Hey, there! Log in / Register

Gun supporters protest new weapons restrictions; vow to fight jackbooted liberal tyrant officials

Maura Healey: Fascist or Communist?

Is Healey a fascist or a communist? Probably both, protesters say.

Hundreds of people converged on the State House today to protest Attorney General Maura Healey's decision to ban the sale of more types of semi-automatic rifles in Massachusetts and demand she rip her order up.

At a rally organized by the Gun Owners Action League, speakers warned Healey is setting gun owners up for arrest when she backtracks on her promise not to prosecute anybody for weapons purchased before her new ban went into effect; they don't trust her promise not to go after people who bought the guns before she issued her new diktat.

Speakers warned that if Healey wins, liberals will march across the country to seize America's guns no matter what the Second Amendment says.

And if Healey really wants to enforce her new regulation, GOAL Executive Director Jim Wallace said, let her do it herself - don't make "our brothers and sisters in blue" demean themselves, he said.

Although none of the speakers, who included several pro-gun legislators, did so, people in the crowd called for Healey's arrest, breaking out into a short series of "Lock her up!" chants. "Put her in jail with Hillary!" one man added.

Maura Healey for prison

A mention of Donald Trump being endorsed by the NRA brought a loud cheer. A mention of Boston Mayor Marty Walsh brought jeers, especially after Wallace mused about all "the felons he's been hanging around with." Wallace also said the assembled gun owners on Beacon Street meant "this is probably the safest time in Boston history!"

Black rifles matter
Trumping dead people
Come and take our guns
Refugees suck
Healey for Harbor
Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

You seem to think of youself as educated on the subject, so tell me.

Are Tavors legal? Does not share parts with the AR platform, not banned by name.

How about the Kel-tec RFB?

How about the Kel-tec sub2000

How about the FN FS2000?

How about the M1A?

Dont know? Neither do we!

up
Voting closed 0

When you threaten hundreds of thousands of previously law abiding persons with felonies and raids at 2am expect Hitler comparisons.

up
Voting closed 0

You're upset about my post with a headline about a protest against jackbooted liberal thugs and how that distorts what happened at the rally and now you say people are upset about jackbooted liberal thugs bursting into homes at 2 a.m.

Also, where did Healey threaten to burst into your home at 2 a.m.? I seem to have missed that. Was it at the same secret meeting where Obama announced the start of his plan take away all your guns? If so, he better hurry - he's only got a few months left.

up
Voting closed 0

The AG declared them illegal and declared they have always been illegal since 98 (in state when the MA ban passed). Miss that? If that is the case (which is BS) we are all just a political point scoring opportunity away from prosecutions.

The only thing protecting us gun owners from felony charges are her good graces that can be (in her offices words) "The AGO reserves the right to alter or amend this guidance." No law, no ex post facto protections, nothing. We are all F**** at the click of a button, at a wake up on the wrong side of the bed day.

up
Voting closed 0

"Was it at the same secret meeting where Obama announced the start of his plan take away all your guns? If so, he better hurry - he's only got a few months left."

Really? Is this the angle of attack you will be pursuing? Again attacking my character? For what? Because we disagree? Dude, your having a bad night, perhaps you should rethink that as I did my own comment above that you called me on.

The rest of it is covered above. The ag has reserved the right to change her 'guidance' at any time, that includes a 2am knock knock.

up
Voting closed 0

"If so, he better hurry - he's only got a few months left."

Are you familiar with what a straw man is?

Is this a discussion about Obama or the actions by the AG? Try and stay on target.

up
Voting closed 0

"Try and stay on target."

up
Voting closed 0

Do what I do - don't keep your guns in the state.

You can still keep the pieces that you feel that you need to have on your person and are permitted to carry. The rest? Store it in Vermont or something.

I left my guns in Oregon because I didn't want the hassle of travelling with them and all the crazy rules about storing them and transporting them or getting permission to have them. It wasn't worth my time. If I felt the need to have a gun, I'd do the paperwork.

up
Voting closed 0

"Do what I do - don't keep your guns in the state"

Too late. Owned and FA10d a firearm a that the AG has declared illegal? You have testified against yourself as a felon at the whims of the AG.

Here in MA all transfers are recorded. If you have recorded you transfer of a semi auto firearm you have effectively told the state you are a felon.

