Mass but someone has proposed a repeal of the 'salt ban.

There's no shortage of ugliness in these bills, unfortunately. Some I think have not yet been mentioned on this thread: ban on anyone 'handling' a 'machine gun' if they are not legal to own said 'machine gun', applying firearm distance requirements from structures & roads for archery. Bye bye full auto fun shoots & backyard archery. I know, real rednecks have archery targets in the front yard. Some of my redneck friends from my home state of Tennessee were known to take deer from their back porch- in a subdivision.[laugh]
Click to expand...

Deval's bill bans magazines containing over 7 rounds of ammunition and forces you to destroy your legally possessed pre-ban mags (same as NY). You can obviously see what sort of issues the bill creates...

Creem's bill bans 50cal
 
I'm going to ask for permission to use 8 hours of MY Vacation time so I can attend this hearing. I just emailed my rep to see if he's going. I don't know if I will speak but strength in numbers has worked well in my local City Hall on various issues. If no one shows up, they just bang the gavel, case closed.............

Here is a story from today. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2013/07/04/mass-lawmakers-wei

Read Linsky's bill about insurance and his rationale for it. Tell them when criminals can present proof of liability insurance for assaulting, raping, and / or killing us, maybe we'll talk.

I would ask, what about the famous billboard in Boston, automatic 1 year in year for unlicensed possession. I live in Fitchburg, a jungle now. My brother is a retired LEO, 42 years on the job. He said he saw ONE person go to jail for said violation. I've seen news stories here where 1st timers unlicensed just get arraigned and then go home!!!!! Including illegals!!!! Let's start there. ENFORE THE GODDAMN LAWS ON THE BOOKS!
 
Coyote33 said:
Who wants to get together Sunday, to practice speaking, and coordinate on points, and maybe even try the "diamond" thing?
Click to expand...
Not the time or place for that - No comment period on the testimony being presented, and any rabble rousing will be viewed as detrimental.
Coyote33 said:
I also wonder if local clergy people will speak.

We REALLY need to organize. Has anyone reached out to the Worcester Tea Party folks yet?

IT'S TIME has gotten quiet lately. Deb? Ty? Mike?
Click to expand...
It's likely that local clergy people will speak. There are enough churches/denominations/religious flavors that are against firearms ownership that (IMHO) it's time for people to start cutting ties if you can't gain the support that you need. Yet another reason (again, just MHO) to remove religion from the legislative picture completely...but that's another can of worms.

Deb's organizing her move to NH. Not sure how much time she's going to be able to give us in the future, and I wish her nothing but well in her move. She did a hell of a job in Westford, and her leadership and hard work will be missed.

I'm dealing with wedding, imminent major home repairs, a kid on the way, and a replaced phone that I haven't had the time to re-root so I can do the Constant Contact work during the day.

Tynan was working with someone for a redesign of the web site and transfer of ownership of a video or two that someone shot for us. I'm not completely sure of the status of either, but if anyone here has done a Wordpress setup before and has some time to donate, please hit up either me or Tynan (HKDrummer). It's not that it's too difficult for me to figure out, it's that it's too difficult for me to find the time to figure it out.

We're not gone...
 
joeendris said:
Leave the uniform at home. Prove to the population that you're one of the good guys and testify for the rights of citizens. that's a good start to earning our trust back....
Click to expand...
They won't. They have LEOSA protection, so no law will apply to them, regardless. Even if common pocketknives were banned, LEOs will be exempt. Just look at the anti-knife ordinances in Lawrence, Worcester, Beverly, Lynn, Revere, Salem, Boston and Cambridge (did I miss any?). All of them exempt LEOs. We are second-class citizens. The language in these bills continues to remind us of that.
 
zork51 said:
Here is a story from today. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2013/07/04/mass-lawmakers-wei
Click to expand...

bad link.

It's S.1126, Creem's bill that outlaws the .50 BMG. It specifically describes the shell dimensions so as to cover any firearm capable of shooting it. I think someone has seen SWAT too many times, given that I think there is at most one documented crime occurring with one of these babies.

I'd buy one, but I lack both the money to buy it, and a safe large enough to house it.
 
I would ignore it as it would be an illegal law and I have sworn an oath to the constitution. I cannot violate that oath by validating an unconstitutional law.

I called Senator Creems office to discuss this a few months back. Besides being talked to like I was retarded, I was informed unconstitutional laws cannot be passed. I guess they never heard of the SCOTUS. These people who have no idea how the laws in this country even work at a fundamental level are not the people who will dictate to me how I live my life.

