Jim Wallace is 100% right that Mass laws are extremely tough for gun owners to understand. You almost have to consult with an attorney because you could easily be breaking the law and not even know it. There's a lot of grey areas from proper storage, to parts replacement, etc. I don't have any issues with mental health evaluations and in-depth background checks if that's all it is, but this is Mass....so I'm expecting more hurdles and problems for responsible gun owners.

Liberals passing yet more laws against legal gunowners does not impact the criminal or deranged person one bit.
All they have done and are now doing again, is making it more difficult for the honest citizen to protect himself, his property, and his fellow citizens.

If additional gun laws or bans worked, then Chicago would be the most least violent state in the country.

I agree with all the comments above. I have no issue going through mental health evaluations (though I know it'll end up costing me even more money than it already does.) but these hurdles are already way higher than most the country. And in the end it will deter honest law abiding citizens from protecting themselves, and the criminals will do what they have always done. Not pay attention to laws. These laws will not save lives. They will cost us more because the person attacked cannot save themselves.

Every gun owner should be responsible for every gun he has. Or she. If your gun is ever used in any crime, you should be held responsible for that crime. Once every gun is registered in a straightforward way, then we make a huge effort to go after the illegal, unregistered guns. I'm talking rewards for info, huge penalties for unregistered guns or ammo, etc. and of COURSE we should improve background checks into the health and security of the gun owner, the family and people who live with it, etc. it's worth it!

That is the worst idea I have ever heard.
So say I am a gun collector and a criminal knows this. They break into my house with a saw and metal cutting blade and cut through my "highly secure" safe and subsequently use the gun in a murder, now that murder is my fault?
I didn't decide to break in, steal guns and kill someone. Talk about blaming anyone but the criminally, perhaps some critical thinking before blaming gun owners for everything.

BH is right, that is just outlandish thinking. If someone steals my entire gun safe and sells all my guns illegally on the black market and they are used in robberies, a gang shooting, and by a drug cartel- ME, the responsible gun owner who was ROBBED is up on multiple murder charges, robberies, and drug sales? WHAT?! No. That's not even LOGICAL. Lets try this one, some guy steals your car and in the police chase kills an entire family in a mini van. You wanna be held for 5 counts of vehicular manslaughter (oh, and he was drunk when he stole the car so you're up on drunk driving charges too) even though you weren't in the car and in all reality you too are a victim, as your car being stolen was the first crime?

Thanks Brianna, good example

The contents of this article can not contain the true effects , facts or complete impact of the proposed laws and regulations that would take effect immediately or in the future. The above article is to simple and presented in such a way that any one with common sense ( even fire arm supporters ) would not disagree with. What you have put up for comment or debate is exactly what the government or devil Patrick want the public to think. I have not had a chance to read the bill and I bet no one else has either. Citizens need to wake up and pay attention not just to gun laws but all rights and laws. WE are being hood winked in all aspects by this type of media with out all the FACTS. No different than hidden so called pork barrels that waste tax payer money in funding bills. There is always more to it especially when it appears so simple. REMEMBER GUNS DO NOT KILL , SICK BAD PEOPLE KILL and they will KILL with or with out a gun, without a gun they would use more destructive devices and the good people will be defenseless

Chris: How about we all acknowledge the rights our forefathers and every generation after have fought and died for and just shoot the SOB that breaks in to our homes threatening our lives and all that America stands for. Which is those certain UN-alienated rights given in a certain document of which I wander if you or any one else can even name.

Nope, I still think gun owners do have to accept more responsibility for their guns, and keep better track of them, and SHARE the moral and financial responsibility when they are used illegally. Some leverage from that direction helps to reduce their misuse by bad people. And yeah, guns don't kill, people do, but most people who kill in this country use guns, ergo guns are part of the problem, and how can we solve a problem without addressing a big part of it? Also people with guns should stop describing their shooting fantasies in public--I think it hurts their arguments!

Bill of rights! Bill of Rights.

