Massachusetts: This Is The Nation’s Toughest Gun Law

[Lakhota]

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!

The most deadly weapon in America is the automobile... You have a Constitutional Right to own a firearm but you do not have a Constitutional Right to drive.

So let cut the nonsense and admit firearms are only dangerous to those like you that are ignorant...

Automobiles are heavily regulated - guns aren't.

Shannyn Moore: My Guns Are Less Regulated Than My Uterus

So it's easier to open carry an M16 in NYC than it is to drive a car on a public NYC road?

I remember those like the op'er claimed the AR-15 was fully automatic and when pointed out the requirements to own a fully automatic weapon, well let just say the op is now more educated!

I'm 71, and only used full auto in the military (M16). None of you gun nutters ever educated me on full auto - because I've always known.

 

[bgrouse]

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

The most deadly weapon in America is the automobile... You have a Constitutional Right to own a firearm but you do not have a Constitutional Right to drive.

So let cut the nonsense and admit firearms are only dangerous to those like you that are ignorant...

Automobiles are heavily regulated - guns aren't.

Shannyn Moore: My Guns Are Less Regulated Than My Uterus

So it's easier to open carry an M16 in NYC than it is to drive a car on a public NYC road?

I remember those like the op'er claimed the AR-15 was fully automatic and when pointed out the requirements to own a fully automatic weapon, well let just say the op is now more educated!

I'm 71

Too bad. I was hoping you were 6 or 7. Then you'd have a chance of getting smarter as you age. At 71, that's about as smart as your going to get as your experiences wind down and dementia sets in. Did you get brain damage in the military?

 

[Lakhota]

The most deadly weapon in America is the automobile... You have a Constitutional Right to own a firearm but you do not have a Constitutional Right to drive.

So let cut the nonsense and admit firearms are only dangerous to those like you that are ignorant...

Automobiles are heavily regulated - guns aren't.

Shannyn Moore: My Guns Are Less Regulated Than My Uterus

So it's easier to open carry an M16 in NYC than it is to drive a car on a public NYC road?

I remember those like the op'er claimed the AR-15 was fully automatic and when pointed out the requirements to own a fully automatic weapon, well let just say the op is now more educated!

I'm 71

Too bad. I was hoping you were 6 or 7. Then you'd have a chance of getting smarter as you age. At 71, that's about as smart as your going to get as your experiences wind down and dementia sets in. Did you get brain damage in the military?

Are you like Trump - no respect for veterans?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Laws make gun barrels impervious to any type of saw, blow torch, or any other cutting device.

Thanks to that 1934 gun law, no barrel can ever be cut by any means.



Some people are so fucking stupid.

LAWS DO NOT PREVENT!!!

 

[MikeK]

I salute Massachusetts for passing commonsense gun laws! Thankfully, we have states like Massachusetts that are moving forward on gun control. Hopefully more will follow their lead.

"Tough" gun laws operate to disarm the law-abiding, making them more vulnerable to the criminal element who ignore those stupid laws and arm themselves with black market guns.

The ability for government to control guns is equal to its ability to control narcotics. When will you and those who think like you wise up to that simple fact? The only good thing about the Massachusetts law is the training requirement (for those who can't pass a proficiency test). That will be helpful.

 

[bgrouse]

Automobiles are heavily regulated - guns aren't.

Shannyn Moore: My Guns Are Less Regulated Than My Uterus

So it's easier to open carry an M16 in NYC than it is to drive a car on a public NYC road?

I remember those like the op'er claimed the AR-15 was fully automatic and when pointed out the requirements to own a fully automatic weapon, well let just say the op is now more educated!

I'm 71

Too bad. I was hoping you were 6 or 7. Then you'd have a chance of getting smarter as you age. At 71, that's about as smart as your going to get as your experiences wind down and dementia sets in. Did you get brain damage in the military?

Are you like Trump - no respect for veterans?

I judge people more by the content of their character than by their employment history.

 

[Lakhota]

I salute Massachusetts for passing commonsense gun laws! Thankfully, we have states like Massachusetts that are moving forward on gun control. Hopefully more will follow their lead.

"Tough" gun laws operate to disarm the law-abiding, making them more vulnerable to the criminal element who ignore those stupid laws and arm themselves with black market guns.