FA10 is :Massachusetts General Law c. 140, §§128A and 128B, requires all individuals who sell, transfer, inherit, or lose a firearm to report the sale, transfer, inheritance, or loss of the firearms to the Department of Criminal Justice Information Services Firearms Records Bureau (FRB). This on-line system will allow you to report the sale, transfer, inheritance, or loss/theft data electronically to the FRB.

up
Voting closed 0

Why did you feel the need to own guns in Oregon? Are you some kind of a gun nut?
Or, to give you the benefit of the doubt (and to guess more correctly) you liked shooting. It wasn't about protection, you liked target shooting. Or hunting. So you might have an understanding of the frustration of the pro-gun people here, because you see the bureaucratic nightmare this state has become regarding firearms.

up
Voting closed 0

My parents both died within a relatively short time. My brother lives in Canada, and, more to the point, never even wanted anything to do with guns, hunting, or skeet in the first place.

That means that I inherited their weapons. One of them is an heirloom - my grandfather built it about 100 years ago - so I'm not selling it. I wasn't going to get on a plane with them, either, as I don't have papers on them. So I did something legal that would be illegal in MA: put them in the trunk and took them to my uncle's house for safekeeping.

I view mass gun laws as a bit silly and ignorant - but I wholeheartedly support the regulation or even banning of mass-casualty weaponry. As a hunter, I know these weapons are wholly unnecessary. As a citizen, I view gun restrictions like I view the requirements on voter registration or purchase of alcohol - both of which are also addressed in the Bill of Rights.

Many of the comments here make me wonder: is it ever possible for the paranoids who write them to operate without an elaborate, fact free conspiracy behind anything? Like, including their morning toast? I'm betting not. I'm also betting that very few of you have ever actually hunted for food, either.

up
Voting closed 0

What does the right to bear arms have to do with hunting?

up
Voting closed 0

I think DPM's suggestion that he be banned is worthy, and could be implemented to the benefit of the site. I also would like to point out that he edited the comment which now has the heading "Get Lost," but originally was even less civil. That's bad form, to say the least.

up
Voting closed 0

Indeed, because the personal attack I was responding to was so civil. As you and I can both see I did indeed edit the post and have pointed that out elsewhere as well.

up
Voting closed 0

Yeah, I don't find "We Won't Comply!" and "I Dare You to Come & Take It" signs approachable. Or the Nazi imagery.

I also don't think that a crowd screaming that the governor should override an election result, and fire and imprison the AG who was elected by a majority of voters, is evidence that those screamers believe in American democracy.

Pretty much, the opposite.

Oh, and "scumbag" is one word.

up
Voting closed 0

If you use your office to deny civil rights you can be imprisoned. You think the DOJ investigates civil rights complaints for fun?

The AG is the top cop in the state, she would not be the only cop who has been imprisoned for violating a persons rights.

up
Voting closed 0

So it's ok for people to compare Trump to Hitler, but not Healey?

up
Voting closed 0

Actually what did he say:

“We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. ‘Miller’ said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those ‘in common use at the time.’ 307 U.S., at 179, 59 S.Ct. 816. We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons.’”

Justice Scalia also wrote:

“It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service — M-16 rifles and the like — may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right.”

From that radical Socialist Communist Anarchist Pagan and supporter or extraterrestial illegal aliens the New York Times:
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/12/11/justice-scalias-gun-contr...

In other words, even one of the most conservative activist justices to sit on the Supreme Court agreed that the correct interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is that the right to bear arms does not extend to weapons of mass destruction such as cannons or assault rifles.

up
Voting closed 0

M16 Rifles are banned for civilian ownership. The weapons in question are not assault weapons. Before you just spew off some legal opinions, please also educate yourself on what weapons are in question here, and whether it is ok for a person just to reinterpret a standing law.

up
Voting closed 0

The weapons in question are weapons that are substantially duplicates of already banned weapons. The M16 is described as an assault weapon.

What is the nature of the emotional motivation that makes gun advocates sound hysterical, such as Charleton Heston's' statement "over my dead body." If only that emotional energy was spent helping kids born into dysfunctional and poor environments. The volume and hyperbole of many gun advocates strike me as evidence of a fear based view of the world that believes life is a me against them struggle.

As for the hysteria concerning retroactive application of a legal interpretation a review of the Federal Constitution might offer some assurance. Neither the Federal nor State governments may pass ex post facto laws (my apology if that is spewing a legal opinion). While an interpretation is not technically a law my guess is that a court would apply the ex post facto restriction in any instance of prosecuting for actions that occurred before the regulation was issued. But that does not fit well with the illusion and narrative that the NRA, gun manufacturers and fans of death dealing weapons like to spin.

up
Voting closed 0

The way my Matchbox car can be driven to the grocery store.

up
Voting closed 0

...it's an assault rifle. No sane army would send its' people into combat with 'assault weapons'.
The M16 is a 'select fire' weapon. There's a little select thingie that lets you go single shot or full auto.
"Charleton Heston's' statement "over my dead body."...He said that holding a musket that was presented to him, if I recall correctly.
So, if I owned a 'suddenly illegal' rifle, tell me, what do I do with it? Can't take it to the range, right? Can't shoot up a Pokemon convention, right?

