HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » (x-post from LBN) AG Maur...

Fri Oct 14, 2016, 05:29 PM

(x-post from LBN) AG Maura Healey: We will win gun lawsuit

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141597906

BOSTON Attorney General Maura Healey on Friday predicted that she will win a lawsuit filed by a national gun rights group over her interpretation of the state's assault weapons ban.

This summer, Healey angered gun rights supporters when she interpreted a ban on assault weapons to make illegal certain types of guns that are similar to assault weapons. Around 10,000 of those so-called "copycat" assault weapons were sold last year in Massachusetts.

The lawsuit, filed by the National Shooting Sports Foundation and four gun shops, argues that Healey's interpretation of the law violates due process and is "unconstitutionally vague, invalid and unenforceable."

Healey spoke Friday at a rally on Boston Common urging voters to cast ballots Nov. 8 for candidates who support gun control.

Read more: http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/10/ag_maura_healey_we_will_win_gu.html

47 replies, 5004 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 47 replies Author Time Post
Reply (x-post from LBN) AG Maura Healey: We will win gun lawsuit (Original post)
discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 OP
Jason1961 Oct 2016 #1
discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #2
Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #5
stone space Oct 2016 #18
Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #19
stone space Oct 2016 #20
Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #22
stone space Oct 2016 #23
Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #24
stone space Oct 2016 #25
Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #26
Jason1961 Oct 2016 #3
gejohnston Oct 2016 #4
Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #6
discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #7
benEzra Oct 2016 #8
Jason1961 Oct 2016 #11
beevul Oct 2016 #12
benEzra Oct 2016 #15
stone space Oct 2016 #28
Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #29
stone space Oct 2016 #31
discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #32
beevul Oct 2016 #36
benEzra Oct 2016 #37
Straw Man Oct 2016 #39
discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #40
Eleanors38 Oct 2016 #44
Eleanors38 Oct 2016 #42
stone space Oct 2016 #21
Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #27
stone space Oct 2016 #30
Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #33
discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #34
benEzra Oct 2016 #35
oneshooter Oct 2016 #45
gejohnston Oct 2016 #46
oneshooter Oct 2016 #47
Marengo Oct 2016 #9
Jason1961 Oct 2016 #10
beevul Oct 2016 #13
benEzra Oct 2016 #17
Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #14
benEzra Oct 2016 #16
pablo_marmol Oct 2016 #38
discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #41
Eleanors38 Oct 2016 #43

Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Original post)

Fri Oct 14, 2016, 06:10 PM

1. I hope she wins

I hope Hillary's appointment to the Supreme Court tips the scales and they reverse the Heller decision.

I hope this lawsuit paves the way for a ban on all semi and fully automatic guns

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jason1961 (Reply #1)

Fri Oct 14, 2016, 08:08 PM

2. why?

Why all semi-autos?
Did you know full-autos were already restricted?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jason1961 (Reply #1)

Fri Oct 14, 2016, 08:52 PM

5. Full auto weapons are heavily restricted

 

None have been manufactured for civilian sale since 1986.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #5)

Sun Oct 16, 2016, 12:10 AM

18. Has it worked?

 

Full auto weapons are heavily restricted

None have been manufactured for civilian sale since 1986.


How many children in the US were shot with fully automatic weapons last month?





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stone space (Reply #18)

Sun Oct 16, 2016, 12:14 AM

19. they were not shot when they were fully available

 

prior to 1986.

so there has been no change

I am sure you also know many fully automatic machine guns are still in private hands today, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #19)

Sun Oct 16, 2016, 12:23 AM

20. I know that we're better at controling fully-automatics than we are at controling semi-automatics.

 

A reasonable compromise approach might be to treat semi-automatics more like fully-automatics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stone space (Reply #20)

Sun Oct 16, 2016, 12:31 AM

22. so you are for what is effect a ban

 

OK. Will not happen anytime soon. Fully automatic machine guns were never in hundreds of millions of private hands and not used for many lawful purposes that semi-automatic rifles are. The funny thing is semi-automatic rifles are the ones used the least in murders and crime but that is all you seem to talk about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #22)

Sun Oct 16, 2016, 12:41 AM

23. That's not true. Sometimes I talk about gun culture.

 

but that is all you seem to talk about.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stone space (Reply #23)


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #24)

Sun Oct 16, 2016, 01:03 AM

25. Is what a personal attack?

 

Is that a personal attack?