The ability for government to control guns is equal to its ability to control narcotics. When will you and those who think like you wise up to that simple fact? The only good thing about the Massachusetts law is the training requirement (for those who can't pass a proficiency test). That will be helpful.

Who is trying to "disarm the law-abiding"?

 

[bgrouse]

I salute Massachusetts for passing commonsense gun laws! Thankfully, we have states like Massachusetts that are moving forward on gun control. Hopefully more will follow their lead.

"Tough" gun laws operate to disarm the law-abiding, making them more vulnerable to the criminal element who ignore those stupid laws and arm themselves with black market guns.

The ability for government to control guns is equal to its ability to control narcotics. When will you and those who think like you wise up to that simple fact? The only good thing about the Massachusetts law is the training requirement (for those who can't pass a proficiency test). That will be helpful.

Who is trying to "disarm the law-abiding"?

How about New Jersey via their gun laws?

 

[MikeK]

Oh WOW !!! A 4 hour certificate. You must think that the driver's test you took at 18 STILL makes you a great driver... This is in the same looney tune bin of "common sense" as plastering "No Gun Zone" signs all over town...

Don't you think there is something wrong about someone who has never handled or shot a gun being able to just put some money down and walk out of the store with one?

Many years ago, I was at the Metropolitan Firearms Academy indoor range in lower Manhattan when the guy two booths away from me put a .38 bullet through the wood booth wall. When I along with several others walked over there this fellow had turned white as a sheet and was standing there staring at the automatic he was holding with both hands. And would you believe what he had to say was, "Shit! I thought it was empty!" Luckily the shot was aimed at an upward angle or it surely could have hit the fellow in the next booth.

This guy didn't come to Metropolitan for training. He had just bought the gun, did some reading, thought he knew all there was to know about it, and wanted to put his knowledge to use. That, plus a few other things I've learned over the years has convinced me that no one should own a gun who has not been trained in its use by a competent gunner.

I was trained by my father, by the U.S. Marine Corps, and by a few more competent teachers over the years. But if I obtained a new gun tomorrow I would treat it like a snake in a bag until I became thoroughly familiar with, and experienced with, its every feature. Because I've been taught to regard guns that way.

 

[Lakhota]

Laws make gun barrels impervious to any type of saw, blow torch, or any other cutting device.

Thanks to that 1934 gun law, no barrel can ever be cut by any means.



Some people are so fucking stupid.

LAWS DO NOT PREVENT!!!

Imagine if one could purchase dynamite at the local hardware store - with no restrictions. Laws make us all safer. And before you say it - I'm aware that explosive devices can be made with gun powder or fertilizer/ammonium nitrate.

 

[Lakhota]

I salute Massachusetts for passing commonsense gun laws! Thankfully, we have states like Massachusetts that are moving forward on gun control. Hopefully more will follow their lead.

"Tough" gun laws operate to disarm the law-abiding, making them more vulnerable to the criminal element who ignore those stupid laws and arm themselves with black market guns.

The ability for government to control guns is equal to its ability to control narcotics. When will you and those who think like you wise up to that simple fact? The only good thing about the Massachusetts law is the training requirement (for those who can't pass a proficiency test). That will be helpful.

Who is trying to "disarm the law-abiding"?

How about New Jersey via their gun laws?

What has New Jersey banned?

 

[Pop23]

A rifle in the military is just as often used for defensive purpose than assault.

What am I missing boys and girls?

 

[bgrouse]

I salute Massachusetts for passing commonsense gun laws! Thankfully, we have states like Massachusetts that are moving forward on gun control. Hopefully more will follow their lead.

"Tough" gun laws operate to disarm the law-abiding, making them more vulnerable to the criminal element who ignore those stupid laws and arm themselves with black market guns.

The ability for government to control guns is equal to its ability to control narcotics. When will you and those who think like you wise up to that simple fact? The only good thing about the Massachusetts law is the training requirement (for those who can't pass a proficiency test). That will be helpful.

Who is trying to "disarm the law-abiding"?

How about New Jersey via their gun laws?

What has New Jersey banned?

Guns. You can't buy them legally unless the government decides you can.

