Massachusetts: Lowell proposes "arsenal" law


PDA






Aren't we all
May 9, 2011, 09:12 PM
http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/InTheNews.aspx?ID=15108


NRA alert. Owners of more than 10 guns have to tell police within 24 of acquisition and keep them in a vault w/central alarms.

Good thing I don't live in MA. :evil:

Hope this thing dies..

Scary..

If you enjoyed reading about "Massachusetts: Lowell proposes "arsenal" law" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
AlexanderA
May 9, 2011, 09:31 PM
This is a good example of legislators addressing a non-existent "problem." They're trying to score points by scaring the ignorant. Since when are gun collections used in crime? All a criminal needs is one, or at most two, guns. This is just grandstanding.

HOOfan_1
May 9, 2011, 09:42 PM
Remember what the people of Massachusetts did the last time a government had a problem with arsenals? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_Lexington_and_Concord

Owen Sparks
May 9, 2011, 09:50 PM
How many can you shoot at a time? Suppose you had a reason to resist the government, Is it not easier to change magazines than to change guns?

bushmaster1313
May 9, 2011, 10:15 PM
Very Scary!

How many times are you allowed to excercise a Constitutinal right before you have to report your activity to the Police?

pikid89
May 9, 2011, 10:52 PM
thats rather disturbing

9mm+
May 9, 2011, 11:03 PM
No wonder why people are fleeing MA for New Hampshire --lower taxes and more reasonable gun laws. This ordnance in Lowell shows the level of stupidity that lawmakers will stoop to in order to score points with their ignorant constituents.

bushmaster1313
May 9, 2011, 11:23 PM
This ordnance in Lowell shows the level of stupidity that lawmakers will stoop to in order to score points with their ignorant constituents.


This is what it is all about.

My opponent is in favor of letting wife beaters have guns
My opponent voted against banning assault rifles
My opponent is in favor of making concealed carry easier

9mm+
May 10, 2011, 12:01 AM
My opponent is in favor of letting wife beaters have guns
My opponent voted against banning assault rifles
My opponent is in favor of making concealed carry easier

Bingo. And the voters* buy it lock, stock, and barrel.

*not all voters, just the ignorant ones

Demarko
May 10, 2011, 03:46 AM
A lot of legislation these days seems to come down to not what they think the constituents want, but rather, what they're afraid their next opponent will use against them as a sound bite.

And sometimes, it's about some small-print rider they put on there, too.

elcaminoariba
May 10, 2011, 05:16 AM
MA already has some of the most byzantine, tyrannical, and anti law abiding citizen gun laws in the country, and we're supposed to get outraged at this? This is nothing. Hell, I'd trade this law for getting rid of the expensive licensing requirement. I say pass it and drive the remaining gun owners out of that awful state. We still have a lot of cling-ons who won't leave MA for various reasons. I also say pass it because there's a good chance it would violate Heller.

Pilot
May 10, 2011, 05:59 AM
Remember what the people of Massachusetts did the last time a government had a problem with arsenals? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles...on_and_Concord



The current population of Mass is much different than those people. Much different.

MachIVshooter
May 10, 2011, 10:55 AM
Is it not easier to change magazines than to change guns?

Except in NY ;)

CraigC
May 10, 2011, 10:57 AM
The misuse of the term "arsenal" by media cretins has gotten to be like fingernails on a chalkboard to me. An arsenal is a military installation where weapons are made and has nothing to do with Joe Blow having a closet full of guns.

mrbro
May 10, 2011, 11:20 AM
You can apply political media speak to anything we do. I have a "cache of unregistered military-style rifles, pistols and long range rifles similar to those used by snipers" and an "unlicensed ammunition manufacturing facility" hidden out of sight in the basement. Sounds evil, but I reload for a small collection of US WW2 arms and scoped hunting rifles in a state where registration is not required.

