(Another) Major State Passes Gun Control Bill

lionshead2010 wrote: We can chat about it again after the results of the 2014 election are in.

I plan to... !

So, what about the GOP's own "obstructionist Republicans" in the Senate? Why didn't Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, Susan Collins of Maine, Mark Kirk of Illinois, and John McCain of Arizona, vote against this one and just kill it with the usual 'bagger majority block? Afraid they don't care about the NRA threats?

And no one's Second Amendment rights are being infringed. Repeating it over and over again does not make it so.

But you keep checking those Rasmussen, Dick Morris, Karl Rove and FauxNews polls... They worked so well for you last time...

Here...Try this: Eight Reasons Polls Showing Obama Winning Are Dead Wrong That should keep your spirits up as we head toward 2014...and 2016...

I think we've seen our last GOP president in our lifetime... And the more of the "old, angry white guys" that die off, the more even the gerrymandered "safe" districts will start losing their right-wing safety. The Party of Selfish is fading fast.

I have an idea... let's use the liberal's tactics and insist on gun ownership and 2nd amendment rights based on the terror wrought by the radical Islamist terrorists in Boston. I can bet your bottom dollar that you could find a lot of people in the greater Boston area who would have loved to have a gun while they were groveling in their homes... waiting for Dzhokhar to invade their property.

But... you see... owning a gun in Mass. is rather restrictive....

IN 1998, Massachusetts passed what was hailed as the toughest gun-control legislation in the country. Among other stringencies, it banned semiautomatic “assault” weapons, imposed strict new licensing rules, prohibited anyone convicted of a violent crime or drug trafficking from ever carrying or owning a gun, and enacted severe penalties for storing guns unlocked.

“Today, Massachusetts leads the way in cracking down on gun violence,” said Republican Governor Paul Cellucci as he signed the bill into law. “It will save lives and help fight crime in our communities.” Scott Harshbarger, the state’s Democratic attorney general, agreed: “This vote is a victory for common sense and for the protection of our children and our neighborhoods.” One of the state’s leading anti-gun activists, John Rosenthal of Stop Handgun Violence, joined the applause. “The new gun law,” he predicted, “will certainly prevent future gun violence and countless grief.”

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2013 ... story.html

Well... their highly restrictive gun laws didn't "prevent future gun violence and countless grief." The two Tsarnaev brothers had a nice supply of guns, ammunition and other explosive devices... it looks like the "toughest gun-control legislation in the country" didn't do diddly-squat. Lady Jazzer says "And there will be a price to pay..." yep... 4 dead bodies and over 150 injured or maimed... that was the price paid.

LAdy Jazzer and her lefty friends want to use Newtown as an example for more restrictive gun control... we'll the right can play the same game... Boston is our call to arms.

What in the current gun laws in Mass would keep a law abiding citizen from owning a gun to defend themselves?

Nothing.
A recent article in the Globe revealed that Mass has the 3rd highest rate of out-of-state guns found at crimes scenes in the nation. But, Mass has a murder rate that is about half the national average. Just proof that federal laws are needed.

Photo-fish wrote: Nothing.
A recent article in the Globe revealed that Mass has the 3rd highest rate of out-of-state guns found at crimes scenes in the nation. But, Mass has a murder rate that is about half the national average. Just proof that federal laws are needed.

Nice jumping to conclusions there!!!
Chicago & Illinois have some of the most restricive gun laws and yet have a very high gun violence rate. Maybe it is due to other reasons besides access to guns? Vermont has very permissive gun laws, you can carry concealed without a permit but the murder rate is very low.

Photo-fish wrote: Nothing.
A recent article in the Globe revealed that Mass has the 3rd highest rate of out-of-state guns found at crimes scenes in the nation. But, Mass has a murder rate that is about half the national average. Just proof that federal laws are needed.

Half the murder rate against the national average has nothing to do with the actual rise in the murder and crime rate from 1998 through 2011 in Massachusetts. And the data from the FBI itself proves this out. Evidently you didn't read the article I linked to... I'll read it for you...

But crime in Massachusetts didn’t just continue, it began climbing. As in the rest of the country, violent crime had been declining in Massachusetts since the early 1990s. Beginning in 1998, that decline reversed — unlike in the rest of the country. For example, the state’s murder rate (murders per 100,000 inhabitants) bottomed out at 1.9 in 1997 and had risen to 2.8 by 2011. The national murder rate, on the other hand, kept falling; it reached a new low of 4.7 in 2011. Guns-across-borders might have explained homicide levels in Massachusetts continuing unchanged. But how can other states’ policies be responsible for an increase in Massachusetts homicides?

Relative to the rest of the country, or to just the states on its borders, Massachusetts since 1998 has become a more dangerous state. Economist John Lott, using FBI crime data since 1980, shows how dramatic the contrast has been. In 1998, Massachusetts’s murder rate equaled about 70 percent of the rate for Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New York. Now it equals 125 percent of that rate.

I'm glad to have been able to help.

Oh my...

The two brothers suspected in the Boston Marathon bombings, who police say engaged in a gun battle with officers early Friday after a frenzied manhunt, were not licensed to own guns in the towns where they lived, authorities said on Sunday.

In the confrontation with police on the streets of a Boston suburb, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev were armed with handguns, at least one rifle and several explosive devices, authorities say.

But neither brother appears to have been legally entitled to own or carry firearms where they lived, a fact that may add to the national debate over current gun laws. Last week, the U.S. Senate rejected a bill to expand background checks on gun purchases, legislation that opponents argued would do nothing to stop criminals from buying guns illegally.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/b ... 90410.html

Imagine my surprise.

The younger brother also carried a BB gun. WTF?

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

Photo-fish wrote: Nothing.
A recent article in the Globe revealed that Mass has the 3rd highest rate of out-of-state guns found at crimes scenes in the nation. But, Mass has a murder rate that is about half the national average. Just proof that federal laws are needed.

Half the murder rate against the national average has nothing to do with the actual rise in the murder and crime rate from 1998 through 2011 in Massachusetts. And the data from the FBI itself proves this out. Evidently you didn't read the article I linked to... I'll read it for you...

But crime in Massachusetts didn’t just continue, it began climbing. As in the rest of the country, violent crime had been declining in Massachusetts since the early 1990s. Beginning in 1998, that decline reversed — unlike in the rest of the country. For example, the state’s murder rate (murders per 100,000 inhabitants) bottomed out at 1.9 in 1997 and had risen to 2.8 by 2011. The national murder rate, on the other hand, kept falling; it reached a new low of 4.7 in 2011. Guns-across-borders might have explained homicide levels in Massachusetts continuing unchanged. But how can other states’ policies be responsible for an increase in Massachusetts homicides?

Relative to the rest of the country, or to just the states on its borders, Massachusetts since 1998 has become a more dangerous state. Economist John Lott, using FBI crime data since 1980, shows how dramatic the contrast has been. In 1998, Massachusetts’s murder rate equaled about 70 percent of the rate for Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New York. Now it equals 125 percent of that rate.

I'm glad to have been able to help.

Put your silly facts away.