If you haven't seen this YouTube on crime stats...check it out

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ooa98FHuaU0

Let's take a minute and think people ! Why are they going after our guns ? Why are they not looking at our society in general ? I think we can all make a list of societal problems that caused this not a metal object, perhaps a car should run into a large crowd of people at a parade and kill 15-20 people will the politicians and media blame the car ? No not hardly or how about a bomb you can keep going with this can't you ? The bottom line is they have to react and this is how they ae doing it in a way that is simply senseless. Let's not offend the Movie makers, the Video gamer crowd, The parents, the schools, and especially the progressive crowd who believe that there are no absolutes and that life should be lived in the grey area.
People of faith and character must speak out and demand changes and not the ones that our talking heads and government are talking about ! Pick up the oldest book in the world and carefully read it's passages, it is proven, it is now, and it will be the future that you can count on .

mcremvonstauffenfritzpellmell

Answer Brianna's question then, if your car was stolen and used in a drunk driving hit and run vehicular homicide, should you be help responsible? Your argument is clearly biased because you do not like guns period. What someone broke into your house, stole a hammer and killed someone with it, are you and the hardware store responsible for that?
Your argument is not a fring argument that is
debateable, it is just ludicrous and plain wrong, you wouldn't get one politician to agree with it. Blame gun owners not criminals huh? You are seemingly punishing law abiding citizens for crimes they did not commit, can't arrest someone for that.

Everytime something awful happens our government over reacts. The laws that came after the station night club ended up closing factories down because of sprinklers and fire boxes, businesses went under that had plenty of exits.

I keep hearing the same thing over and over and over- "passing laws only affects legal gun owners" well I have two things to say about that-
1- who says legal owners don't break laws??? That is, what is to stop a legal gun owner from buying guns and reselling them, after erasing all evidence of the "legal" owner?
2-The laws in MA are pretty strict and should serve as a model for the rest of the country.
As for the second amendment, it says no law shall be written to ban the prohibit citizens from bearing arms (or something like that) well where do you draw the line?? Just curious because I don't know where people draw that line, Is it with all hand guns, or large capacity or "assault weapons" (whatever that means) is it with automatic weapons?? Is it with rocket launchers or bazookas??? I ask because I always wondered where people drew that line. For me I think non-automatic hand guns and rifles should be legal. I think large capacity magazines and things like hollow point bullets should be illegal. A citizen whether by legal means or otherwise should not possess the ability to kill dozens of other people anytime they choose. I don't want to hear about protecting ourselves from the government, we have passed that threshold decades ago. I am concerned with my fellow citizen that has a screw loose. My opinions (as a gun owner) so go ahead and yell at me and tell me I'm stupid.

I have never seen such a bunch of hooey in my days on PATCH. You folks are certifiable, IMO. Gun owners in the USA are not only obsessed with their guns, they are addicted to them. They need one under their pillow and one by their feet. Even then they don't sleep and need their metal thumb to suck on. Cause' Big Bad Obama's coming in the night with a AFT swat team -- in a black helicopter--to take away your guns and your magazines with 100 round in them.

The NRA is the world's worst fearmongerer next to congressional rethuglicans. And now you have gone over the edge into full fledged paranoia. There is not one rational comment here. You even have John Bouchard saying to read the bible. The world's most violent religion is x-ianity with children slaughtered right and left and you want that as your moral standard. Gov. Rick Perry says we should pray to end gun violence. What crap!

Gretchen: Did you forget to take your meds today? The rant is a bit bizarre. I try to be civil, this time it is kind of difficult. Calm down, everyone is entitled to their opinions without being admonished. You have your point of view, others have theirs. Allow them to speak. If you disagree, state why you do, in a rational, civil manner. If I don't agree with your view, Itry to provide examples, in a thoughtout fashion. Hysterical blubs carry no weight. I appreciate your comments, when pointed in a civil manner. You get me to think of things from a different perspective. Obviously, I lean Conservative, you lean Liberal. In reality, it really isn't a big deal, especially if you take the time to try and understand where the other is coming from. My thoughts are as important to me as yours are to you. Difference being I try to look at things from the other side, you don't or won't. Either way, it's still called Freedom of Speech. That goes for everyone, Left & Right. There should be no vile diatribe because people can't agree. That is now one of our country's largest problems. Both sides say we have to be "tolerant" or "accepting" yet neither side really is when you get right down to it...