Travis McGee
May 10, 2011, 11:50 AM
Ten guns is an arsenal? Really?

merlinfire
May 10, 2011, 12:37 PM
Ten guns is an arsenal? Really?

gun shows must REALLY tick them off.

mbt2001
May 10, 2011, 12:41 PM
This is a good example of legislators addressing a non-existent "problem." They're trying to score points by scaring the ignorant. Since when are gun collections used in crime? All a criminal needs is one, or at most two, guns. This is just grandstanding.

Perfect response and 100% true.

EVIL
May 10, 2011, 01:18 PM
double tap - pls delete.

EVIL
May 10, 2011, 01:20 PM
The current population of Mass is much different than those people. Much different.
Those guy's descendants all moved west to escape the increasing nannying in New England ... Just like thier ancestor's moved across the pond to escape European Nanny-states...The vote with your feet concept is still alive and well in the USA ... just reference the 2010 census - all the pro-freedom, low-tax burden states were population gainers.

hermannr
May 10, 2011, 02:42 PM
It has been proven that fear of the unknown will cause nomally rational people to act irrationally. Consider the original "War of the Worlds" broadcast.

The more reason to educate the public, so firearms are not an "unknown" quantity. Respect, yes, fear, no.

thunder173
May 10, 2011, 02:47 PM
Unfortunately,...Uncle Sam sent me to Ft. Deven's in 1983,...but after 10 months I managed to escape,......never ever looked back......

ZCORR Jay
May 10, 2011, 03:59 PM
This is a good example of legislators addressing a non-existent "problem."

Exactly. Now they can say that they are there to protect the people and if anyone objects to it they are accused of defending murders.

It's amazing how a perfectly legal firearm owner is still seen as a violent criminal in the eyes of government and the ignorant. :banghead:

LawScholar
May 10, 2011, 04:15 PM
TEN!?

I have five, my brother has seven, and my parents have well over a dozen, and we're not even that dedicated to collecting!

Ten is a crazy-easy number to reach. Even if you just had one of each essential category.

1.) Full-size home defense/range pistol
2.) .22 pistol
3.) .22 rifle
4.) HD/Hunting Shotgun
5.) Hunting rifle
6.) CCW piece
7.) Warm-weather CCW piece
8.) Spouse CCW piece
9.) Spouse warm-weather CCW piece
10.) 1911

Even with just a single type of each gun, you hit the limit. And what if you like to collect 1911s or rifles?

More more concerning than the practical application...what other rights do we require this for?

Am I required to report if I protest in front of the capitol more than 10 times?

If I don't let troops into my house more than 10 times?

If I decline to self-incriminate more than 10 times?

Tyranny, plain and simple.

Owen Sparks
May 10, 2011, 04:16 PM
This is really not about crime. The statists believes that the government should have a monopoly on the use of force and weapons in private hands are seen as symbols of defiance and a challenge to their authority.

LawScholar
May 10, 2011, 04:18 PM
I love living in Wyoming more than ever when I read stuff like this. The other day I was blasting away at the hillside with my new Daniel Defense AR, a county sheriff drove by as I had this fierce-looking AR with a full magazine tucked to my body, and all he did was wave. Didn't even slow down. THAT is America.

swiftak
May 10, 2011, 04:25 PM
Amazing how 1 state below you can be as different as night and day. Our laws in NH are totally different from theirs. We have ALOT more guns and 1/1000 the crime. Hmmm.
They even had a sign on the Mass Pike entering Boston blaming NH for their crime, because guns were easy to buy and own here.

9mm+
May 10, 2011, 04:33 PM
Amazing how 1 state below you can be as different as night and day. Our laws in NH are totally different from theirs. We have ALOT more guns and 1/1000 the crime. Hmmm.
They even had a sign on the Mass Pike entering Boston blaming NH for their crime, because guns were easy to buy and own here.

These liberal "intellectuals" cannot fathom the fact that legal gun ownership and crime are negatively correlated, not positively. This is why I could never live in those liberal hell-holes. No way, no how.