The state has confiscated the value of the property I own. Well, then the state must compensate me for that taking.

up
Voting closed 0

Confiscation means removing the property. The property was not removed. Therefore it was not confiscated.

The value is no longer maintained because it may not be used at a shooting range? Sell it in a state where it is still legal. Buy a weapon that is legal and use that at a shooting range.

I do not understand the extreme emotional outbursts over owning weapons that shoot bullets. What makes objects that are designed either destroy other objects or kill living creatures so valuable that owners become hysterical when restrictions are applied?

There is a grossly disproportionate emotional response. Is it about the symbolism of power? Is a gun or rifle somehow linked to a person's sense of power in the world? Have gun feel powerful? A bond between man or woman that is so powerful that they will go to extremes of painting a person as a Hitler reincarnated when there is a mere suggestion of a threat to that bond?

Is the strength and force of person's manhood and womanhood based on owning a gun?

up
Voting closed 0

Your Corvette with $50,000 worth of customization is now illegal in MA, I'm sure you're perfectly all right with taking a huge loss and spending all that time finding an out-of-state buyer, transporting the car to him and shopping for another car that's legal. Oh, and you better do it soon, having that 'Vette on the road will get you tossed in the slammer! Piece of cake, right?

up
Voting closed 0

If you think this sort of thing 1) hasn't happened or 2) is not legal.

Of course, they whine in the same way about their illegal modifications to their emissions equipment and illegal body work that the "my gun is my pacifier/security blanket/codpiece" crowd whines about their guns being regulated.

up
Voting closed 0

A rifle is not a Corvette. But if we are to use the analogy of apples to oranges comparisons consider houses that have lead paint. Before laws concerning lead paint were passed covering walls and pipes with lead based paint was fine. Then laws were changed. Now there are conditions that sellers and landlords have to deal with when lead paint is present.

Or motorcycles that are fitted with after market exhausts that create a terrible noise. These were legal in Boston until the City Council passed an ordinance banning exhausts that do not meet EPA noise standards. Owners of motorcycles with newly illegal exhausts suddenly had to deal with paying more money to make their vehicles compliant.

Probably the saddest element of this argument is that people opposed to these weapons are concerned about reducing maiming and death due to guns. But people who support gun ownership with little or no regulation sound more concerned about owning these objects than they do about the violence resulting from the existence of guns.

I hear an argument that comes down to reducing violence on one side versus a supposed God or nature's given right to own weapons that are designed specifically for causing violence.

up
Voting closed 0

"Confiscation means removing the property. The property was not removed. Therefore it was not confiscated."
To declare something illegal removes your right to own it. The way I read it (IANAL) the pre July 20 rifles are legal for the current owners.
BUT...
I have to convey to an out of state if I want to recoup my investment. That reduces the value of the investment, out of state FFL, whatever.

No, it's not emotional. It's the second amendment. All the ravers here about 'a well regulated militia' might do well to read the Federalist Papers, then maybe an intelligent discussion could result. Find out what the Founding Fathers felt about the issues of the day.

As far as Hitler comparisons. let the innocent liberal throw the first stone, or have you forgotten 'BushHitler' so fast?

up
Voting closed 0

I can't even.

up
Voting closed 0

I'm just shocked it wasn't "right's" and "you're".

up
Voting closed 0

Did you really just come out and say, "The Constitution is killing us"?

Do you really want to live in an administrative dictatorship where any random administrator can alter the rule of law on a whim and declare you a criminal? Look at Turkey for how well that works out for the populace.

up
Voting closed 0

Did you really just come out and say "You're endorsing genocide and dictatorships by not letting me have the ability to own mass murder tools!"

No, of course you didn't.

up
Voting closed 0

Healy is certainly acting the tyrant, whether communist or fascist flavor is moot. She is stepping way beyond her purview in declaring the intent of a law post-facto; that is the job of the courts. The law that was passed was the one that was sold to the voters as being not so broad as to allow virtually any firearm to be banned arbitrarily, not the one that Healy seeks to write. It was not so long ago the attorney general was being excoriated on here for her harsh and pointless ruling against Nashoba Valley Winery. This is a dangerous trend.

up
Voting closed 0

I don't like wackos on either side, but Adam I don't recall you doing an in depth analysis on the BLM protestors and their chants and signs and how strange, offensive and innacurate some of those can be.

up
Voting closed 0

Thank you for this comment, I try to stay neutral as he tries his best to keep us all informed. But if you cant see that this is cherry picked, something is wrong.

up
Voting closed 0

Cherry picked? Please, share photos showing us the diversity of the crowd...since you imply these photos are cherry picked, let's see your proof.

up
Voting closed 0

There was a black guy there. I also saw a gay guy (he held a sign that said something about how gays with guns never get attacked) and a couple of East Asian folks. True diversity!

up
Voting closed 0

And a relatively homogeneous group protesting makes it bad and less worthy of respect?