I liked Gretchen's rant, what I didn't like was inferring she had a mental health problem. Rather poor taste.

I've decided that in some respects guns are like TV remote controls to many men and God forbid you take it away from them.

I'm not a big fan of guns but I'm not looking to see them banned either. I do think the NRA should be pistol whipped and if I hear "the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun" one more time I'm going to vomit.

Pablo, how does a responsible gun owner protect themself when their gun is locked up in a metal safe? I think an alarm system just might be more effective.

PJ, insults like the above from Fiscal Conservative (FC) are par for the course for him.

I agree with you about the good guy/bad guy thing. So illogical, in fact most of what is said here is bogus and illogical. If everyone on the street has a gun then how do you tell them apart? Don't shoot until you see the whites of their eyes?? Just invites reactivity and more paranoia.

The below link is an article from a Conservative site. It gives numbers for killing using assult weapons from 2011 (latest full year of numbers, I'm sure 2012 will be higher). Here is what I suggest, read it, find an article from a Liberal publication on the same topic. COMPARE them. Truth of the matter is, both sides always SLANT their way. Educated people don't take either sides word verbatum, they delve into them and try to find the truth. I will look for others later today (have to to work now, yeah, Sr citizen still works. Gov't makes me). Educated people don't believe everything they read. Fact is, far too much lieing to present one's opinion. Journalism and media coverage is so dishonest, regarding politics, it's not funny. Try having an open mind about things and decide for yourself instead for being Lemmings for just one side. Again, I'm presenting, not dictating a point of view. You're the final judge whether to read it or not. If you do read it, I'm not asking you to believe it. If you disagree, try to find another point of view with factual numbers. GR; Not meant as an insult, just asking to calm down. Not everything we see & read is true. Please take the time to look at how others percieve issues.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/18/Assault-Weapons-Tied-To-Less-Than-012-Percent-Of-Deaths-In-2011

Perhaps it is time to stop the blame game,and both sides start suggesting real ideas that can reach middle ground ( not to far left or right ). I will start with the following.
1. States should have must of the control as they see fit for their citizens. Every state has particular issues and needs. Example: some have vast metro areas some do not.
2. Feds should develop true definition of assault weapon based on these simple descriptions.
A. Any fully automatic gun ( squeeze trigger once and keeps firing )
B. Any gun capable of firing more than 10 rounds without manually reloading or shotguns more than 5 rounds.
3. Feds ban the future manufacturing,sale,trade,etc.
A. Should not be illegal to posses for the current owners
B. Offer existing owners say $2,000 ( not sure of $ amount ) for each such weapon turned in.

Who's next ?

Why do we need to add more laws if the people (animals) committing these crimes don't give a (bleep) about laws? We need stiffer penalties for lawbreakers up to and including capital punishment. There is no better deterrent than that. We also need to make prison actually feel like a prison, not a country club. No cable , no internet, just 3 baseline meals per day and hard labor.

I just read a fascinating book by John Grisham, An Innocent Man. If you read it, I think you will come to see that the death penalty is a terrible thing, because innocent people are put to death, and no amount of punishing the guilty can ever justify the killing of a single innocent person.

People who bring up the issue of "automatic weapons" really show that they are uneducated on the gun control issue. Since 1934 there have been exactly TWO murders with a legal automatic weapon, one of the shooters was a police officer. It seems most people are not aware of this fact and think automatic weapons are commonly used in crimes, this is completely false. Evidence below....

"In 1995 there were over 240,000 machine guns registered with the ATF. (Zawitz, Marianne,Bureau of Justice Statistics, Guns Used in Crime [PDF].) About half are owned by civilians and the other half by police departments and other governmental agencies (Gary Kleck, Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control, Walter de Gruyter, Inc., New York, 1997.)