 

[Rustic]

Looks like the only people in MA to have weapons will be the criminals.

I wish the State good luck with that. LOL

That's what I can't understand, how so many people can't see that laws only affect those who abide by them. Those given to misdeeds are not concerned about laws.

So why have speed limits and motor vehicle laws? In fact, why have any laws if criminals don't abide by them? Does that make sense to you?

Well, first of all, there are no rights to driving a motor vehicle outlined in the constitution, so, having speed limits is a legitimate set of laws.

Putting laws on motor vehicles doesn't have any nearing on freedoms and liberties of the people, however, speeding poses an imminent danger to the driver as well as other motorists on the road. Aside from the driver possibly making a mistake and causing harm to others, there are also outside factors to consider. Road conditions, weather, congestion, all of those things pose a problem where excess speed is concerned.

As far as seatbelt laws are concerned, I disagree with them. If you want to drive around without a safety belt, that should be your business. It's like how most states don't have helmet laws, but they have seatbelt laws. That doesn't make any sense. The only time a seat belt law should be enforced is if there is a child in the car, who doesn't have the ability to protect themselves, or affect the outcome should an accident happen.

Most laws are redundant, murder, robbery, those are things that are common sense and apply to all people. Other laws are implemented to guide people into following the rules, don't cheat on your taxes, don't trespass on private property.

None of these apply to guns, because guns don't kill people, people kill people. This idea that banning guns will make the country a safer place is just a myth. Murderers will find a way to murder, and often, with just as much efficiency as a firearm.

Who's talking about "banning" guns? As a lifelong gun enthusiast, hunter, and law-abiding U.S. citizen - I fully support closing all loopholes. Here's what I want: Ban assault weapons (like in the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994). Ban high-capacity magazines. Universal background checks. Address mental health, domestic abuse and reporting issues. Accurate and timely information being fed into an enhanced National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). All responsible gun owners should want this. States have a right to regulate guns.

Na, AR15s are just sporting rifles, the size of the magazine makes no difference whatsoever, so called “universal background checks” is anti-gun nutter dog whistle for firearm registration.
Your ideas are one sided.. your ideas are absolutely unnecessary, unreasonable and unacceptable...

 

[Rustic]

That's what I can't understand, how so many people can't see that laws only affect those who abide by them. Those given to misdeeds are not concerned about laws.

So why have speed limits and motor vehicle laws? In fact, why have any laws if criminals don't abide by them? Does that make sense to you?

Well, first of all, there are no rights to driving a motor vehicle outlined in the constitution, so, having speed limits is a legitimate set of laws.

Putting laws on motor vehicles doesn't have any nearing on freedoms and liberties of the people, however, speeding poses an imminent danger to the driver as well as other motorists on the road. Aside from the driver possibly making a mistake and causing harm to others, there are also outside factors to consider. Road conditions, weather, congestion, all of those things pose a problem where excess speed is concerned.

As far as seatbelt laws are concerned, I disagree with them. If you want to drive around without a safety belt, that should be your business. It's like how most states don't have helmet laws, but they have seatbelt laws. That doesn't make any sense. The only time a seat belt law should be enforced is if there is a child in the car, who doesn't have the ability to protect themselves, or affect the outcome should an accident happen.

Most laws are redundant, murder, robbery, those are things that are common sense and apply to all people. Other laws are implemented to guide people into following the rules, don't cheat on your taxes, don't trespass on private property.

None of these apply to guns, because guns don't kill people, people kill people. This idea that banning guns will make the country a safer place is just a myth. Murderers will find a way to murder, and often, with just as much efficiency as a firearm.

Who's talking about "banning" guns? As a lifelong gun enthusiast, hunter, and law-abiding U.S. citizen - I fully support closing all loopholes. Here's what I want: Ban assault weapons. Ban high-capacity magazines.

Would you support banning assault cars that go over 65 mph? How about cars with automatic transmissions and electrical starters?

Cars aren't made to kill. They are classified as transportation - not weapons. BTW, speed limits regulate how fast we can go. Police monitor violators.

No one has a right to vehicle ownership, not so much for firearm ownership. Firearm is ownership is an absolute right till someone fucks it up for themselves

 

[Rustic]

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!