Interesting argument you got there.

up
Voting closed 0

I'm not the one who brought up the homogeneity of the crowd, but, yes, as long as we're all just chattering away here, it was kind of striking. And really, your posting a photo of That One Black Guy is kind of like pointing a camera at Ben Carson last week and saying that proves the RNC truly represents the diversity of America.

I will admit I appreciated Wallace's comment about how Boston had never been safer than with all those gun owners assembled in front of the State House Why, I made it back to my car in the Common garage without being mugged! Thanks, NRA!

up
Voting closed 0

This rally had nothing to do with the NRA. The NRA holds zero influence in MA. This was GOAL and grassroots gun owners full stop. The NRA posted the rally on their facebook, gee thanks guys!

Are you sure you were paying much attention today?

That token black guy as you seem to suggest is a personal friend and a qualified NRA (educational) instructor that is holding a free rifle course for all persons who purchased rifles before the AGs ban went into effect. That is a problem with you? Should I post a picture of some women for you? Or perhaps some Asians to be worthy of merit? Is that really how you judge the merits of a crowd?

Most gun owners are not in the city(making them more white), gun owners are largely white and male, the crowd reflected that. That makes it unworthy?

Please ANSWER THIS!: Do you understand the immense anger presence and FEAR present in the crowd today? The AG has threatened all of us with felonies. At her whim we are having our homes raided. Do you NOT SEE THE MAJOR CONCERN?

up
Voting closed 0

It has nothing to do with guns, and everything to do with people who insist on living a life of constant fear of everything and relentless seething anger over nothing.

The rest of us have a term for this: mental illness.

up
Voting closed 0

Quite a diverse crowd.

up
Voting closed 0

Funny, I thought I just did a few paragraphs on what these people said and then ran a bunch of photos. I spent a lot more time "analyzing" a pro-Palestine march a couple years ago.

Please don't try any gaslighting on me. These folks did call for the overthrow of the tyrant they consider Healey to be, they were carrying signs calling the elected attorney general a fascist and a communist, they did call for her to be put in prison or just thrown in the harbor. At least nobody called for her to be executed, I'll give them that. Here's another example:

Another sign

I will admit I think it's really kind of sad we've gotten to the point where at least one part of the political spectrum now thinks it's acceptable to imprison elected officials who do something they disagree with (and as I noted, the people giving the speeches never said that).

up
Voting closed 0

Openly calling for murder of police officers? Is that acceptable? Can't have it both ways gaffin.

up
Voting closed 0

Can you refer me to instances where protesters in Boston called for the death of police officers?

But if we're going to go national, can you refer me to instances where advisers to either Clinton or Sanders called for the execution of the Republican candidate?

up
Voting closed 0

Violate the constitution and you have violated the law. She has betrayed her oath.

It sure is a special kind of sad that the ma ag has accused hundreds of thousands of being felons and the only thing protecting us are her good graces all for political points.

She has threatened us with prison. Why should we not return the favor to an oathbreaker?

up
Voting closed 0

...but doing an Obama-esque tortured interpretation of it, can she be reversed in court? Can she be charged with malfeasance?
Obama has been reversed 9-0 many times by the Supreme Court. So, it's not a 'lib vs con' thing, it's a 'he's doing it wrong' thing in his case.
Can the Mass Judiciary see if she overstepped her bounds?

up
Voting closed 0

There are a number of ways in which this could be challenged in court. Gun dealers could sue on the basis of a taking. Gun owners could sue because they are now unable to purchase firearms in common use. If the AG attempts to convict anyone under these new guidelines there will be a MAJOR battle in the courts likely with the backing of Comm2A.

I have no doubt Comm2A is formulating a battle plan to be challenging this in the courts. I do hope to hear they act soon but we will see how long it takes for them to prepare.

In the meantime Comm2A is the organization that needs your support.

up
Voting closed 0

Why is it that almost nobody making hand-drawn posters and signs for protests (across the political spectrum) can letter them by hand neatly and legibly?

A yardstick and some horizontal pencil lines is a great start.
It adds an element of Cray-Cray to and Half-Ass anyone holding up their signs.

