A Common-sense Approach to Gun Control

A Common-sense Approach to Gun Control

There are 94 comments on the Beacon Hill Times story from Jun 4, 2014, titled A Common-sense Approach to Gun Control. In it, Beacon Hill Times reports that:

The gun control bill announced this week by House Speaker Robert DeLeo represents one of the most comprehensive efforts in our nation to bring about sensible gun control legislation that both improves public safety while also safeguarding the rights of law-abiding citizens to purchase guns as enunciated in the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision ... (more)

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Beacon Hill Times.

First Prev
of 5
Next Last

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#2 Jun 4, 2014
Banned wrote:
The lack of any specific information on what restrictions would become law under this bill causes me to believe the author of this story probably doesn't even understand what this legislation calls for.
It's not hard to find what restrictions this bill proposes.

If you're willing to take a second and look for them instead of just making uninformed, knee-jerk criticisms about something you know nothing about.

Of course if you could do that, you wouldn't be a gun nut, would you? LOL!

----------

Bill H.4121; 188th (Current)
An Act relative to the reduction of gun violence
https://malegislature.gov/Bills/188/House/H41...

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#3 Jun 4, 2014
Speaker DeLeo Announces Most Comprehensive Gun Legislation in 16 years

Speaker Robert A. DeLeo (D-Winthrop) was joined by House members and the Gun Violence Task Force yesterday to announce the most comprehensive gun legislation proposed for Massachusetts in the last 16 years.

The bill places focus on mental health, violence prevention, oversight, and systemic problems while extending federal restrictions for firearm acquisition to the state level.

“It is not enough to be one of the safest states in the nation, we must enact laws that make our communities the safest in the world,” Speaker DeLeo said.“I believe this legislation give us the tools and foundation to reach that goal.”

For the first time, legislation would authorize a police chief to deny a firearm identification (FID) card for a rifle or shotgun based on a “suitability” standard to be established by the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security (EOPSS). The bill also requires local licensing authorities to trace any firearm used to commit a crime within its jurisdiction and to report relevant data.

This legislation emphasizes a focus on treating mental health and substance addiction that includes a number of provisions to ensure law enforcement officials have appropriate public documents relating to applicants’ health and criminal histories and requires courts to report information regarding domestic violence, substance abuse and mental health.

All information under the control of Massachusetts’ Department of Criminal Justice Information Services (DCJIS) allowed by law will now be transferred to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. The bill also heightens suicide prevention efforts and related training for educators, health care providers and firearm owners and dealers.

The bill will also immediately affect school safety. There will be an increase in the penalty for carrying a firearm on school grounds, and now requires schools to have two-way communication devices for specific use with police and fire officials. The provision also establish a special commission to study and report on mental, emotional and behavioral health in public schools.

There will be Increased oversight for firearms dealers and gun owners, including a mandate that all secondary market gun sales take place at a location operated by a licensed firearm dealer. There will also be an increase in the fine for failing to report a lost or stolen firearm, and establishes a criminal penalty for gun dealers who fail to report a lost or stolen weapon.

The legislation also eliminates Class B licenses, ensuring that all licenses to carry will now have the same conditions and restrictions. There are also Increased penalties for improper storage of a firearm, rifle or shotgun; a stricter certification process for firearms safety instructor; and creates sanctions for carrying a firearm while intoxicated.

An Act Relative to the Reduction of Gun Violence was drafted based upon the recommendations made by the Committee to Reduce Firearm Violence. The eight-member task force appointed by DeLeo and chaired by Dr. Jack McDevitt of Northeastern University included individuals with expertise and varied perspectives on gun violence and ownership.

http://www.nobomagazine.com/2014/05/28/speake...
Yep2

Gainesville, FL

#4 Jun 4, 2014
Considering that the vast majority of americans oppose gun bans, don't believe stricter gun control prevents gun violence, and the spectacular flop the Assault Weapons Ban was-

Leftwing gun grabber nuts never give up their attempts to subvert the Constitution.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#5 Jun 4, 2014
Yep2 wrote:
Considering that the vast majority of americans oppose gun bans, don't believe stricter gun control prevents gun violence, and the spectacular flop the Assault Weapons Ban was-
Leftwing gun grabber nuts never give up their attempts to subvert the Constitution.
Of course since nobody is talking about banning guns, your point is irrelevant.

But a majority of Americans support stricter gun laws. And gun violence dropped in the US after the assault weapons ban.

And, of course, nobody is seeking to subvert the Constitution. Limitations on firearms are perfectly Constitutional, as court after court has ruled.