The most deadly weapon in America is the automobile... You have a Constitutional Right to own a firearm but you do not have a Constitutional Right to drive.

So let cut the nonsense and admit firearms are only dangerous to those like you that are ignorant...

Firearms are designed to kill . Cars are not .

Quit falling down the well, Vehicle ownership is not a right, firearm ownership is an absolute right till someone fucks it up for themselves.

 

[Timmy]

Looks like the only people in MA to have weapons will be the criminals.

I wish the State good luck with that. LOL

That's what I can't understand, how so many people can't see that laws only affect those who abide by them. Those given to misdeeds are not concerned about laws.

So why have speed limits and motor vehicle laws? In fact, why have any laws if criminals don't abide by them? Does that make sense to you?

Well, first of all, there are no rights to driving a motor vehicle outlined in the constitution, so, having speed limits is a legitimate set of laws.

Putting laws on motor vehicles doesn't have any nearing on freedoms and liberties of the people, however, speeding poses an imminent danger to the driver as well as other motorists on the road. Aside from the driver possibly making a mistake and causing harm to others, there are also outside factors to consider. Road conditions, weather, congestion, all of those things pose a problem where excess speed is concerned.

As far as seatbelt laws are concerned, I disagree with them. If you want to drive around without a safety belt, that should be your business. It's like how most states don't have helmet laws, but they have seatbelt laws. That doesn't make any sense. The only time a seat belt law should be enforced is if there is a child in the car, who doesn't have the ability to protect themselves, or affect the outcome should an accident happen.

Most laws are redundant, murder, robbery, those are things that are common sense and apply to all people. Other laws are implemented to guide people into following the rules, don't cheat on your taxes, don't trespass on private property.

None of these apply to guns, because guns don't kill people, people kill people. This idea that banning guns will make the country a safer place is just a myth. Murderers will find a way to murder, and often, with just as much efficiency as a firearm.

Who's talking about "banning" guns? As a lifelong gun enthusiast, hunter, and law-abiding U.S. citizen - I fully support closing all loopholes. Here's what I want: Ban assault weapons (like in the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994). Ban high-capacity magazines. Universal background checks. Address mental health, domestic abuse and reporting issues. Accurate and timely information being fed into an enhanced National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). All responsible gun owners should want this. States have a right to regulate guns.

Na, AR15s are just sporting rifles, the size of the magazine makes no difference whatsoever, so called “universal background checks” is anti-gun nutter dog whistle for firearm registration.
Your ideas are one sided.. your ideas are absolutely unnecessary, unreasonable and unacceptable...

“Sporting “ is a euphemism for people killing .

 

[Rustic]

I salute Massachusetts for passing commonsense gun laws! Thankfully, we have states like Massachusetts that are moving forward on gun control. Hopefully more will follow their lead.

"Tough" gun laws operate to disarm the law-abiding, making them more vulnerable to the criminal element who ignore those stupid laws and arm themselves with black market guns.

The ability for government to control guns is equal to its ability to control narcotics. When will you and those who think like you wise up to that simple fact? The only good thing about the Massachusetts law is the training requirement (for those who can't pass a proficiency test). That will be helpful.

Who is trying to "disarm the law-abiding"?

You...

 

[Lakhota]

I salute Massachusetts for passing commonsense gun laws! Thankfully, we have states like Massachusetts that are moving forward on gun control. Hopefully more will follow their lead.

"Tough" gun laws operate to disarm the law-abiding, making them more vulnerable to the criminal element who ignore those stupid laws and arm themselves with black market guns.

The ability for government to control guns is equal to its ability to control narcotics. When will you and those who think like you wise up to that simple fact? The only good thing about the Massachusetts law is the training requirement (for those who can't pass a proficiency test). That will be helpful.

Who is trying to "disarm the law-abiding"?

How about New Jersey via their gun laws?

What has New Jersey banned?

Guns. You can't buy them legally unless the government decides you can.

True - and that is how it should be for public safety.

 

[bgrouse]

Who's talking about "banning" guns?

Here's your answer, idiot.

What has New Jersey banned?

Guns. You can't buy them legally unless the government decides you can.

True - and that is how it should be for public safety.