Not very nice and not a true statement at all.


Saying that I sometimes talk about gun culture?



Why is gun culture so predatory?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stone space (Reply #25)


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Original post)

Fri Oct 14, 2016, 08:21 PM

3. I know that they're restricted but not banned

I don't think Ted Nugent or anyone else should have a machine gun and I don't think anyone should have a semiautomatic firearm.

You can hunt with a bolt action rifle or pump action shotgun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jason1961 (Reply #3)

Fri Oct 14, 2016, 08:46 PM

4. technically they are banned

since the registry is closed, only the ones registered before that date are legal to own. The same is true in Canada, where machine gun ownership was much easier until 1977. You can still transfer and own them there, if you have a license for prohibited weapons.
http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/fs-fd/prohibited-prohibe-eng.htm

I don't think anyone should have a semi-automatic firearm.
Not a valid reason to change public policy, and is illiberal. The liberal values this country puts the individual above "the community". Any other view is authoritarian.

You can hunt with a bolt action rifle or ppump-actionshotgun.
There are several target competitions that use semi autos. Besides, after semi autos will be pump and bolt action "sniper rifles". See Australia and lever action shotguns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jason1961 (Reply #3)

Fri Oct 14, 2016, 08:53 PM

6. Hunting is not the only reason to own a weapon

 

You do realize that right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jason1961 (Reply #3)

Fri Oct 14, 2016, 10:01 PM

7. Why--->>>

I was asking "for what cause, reason, or purpose" you want these items banned.
What do you hope to accomplish, how does such a ban advance that and why do you think that?

I believe you're wrong so convince me. Show me some logic or evidence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jason1961 (Reply #3)

Sat Oct 15, 2016, 08:54 AM

8. Bicycles kill three times as many people annually as semiautomatic rifles do....

and rifles as a class are the least misused of all weapons. Even the Liberal Gun Club forum is dominated by semiauto rifle shooters. I think you are either misinformed about the scope of rifle misuse, or in deep denial about the prevalence of semiautos in U.S. homes, including Dem and indie households.

Not just the USA, either; semiautos are legal and popular in Canada, most of Europe, New Zealand, etc., and even UK residents can own semiauto shotguns and semiauto .22LR rifles of unlimited capacity, if they so choose.

It's ironic that your avatar is a picture of an avid semiauto shooter who was murdered with a bolt-action.

The thing is (and I pointed this out in another thread), if all semiautos were banned (not going to happen), the professional gun-control lobby would simply switch to demonizing "Saturday Night Specials", "Vest Busters", "Big Boomers", "Sniper Rifles", "Combat Shotguns", "Riot Guns", "Silent Killers" (.22LR assassin's weapons, dontchaknow), and "Cop-Killer Bullets". Pumps and levers fall under the "assault weapons" catch-all, anyway.

Or would you be OK with people owning this pump-action?





Only a tiny minority of gun owners hunts, FWIW, so the hunting canard is irrelevant. If other guns were banned, you'd be saying "You can hunt with a bow, nobody needs a military-style sniper rifle" anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to benEzra (Reply #8)

Sat Oct 15, 2016, 02:53 PM

11. I'd like a ban on all modern firearms.

How many kids use bicycles as opposed fo assault weapons?

Bicycles also kill more people than nuclear weapons every year but I don't want those in streets either.

I'd like to see a ban on all modern firearms eventually but I know it won't happen over night.