Red Cent
May 10, 2011, 04:50 PM
Massachusetts is the only state where lawmakers have actually banned the use of silhouette targets for defensive training. Home of Barney Frank. Now, it sems, we have another fr.........nut.

KimberUltra
May 10, 2011, 05:25 PM
O great. Connecticut will follow suite if that garbage passes. I don't have 10 guns, but I'm sure I will at some point.

HOOfan_1
May 11, 2011, 09:16 AM
Massachusetts is the only state where lawmakers have actually banned the use of silhouette targets for defensive training..

That is unreal. What is happening to this country? To think that Massachussetts tax payers are paying for such ridiculous laws to be passed.

Nanny laws :barf:

M-Cameron
May 11, 2011, 09:50 AM
Massachusetts is the only state where lawmakers have actually banned the use of silhouette targets for defensive training. Home of Barney Frank. Now, it sems, we have another fr.........nut.

thats one of those laws that was written on a whim and no one ever actually cares/ enforces it.......

kind of like those archaic laws that prohibit keeping a horse on the second floor of an apartment or prohibit throwing a snake into the wind on a thursday.....

go into just about any gunshop and you will see silhouette targets for sale.

SSN Vet
May 11, 2011, 10:03 AM
No wonder why people are fleeing MA for New Hampshire

and unfortunately, they bring their socialism with them and insist on all the nanny state services they had back in Taxachusettes.....

Now Maine and NH have both shifted from freedom loving independant red states to "I want my healthcare and wellfare!" blue states. But fortunately Maine just experienced had a major backlash in the last election, and NH starves the government with some of the lowest taxes in the nation (no sales tax and no income tax) so state officials can't get to far out of hand.

RockyMtnTactical
May 11, 2011, 10:49 AM
ridiculous.

Carl N. Brown
May 11, 2011, 10:49 AM
Even if an antigunner accepts some highly regulated gun ownership, it is only for self-defense and then they see no "need" for more than one gun. They accept and see guns only as weapons. So a "sporting purpose only" gun buff or gun collector with more than one "instrument of death" scares the bejeebers out of them.

I have shot guns since I was six, owned guns since I was fifteen, and bought guns when I was sixteen. I started with plinking with .22, then hunting, then civilian marksmanship, military history, muzzleloaders, back to hunting, and finally convinced by two detectives and a corrections officer that self defense was a legitimate reason for owning a gun.

So I own more than ten guns, and have seen national gun control groups raise this "arsenal license" idea before, and I would hate to see it revived again.

grubbylabs
May 11, 2011, 11:50 AM
This is really not about crime. The statists believes that the government should have a monopoly on the use of force and weapons in private hands are seen as symbols of defiance and a challenge to their authority.

I seem to remember a history lesson about a group of people fighting a revolutionary war over this very concept.:confused:

merlinfire
May 11, 2011, 12:04 PM
News flash:

"Religious Extremism" law requires people owning more than 7 religious texts in their home to notify FBI and police.

Those who have more than 9 things they would like not to be searched or seized illegally must immediately notify police or risk having them seized anyway.

Cop Bob
May 11, 2011, 03:56 PM
Dang........ In Mass a too chit.. I'm a FELON... tell em I'm Hiding in TEXAS... !

ThePunisher'sArmory
May 11, 2011, 04:16 PM
I seem to remember a history lesson about a group of people fighting a revolutionary war over this very concept.

