Massachusetts: This Is The Nation’s Toughest Gun Law

[Claudette]

It's $100 bucks !!! No poor person in MassaHoochets gonna afford that. I sense a discrimination suit on this. Must be rich white privilege to have a "permit"..

Here's the Application that's so innovative and exciting.

https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2017/12/13/Updated LTC_FID card app - REVISED 05.19.15.pdf

Far as I can tell, most ALL of the questions are on the EXISTING NICS questionnaire.. Except maybe that "Green Card" question. And here's the WORST PART..

Far as I can tell the ACTIVE DATE on a "permit" is TEN DAYS.. $100 for a 10 day window to buy "ONE" gun or as many as you want??? And do you have to take the SAME COURSE everytime you purchase ANOTHER GUN?

If you do --- it's a $100 TAX on every gun you buy. THERE is what MassaHoochets is doing right there...

I smell law suits. Fire up the Supremes. I wanna hear "Come See About Me" or "Run RUn Run".

LMAO Well they don't call it Taxachussetts for nothing.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

No need to argue it. The Second Amendment explicitly states it. It is the “…right of the people…”, not of the states; and it …shall not be infringed.” It couldn't have been written any more clearly.

What I meant was that some would argue that it doesn't specifically reserve power to the States (and clearly does not give power to Congress) to regulate firearms, and therefore, no government has the power to regulate firearms.

It explicitly reserves this right to the people. There ought to be nothing to argue, here.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

The other way to look a it is this: Defending one's self from assault and battery with deadly force is justified. If aborting is killing a human being, that human being is assaulting and enslaving the other.

I find it amazing that you cannot see the utter depravity in your argument, likening the most innocent and defenseless of all human beings to a violent criminal.

The point is that we should NEVER allow GOVERNMENT to FORCE one human to carry, feed, and give birth to another. One human's involuntary servitude to another should never be forced by government. EVER.

It is the responsibility of parents to care for their children. Your argument is that parents have an absolute right to neglect and abandon their children, leaving them to die. Again, I find it amazing that you are so oblivious to the depravity inherent in your position.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

So the supreme court has ruled that just about everything in our nation that is sold, can be regulated since everything here comes from in part or completely from somewhere outside the state it was sold.

Do you really believe that was the original intent?

Basically, the Federal Government is now all powerful because the SCOTUS had a bunch of socialists sitting on the bench. The amendment process can just fuck off. Interpret the shit out of the constitution to give power to whomever.

Do you see why we need another civil war?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

It explicitly reserves this right to the people. There ought to be nothing to argue, here.

It could have been a lot more clear, in my opinion.

I believe you are right, but it's not clear enough to convince the gun-grabbers (like anything ever would be clear enough).

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I find it amazing that you cannot see the utter depravity in your argument, likening the most innocent and defenseless of all human beings to a violent criminal.

I was going for slave master.

You're are appealing to emotion.

Do you see the absolute insane government power you are willing to abide? One human is FORCED at the point of a government gun to be completely responsible for the needs of another. Forget the innocent life/emotion/babies are cute arguments. FORCING ONE HUMAN TO PROVIDE FOR ANOTHER IS WRONG!!!

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

It is the responsibility of parents to care for their children. Your argument is that parents have an absolute right to neglect and abandon their children, leaving them to die. Again, I find it amazing that you are so oblivious to the depravity inherent in your position.

and if they don't want to?

Your argument is that government should force one human to be a slave to another.

 

[Claudette]

I find it amazing that you cannot see the utter depravity in your argument, likening the most innocent and defenseless of all human beings to a violent criminal.

I was going for slave master.

You're are appealing to emotion.

Do you see the absolute insane government power you are willing to abide? One human is FORCED at the point of a government gun to be completely responsible for the needs of another. Forget the innocent life/emotion/babies are cute arguments. FORCING ONE HUMAN TO PROVIDE FOR ANOTHER IS WRONG!!!

I couldn't agree more.

I'm sick of being made responsible for the actions of others. Let em support themselves.

 

[LOki]

Massachusetts. Think about that.

I believe all gun owners should be required to have a permit and undergo the same requirements as outlined in the OP. Anyone not willing to undergo such requirements should not be allowed to have guns. It's a small inconvenience to help make us all more secure from gun violence.

No criminal, or person with criminal intentions, will submit to a background check, submit to any weapons registration, and certainly not obtain any kind of license in order to obtain a firearm.

This is obvious.