The guns pictured in your post just provide more evidence that the gun industry will do everything it can to skirt the law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jason1961 (Reply #11)

Sat Oct 15, 2016, 05:15 PM

12. Hows that?

 

The guns pictured in your post just provide more evidence that the gun industry will do everything it can to skirt the law.


Hows that? How do those guns 'skirt the law'?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jason1961 (Reply #11)

Sat Oct 15, 2016, 10:27 PM

15. Given that 50-60 million people own semiauto rifles,

I think the fact that they kill *fewer* people than shotguns, revolvers, knives, clubs, and even bare hands---making them among the least misused of all weapons---demonstrates that the obsession with rifle stock styling, and criminalizing responsible ownership thereof, is wrongheaded and counterproductive.



As to the nukes analogy, a .22 caliber non-automatic civilian rifle is many orders of magnitude less dangerous than a nuke, both in terms of storage and in terms of accidental or intentional misuse. I think banning alcohol is a better analogy than nuclear weapons, since alcohol and guns are both popular consumer products that are commonly enjoyed by a substantial fraction of the population, but with a very small percentage of misuse as well, and which a minority wish to outlaw on moral or pragmatic grounds---except that alcohol kills about 250 times as many people annually as rifles do.

As to banning only modern firearms, I don't think you'd really be OK with us owning guns from the 1830s through the 1870s either, since rate of aimed fire with a lever-action is pretty comparable to that of a modern semiauto, and I believe pumps go back to the mid-1800s as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to benEzra (Reply #15)

Sun Oct 16, 2016, 01:16 AM

28. Alcohol is a drug. For some people, guns are not a drug, so your analogy fails.

 

Or more precisely, the alcohol analogy only applies to those who relate to their guns as a drug.

That's not all gun owners, only a subset of all gun owners.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stone space (Reply #28)

Sun Oct 16, 2016, 01:25 AM

29. So I guess you agree with all of the other parts

 

of the post

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #29)

Sun Oct 16, 2016, 02:24 AM

31. Why would you guess that?

 

So I guess you agree with all of the other parts

of the post

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stone space (Reply #28)

Sun Oct 16, 2016, 08:12 AM

32. On the contrary...

...it is your limited understanding/application of "analogy" which fails.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stone space (Reply #28)

Sun Oct 16, 2016, 11:38 AM

36. Non-sequitur.

 

And a red herring too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stone space (Reply #28)

Sun Oct 16, 2016, 11:43 AM

37. Both are semi-controversial consumer products that lead to some deaths from abuse,

Last edited Sun Oct 16, 2016, 06:14 PM - Edit history (1)

and which a minority of zealots who don't personally like them wish to outlaw.

The Federal government puts annual alcohol-related fatalities at 100,000, but let's assume that number is overestimated by a factor of two, so say 50,000 deaths annually from alcohol for the sake of argument. All rifles combined account for less than 350 murders annually (extrapolating from the FBI UCR) and a small number of accidental deaths, with semiautos probably responsible for roughly half. So say 250 semiauto-rifle deaths annually, all told. That's a ratio of 200:1.

Small question: Do you personally drink alcohol? Or do you believe in total abstinence and prohibition?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stone space (Reply #28)

Mon Oct 17, 2016, 03:46 AM

39. Every hear of "abstract thinking"?

Alcohol is a drug. For some people, guns are not a drug, so your analogy fails.

Or more precisely, the alcohol analogy only applies to those who relate to their guns as a drug.

That's not all gun owners, only a subset of all gun owners.

Let's see ... alcohol and guns. Potentially dangerous items that are therefore subject to government controls and potentially to prohibition? Yes, I think the analogy holds up.

Your logic is akin to saying that alcohol and cocaine cannot be compared because one is a liquid and the other a powder. Literal-mindedness ad absurdum makes all analogies fail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Straw Man (Reply #39)

Mon Oct 17, 2016, 05:07 AM

40. re: "...alcohol and guns..."

I guess that's why there's special agency for them. That's 2 of the 4 in alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives.