Rightwing gun nuts will never give up their attempts to subvert the Founders' original intent by trying to allow anyone to own any weapon they want without any oversight whatsoever.
Yep2

Watseka, IL

#6 Jun 4, 2014
The vast majority of americans oppose handgun bans;

Gallup poll 10/6/2013

"Do you think there should or should not be a law that would ban the possession of handguns, except by the police and other authorized persons?"


Should be -25%

Should not be -74%

The vast majority of Americans don't believe gun control reduces gun violence;

Quinnipiac poll 9/29/2013

"Do you think stricter gun control laws could have prevented the mass killing at the Washington Navy Yard or not?"

Could have prevented - 32%

Could not have prevented - 61%

The Assault Weapons Ban was such a bad joke that it was thrown out and is now >GONE<.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#7 Jun 4, 2014
Yep2 wrote:
The vast majority of americans oppose handgun bans;
Gallup poll 10/6/2013
"Do you think there should or should not be a law that would ban the possession of handguns, except by the police and other authorized persons?"
Should be -25%
Should not be -74%
The vast majority of Americans don't believe gun control reduces gun violence;
Quinnipiac poll 9/29/2013
"Do you think stricter gun control laws could have prevented the mass killing at the Washington Navy Yard or not?"
Could have prevented - 32%
Could not have prevented - 61%
The Assault Weapons Ban was such a bad joke that it was thrown out and is now >GONE<.
LOL!

Logical reasoning really isn't your thing, is it?
Yep2

Gainesville, FL

#8 Jun 4, 2014
Rightwing gun nuts will never give up their attempts to subvert the Founders' original intent by trying to allow anyone to own any weapon they want without any oversight whatsoever.
----------

Baloney comrade.

I don't want anyone adjudicated mentally unstable or anyone convicted of a felony crime of violence to possess firearms.

Your idea that "gun nuts" want to subvert the 2nd Amendment - which gives them the right to possess guns - is worthy of Peter Pan and the Magic Kingdom.

Quit trying to baffle people with your clumsy falsehoods and whining.

Polls prove that the vast majority think you are out of touch with reality.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#9 Jun 4, 2014
Yep2 wrote:
Rightwing gun nuts will never give up their attempts to subvert the Founders' original intent by trying to allow anyone to own any weapon they want without any oversight whatsoever.
----------
Baloney comrade.
I don't want anyone adjudicated mentally unstable or anyone convicted of a felony crime of violence to possess firearms.
Your idea that "gun nuts" want to subvert the 2nd Amendment - which gives them the right to possess guns - is worthy of Peter Pan and the Magic Kingdom.
Quit trying to baffle people with your clumsy falsehoods and whining.
Polls prove that the vast majority think you are out of touch with reality.
Learn to read. I didn't say gun nuts want to subvert the 2nd Amendment. I said gun nuts want to subvert the Founders' original intent, which everyone knows applied only to keeping and bearing arms for military purposes. That was the uniform understanding of all federal judges for over 200 years, until an activist SCOTUS abandoned original intent and stare decisis in 2008.
Yep2

Gainesville, FL

#10 Jun 4, 2014
Pure bullcrap

The 2nd Amendment addresses MILITIA which is NOT "military"'

The militia is all armed citizens who are NOT in the military.

Kind of hard for them to keep and bear arms for "military purposes" if they don't have arms to bear.

Gun grabbers live in Fantasyland.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#11 Jun 4, 2014
Yep2 wrote:
Pure bullcrap
The 2nd Amendment addresses MILITIA which is NOT "military"'
The militia is all armed citizens who are NOT in the military.
Kind of hard for them to keep and bear arms for "military purposes" if they don't have arms to bear.
Gun grabbers live in Fantasyland.
LOL!

You're just completely brainwashed, aren't you?

If you prefer to believe rightwing revisionist history because it reinforces your extremist ideology, that's fine. Just don't expect those of us who live in the reality-based universe and believe actual US history to go along with your self-serving delusions.
Yep2

Gainesville, FL

#12 Jun 4, 2014
I don't care what you think gun grabber - believe what ever you like.

You're going to lose.

I blew away every one of your absurd arguments with ease, and don't mind a bit if you choose to believe in loser fairy tales.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#13 Jun 4, 2014
Yep2 wrote:
I don't care what you think gun grabber - believe what ever you like.
You're going to lose.
I blew away every one of your absurd arguments with ease, and don't mind a bit if you choose to believe in loser fairy tales.
LMAO!

Having not presented a single fact or a shred of evidence to support your faith-based beliefs, you nevertheless believe you've somehow won the debate.

And that is hilarious!