What is also obvious, is that all such measures are intentionally designed to be obstacles to gun ownership for self defense and other legal purposes.

There is only one motive in the wish to see the targets of criminal violence undefended.

There is only one kind of person who wishes to see the targets of criminal violence disarmed.

The people who wish to see the targets of criminal violence disarmed are the problem; they are the entire problem, and they are making their intentions clear.

You are making your intentions clear.

Who's talking about "disarming"?

No one.

That's just another rightwing lie and red herring fallacy.

Disagree.

All talk of registration, licensing, permitting, bans, magazine capacity limits, etc... are obviously all about civilian disarmament.

The pretense that any of such measures have been subject to the application of reason or "sense" is the lie.

 

[Lakhota]

Why More Than 90 Percent Of Gun Owners Don’t Join The NRA

I'm one of them! Go Massachusetts!

 

[Pop23]

Why More Than 90 Percent Of Gun Owners Don’t Join The NRA

I'm one of them! Go Massachusetts!

Golly Gee Wiz, an article about paying a not paying dues to an organization you don't want to join.

I wonder how many American's don't pay a fee to the American Auto Association? We all have cars, don't we?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Why More Than 90 Percent Of Gun Owners Don’t Join The NRA

I'm one of them! Go Massachusetts!

I am too, but I fall into the category of believing the NRA are too Statist in their approach. They want to give too much power to Big Brother, and favor restrictions that should be removed.

The NRA supports universal criminal background checks while simultaneously supporting limitations on SBRs and full-autos. The limitation on SBRs and full-autos was to accomplish the goal of keeping those weapons out of the hands of criminals, eliminating the need for the background check. They need to pick one. Those who pass the background check should no longer be limited by the NFA and subsequent illegal federal restrictions.

 

[NoNukes]

Certainly glad I don't live there.

There is a reason I moved away

I left the USA twenty some years ago. I am a citizen of Europe, and love living in Civilization.

 

[NoNukes]

It's $100 bucks !!! No poor person in MassaHoochets gonna afford that. I sense a discrimination suit on this. Must be rich white privilege to have a "permit"..

Here's the Application that's so innovative and exciting.

https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2017/12/13/Updated LTC_FID card app - REVISED 05.19.15.pdf

Far as I can tell, most ALL of the questions are on the EXISTING NICS questionnaire.. Except maybe that "Green Card" question. And here's the WORST PART..

Far as I can tell the ACTIVE DATE on a "permit" is TEN DAYS.. $100 for a 10 day window to buy "ONE" gun or as many as you want??? And do you have to take the SAME COURSE everytime you purchase ANOTHER GUN?

If you do --- it's a $100 TAX on every gun you buy. THERE is what MassaHoochets is doing right there...

I smell law suits. Fire up the Supremes. I wanna hear "Come See About Me" or "Run RUn Run".

Even if true - it's a small price to pay for owning deadly weapons!

What about poor folk who live in high crime areas? You gonna SUBSIDIZE a gun permit for them? Or does your bleeding heart only cover VITALS like cell phones and govt cheese? Grandmas' been broken into 4 times and pistol whipped once.. Don't you care about the POOR?

And $100 per PURCHASE?? THat's a tax dude. That's not gonna stand.

Tough shit. They can still afford non-lethal weapons such as pepper spray and mace. Your hyperbole sounds like typical NRA bullshit.

Home Security: 10 Best Non-Lethal Self Defense Weapons

Hey ..... Read your own shit. On the link you gave to "getting a permit" --- you fill out the SAME DAMN FORM FOR PEPPER SPRAY in Masshahoochets as you do for a FIREARM... That'll be $100 for a PEPPER SPRAY permit.




But it's really NOT funny when you make too expensive for poor folks to DEFEND THEMSELVES...

The progressive elite are well known to hate the poor. They only pay attention to them when they need their vote, then they toss a couple of bucks their way and then ignore them till election season comes around again. This law is yet another example of how they abuse the poor.

It's $100 bucks !!! No poor person in MassaHoochets gonna afford that. I sense a discrimination suit on this. Must be rich white privilege to have a "permit"..

Here's the Application that's so innovative and exciting.

https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2017/12/13/Updated LTC_FID card app - REVISED 05.19.15.pdf

Far as I can tell, most ALL of the questions are on the EXISTING NICS questionnaire.. Except maybe that "Green Card" question. And here's the WORST PART..