I have it on good authority that a former supervisor when appoint me as Secretary of Analogy when he's elected President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to benEzra (Reply #15)

Mon Oct 17, 2016, 04:51 PM

44. Rate of one (1) rifle homicide per year in MA?? da horror.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jason1961 (Reply #11)

Mon Oct 17, 2016, 04:38 PM

42. Much of American prohibition history is based on the repugnancy of physical images...

 

The pump-action weapon pictured above is essentially the same as pump-action rifles (Remington still makes one with decent walnut), and a bazillion shotguns, which date to the late 1890s. Are these hoary old examples OK by you for for hunting, as you indicate? If so, then why not the example provided by Ben Ezra?

Incidentally, less than 20% of gun-owners hunt. The rest.......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to benEzra (Reply #8)

Sun Oct 16, 2016, 12:25 AM

21. When's the last time you rode an AR-15 to work?

 

Bicycles kill three times as many people annually as semiautomatic rifles do....


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stone space (Reply #21)

Sun Oct 16, 2016, 01:09 AM

27. Why are you obsessed with a firearm

 

That is used the least in crime and murders? I would love to hear your explanation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #27)

Sun Oct 16, 2016, 01:30 AM

30. Are you referring to semi-automatics or fully-automatics here?

 

Why are you obsessed with a firearm

That is used the least in crime and murders? I would love to hear your explanation.


I'm interested in fully-automatics precisely because they are used least in crime and murders.

They are also used less in accidents and suicides and school shootings and stuff.

So, my attitude is this:

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Leave the rules for fully-automatics alone.

But if it is broke, do fix it. Apply the rules that work to semi-automatics as well.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stone space (Reply #30)

Sun Oct 16, 2016, 08:31 AM

33. I am talking about semi-automatic rifles

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #33)

Sun Oct 16, 2016, 08:35 AM

34. In the Easter Egg Hunt of life...

...some of us concern ourselves more with the all important egg-shaped indentations in our surroundings rather than the holes in our baskets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stone space (Reply #21)

Sun Oct 16, 2016, 11:35 AM

35. I like bikes, and I've commuted to work on one before, when I lived closer.

One of my hobbies is riding singletrack on my old GT iDrive.

My point is that the scope of rifle misuse is vastly exaggerated by those who want to coerce their neighbors into living by their philosophical/religious beliefs on the topic, and being honest about the magnitude of rifle misuse would undermine your case. So instead we get rhetoric about "weapons of mass destruction" and "epidemics of violence" and even (in this very forum) intimations that a bloody fight for confiscation would be justifiable.

Many states have *zero* rifle homicides in any given year. The vast majority of states are in the single digits. Massachusetts, which just outlawed the most popular civilian rifles by executive fiat, averaged less than 1 rifle murder per year in the last 8 years for which we have data.

Murder, by State, Types of Weapons, 2015

[font face="courier new"]Total murders...................... 13,455
Handguns............................ 6,447 (47.9%)
Firearms (type unknown)............. 2,648 (19.7%)
Clubs, rope, fire, etc.............. 1,671 (12.4%)
Knives and other cutting weapons.... 1,544 (11.5%)
Hands, fists, feet.................... 624 (4.6%)
Shotguns.............................. 269 (2.0%)
Rifles................................ 252 (1.9%) [/font]

To put that into perspective, bicycles accounted for 722 deaths in 2014, the most recent year for which I could find stats.

If you don't think bicycle deaths are an "epidemic" that requires coercive solutions and prohibition (never mind, say, swimming pool deaths, or knife deaths, both of which kill an order of magnitude more people than semiauto rifles do), yet you use that level of rhetoric about non-automatic, small-caliber civilian rifles and threaten coercive action against their owners, then you are being disingenuous.

To quote the gun-control lobby, back when rifle murder was *twice* the problem it is now:

"O)ur organization, Handgun Control, Inc. does not propose further controls on rifles and shotguns. Rifles and shotguns are not the problem; they are not concealable."