Mike
 
See ya' at Assumption!!!!
I will be wearing a grey sport coat and grey tie.
I have prepared statement...a that I will read ( or try to ) and leave as written testimony.
ggboy
 
cekim said:
Regarding pastera's comments, I agree there is no benefit to diamond in this sort of format. You come up to the microphone.

The win here is numbers, presentation and putting a lie to their emotional, heart string tugging propaganda.

Some thoughts from the prior meeting:
They have heard their fill of generalities at this point. Never a bad thing for them to hear how people really feel, but at this point the statistics have all been said, skewed, re-said, etc...

What seemed to move them most is specific commentary on how specific bills and specific clauses are broken, hurt good people, could be changed, etc...

I know it is tough since I 've begun this process myself, but try to go through some of the bills and comment specifically on things like how no FTF transfers will preclude family guns from being passed down for example.

Personally, I would mix some broad advocacy with laser focused critique of bills... give a little intro/stats to show the futility of the law and then get back to specifc bill numbers.

Leave the screaming and repetition of platitudes to the other side, I assure you, they will be there to vomit up Bloomberg's talking points over and over.

Sorry I can't be there. Thank you to all who can and I look forward to seeing some of you at hearings later in the year...
Click to expand...

So at this point, citing stats is a bad idea and stating why the provisions are horrible is preferred?
 
Short and sweet is what I would be thinking. A good mix of stats and common sense. If you have professional experience I'd flaunt it too. All they hear about is how politically appointed chiefs of police support X Y and Z. If you work with the boots on the ground law enforcement, or ARE the boots on the ground law enforcement, it is an ideal time to bring that up as it gives credibility to what you have to say. You better believe I would/will be shamelessly pulling the veteran/MSP certified firearms instructor card. If you are giving stats, cite them, and use ones they can't argue with (IE from their own beloved government). Simple stats relative to what you are saying. The one gun a month bill seeks to curb straw purchasing... According to X, Y crime guns originate from Mass. Mass has only prosecuted "X" straw purchases, etc.

With the 7 round mag limit thing... cite FBI statistics on hit percentage for law enforcement. "7 rounds at a worst case X% hit means you really only have Y rounds, etc). Ask them to ask their security details if they think they should only be allowed to have X Y or Z. Ask them to poll random cops on their details about it, and ask for an honest answer. Challenge them to do they leg work they claimed they have.

Mike
 
PaulD said:
So at this point, citing stats is a bad idea and stating why the provisions are horrible is preferred?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say anything factual that speaks to the overall point that these laws are broken is a bad idea.

More that the panel is going to engage more with specifics about _these_ bills.

Whether to explain why the good bills are good or why the bad bills are bad, connect the dots specifically to the bills on the table. The point earlier about the 7 round limit is a fine example as is connecting the dots to the recent CDC study commissioned by Obama that found the following:
CDC said:
Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns [...] have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies.
...
Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence [...]. Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.
Click to expand...

These examples connect directly to the various bills, supported by GOAL, that want to bring MA into the modern era of "shall issue". To do otherwise is to put the people of MA at risk of greater injury for lack of means to protect themselves.

They also speak in opposition to "offsite storage" and mag limits as well as their demands for "may issue FID". (phrased as "greater latitude to chiefs for FID issuance).

I hope that makes sense. My personal observation is that there will be ample generalizations and stats spewed and the Bloomberg/Rosenthal machine will drone their "demands", so we need to present things as concretely as possible WRT the bills on the table.
 
Ya MA, fight the good fight.
You guys (gun owners) are so screwed.
It's gonna make NY & CT look tame because there is on way the M*******s will be out done.
I was born in IL, but left 20 years ago & will never go back.
I feel sorry for those of you born there in MA or with immediate family there.
I've got just a few words for you...Move Now !

smitty

Yuma, AZ
 
Last edited:
cekim said:
I wouldn't say anything factual that speaks to the overall point that these laws are broken is a bad idea.

More that the panel is going to engage more with specifics about _these_ bills.

Whether to explain why the good bills are good or why the bad bills are bad, connect the dots specifically to the bills on the table. The point earlier about the 7 round limit is a fine example as is connecting the dots to the recent CDC study commissioned by Obama that found the following:


These examples connect directly to the various bills, supported by GOAL, that want to bring MA into the modern era of "shall issue". To do otherwise is to put the people of MA at risk of greater injury for lack of means to protect themselves.

They also speak in opposition to "offsite storage" and mag limits as well as their demands for "may issue FID". (phrased as "greater latitude to chiefs for FID issuance).

I hope that makes sense. My personal observation is that there will be ample generalizations and stats spewed and the Bloomberg/Rosenthal machine will drone their "demands", so we need to present things as concretely as possible WRT the bills on the table.
Click to expand...

