Open carry / firearm handy

[k0ua]

How so ??? All of the guns listed would surely fit in the self defense and sportsman category. At least it is fair in it's inclusions. Are we supposed to have "everything" at our whim? Is it our right to own, or chose?

Yes, it is. It is up to the whim of the buyer and no one else. Why on earth would you even think otherwise?

 

[k0ua]

I think the point is the list shouldn't exist in the first place.

Exactly. It is just wrong on its face.

 

[bcp]

Being able to buy only guns on a list approved by a current gov't is

like being able to vote only for candidates picked by the current gov't.

Bruce

 

[Luke'sScreenName]

actually no one is suggesting banning guns (at least in my response), nor telling anyone what or what not to shoot. maybe just a different way of looking at the world. one would hope we could have that diversity & discussion without all the vitrol....no one is coming to take away your guns, my friend

although we probably are on opposite sides of the spectrum, i do wish you well & respect your constitutional right to bear arms, and freedom of speech, some of our most important rights as citizens.

my hope (& know i'm in the minority here) is that there is minimal suffering imposed on the world of creatures and humans as you execute your due right along the way. that's all

good day sir, and enjoy the holidays.

I'm with you on this one bubba. I value my guns but not enough to spew vitriol and hate at others.

 

[k0ua]

I just went through the list, not sure what is "missing" actually. It isn't exactly what I would call onerous.

Mr. Wolfe, I by the power vested in me have decried that some books are not suitable for your viewing. I have made a list of the suitable ones, and as the list contains thousands of books, it will not be onerous nor burdensome for you to choose among them. If I find others that are unsuitable by my decree, I will add and remove from the list at my own whim. But again it will not be onerous. Oh, I do realize that one of your favorite books is not on my list, but as this particular book has been troublesome to some of my principals and goals in the past it shall remain on the banned list. As the Koran is still on my approved list, I don't think you will miss your Bible. Thank you, signed your legislature.

 

[Reg]

Not "defending" the contents of the Massachusetts list or its existence, but I'll try to offer up what I believe to be SOME of the rationale - at least the rationale that I have heard.

Yes, there is "political" input - basically what they view as guns that have appeal for "Street thugs".

Second there is a drop test - I don't have the specs for that, but the gun is supposed to withstand a drop from some height and not fire (I think it may be tabletop height, don't quote me).
Some number of guns don't get submitted for this reason alone - I don't know how many, but have heard that this is the reason that some Glock models aren't on the list.

Third is the safety lever, I don't know how they evaluate that.

Guns also have to be easily checked and verified as empty/unloaded.

They must also be unable to accept high capacity magazines, e.g. from other models.

Probably incomplete, but I think that is most of it.

 

[Luke'sScreenName]

I'm sure y'all know this talk of MA regulations will quickly degrade into a closed thread.

Furthermore, no one has any intentions of actually being swayed by any argument (no matter how valid). :drink:

 

[ch1ch2]

Mr. Wolfe, I by the power vested in me have decried that some books are not suitable for your viewing. I have made a list of the suitable ones, and as the list contains thousands of books, it will not be onerous nor burdensome for you to choose among them. If I find others that are unsuitable by my decree, I will add and remove from the list at my own whim. But again it will not be onerous. Oh, I do realize that one of your favorite books is not on my list, but as this particular book has been troublesome to some of my principals and goals in the past it shall remain on the banned list. As the Koran is still on my approved list, I don't think you will miss your Bible. Thank you, signed your legislature.

Very well said!
2nd Amendment is the only one that says shall not be infringed, but it is the most infringed upon.
With over 20,000 federal laws on guns, then add in states and local governments laws.

How do you think the media would act with 20,000 federal laws restricting them in their speech?
How about signs on government buildings prohibiting voicing your opinion to your councilman.

 

[Steppenwolfe]

"Shall not be infringed."

Yes.

Excellent reply. I hadn't thought of that. You are of course, correct. That list is a terrible idea!!!:thumbsup:

 

[Steppenwolfe]

Mr. Wolfe, I by the power vested in me have decried that some books are not suitable for your viewing. I have made a list of the suitable ones, and as the list contains thousands of books, it will not be onerous nor burdensome for you to choose among them. If I find others that are unsuitable by my decree, I will add and remove from the list at my own whim. But again it will not be onerous. Oh, I do realize that one of your favorite books is not on my list, but as this particular book has been troublesome to some of my principals and goals in the past it shall remain on the banned list. As the Koran is still on my approved list, I don't think you will miss your Bible. Thank you, signed your legislature.

:duh::banghead::duh:

OK,OK, OK... So I didn't think this one through, as I was making quite merry, yesterday. Your rebuttal is stellar, and I stand corrected.