--Nelson T. "Pete" Shields, Guns Don't Die--People Do, Priam Press, 1981, pp. 47-48).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stone space (Reply #21)

Mon Oct 17, 2016, 06:11 PM

45. The last time I carried a rifle to work

Was 10 years ago. It was not a AR15, it was a 478 Wesly Richards double rifle. There was a FN-Fal in the Land Rover for when it was needed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #45)

Mon Oct 17, 2016, 08:42 PM

46. game warden or hunting guide?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #46)

Tue Oct 18, 2016, 04:08 AM

47. Game Ranger in Kenya. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jason1961 (Reply #3)

Sat Oct 15, 2016, 08:57 AM

9. I may be mistaken, but haven't you advocated for a complete ban of all firearms?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marengo (Reply #9)

Sat Oct 15, 2016, 02:47 PM

10. Yes

I'd like a complete ban on all modern firearms eventually. I think that there should be strict licensing for muskets but that would be the ONLY firearm you should be able to own.

I know that there won't be a complete ban overnight but if we can get semiautomatic and automatic weapons off the streets it would be a great goal for Hillary's first term.

I don't see how people feel our current gun culture is okay and call themselves a Democrat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jason1961 (Reply #10)

Sat Oct 15, 2016, 05:17 PM

13. How come...?

 

I know that there won't be a complete ban overnight but if we can get semiautomatic and automatic weapons off the streets...


How come you guys always say "off the streets" when you mean "out of private possession"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #13)

Sat Oct 15, 2016, 10:42 PM

17. Yup. They're not "on the streets"; they're "in citizens' homes".

Almost exclusively in the homes of the lawful and responsible, if you correlate the FBI Uniform Crime Reports with ownership and sales statistics...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jason1961 (Reply #10)

Sat Oct 15, 2016, 08:41 PM

14. Just curious

 

How many automatic weapons are on the streets and are used in criminal acts?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jason1961 (Reply #10)

Sat Oct 15, 2016, 10:41 PM

16. Do you call the guy in your avatar a Democrat?

Because he was a gun enthusiast who avidly enjoyed shooting semiauto rifles, and personally owned an AR-15, an M1 carbine, and a Garand. And rifle homicide was probably higher back then than it is now, since it has been at historic lows in recent years.

Was Eleanor Roosevelt a Democrat, with her concealed-carry license and her views on armed self-defense?

I'd also point out that prior to the first Clinton administration, when the Third Way types decided to go hard on gun control as a way to appeal to right-leaning law-'n-order types (thereby shooting the party in the foot in 1994), support for gun control was an urban/rural thing, *not* a liberal-vs.-conservative thing. Most gun control prior to that time had been instituted by conservatives seeking to centralize power in the hands of elites, and keep guns out of the hands of people with the wrong color skin or the wrong ethnicity. That's true of the Mulford Act in California (signed by none other than Ronald Reagan), NY's Sullivan Law (aimed at keeping guns out of the hands of immigrants), and the Jim Crow gun control in the South, vestiges of which still stand today (like NC's law allowing sheriffs to deny handgun ownership on the basis of subjective "moral character", which was originally code for "has the wrong color skin".

The modern gun-control lobby is primarily funded by a single Wall Street billionaire who believes in stopping and frisking brown people without warrant, among other illiberal police-state positions he advocates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Original post)

Mon Oct 17, 2016, 02:27 AM

38. Healy is too ignorant and ideologically blinkered to know it would be a pyrric victory.

Culture war causes enormous political damage. Democrats nationwide will pay for her useless, feel-good edict.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pablo_marmol (Reply #38)

Mon Oct 17, 2016, 05:10 AM

41. Going off the reservation usually doesn't bode well for the long term.

"Party of the people" Those words still mean something to some folks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pablo_marmol (Reply #38)

Mon Oct 17, 2016, 04:47 PM

43. Healy is also an activist Drug Warrior, joining with the GOP governor of MA.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread