Crazy MA Anti-Gun Legislation, Did it pass or fail?

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

they still haven't reported these in our media, i want to know what happened

 

[The Rabbi]

House Bill 1561, sponsored by state Representative David Paul Linsky (D-Natick), would require all firearms of new manufacture to bear serial numbers permanently inscribed on a visible metal area with the serial numbers being kept on record by the manufacturer.

Is this idiot not aware that this has been Federal law since 1968? Probably not.
As for microstamping, the technology does not exist. And anything that could perform such a function is easily defeated. And anyone intent on committing crimes will not bother with obeying other laws.

Personally MA ought to criminalize sodomy and throw Barney Frank in jail. That would solve more problems than any of this drekk.

 

[cutter]

What would the Founding Fathers do? In their day, every gun fired a single shot, was muzzle loaded and hand crafted. Maybe it's time to go back to the Founding Father's ideas when they wrote the second amendment. Because if they ever saw an AK-47 or an Uzi ravish a dwelling during a drive by shooting, I'm pretty certain they would have re-thought gun control.

Or maybe they would just enforce the laws we now have. Got a problem with drive by's. Just execute a few drive by shooters and your problem will go away. If it doesn't go away execute a few more. Eventually you'll get them all.

 

[Chris]

1,000,000 Americans have been killed by guns since 1960.

We really need more guns.

 

[cutter]

1,000,000 Americans have been killed by guns since 1960.

We really need more guns.

If it's a million gang bangers, criminals, rapist, child molesters maybe it's a good thing and maybe the number should be higher.

 

[Missourian]

1,000,000 Americans have been killed by guns since 1960.

We really need more guns.

Here comes the cut and paste spamfest.

 

[martybegan]

1,000,000 Americans have been killed by guns since 1960.

We really need more guns.

How many of those were non suicide, legally owned gun deaths?

You really are a lockstep liberal shill, aren't you?

 

[The Rabbi]

1,000,000 Americans have been killed by guns since 1960.

We really need more guns.

So you're in favor of disarming the police.
Got it.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

its been 7 days since the hearings on these laws and I can't even get an answer from the official government website nor the darn media.

Im hoping these stupid laws all failed but who knows.

 

[Nosmo King]

What would the Founding Fathers do? In their day, every gun fired a single shot, was muzzle loaded and hand crafted. Maybe it's time to go back to the Founding Father's ideas when they wrote the second amendment. Because if they ever saw an AK-47 or an Uzi ravish a dwelling during a drive by shooting, I'm pretty certain they would have re-thought gun control.

Or maybe they would just enforce the laws we now have. Got a problem with drive by's. Just execute a few drive by shooters and your problem will go away. If it doesn't go away execute a few more. Eventually you'll get them all.

Sure. Because hanging stopped all the cattle wrestling. Because firing squads stopped all the deserters in every army in every war. Because electrocutions have stopped all the murders and rapes and kidnappings. Think before you venture out into the deep end.

 

[The Rabbi]

What would the Founding Fathers do? In their day, every gun fired a single shot, was muzzle loaded and hand crafted. Maybe it's time to go back to the Founding Father's ideas when they wrote the second amendment. Because if they ever saw an AK-47 or an Uzi ravish a dwelling during a drive by shooting, I'm pretty certain they would have re-thought gun control.

Or maybe they would just enforce the laws we now have. Got a problem with drive by's. Just execute a few drive by shooters and your problem will go away. If it doesn't go away execute a few more. Eventually you'll get them all.

Sure. Because hanging stopped all the cattle wrestling. Because firing squads stopped all the deserters in every army in every war. Because electrocutions have stopped all the murders and rapes and kidnappings. Think before you venture out into the deep end.

So because no law is 100% effective that means we need to get rid of all of them?
Talk about a deep end.
SHouldn't you be inspecting toilets instead of wasting people's time with your bilge?

 

[Nosmo King]

Or maybe they would just enforce the laws we now have. Got a problem with drive by's. Just execute a few drive by shooters and your problem will go away. If it doesn't go away execute a few more. Eventually you'll get them all.

Sure. Because hanging stopped all the cattle wrestling. Because firing squads stopped all the deserters in every army in every war. Because electrocutions have stopped all the murders and rapes and kidnappings. Think before you venture out into the deep end.

So because no law is 100% effective that means we need to get rid of all of them?
Talk about a deep end.
SHouldn't you be inspecting toilets instead of wasting people's time with your bilge?

Do you jhave nothing better to do than follow me around the board and post the same old lame crap? I do pity you.

 

[Anachronism]

Okay, first thing.... You should have GOAL's website Gun Owners' Action League - GOAL.org - "Protecting Your Freedom Begins Here" bookmarked on your PC if you're a Massachusetts Gun Owner. It's the only truly reasonable place to find information. I didn't see anything on these bills in their weekly update last Friday. I can't access the website at work, but there's a link on the frontpage of their site to pending National and Massachusetts gun-related legislation that should give you all the info you need.

Senate Bill 1202, sponsored by state Senator Cynthia Stone Creem (D-Newton), would make it a crime to purchase or sell to the same person more than one firearm or “large capacity weapon” in a thirty-day period. The punishment for a first offense in violation of such gun rationing for both the retailer and the purchaser would be up to a $5,000 fine and/or two-and-a-half years imprisonment.

That one's been suggested before and been shot down. Not a real big concern with that one.

Senate Bill 1234, sponsored by state Senator James Timilty (D-Walpole), would make it unlawful to manufacture, sell or possess a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium; or a full jacketed projectile larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile.

This one is really mostly worthless just on its face. Very little Total Copper Jacketed ammo has a jacket whose weight is more than 25% of the bullet weight. As for the cores.... not something I'm all that familiar with except that it would make Wolf Ammunition from Russia illegal (steel core).

House Bill 665, sponsored by state Representative Timothy J. Toomey, Jr. (D-Cambridge), would require all concealed carry applicants to present a complete list of every handgun owned along with a certificate of insurance verifying that the applicant has a valid insurance policy insuring against any harm or damage that might arise out of the use of each firearm on said list. The insurance policy would need to be in the amount of at least $250,000.

This one is worrying. Currently we don't have to list anything (though the State should already have a list, since they are supposed to be keeping copies of all purchase paperwork). It's the Insurance part that is most worrysome. Many insurance companies won't even sell homeowner's policies to gun owners. $250K for EACH GUN? That's insane. Of course most of us would simply ignore that requirement.

House Bill 1561, sponsored by state Representative David Paul Linsky (D-Natick), would require all firearms of new manufacture to bear serial numbers permanently inscribed on a visible metal area with the serial numbers being kept on record by the manufacturer. In addition, all semi-automatic firearms would be required to micro-stamp ammunition by mechanically stamping a code that would imprint the make, model and serial number onto the cartridge case when the gun discharged.

Not possible. Of course even if it was, there would be very simple ways around it. All that would do is limit the number of manufacturers who would be able to sell guns in MA; which would simply mean we'd have to buy our firearms elsewhere and just not tell the Communistwealth about them when we brought them into the state.

 

[The Rabbi]

Sure. Because hanging stopped all the cattle wrestling. Because firing squads stopped all the deserters in every army in every war. Because electrocutions have stopped all the murders and rapes and kidnappings. Think before you venture out into the deep end.

So because no law is 100% effective that means we need to get rid of all of them?
Talk about a deep end.
SHouldn't you be inspecting toilets instead of wasting people's time with your bilge?

Do you jhave nothing better to do than follow me around the board and post the same old lame crap? I do pity you.

Translation: You're right and I'm an idiot.

 

[cutter]

What would the Founding Fathers do? In their day, every gun fired a single shot, was muzzle loaded and hand crafted. Maybe it's time to go back to the Founding Father's ideas when they wrote the second amendment. Because if they ever saw an AK-47 or an Uzi ravish a dwelling during a drive by shooting, I'm pretty certain they would have re-thought gun control.

Or maybe they would just enforce the laws we now have. Got a problem with drive by's. Just execute a few drive by shooters and your problem will go away. If it doesn't go away execute a few more. Eventually you'll get them all.