I agree and I think you make a lot of great points.

This is just my opinion - but I think it may be helpful when putting together a statement to break it down something like this:

Pick a proposed law or group of laws. Be specific.

Keep it brief and to the point.

Try to hit specific bullet points:


  • Why you should listen to me (Credibility, in their eyes): LEO or ties to LEO, Medical Professional, Teacher, Parent, Woman, Minority, etc.
  • Throw in what they REALLY care about (Make them worry about their job): "I care deeply about our community and this issue in particular" , "I'm a ..." Always Voter, work or donate to political campaigns, active in the community, Woman, Minority or Liberal approved special interest group, etc.
  • Personalize (Push some emotional buttons): "This issue brings up particularly strong feelings for me because I'm (a) ..." Victim of violent crime, close to victim, have or care for children, mention how terrible "Newtown made you "Feel", etc.
  • Studies(CDC, DOJ, etc.)("Their" studies not an NRA study) or Personal Experience that speaks specifically to the proposed law: "Study x shows that ..."
  • State your theory of why the proposed law is Good or Bad: "Because of Study x, Proposed Law x would hurt (Me, people in general, 'The Children' ) specifically because ..."
  • Try to end on an emotional note: "We all want to do 'something' after (insert tragedy here) BUT Proposed Law x would (hurt rather than help) ...

Avoid self-indulgence: They don't care about The Constitution, God, what Thomas Jefferson said, your "Rights" or whether they have to pry your gun from your dead hands.
 
Last edited:
You guys make some good points, but you will be amazed how difficult it is to make all those points and be brief. I have been hacking away at talking points for a while now and three minutes is pretty hard to achieve while forming a coherent argument.

Thanks though; now I think I have to start writing a whole new version.
 
I will not be able to attend tomorrow as Im going in for surgery. Good luck to all who are attending I will be there in spirit. Give them hell!!...

Sent from my HTC One X+ using Tapatalk 2
 
actual comment on the bill # specifically, and not general b.s. about the subject in general.

site bill # and state why it sucks, or bill # and why you want support.

- - - Updated - - -

Rider said:
You guys make some good points, but you will be amazed how difficult it is to make all those points and be brief. I have been hacking away at talking points for a while now and three minutes is pretty hard to achieve while forming a coherent argument.

Thanks though; now I think I have to start writing a whole new version.
Click to expand...

don't step down till they kick you off.
 
I'm looking forward to tomorrow and I'll be there. The advice on what to say/not say is generally very good. The most important thing is that people show up in numbers. 90%+ of lawmakers already know where they stand based upon the merits. What they haven't yet decided is how they'll actually vote. How they vote depends upon how they perceive their votes helping or hurting them. We need to sow as much uncertainty as possible into their minds regarding how supporting more gun control might hurt them. They're not going to come away from these hearing in favor of the bills designed to roll back our gun laws. But hopefully, based upon the numbers of people that turn out for these hearings, they'll be unsure enough to keep doing what they've been doing for the past several years: Nothing.
 
Good luck with your surgery.

Glockfan71 said:
I will not be able to attend tomorrow as Im going in for surgery. Good luck to all who are attending I will be there in spirit. Give them hell!!...

Sent from my HTC One X+ using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
 
How long will this go, and what's the process for getting "in line" to speak?

I need to be in Boston until Noon so I doubt I can make this one. Springfield looks more promising for me to make.
 
JJ4 said:
How long will this go, and what's the process for getting "in line" to speak?

I need to be in Boston until Noon so I doubt I can make this one. Springfield looks more promising for me to make.
Click to expand...
When they crowded they go slow... It was ~5 hours last time.

The process is that you sign-in when you show up and they work their way down those sheets. No guarantees on order though as there are often multiple aides with sheets and they got jumbled.
 
Last edited:
Knuckle Dragger said:
I'm looking forward to tomorrow and I'll be there. The advice on what to say/not say is generally very good. The most important thing is that people show up in numbers. 90%+ of lawmakers already know where they stand based upon the merits. What they haven't yet decided is how they'll actually vote. How they vote depends upon how they perceive their votes helping or hurting them. We need to sow as much uncertainty as possible into their minds regarding how supporting more gun control might hurt them. They're not going to come away from these hearing in favor of the bills designed to roll back our gun laws. But hopefully, based upon the numbers of people that turn out for these hearings, they'll be unsure enough to keep doing what they've been doing for the past several years: Nothing.
Click to expand...

