(MA) Letter From My State Senator

U

USP45

New member
(I'll post my initial letter to Sen. Glodis on this matter later, when i find it! :( )

July 13, 2000

Dear Mr. USP45:

Thank you contacting me and voicing your opinion on the 940 Code of Massachusetts Regulations 16.00 of 1997. I share in your concern and anger of the actions of Attorney General Thomas Reilly. It is for that reason that I have and will continue to fight to repeal these regulations.

As you may be aware, in recent years the debate over gun control has been a highly contentious one in the Massachusetts Legislature. The attorney general's actions, in bypassing the legislature, is shortsighted and overreaching. Please rest assured that I will continue to fight on your behalf and on that of every citizen until our right to keep and bear arms is secured.

Again, thank you for taking the time to bring this matter to my attention. If you have any further questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

Guy W. Glodis
Massachusetts State Senator, 2nd Worcester District



------------------
~USP

"[Even if there would be] few tears shed if and when the Second Amendment is held to guarantee nothing more than the state National Guard, this would simply show that the Founders were right when they feared that some future generation might wish to abandon liberties that they considered essential, and so sought to protect those liberties in a Bill of Rights. We may tolerate the abridgement of property rights and the elimination of a right to bear arms; but we should not pretend that these are not reductions of rights." -- Justice Scalia 1998
 
Ok, so maybe nobody cares, but i said i'd post my letter when i found it. Here it is.

Perhaps one of you reading this will see that if an illiterate putz like me can write and get a pro-gun response, in Massachusetts, then maybe you can too.

(Note: I sent this letter during the week when 940 CMR 16.00 was enforced, with the appropriate salutations :), to Gov. Cellucci, Speaker Finneran, President Birmingham, and Rep. Frost. Glodis is the only one as yet to respond.)

WRITE YOUR REPS!

Honorable Sen. Glodis.

Please allow me to begin my correspondance to you
with a reminder that I am a registered voter of the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

I wish to take this time to express to you my profound
disappointment of the behavior of the Attorney General's
office concerning the matter of "940 CMR 16.00: Handgun Sales"

As I'm sure you know the origin of 940 CMR 16.00 of 1997 was the desire
of then Attorney General Harshbarger to either increase the level
of safety of firearms sold in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
or to effectively eliminate most civilian firearm sales in
Massachusetts.

As it is still legal to own firearms in Massachusetts (per MGL Chapter 180
acts of 1998), one can only assume that the current Attorney General's
recent decision to enforce 940 CMR 16.00 of 1997 is purely embodied by
a desire to eliminate civilian firearm sales in the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts.

I have come to this conclusion becuase under the legislation written
for MGL Chapter 180 acts of 1998, all of the necessary, effective, and
acceptable regulations on firearms were enacted by the Congress
of Massachusetts. The regulations of 940 CMR 16.00 of 1997 go further
than what the Congress of Massachusetts deemed feasible.
The statue of 940 CMR 16.00 of 1997 is in conflict with MGL
Chapter 180 acts of 1998. The citizens of Massachusetts are entitled
to a clear implementation of the law; this is obviously not the case.

Furthermore, MGL Chapter 180 acts of 1998 places reglatory
oversight with the Executive Office of Public Safety, not with the
Attorney General. What is the reason that this conflict in regulatory
oversight is allowed?

No reasonable person would argue against a need for safe
products for consumers. But the regulations of 940 CMR 16.00
restrict the sale of firearms that are clearly manufactured of
fine materals and high standards of quality control. There are
many fine firearms that do not meet all the requirements
outlined in 940 CMR 16.00 that are still safe, effective and
fair products, which gun owners have purchased and used for
legal purposes for nearly 100 years. These new regulations on
the design of firearms will only have the effect of eliminating
reasonably priced firearms for licensed gun owners of Massachusetts.
They will not prevent the negligent or criminal missuses
of -any- firearms.