Sure. Because hanging stopped all the cattle wrestling. Because firing squads stopped all the deserters in every army in every war. Because electrocutions have stopped all the murders and rapes and kidnappings. Think before you venture out into the deep end.

It never ceases to amaze me that the same people that want to take guns away from law abiding people refuse to punish the the people that use guns illegally. They seem to think these crimes are the fault of the gun and not the criminal using it. If you execute EVERY criminal that uses a gun in a crime you will soon find NOBODY will use a gun in a crime more that once. NO repeat offenders. NO prison program can claim they have NO repeat offenders. I think it's more about taking guns away from everyone that stopping crime with these people.

 

[Nosmo King]

Or maybe they would just enforce the laws we now have. Got a problem with drive by's. Just execute a few drive by shooters and your problem will go away. If it doesn't go away execute a few more. Eventually you'll get them all.

Sure. Because hanging stopped all the cattle wrestling. Because firing squads stopped all the deserters in every army in every war. Because electrocutions have stopped all the murders and rapes and kidnappings. Think before you venture out into the deep end.

It never ceases to amaze me that the same people that want to take guns away from law abiding people refuse to punish the the people that use guns illegally. They seem to think these crimes are the fault of the gun and not the criminal using it. If you execute EVERY criminal that uses a gun in a crime you will soon find NOBODY will use a gun in a crime more that once. NO repeat offenders. NO prison program can claim they have NO repeat offenders. I think it's more about taking guns away from everyone that stopping crime with these people.

Actually, you present a false dichotomy. Executing ALL the criminals who use guns is a senseless silly statement and it's not worthy of someone who wants to be taken seriously. Taking the guns from law abiding citizens is also senseless and silly.

How about this: We prohibit the sale, manufacture, importation, distribution and ownership of any weapon with a barrel length of less than six inches and a capacity of greater than six rounds. Weapons with semi or fully automatic firing systems will be similarly banned. Any person in possession of such weapons is subject to a $150,000
fine and/or two years in federal prison. Any arms manufacturer producing such weapons shall have its means of production seized and the executive officers of such a company shall be imprisoned for not less than fifty years in a federal maximum security penitentiary.

Now, if you can explain just what use such weapons have, their merits as tools loose in society, we can discuss it. But don't put up whatever hyperbole some idiot Conservative pundit says, whatever propaganda the NRA has sold you or whatever crap that just bubbles up to the top of your brain and tell me that this is the argument.

 

[NoNukes]

A Democratic Congresswoman tried to have a bill passed to make it illegal for anyone on the Terrorist Watch List to purchase a gun. Not one Republican voted for it for fear of the NRA lobby. Terrorists can purchase guns, they just cannot board planes.

 

[Anachronism]

A Democratic Congresswoman tried to have a bill passed to make it illegal for anyone on the Terrorist Watch List to purchase a gun. Not one Republican voted for it for fear of the NRA lobby. Terrorists can purchase guns, they just cannot board planes.

You do realize that for the most part that legislation would have been frivolous at best, correct? Non-US Citizens are already barred from purchasing firearms legally in the United States. Those US Citizens who are on the Watch List are often ones who already have criminal backgrounds that also already restrain them from purchasing legal firearms in the USA.

How many criminals walk into gun shops and attempt to LEGALLY purchase firearms? Very few. Most purchase them illegally though the black market, which is not going to be restrained from making sales based on laws. All that legislation would have done is to create a massive tie-up for law abiding citizens whose names happen to be similar to Watch List members to legally purchase a firearm.

 

[cutter]

Sure. Because hanging stopped all the cattle wrestling. Because firing squads stopped all the deserters in every army in every war. Because electrocutions have stopped all the murders and rapes and kidnappings. Think before you venture out into the deep end.

It never ceases to amaze me that the same people that want to take guns away from law abiding people refuse to punish the the people that use guns illegally. They seem to think these crimes are the fault of the gun and not the criminal using it. If you execute EVERY criminal that uses a gun in a crime you will soon find NOBODY will use a gun in a crime more that once. NO repeat offenders. NO prison program can claim they have NO repeat offenders. I think it's more about taking guns away from everyone that stopping crime with these people.

