Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Speaking of Stupid...

JD at Tekmage's Blog brings the following idiocy to my attention:

AN ACT RELATIVE TO FIREARMS IN THE COMMONWEALTH.
(Just seeing that alone should tell all MA gunowners to assume the position...)

JD also has a comprehensive run down of other pending firearms-related bills. Go. Read. Get angry...



What, praytell, does this bill purport to do?
No license to carry shall be issued pursuant to this section unless and until the applicant for the license or for the renewal of an existing license presents to the licensing authority a complete list of every handgun owned by the applicant along with a certificate of insurance verifying that the applicant has a valid insurance policy insuring against any harm or damage that might arise out of the use of each weapon on said list. The applicant shall swear under the penalties of perjury that said list is a complete list of all handguns owned by the applicant. The insurance policy shall be in an amount of at least $250,000 and shall list the specific weapons covered by the policy.
Yeah. You read that right. Once again, law-abiding gun owners are being led out to the woodshed in a feel-good-but-do-NOTHING gesture that will have exactly ZERO impact on gun crime. It will, however, serve to drive more gun owners underground, out of state, or out of money. Which, really, is the only purpose for this bill. First off, good luck finding an insurance company that will write a policy that open-ended ("any harm or damage that might arise..."). Secondly, the state already knows about all my guns; why on earth does anyone need ANOTHER list?

The more I think about this, the more it pisses me off. Aren't we be constantly told that the only reason MA has gun crime is because of lax gun laws in neighboring states? Aren't the Uzi trees in NH (thanks Bruce) responsible for MA gun violence? Don't criminals get all their "illegal guns" from straw purchases at northern NH gun shows (Steve Bailey, call your office)? So why the fuck do law-abiding gun owners (in and of themselves one of the groups least likely to break the law, especially in MA where pretty much anything can lead to one being declared "unsuitable" to own firearms) have to take it in the shorts?

Let me break this down: I need to provide a quarter mil of insurance so that... Help me out here. I'm having a hard time envisioning what, exactly, this measure is going to do to combat gun crime. I pay for insurance. For??? In case my guns are stolen? The state of MA has already decreed that my guns be locked up at all times. Okay. Done. Now it's purely punitive? I've got to insure my guns against theft, at the risk of losing my LTC, and this is going to magically do SOMETHING to reduce gun crime?

Folks, they're not even trying to hide their contempt for us any more. They know we are such a small minority that they can kick us in the ass with impunity. So... to any and all MA gun owners reading this... First off, if you haven't already, join GOAL. Next, while I believe that this has been tried before and failed, it couldn't hurt to write your rep and tell them that you oppose this bill as the utter sham that it is. Make sure to point out that it will do nothing to deter criminals, and serve only to drive more people out of MA. Be respectful, but firm.

Thanks.

(Side note: Gah. Bring a list of serial numbers. Fuck you. That alone would take me days...)

10 comments:

Rustmeister said...

Wow, the insurance angle.

Didn't see that one coming.

BobG said...

I saw that insurance thing proposed several years ago by gun-grabbers on bulletin boards; I'm just surprised it took this long to try and pass it into law. It figures it would be either Massachusetts, NY, or California.

JD said...

Was just a matter of time till they got creative after the success they had using the AG and his/her list of good guns to start limiting what we could buy here. Now they are starting to come up with some good way to deny you a gun but say you still have the right to one. . . but I still dream that some day Mass will be a free state again. . . .

Bruce said...

That one pops up every year. This time around though, Beacon Hill's M.Q. (Moonbat Quotient) is higher than it's been in a long long time.

If that passes, and you stay in Mass., the only finger of blame will pointing at you.

You know what to do.

Jay G said...

Yeah, move to NH so I can go through the same bullshit in 20 years?

Fuck. That. Shit.

I ain't runnin'. Not when NH is poised to become North Massa-fucking-chusetts, sorry.

Talk to me in 2008 IF Sununu keeps his seat.

Anonymous said...

Jay,

I love the attitude... If it makes you feel better when you go to bed at night stay in MA and support those who won't support themselves.

I'll open carry over to Bruce's house and do a paperless non-recorded private gun sale.

doubletrouble said...

Now, now, don't be pissy @ Bruce, he just wants what's best for ya.

I know this "Free State" is getting less so, but I think crap like this is a loooooong way off, if at all; we don't have the same liberal (read dumfuck) history here.

I know there's family connections & all, but I think it may be time to check the bus schedules for the next one north.

Damn.

Jay G said...

Re-reading my comment, it might have seemed like I was snapping at Bruce. For that, I most humbly apologize.

I'm just sick of the whole fucking thing at this point. We are going to hell in a bucket, and I am not enjoying the ride...

Yosemite Sam said...

"ain't runnin'. Not when NH is poised to become North Massa-fucking-chusetts, sorry.

Talk to me in 2008 IF Sununu keeps his seat."

I'm not going to gainsay your worries about NH. Our two new Reps. are to the Left of many in the Mass. House delegation. But, NH does have a measure of freedom right now. We have managed to fight the gun banners back. It has helped to have former Mass. citizens, who knew how bad it can get, to stand and push back against the Leftists up here.

The elections up here have been close. We need every vote we can get.

I think Massachusetts is a lost cause. The sheeple there want even more gun control then you have there now. They won't stop until guns are banned or it is so difficult and expensive to get one, they may as well be banned.

Anonymous said...

Jay,
Its not insurance against theft, its insurance against 'damages caused by use' or some similar shit. I read that to mean: 'minimum 250K pay off to the relatives of the goblin you just greased'. Then your insurance gets canceled and you are SOL.

As an aside, if this passes wanna take bets on how long it takes to cross link the insurance data base to the LTC data base, automatically invalidating your LTC if you let the insurance lapse. Just like they do it at the RMV.

AE