If you are serious about your statements, take 2 more minutes to make a decent sign that doesn't look like an elementary schoolkid knocked it out for the 2nd grade graduation celebration for their little sister.

up
Voting closed 0

automatic weapons and assault rifles here in the Bay State. It's long overdue!

up
Voting closed 0

Actually, federal law has prohibited automatic weapons and assault rifles since 1986.

She did not ban either.

I do no not think you know what any of these terms actually mean.

up
Voting closed 0

...don't go ruining an epic rant with logic and reason.

up
Voting closed 0

A long rifle visible from a mile away more dangerous than an easily concealable handgun that you won't see until it's stuck right in your face, ready to blow your head off?

up
Voting closed 0

When it is configured to fire a large number of rounds in a short period of time.

up
Voting closed 0

Is that why so many homicides are committed with them in MA and nationally?

up
Voting closed 0

I went and shot two rounds of trap. Did better on Sporting Clays. Two at a time, those.

There were no Trumpist Gaffin-Looneys on the trap field. No Gadsen flags or self aggrandising openly Lesbian (! ! ! Like OMG!) AGs. Just people out enjoying a summer afternoon in their sport of choice, almost as if they had a basic right to it. That 2nd Amendment thingy.

I know how unlikely that sounds but go figure.

up
Voting closed 0

Hope you were not in canoodles with anybody using a semi auto shotgun to shoot trap!

up
Voting closed 0

Even if it's your God-given right to do so.
You could shoot your loved one. (Gee, why does that ring a bell? Maybe b/c I've read about a toddler shooting a family member way too many times recently?))

I think the word you're looking for is "cahoots."

Good grief.

up
Voting closed 0

Can I buy you a bottle of scotch? I cannot imagine what it's like to have to moderate this shit. Jesus H. Christ.

up
Voting closed 0

An AR15 is Not an Assault Rifle

To help educate all of those who think AR15 stands for and is an Assault Rifle, here are some basics.

• An Assault Rifle is a military rifle which is capable of automatic (machine gun like) fire. An AR-15 is a civilian rifle that can only fire one bullet for each pull of the trigger. It is no different in that respect from ANY other commonly used semi-automatic rifle or pistol ever made.

• AR-15 actually stands for "Armalite Rifle design 15”. It does not stand for Assault Rifle. It is a 1950’s modular design allowing certain components to be customized for different uses. The Armalite Company sold their designs to Colt in 1959, which provided a basis for designing the US Military’s M-16 Automatic Fire Assault Rifle.

• An AR-15 can be made to look cosmetically similar to a military “assault rifle”. That is why it is often confused with one. It does not provide any magic assault, automatic fire military capabilities. In fact, given its almost 60 year old design most civilian, single shot AR-15 rifles in use are light years behind the capabilities of current military firearm technology.

• What makes the AR design one of the most popular types of civilian rifles in the US and the world is its flexibility to suit a wide range of civilian sporting, hunting and home defense uses. Armalite Rifles can be configured for .22, 9mm, 5.56 or any of over a dozen common calibers; and for different styles of barrels, hand guards, triggers, and optics (scopes).

• Unfortunately because of its immense popularity Armalite style rifles will occasionally be misused by criminals to commit crimes. Those exceedingly rare events, despite the tens of millions of law abiding AR owners since the 1950’s, are what the certain media and politicians seize upon to make headlines and promote their anti-firearms agenda.

up
Voting closed 0

If Healey was anything like Hitler, all of those people would have been rounded up. Or put on a list and given a visit in the middle of the night. Hell, if Healey was anything remotely like Hitler, these people wouldn't have been out there to start with - despite how everybody likes to think of themselves as the action star hero, 99% of people keep their heads down and go along to get along in situations like Nazi Germany, if only for the sake of their loved ones.

These are not people afraid that protesting her in public is going to get them in trouble, let alone knowing that simply existing as an 'undesirable' is going to get you probably killed.

Whether you think her actions are right or wrong, the comparison displays either a stunning ignorance of history and context, or a breathtaking lack of empathy for Holocaust victims and their families.

up
Voting closed 0

"Or put on a list"

Check off step one. We are already on a list via the FA10 system.

up
Voting closed 0

The most ridiculous thing about these protestors is the paranoia that our liberal politicians are coming for their guns. Confiscation has never been on the table. Obama has never proposed it, nor has Healy, nor is Hillary. There are guns out there today which are currently illegal to buy, but people who bought them when they were legal are allowed and will continue to be allowed to keep them.

Even Healy made it clear, she has no plans to confiscate anyone's guns. What is so hard to understand about that?!

up
Voting closed 0

Pages