Also, the enforcement regulations of 940 CMR 16.00 and
the Office of the Attorney General do not agree upon
a date of enforcement. Is it to much to ask that the citizens of
Massachusetts be granted a clear definition as to when the laws
apply?

Both MGL Chapter 180 acts of 1998 and 940 CMR 16.00
are vague, unfair and conflicting laws which require extreme
ammounts of time to fully understand and abide by. As a law abiding citizen
of Massachusetts, I implore you to understand that it is becoming
more and more difficult for every citizen and local athoraties to
understand what is within the law, what is an exception, what is
vague and what is illegal.

With this letter I respectfully ask you to help repeal 940 CMR 16.00. It
goes to far. The reasonably minded, law abiding gun owners of
Massachusetts deserve better for their continued support of legislation
designed to control the illegal use of firearms in Massachusetts. Please
do not condone making it illegal for citizens of Massachusetts to purchase
firearms that already meet ANSI (American National Standards Institute)
and SAAMI (Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute, Inc.)
standards.

I also ask you to keep an open mind concerning new legislation clarifying
MGL Chapter 180 acts of 1998. Punishing law abiding citizens with
vague and unfair legislation is the wrong thing to do.

Thankyou for your time.

Respectfully,

------------------
~USP

"[Even if there would be] few tears shed if and when the Second Amendment is held to guarantee nothing more than the state National Guard, this would simply show that the Founders were right when they feared that some future generation might wish to abandon liberties that they considered essential, and so sought to protect those liberties in a Bill of Rights. We may tolerate the abridgement of property rights and the elimination of a right to bear arms; but we should not pretend that these are not reductions of rights." -- Justice Scalia 1998

[This message has been edited by USP45 (edited July 24, 2000).]
 
Who knows maybe their is hope for Mass after all. I'm to the point now that I don't want to spend another penny on guns or ammo, I just give the money to JPFO,NRA,Brassroots,GOA.

-------------------
In a shooting war I would make a great sandbag. :)
 
Never mind wht he says, how does he vote? Is he like my state senator who proudly tells me he is pro gun and then votes for Gov Puketatki's (NY) anti gun bill!

Can't trust a politician, they vote according to how they think they will fare in the next election.

Check my prior post "Letter from my NY state senator" Notice the flowing pro RKBA language, notice how the creep voted!


Geoff Ross

------------------
One reason to vote in the next Presidential election.

It's the Supreme Court, Stupid!
 
I received the same response from Glodis. Despite the word processorancy, he seems genuinely pro-gun.

My state Rep. -- George Peterson -- is wonderfully pro-gun. He has almost single-handedly carried the fight in the state house. Anyone looking to contribute to a local rep who probably isn't your own could do a lot of good by giving to George Peterson.
 
USP,

I received the same letter from Sen. Glodis a couple of weeks ago. Everything I've heard is that he is pro-gun. He has an A+ rating from GOAL. I didn't write a letter, I called on behalf of my wife and I. The response letter was addressed to both of us.
It was nice to get a response (especially since I was on here complaining about a lack of response).

Peterson is also my rep. I've contacted him. No reponse, but everyone at his office has assured me he's on the fight. I have heard him on local talk radio and like what I hear.

We need to keep these good people in local offices and work to get good people in higher levels. I'm sure you guys have all heard of her, but http://www.carlahowell.org
She's in the running against Kennedy and needs the votes.

Everyone always says vote with your feet, but I'm staying.
Hoppy
 
If you know folks that live on the South Shore or the Cape, ask them to support Eric Bleicken, Republican for Congress. US Navy vet and strong supporter of the 2nd.

[This message has been edited by Paul Morceau (edited July 31, 2000).]
 
With all the gun companies in both Massachusets and Connecticut who the f*ck do these politicians out there think they are representing?

------------------
"We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force."

--Ayn Rand, in "The Nature of Government"

http://hometown.aol.com//jsax13/web.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top