Thanks, friend, but I think I'll just continue to believe objective facts and verifiable reality instead of your rightwing fantasies and revisionist history. LOL!
Yep2

Saint Augustine, FL

#16 Jun 4, 2014
I accept your admission that you can't defeat my points.

Sweet - if minor - victory.

“Act Interdimensional ly”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#17 Jun 4, 2014
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
...gun nuts want to subvert the Founders' original intent, which everyone knows applied only to keeping and bearing arms for military purposes..
In the 1780's, the vast majority of Americans lived in rural or semi-rural conditions, and there were precious few police outside of the major cities and not a Safeway in sight during the 18th Century. Firearms were not only kept for protection, most Americans used them to feed themselves.

Given that fact, I find it HIGHLY dubious that our Founders intended Americans keep firearms only for military purposes. They were establishing a free state, not a gulag.
Yep2

Saint Augustine, FL

#18 Jun 4, 2014
Strictly speaking militia is the reason the Founders put in the 2nd Amendment.

The militia are all able bodied citizens who are not already in the military.

They are strictly volunteer, unpaid, and supply their own weapons and bullets and beans.

They are a HUGE, FREE defense force.

That is why the Founders made sure they could possess MILITARY GRADE firearms.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#19 Jun 4, 2014
Yep2 wrote:
I accept your admission that you can't defeat my points.
Sweet - if minor - victory.
If that's what you have to believe to think you've gotten a victory, that's pretty pathetic.

But you clearly know that I don't NEED to defeat your points since I've refuted them with facts and you can't offer ANY evidence to support them. None.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#20 Jun 4, 2014
Rick Moss wrote:
<quoted text>
In the 1780's, the vast majority of Americans lived in rural or semi-rural conditions, and there were precious few police outside of the major cities and not a Safeway in sight during the 18th Century. Firearms were not only kept for protection, most Americans used them to feed themselves.
Given that fact, I find it HIGHLY dubious that our Founders intended Americans keep firearms only for military purposes. They were establishing a free state, not a gulag.
They were establishing a free state ... protected by state militias. For 200 years that's been the legal and historical consensus by every federal court in the land.

You can certainly choose to believe otherwise, but that would be a faith-based belief in contrary to real-world American history.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#21 Jun 4, 2014
Yep2 wrote:
Strictly speaking militia is the reason the Founders put in the 2nd Amendment.
The militia are all able bodied citizens who are not already in the military.
They are strictly volunteer, unpaid, and supply their own weapons and bullets and beans.
They are a HUGE, FREE defense force.
That is why the Founders made sure they could possess MILITARY GRADE firearms.
Right, that's the point of the Amendment - the necessity of well-regulated militias to the free states. And that's been the clear opinion of all federal courts since the Constitution was passed until 2008.

Good to see you've finally come around to seeing the truth. I'll take that as a sweet - if minor - victory.

“Act Interdimensional ly”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#22 Jun 4, 2014
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
...For 200 years that's been the legal and historical consensus by every federal court in the land...
And yet, there hasn't been a single ruling in over 200 years by either state or federal courts that hasn't been overturned supporting an all out prohibition of the RKBA for individuals in favour of the collective.

Is it that the legal minds of the past 200 years just haven't had the time or inclination to write into the law that which you seem to believe is a foregone conclusion? Or, perhaps you're the first one enlightened enough to see things the way they really are?

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#23 Jun 4, 2014
Rick Moss wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet, there hasn't been a single ruling in over 200 years by either state or federal courts that hasn't been overturned supporting an all out prohibition of the RKBA for individuals in favour of the collective.
Is it that the legal minds of the past 200 years just haven't had the time or inclination to write into the law that which you seem to believe is a foregone conclusion? Or, perhaps you're the first one enlightened enough to see things the way they really are?
*sigh*

I have told you repeatedly that I have zero interest in "all out prohibition of RKBA for individuals," yet you keep attributing that motive to me. At this point you're simply lying.

It is impossible to have a discussion with you when you refuse to be honest.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 5
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Guns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News The new Wild West: Sacramento's sheriff issues ... 5 hr RayOne 1
News Packing pistols: Is Texas safer with more licen... (Jul '11) 20 hr Public farts 6
News Suspect in Louisiana theatre rampage had histor... Jul 28 El Chapo 56
News Local Jews upset by Holocaust references in cam... (Jun '12) Jul 27 swedenforever 123
News Louisiana Moms, Aurora Theater Shooting Survivo... Jul 25 payme 2
News Why assault rifle sales are booming Jul 24 Here Is One 242
News Legal Loophole: Concealed carry law Jul 24 CGiven 2
More from around the web