I would like to attend, but don't plan to speak. Some people are gifted with being able to make a good point in these type of forums. Unfortunately, I am not one of them.

Is it ok to show up without providing testimony? If so, how will the committee members know where we stand and which side we support?
 
Horrible said:
I would like to attend, but don't plan to speak. Some people are gifted with being able to make a good point in these type of forums. Unfortunately, I am not one of them.

Is it ok to show up without providing testimony? If so, how will the committee members know where we stand and which side we support?
Click to expand...

put on your molon labe shirt.
 
Horrible said:
I would like to attend, but don't plan to speak. Some people are gifted with being able to make a good point in these type of forums. Unfortunately, I am not one of them.

Is it ok to show up without providing testimony? If so, how will the committee members know where we stand and which side we support?
Click to expand...
The room generally isn't well organized that way unless you recognize the faces. There is some cheering and jeering that will measure the tone of the room, but they will generally gavel that down and lecture about how it wastes time for people to speak.

Yes, absolutely show up if for nothing else to learn about the process and provide moral support to our side.

You may also find yourself moved to speak. You don't have to give the Gettysburg Address. Just speak your mind. There is no requirement to fill 2-3 minutes, so if all you have to say is "no" then say that. Again though, you don't have to testify if you don't want. I would encourage everyone to come. The more you see these processes at work, the better you can engage later on.

You will hear arguments that will stretch your understanding of the insanity of our opposition and that is a good thing. It will force you to refine your arguments and/even change your approach.
 
Last edited:
Horrible said:
.....
Is it ok to show up without providing testimony? If so, how will the committee members know where we stand and which side we support?
Click to expand...
Numbers of people in attendance count more than the speakers. The committee members will use level of interest as a their gauge for determining where public interest lies. Heavy turnout runs in our favor. Few gun control supporters are a intimately vested in this issue as is the average gun owner. Apart of the usual suspects, they can't really put together a good grassroots turn out the way we should be able to.

W.E.C said:
put on your molon labe shirt.
Click to expand...
- No, Don't
 
Knuckle Dragger said:
Numbers of people in attendance count more than the speakers. The committee members will use level of interest as a their gauge for determining where public interest lies. Heavy turnout runs in our favor.......
Click to expand...

We in CT had large pro-gun turn outs, but it did not help at all. Hopefully it works better for you MA people.



Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk 2
 
Horrible said:
I would like to attend, but don't plan to speak. Some people are gifted with being able to make a good point in these type of forums. Unfortunately, I am not one of them.

Is it ok to show up without providing testimony? If so, how will the committee members know where we stand and which side we support?
Click to expand...

They will really only know if you testify - don't need to speak for long:
Good morning
I would like to thank the chairman, committee and all in attendance for this opportunity.
My name is ___________ from (town) and I am a firearms owner, (Mom/Dad), (Veteran), (profession), and I vote in every election.

I am hear to support my rights and therefore must oppose the following bills:

H.47 - this bill bans most handguns in common use and also creates a new crime but fails to clearly define that crime.
H.3252 - Institutes a punitive and confiscatory 25% tax on lawful gun owners purchases and also bans most handguns in common use
S.1126 - Bans a class of commonly owned rifles and establishes a punitive 4.75% tax on lawful gun owners. Bans .50 BMG, a cartridge that is simply not used in crime

I would like to support the following bills as they will clear up the extremely confusing gun laws in Massachusetts:

H.3264 Toughens laws on prohibited persons in possession, unlawful transfers, illegal trafficking and theft of firearms.
Creates a clear definition for a "prohibited person" and uses that term consistently throughout the laws.
Allows for the denial of FID cards to persons federally prohibited from possessing firearms.
Clarifies terminology used firearms licensing, reduces confusion between license types, and clarifies the review process for license denial.

H.3269 Provides equity in licensing among the different communities
H.2182 Removes conflicting regulations on handguns standards for dealer sales.

Thank you
Click to expand...

Just grab GOAL's newsletter and start reading at page 7
 

Similar threads

Paul Craig: Gun control debate a fractured discourse
Replies
2
Views
150
jkelly1229
J
Gun Control Debate Live Stream
Replies
18
Views
639
Bigfudge16
Bigfudge16
Uvalde mass shooting victims' families suing Meta, gun manufacturer and video game maker
Replies
11
Views
379
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Biden Vows 2nd Term Gun Control, Criticizes Jefferson’s ‘Tree of Liberty’ as ‘A Bunch of Crap’
2
Replies
42
Views
2K
45Badger
45Badger
Mass Shooter Pretends to be Victim & Shoots Cop
Replies
1
Views
266
rewster
rewster
Back
Top Bottom