NRA has right to lobby, Longmeadow has right to ignore it

[SecularMotion]

The National Rifle Association has a right to campaign against proposed bylaws that will tighten gun controls in Longmeadow.

The town has a right to ignore the single-issue, deep-pocketed and politically charged national lobbying organization and take reasonable measures as it sees fit.

The word "reasonable" sticks in the craw of NRA members, some of whom haven't seen a gun control law yet that they'd consider reasonable. The organization's statement on the Longmeadow proposals declared them "unreasonable restrictions on law-abiding gun owners.''

The restrictions call for a $300 fine imposed on anyone possessing a firearm, rifle or shotgun in town-owned buildings or on recreation property. Gun owners would be required to provide the police department with descriptions (including the serial number, make, model, and caliber) of each firearm, rifle, or shotgun they own.

http://www.masslive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/04/nra_has_right_to_lobby_longmea.html

[ileus]

1. Hopefully the people will let their feelings be known.

The articles were proposed by Select Board member Alex Grant,




One person shouldn't bully a whole town...

[justhanginon]

2. I agree, not just one person. Especially when the NRA and its gun worshipping

membership bully so much more effectively.

[friendly_iconoclast]

5. Will you come back and discuss if this gets voted down at Town Meeting on 10 May?

I suspect not...

[gejohnston]

9. are you saying people who disagree with you are bullies?

or are you saying that they actually act uncivil and violent? In my experience, it is usually the prohibitionists that are uncivil and bully by trying to shut down "gun worshippers", which might make them progressives, but not liberals.
It sounds like those who say "I don't like democracy or free speech if it doesn't go my way."

[DonP]

3. So, are you starting a "Go Fund Me", so all you control fans can help Longmeadow?

Or is this just another one of your FYI "cut and paste" posts, with no real action required or expected from all the "activists" in the DU Gun Control and Activism group?

Are you going to let those poor folks in Longmeadow fight this battle alone? At least you could all kick in a few bucks to help cover the coming court costs, right? After all they're proposing all of your favorite things, Gun bans, Heavy Fines, Registration, Threatened confiscation. It's all there, oh joy and rapture!

Better yet, send them your last 2,000 or so cut and paste articles by other people on how evil guns are for "moral" support.

[friendly_iconoclast]

6. Not a dime will be donated, and 'activism' will once again mean 'more wear on keyboards'

Don, you had that lot pegged long ago:

Loud, cheap, and lazy (or words to that effect)

You know damn well that the controllers will strive mightily to disappear down the
Memory Hole when these petitions fail- and $50 to the Brady Campaign from me says
it will.

I've done it before- it was worth just for the begging mail alone:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x426893

[DonP]

10. I know, but pointing out hypocrisy is one of my gulty pleasures

Besides, a little schadenfreude every now and then is good for the soul.

Hell, if any of them lived just the next town over, they couldn't be bothered to drive over to the Town Hall meeting to show their "support".

Just like the Bushmaster lawsuit. When it gets thrown out they will all quietly disappear into their safe haven for a few days, until the next big thing pops up for 72 hours or so. They have very short memories.

This one will get its' ass kicked in court for more 2nd amendment violations than I can even list right now, starting with registration, lack of grandfather clauses et. al.

But ... they do serve a useful purpose.

I have taken to showing some of their more "interesting and creative" posts as examples at the start of my CCW classes to let them know what's out there in the way of gun control/ban supporters and the attitudes toward gun owners and carriers. So they do serve a purpose, as effective comedy relief.

The women find the posts about how women feel about/need firearms and the whole penis thing, particularly "interesting".

[beergood]

25. "schadenfreude"

sorry, couldn't help myself. love this play.

[friendly_iconoclast]

4. "Assault weapons did not exist when the framers of the Bill of Rights penned the 2nd Amendment"

Last edited Thu Apr 28, 2016, 12:13 AM - Edit history (1)

Neither did the internet when the First was penned. I wonder what 'reasonable measures'
to control online speech you and MassLive would find acceptable?

[Eleanors38]

7. Another AWB? This is reasonable?

[benEzra]

18. The framers of the Bill of Rights....

penned the 2nd Amendment in response to bans on military-style firearms that British law enforcement imposed on various American cities in the 1770s, including Boston. So, yeah, I think they would have been OK with peaceable American citizens owning civilian non-automatics like AR-15's.

It's also interesting to note the prohibitionists' obsession with banning "assault weapons", when I doubt a rifle has been used in a murder in this town in years.

And this statement:

"why anyone sees the need to own assault weapons in Longmeadow - or in any private stockpile - is hard to fathom."

is noteworthy for sheer ignorance, when you realize that the working definition of an "assault weapon" is a civilian rifle with an ergonomic handgrip.

No wonder the proposal failed 950 to 30...

[scscholar]

26. This

It doesn't apply to those things just like the people that claim the 1st amendment applies to the Internet.

[gejohnston]

8. some of the comments are interesting

funglejunk
I have yet to see Masslive correctly report the 3 proposed bylaws. If you read the proposed petitions from the Town of Longmeadow's website, you will find that one of the bylaws would make it a finable offense for anyone, even with a legal LTC, to possess any firearm on any town property. Roads are town property... See the full proposed bylaw below as it will appear on the ballot.