Since 1934, there appear to have been at least two homicides committed with legally owned automatic weapons. One was a murder committed by a law enforcement officer (as opposed to a civilian). On September 15th, 1988, a 13-year veteran of the Dayton, Ohio police department, Patrolman Roger Waller, then 32, used his fully automatic MAC-11 .380 caliber submachine gun to kill a police informant, 52-year-old Lawrence Hileman. Patrolman Waller pleaded guilty in 1990, and he and an accomplice were sentenced to 18 years in prison. The 1986 'ban' on sales of new machine guns does not apply to purchases by law enforcement or government agencies"
www.guncite.com%2Fgun_control_gcfullau.html&h=5AQH4Y8L4

Anyone see the news on the Gun Rally in Boston. The Globe is misrepresenting how many people showed up there and nationally (I wonder why). There where THOUSANDS if not tens of thousands that particpated across the country. In Boston, there was a man from China showing his support, who witnessed the Tiananman Square uprising (Do you all remember that China had the nerve to "lecture" us recently on their opinion that America should ban guns?).
Frankly, the safest place in Boston today was at that protest on Beacon Hill.
Here is the link to video of the beginning of the demonstration, including the participant from China. Check out his sign. Looks more like 1000 people showed up just at Beacon Hill.
http://s44.beta.photobucket.com/user/terje201/media/2013-01-19_12-01-23_339.mp4.html
These politicians up here in the Mass., not to be outdone by Cuomo, want to impose a 7 round limit on mags. How ridiculous. MA already has tough gun laws on ownership plus photo/background check, fingerprinting, letters of reference, safety certification, etc., and has a low gun crime rate. They don't need to do anything further than what they already have on the books! Piling on will only turn law-abiding citizens into instant felons/criminals. Further, none of this will decrease the gun crime, for example, in Roxbury or Dorchester. What decreases all crime is exactly what they just did in Boston: diligently go after and sweep for the real criminals.

Shall we talk about the "right to bear arms" within the context of
1. "A well regulated militia being necessary..."
2. the ethic that with rights confer on the right-holder certain responbilities
3. freedom is not an absolute. You can't yell 'fire' in a theatre.

The gun owners I know are responsible. And I agree that the Constitutions affirms natural rights. But the Amendments were necessary for changes such as affirming the natural rights of Blacks to full citizenships. This may be a time, long overdue, to rethink gun ownership. It would be best if gun owners initiated this from within, taking responsibility for gun ownership, as some above.
However the legal discussion here is not the whole picture.

bet many here did not know this history of a responsible NRA throughout most of its history. http://www.alternet.org/suprising-unknown-history-nra?akid=9945.166498.xHHDeS&rd=1&src=newsletter779983&t=11

Hi Gretchen. First, I'd be interested in your thoughts on my reply above relevant to the woman in Georgia. Second, in looking at your posts, you seem to have a theme of injecting religion (Christianity v Islam) and/or race, seemingly because "the legal discussion here is not the whole picture." The legal discussion and our civil rights transcends relious debate. So, arguing the Quaran over the Bible will not get you far, as many will point out the atrocities committed in the name of Islam, and discount your opinion out of hand. As to Race, the fact is, today the 2nd amendment has no color. Danny Glover has made it out to be racist, but looking at the times and the writings of the men who wrote it suggests otherwise. Lastly for some interesting modern perspective, I recommend you search for and visit Colion Noir's site/ you-tube videos.

The woman in GA did not need an assault weapon to do the job of protecting herself and her family.

I bring religion into it because it's relavent. Evangelical Christianity tells men that they are weak and ungodly if they don't own guns. This conflating of guns and Christianity is being ramped up. It's part of the religous right's unholy bargain with Republicans -- or it is Republicans using the religious right?

I am not a pacifist. I am an advocate for non-violence. I also advocate for critical thinking in any discussion here.

I see postings and letters to the editor using the bogus argument for keeping gun laws as they are not, saying welll cars kill people, too and we don't outlaw cars. That is a dumb argument and should be laughed off a site like this.

check out how little critical thinking is to be found here. By the way, Jesus taught nonviolence. Except for throwing the moneylenders and dealers out of the entrance of the temple, he was non-violent.

http://www.amazon.com/God-Guns-Pacifist-Attackers-Christian/dp/1475016344/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1358705409&sr=8-1&keywords=God+guns+and+religion