If these stupid laws keep passing we will see a second round in our lifetime.........

acewolf
May 11, 2011, 06:10 PM
Mississippi is a gun lover state, at a fast food drive up window you might here, would you like fries and a 45 cal. with that? I can literally walk into a gun store, pawn shop, and walk out with a hand gun in less than 15 minutes, including filling out the form and the background check. in our state if someone is kicking in your door, you can shoot them through the door legally, and we can carry a gun in the glove compartment of our car with out any form whatsoever. Out of respect, if we are pulled over, we tell the police officer that we have a gun, behind the seat, or whereever. Our vehicle is considered an extension of our home. Our crime rate with guns is not comparably high to the rest of the nation.

clancy12
May 11, 2011, 07:08 PM
These liberal "intellectuals" cannot fathom the fact that legal gun ownership and crime are negatively correlated, not positively. This is why I could never live in those liberal hell-holes. No way, no how.

Ditto. And I don't get the alarm system requirement part. If you have 10+ guns, why do you need an alarm system?

phoglund
May 11, 2011, 07:19 PM
This one made me laugh...

If you have 10+ guns, why do you need an alarm system? :p

snatale42
May 11, 2011, 09:02 PM
Remember what the people of Massachusetts did the last time a government had a problem with arsenals? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles...on_and_Concord

As someone from MA, I can tell you people ALLOW the state to pull this crap. Nobody REALLY fights back. At one point I'll wind up living back there and I'm sure once I make that move I'll regret it. You'd think they'll enlist some help from there brother to the north NH. It's sad that MA will be totally commie soon. Until then I'll enjoy my guns and freedom living down here in VA. Where it's still America. One thing I love about living in the south now is if state govt pulled the crap here they do up there.......SOMEONES GONNA PAY FOR IT!!!!

Neverwinter
May 11, 2011, 11:17 PM
Ditto. And I don't get the alarm system requirement part. If you have 10+ guns, why do you need an alarm system?
Because most people don't stay at home all day.

merlinfire
May 12, 2011, 07:51 AM
As someone from MA, I can tell you people ALLOW the state to pull this crap. Nobody REALLY fights back. At one point I'll wind up living back there and I'm sure once I make that move I'll regret it. You'd think they'll enlist some help from there brother to the north NH. It's sad that MA will be totally commie soon. Until then I'll enjoy my guns and freedom living down here in VA. Where it's still America. One thing I love about living in the south now is if state govt pulled the crap here they do up there.......SOMEONES GONNA PAY FOR IT!!!!

Back in the days of Lexington and Concord the makeup of the state was a lot different. These days, the ease of transportation and relocation allows a "settling out" effect with areas, where like-minded individuals have a tendency to move to areas that share their views. That's why you've got areas that are hyper-focused on getting rid of guns, and others aren't.

Carl N. Brown
May 12, 2011, 08:14 AM
swiftak post#27
They even had a sign on the Mass Pike entering Boston blaming NH for their crime, because guns were easy to buy and own here.

I hate it when they do that, because it provokes me to post this:

Brady Campaign State Ratings v FBI UCR State Crime and Homicide Rates
Northeastern Old New 2003 2006 2009
STATE GRADE POINT CRIME HOMICIDE CRIME HOMICIDE CRIME HOMICIDE
Connecticut A- 58 308.2 3.0 280.8 3.1 298.7 3.0
Maine D- 9 108.9 1.2 115.5 1.7 119.8 2.0
Massachusetts A- 65 469.4 2.2 447.0 2.9 457.1 2.6
New Hampshire D- 6 148.8 1.4 138.7 1.0 159.6 0.8
Rhode Island B- 44 285.6 2.3 227.5 2.6 252.6 2.9
Vermont D- 6 110.2 2.3 136.6 1.9 131.4 1.1

Brady gives high ratings (A and B grades, 44 to 65 points) to CT MA and RI for
having restrictive gun laws, including discretionary "may-issue" permit laws.
Brady gives ME NH VT bad ratings (D- grades, 6 to 9 points) for having lax gun
laws, especially VT carry w/o permit. CRIME is violent crime: homicide, armed
robbery, aggravated assault and rape and rates are per 100,000 population per
year; HOMICIDE includes murder and non-negligent manslaughter.

If you enjoyed reading about "Massachusetts: Lowell proposes "arsenal" law" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!