Far as I can tell the ACTIVE DATE on a "permit" is TEN DAYS.. $100 for a 10 day window to buy "ONE" gun or as many as you want??? And do you have to take the SAME COURSE everytime you purchase ANOTHER GUN?

If you do --- it's a $100 TAX on every gun you buy. THERE is what MassaHoochets is doing right there...

I smell law suits. Fire up the Supremes. I wanna hear "Come See About Me" or "Run RUn Run".

Even if true - it's a small price to pay for owning deadly weapons!

What about poor folk who live in high crime areas? You gonna SUBSIDIZE a gun permit for them? Or does your bleeding heart only cover VITALS like cell phones and govt cheese? Grandmas' been broken into 4 times and pistol whipped once.. Don't you care about the POOR?

And $100 per PURCHASE?? THat's a tax dude. That's not gonna stand.

Tough shit. They can still afford non-lethal weapons such as pepper spray and mace. Your hyperbole sounds like typical NRA bullshit.

Home Security: 10 Best Non-Lethal Self Defense Weapons

Hey ..... Read your own shit. On the link you gave to "getting a permit" --- you fill out the SAME DAMN FORM FOR PEPPER SPRAY in Masshahoochets as you do for a FIREARM... That'll be $100 for a PEPPER SPRAY permit.




But it's really NOT funny when you make too expensive for poor folks to DEFEND THEMSELVES...

The progressive elite are well known to hate the poor. They only pay attention to them when they need their vote, then they toss a couple of bucks their way and then ignore them till election season comes around again. This law is yet another example of how they abuse the poor.

The progressive elite are the intelligent people. pay attention.

 

[NoNukes]

Even if true - it's a small price to pay for owning deadly weapons!

One is a tool, the other is designed as a weapon.

 

[westwall]

Even if true - it's a small price to pay for owning deadly weapons!

One is a tool, the other is designed as a weapon.

Wrong, they are BOTH tools, and they are no better or worse than the person using them. And, more to the point, assholes with hammers kill more people in the USA every year, than assholes with AR-15s do.

 

[Dana7360]

So the supreme court has ruled that just about everything in our nation that is sold, can be regulated since everything here comes from in part or completely from somewhere outside the state it was sold.

Do you really believe that was the original intent?

Basically, the Federal Government is now all powerful because the SCOTUS had a bunch of socialists sitting on the bench. The amendment process can just fuck off. Interpret the shit out of the constitution to give power to whomever.

Do you see why we need another civil war?

I didn't say my feelings about it. I just posted facts of what the supreme court has ruled.

I do support proper regulation on business.

The founders of our nation did too. That's why they put the ability for the government to regulate business in the constitution in the first place. One of the driving reasons for it was because king george made it illegal for clothes to be made in the colonies. So the founders wanted to encourage manufacturing here.

Just about everything we buy comes from somewhere else now so just about everything we buy can be regulated.

I think that those who buy a weapon should have to prove they have proper insurance to cover any innocent person who is hurt by that gun. The medical bills shouldn't be forced on an innocent person or us tax payers. Us tax payers shouldn't have to pay for years of rehabilitation and all that comes with serious bullet wounds.

We have to have homeowner's insurance and use it if someone is injured on our property. We have to have liability insurance for our cars in case someone is injured by our car. Employers have to have insurance for their employees who get hurt on the job. I don't see why people don't have to have insurance for their guns.

Just because something is a right doesn't mean everyone doesn't have any responsibilities with those rights. A civil right doesn't absolve anyone from the responsibilities that come with harming someone else with a weapon.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

One is a tool, the other is designed as a weapon.

They are both tools. The person is the weapon.

 

[Lakhota]

Even if true - it's a small price to pay for owning deadly weapons!

One is a tool, the other is designed as a weapon.

It's sadly funny to watch NRA gun nutters try to equate hammers and vehicles with AR-15s and other weapons designed to kill.

 

[bgrouse]

Even if true - it's a small price to pay for owning deadly weapons!

One is a tool, the other is designed as a weapon.

It's sadly funny to watch NRA gun nutters try to equate hammers and vehicles with AR-15s and other weapons designed to kill.

An AR-15 is designed to propel a projectile forward in a fairly straight line. A hammer is designed for applying tremendous (relative to physical effort) force to a small point. Either one can be used to kill. Ever hear of something called a war hammer?

War hammers were designed for defeating body armor of the time. Maybe they should ban hammers along with "armor piercing" ammo.