No more Semi Auto Rifles in Mass?? (Franklin: 2013, crime)

[roadstrailstris]

Here I am waving good-bye to you all leaving the state for enforcing the laws! Good luck in those places where the only way you can possibly survive is to defend your life with an assault weapon.

[mpafr012]

Another reason why I moved to Florida!

[LeavingMA]

Originally Posted by roadstrailstris

Here I am waving good-bye to you all leaving the state for enforcing the laws! Good luck in those places where the only way you can possibly survive is to defend your life with an assault weapon.

It isn't about having one, it is about having the right to have one. I don't need the government treating me like a 6 year old kid.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by GeoffD

Can somebody explain to me why they need a semi-automatic rifle with a high capacity detachable magazine? A semi-automatic rifle like a Remington 750 that doesn't have a detachable magazine is totally legal. If it takes more than 4 rounds to drop Bambi, you should be laying off the Jack Daniels.

The Massachusetts law banning those dates back to 1994. All the AG has done is state that the state will be enforcing that law.

Are you really that ignorant? Just use your imagination...

[tysmith95]

Originally Posted by massnative71

Are you really that ignorant? Just use your imagination...

To kill 50 people in short succession. You don't need a weapon that strong to kill an animal.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by tysmith95

I've found that state cops are much more prevalent inside the "live free or die" state than inside Massachusetts. It seems like Mass state cops don't spend as much time catching speeders compared to cops in other states. Honestly I think that is a good thing, the speed limit on many highways are too low and should be raised. Despite the fact that cars are much safer and perform much better than in the past speed limits have stayed low.

Most MA highways are too congested to safely raise the speed limit higher, save for maybe the western portion of the Pike where I think it should be 75. MA roads are plagued with drivers in their Subarus, Toyota Priuses and Corollas doing 50 mph in the left lane with their right blinker on. You also still have plenty of people in old clunkers that cannot safely do more than 65. People weaving around them doing 80+ is extremely dangerous. No matter how high you raise the limit, those slow drivers will not go any faster. I wish the state police would crack down a lot more. Distracted drivers, even more so than the speeders. In general, I think both NH and ME do a much better job at going after the problem people without punishing everyone else.

Originally Posted by tysmith95

To kill 50 people in short succession. You don't need a weapon that strong to kill an animal.

With these animals I wouldn't want to be relying on anything else:

ISIS | Counter Extremism Project



As they say, "don't bring a knife to a gun fight".

Or are you one of those people who Obama successfully convinced we "contained" them?

[Shrewsburried]

Originally Posted by massnative71

With these animals I wouldn't want to be relying on anything else:

ISIS | Counter Extremism Project



As they say, "don't bring a knife to a gun fight".

Or are you one of those people who Obama successfully convinced we "contained" them?

Well, considering the primary methods of attack for MA based terrorists are bombs and planes, I don't expect my AR-15 totting brother in-law will be much use despite his extensive military training. Get real.

I don't own a gun, but I have fired enough (i.e., AR-15 semi, mill-spec M4, various shotguns, 9mm & 37mm hand guns, etc.) to know that in the right hands they are safe, predictable, and controlled. The majority of MA residents are objective thinkers who would, if the NRA were willing to concede some on traceability and liability, be more open to gun ownership. But like many things, the reasonable majority is yelled over by the ideological extremes - in this case the hard line NRA supporters and the ill informed progressives.

Want better gun rights? Stop the rhetoric against urban progressives who have real tangible reasons to fear fire arms and focus on reigning in the NRA. Me personally? If gun owners agree to reasonable measures for traceability and inventorying, I could careless if they own ARs, M16s, M4s ... whatever. This will not, however, happen given the NRA's current ideology which is to fear monger and bolster fire arm sales.

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by Shrewsburried

Want better gun rights? Stop the rhetoric against urban progressives who have real tangible reasons to fear fire arms and focus on reigning in the NRA. Me personally? If gun owners agree to reasonable measures for traceability and inventorying, I could careless if they own ARs, M16s, M4s ... whatever. This will not, however, happen given the NRA's current ideology which is to fear monger and bolster fire arm sales.

Well said.

[Cape Cod Todd]

Originally Posted by Shrewsburried

Well, considering the primary methods of attack for MA based terrorists are bombs and planes, I don't expect my AR-15 totting brother in-law will be much use despite his extensive military training. Get real.



Want better gun rights? Stop the rhetoric against urban progressives who have real tangible reasons to fear fire arms and focus on reigning in the NRA. Me personally? If gun owners agree to reasonable measures for traceability and inventorying, I could careless if they own ARs, M16s, M4s ... whatever. This will not, however, happen given the NRA's current ideology which is to fear monger and bolster fire arm sales.

The NRA takes such a hard stance on gun rights because they know if they give an inch the Gov. will take a mile.
I think Mass. already has good gun laws compared to many other states where all you need is a drivers license to buy. We have a license system that is left up to your towns Police chief to determine who gets a gun. This has problems if your chief is anti gun of course but in most cases after you fill out the forms, pay the fees and pass the background check you get a license either for long guns or hand guns or both. In most cases a hunter/ firearms safety course is also required. The handgun license needs to be renewed every 5 years. Both licenses can be revoked and your guns taken if you get into trouble with the law.
To buy bullets you need to show your proper gun license. A guy with a FID rifle permit cannot buy handgun ammo. Mass has a good system but the NRA sees it as restrictive but I see it as weeding out many who would be up to no good. Of course criminals don't care one bit about any laws.

Speaking of laws we have one were if you are caught with a gun or even bullets and you are not licensed to have them it is a mandatory one year in prison. How often is that one plea bargained away or just dropped. Why? especially if that illegal gun was used by a guy to rob a store.
They need to get tough on the criminals first before coming down on the law abiding.

Healey over stepped her bounds. Rules were made to make a product conform to new laws, the manufacturers altered their product to meet these new rules which made them legal and now Healey is changing the rules on her own.



As for threats being from airplanes and bombs the Boston Marathon bombers were on the run through towns and even had a shoot out with the police in a usually quiet neighborhood. Imagine if one guy or gal was able to take a few shots from their house to immobilize the bad guys.
Germany had an attack the other day where the guy got away and the public was told to shelter in their homes until the perp was caught. Would you rather sit on your couch with a steak knife in your hand trusting the door lock to stop a desperate fugitive or would you feel better and more capable of protecting your family with a gun that can fire multiple shots quickly.

Imagine that scenario on a larger scale.


Healey over stepped her bounds and attacked legal gun owners when she should be going after criminals who use guns in their crimes.
Assault rifles are used very rarely in day to day crimes.

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by Cape Cod Todd

Imagine if one guy or gal was able to take a few shots from their house to immobilize the bad guys.

You really want citizen public to start taking shots out of their house on someone they think might be guilty of something? Really?