Actually, you present a false dichotomy. Executing ALL the criminals who use guns is a senseless silly statement and it's not worthy of someone who wants to be taken seriously. Taking the guns from law abiding citizens is also senseless and silly.

How about this: We prohibit the sale, manufacture, importation, distribution and ownership of any weapon with a barrel length of less than six inches and a capacity of greater than six rounds. Weapons with semi or fully automatic firing systems will be similarly banned. Any person in possession of such weapons is subject to a $150,000
fine and/or two years in federal prison. Any arms manufacturer producing such weapons shall have its means of production seized and the executive officers of such a company shall be imprisoned for not less than fifty years in a federal maximum security penitentiary.

Now, if you can explain just what use such weapons have, their merits as tools loose in society, we can discuss it. But don't put up whatever hyperbole some idiot Conservative pundit says, whatever propaganda the NRA has sold you or whatever crap that just bubbles up to the top of your brain and tell me that this is the argument.

Any way you can think of to restrict the LEGAL use of hand guns and rifles. The fact that they are fun to shoot and millions of people legally pursue this hobby and never hurt anyone doesn't matter to you. Why is use a gun in a crime and get the death penalty a bad idea. I know the libs would claim it's racist, it is unfair to the poor, any thing but what it is. It's a way to stop the use of guns in crime. NO REPEAT OFFENDERS. If you use your logic you would limit all automobiles to 55 miles per hour, limit the gas in cars due to fire hazard. and generally make life generally no fun for anyone but yourself. Why don't you concentrate more on cars they have killed more innocent people than guns ever have. It seems the only group to benefit from restricting the legal ownership of weapons are the criminals by having homeowners disarmed and unable to protect themselves. Some of us take the responsibility for protecting our family's seriously. I will not depend on the state to protect me and my family.

 

[Nosmo King]

It never ceases to amaze me that the same people that want to take guns away from law abiding people refuse to punish the the people that use guns illegally. They seem to think these crimes are the fault of the gun and not the criminal using it. If you execute EVERY criminal that uses a gun in a crime you will soon find NOBODY will use a gun in a crime more that once. NO repeat offenders. NO prison program can claim they have NO repeat offenders. I think it's more about taking guns away from everyone that stopping crime with these people.

Actually, you present a false dichotomy. Executing ALL the criminals who use guns is a senseless silly statement and it's not worthy of someone who wants to be taken seriously. Taking the guns from law abiding citizens is also senseless and silly.

How about this: We prohibit the sale, manufacture, importation, distribution and ownership of any weapon with a barrel length of less than six inches and a capacity of greater than six rounds. Weapons with semi or fully automatic firing systems will be similarly banned. Any person in possession of such weapons is subject to a $150,000
fine and/or two years in federal prison. Any arms manufacturer producing such weapons shall have its means of production seized and the executive officers of such a company shall be imprisoned for not less than fifty years in a federal maximum security penitentiary.

Now, if you can explain just what use such weapons have, their merits as tools loose in society, we can discuss it. But don't put up whatever hyperbole some idiot Conservative pundit says, whatever propaganda the NRA has sold you or whatever crap that just bubbles up to the top of your brain and tell me that this is the argument.

Any way you can think of to restrict the LEGAL use of hand guns and rifles. The fact that they are fun to shoot and millions of people legally pursue this hobby and never hurt anyone doesn't matter to you. Why is use a gun in a crime and get the death penalty a bad idea. I know the libs would claim it's racist, it is unfair to the poor, any thing but what it is. It's a way to stop the use of guns in crime. NO REPEAT OFFENDERS. If you use your logic you would limit all automobiles to 55 miles per hour, limit the gas in cars due to fire hazard. and generally make life generally no fun for anyone but yourself. Why don't you concentrate more on cars they have killed more innocent people than guns ever have. It seems the only group to benefit from restricting the legal ownership of weapons are the criminals by having homeowners disarmed and unable to protect themselves. Some of us take the responsibility for protecting our family's seriously. I will not depend on the state to protect me and my family.

It's fun? That's the argument? okay then.....