MA: MIDEAST FIREARMS SAFETY ACT (Session Ended)

[Junkie]

I don't see the reasoning for the second sentence of the definition of firearm.  Because it then sets no restrictions on possessing a loaded or working firearm.  This statute would only apply to non-functioning firearms that are loaded.

I think we need to chane felon to violent fellon.

I oppose sections 6 and 7.

I'm with you on this.

Here is my reasoning.  The second sentence does not limit the applicability of the statute to nonfunctioning not loaded weapons, but includes them in the overall definition of the statute.  It prevents someone from escaping liability by simply taking out the firing pin or keeping the ammo  in a different place.

The short-barreled shotgun/rifle is in there because cutdown long guns have no legiitimate hunting or other purpose.  The only reason to cut down a long gun is to conceal it.  Additionally, the cutting down of the shotgun barrel increases the spread and thus the lethality of the shotgun at short ranges, while decreasing the long range ability of the weapon.  Simply put, it is designed to kill people -- not animals, because it is really hard to sneak up on animal close enough for the cut down shotgun to have any effect.

While I understand the "violent" versus "non-violent" felony -- what do those terms mean?  In some states a burglary is not considered "violent."  Many killers and gang bangers are multiple felons, but only have drug dealing, forgery, burglary, etc.  In my experience, armed felons are the most likely to commit homicide.  This bill is aimed at reducing that by targeting those people. 

Also, at sentencing, a judge can consider the underlying felony in determining whether to put someone in prison, jail, or on probation.

[Junkie]

I see what you intended to do now, but the way I interpreted this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

was that you meant "In order to be considered a firearm, the firearm cannot be loaded or operable".  I think we need to change the wording, otherwise it has the opposite effect of your intent.

I'll compromise on the shotguns; however, I will not budge on limiting the felons.  We can use a different word than "violent," but the way it's written now is not acceptable to me.

In terms of the wording of "firearm" I see your point.  As far as re-wording, what do you suggest?

As far as the felon portion, I respectfully disagree and will also not budge.

[Junkie]

I would still like to include that a non-functioning firearm still counts, and that the firearm does not have to be loaded.  It might sound stupid, but if it is in the statute, it will be in the jury instructions and thus prevent those defenses at trial.

[Junkie]

While I understand the arguments for changing "felon" to "violent felon," I implore everyone to vote against this amendment.  I have been involved in prosecuting violent crimes for several years now, specializing in gang cases.  Just going through the cases I am dealing with from the most recent gang war -- nearly twenty members involved in shootings and illegal weapons possession.  None of them had a prior violent "felony."  Two cases really stick out -- police come across these guys, they have guns, and are from out of state -- our information was that they were brought up here to be hitters so that we would not be able to find them after the shooting.  Neither had a "violent felony."  One had an auto theft and the other felony drug dealing case. 

The fact of the matter is most first time offenders are not convicted of felonies.  Courts can do hold opens, diversions, and many other programs to prevent criminal convictions.  Yet if someone does get a felony, I believe it is in the public's best interest for them not have a firearm.  Thank you for your attention.

[Junkie]

Rather than labeling them "violent" we could just come up with a list of felonies that being convicted of would trigger the Felon in Possession subsection.

I would propose that a violation of unlawful carrying concealed and possession of a shortbarreled shotgun/rifle should count, as well as: felony theft, robbery, armed robbery, shootings, homicide, attempted homicide, forcible sexual assault, sexual assault of a child, kidnapping, false imprisonment, substantial and aggravated battery, auto theft, car jackings, child pornography and child enticement.

If you want to add or subtract from the list, I am willing to negotiate.

[Junkie]

Abstain

[Junkie]

I agree "must" should be changed to "need" and will do so.

Based on all my previous reasons, sawed off shotguns need to be outlawed.

[Junkie]

Nay

[Junkie]

Nay

Why are you voting against this?  This fixes the problem with your initial definition.  Anything ever built to be a firearm, whether it's loaded or unloaded, functional or unfunctional is covered under this definition.

As I had indicated earlier, I do believe that "must" should be changed to "need."  

However, this definition does not account for inoperable or unloaded firearms.  I am simply thinking of jury instructions -- if it is not in the definition, then someone could argue that for a defense.