"ARTICLE 29. Citizen Petition To see if the Town will vote to accept a bylaw for gun control on town property that reads, whoever possesses a firearm, rifle, or shotgun in any building owned by the Town, or on recreation area, conservation area, or other grounds owned by the Town, shall pay a fine of $300. The terms “firearm,” “rifle,” and “shotgun” shall have the meanings found in Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 140, section 121, or take any other action relative thereto. This proposed bylaw would prohibit anyone from possessing a firearm (defined under state law as a pistol, revolver, or similar weapon), rifle, or shotgun in a town building or on town property."

shapiroeric 1 hour ago
The by-law actually states all town owned property....that includes roads, sidewalks, and the tree line in front of your house....is that reasonable?...How about off duty law enforcement? No guns for them either......The term assault weapon is ambiguous and if you took the time to actually research what the definition of an assault weapon is under Federal law, which the by law defers to, you would see it's rather ridiculous to fine someone for the possession of one....if you also did some research on the current state laws regarding gun permits you would know that we already "register" our guns when we buy one thru MIRCS....

I'm sure the good citizens of Longmeadow will be happy to pay more taxes for a secure computer network for the by-law as well as fund to fight the numerous lawsuits that will certainly take place if these are passed....or should we just cut funds from education to pay for all this? All on the name of safety, right? All the bad guys are certain to stay out of Longmeadow with these new rules....lots of firearm crime going on in this town....

[beevul]

11. This is oh so rich...

The word "reasonable" sticks in the craw of NRA members, some of whom haven't seen a gun control law yet that they'd consider reasonable. The organization's statement on the Longmeadow proposals declared them "unreasonable restrictions on law-abiding gun owners.''

This is oh so rich, considering it was posted by a poster who has never called a single gun law unreasonable, and presumably thinks they're ALL reasonable.

Gun owners would be required to provide the police department with descriptions (including the serial number, make, model, and caliber) of each firearm, rifle, or shotgun they own.

Gun haters loves them some registration.

Assault weapons would be banned in town, with a $300 per day fine on people who own them within the town.

I'm shocked.

Of the three articles, the proposal requiring the submission of descriptions to police might cause the most dispute. That doesn't mean it's not reasonable, though, and as for the others, why anyone sees the need to own assault weapons in Longmeadow - or in any private stockpile - is hard to fathom.

Doesn't mean its reasonable either. While the author may find it hard to fathom, people who know the facts aren't subject to that sort of cluelessness, and do not suffer from this deficit in understanding.

Assault weapons did not exist when the framers of the Bill of Rights penned the Second Amendment, which NRA spokesmen wave like a club whenever gun control comes up.

The hatred is strong with this one.

It's at least as daunting and disturbing when a powerfully financed national lobbying organization feels the need to sweep into any community in an attempt to influence local autonomy and local decisions.

I'll just bet this guy wouldn't say the same thing about Bloomberg or the brady bunch.

Whatever the town decides, the best path will be for the town to make its decisions on its own...

Until that isn't the best path. When its the authors ox getting gored by the town, I'd just bet the author changes the tune.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

12. What is a "reasonable" gun law?

Is it a law that is just a bit more restrictive than we had yesterday? Then if the reasonable law is passed, tomorrow there is another "reasonable" law.

"Reasonable" = "Incremental"

[friendly_iconoclast]

13. UPDATE: "Longmeadow residents defeat controversial gun control initiatives in Town Meeting"

http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2016/05/longmeadow_town_meeting_defeat.html

LONGMEADOW — Longmeadow residents defeated three proposals for increased gun control bylaws with overwhelming majorities in a Town Meeting that also rejected a 20 mile per hour speed limit, and designated Wolf Swamp fields as a recreation space.

For more than an hour, nearly 1,000 residents who attended Town Meeting Tuesday night debated the three citizen-led initiatives to impose bylaws that would have imposed $300 fines for carrying guns in public buildings, possessing an assault weapon and required gun owners to register their weapons with the police department...

...All three bylaw proposals failed by an overwhelming majority.

950 to 30, to be exact

[TeddyR]

21. Outstanding!

Another "win" for Bloomberg's group

[pablo_marmol]

27. Outstanding INDEED!

More evidence that contradicts the "turning tide" rubbish, and the lie that the majority of Americans support the "common sense" laws put forth by The Controllers.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

14. Longmeadow saw those laws for what they were. Just another...

...turd in the bowl.... And they flushed.

[beevul]

15. "Whatever the town decides, the best path will be for the town to make its decisions on its own..."

From the article:

"Whatever the town decides, the best path will be for the town to make its decisions on its own..."

Anyone want to bet this guy supports Bloomberg forcing gun control on towns like this one, via the state level, despite his own words?

[DonP]

16. "Situational ethics" at their best

"Local municipalities should have the right to legislate on guns" .... unless of course they want to leave them alone or loosen them.

Then we need some serious state pre-emption, rigidly enforced .... as long as they want stricter gun laws of course.

Yeah, gun control fans are really consistent in their "principles".

[DonP]

17. Will you let us know if any of this crap ever passes?

You seem to be big on posting all about "Proposals" or "Bills presented" and meaningless basement blogger posts, but kind of weak on follow up on all your hopeful, optimistic posts for more gun control.

I'm sure everyone here wants to know your batting average on these.

Where are you now, maybe .085?

[Brickbat]

19. The tipping point approacheth...

...so they say...

[beevul]

20. "...And your little dog too!". N/T

[virginia mountainman]

22. Seems like the gun control groups got ignored..

Very good outcome!!!

[Duckhunter935]

23. Are you going to post this and the outcome in your group?

It needs at least one post this week

[friendly_iconoclast]

24. As if. That place makes regular use of the Memory Hole...

[pablo_marmol]

28. Pity that Longmeadow ignored The Controllers.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172190855#post13