Gun group snubbed at signing of law it helped to pass

[sarisataka]

Gun group snubbed at signing of law it helped to pass

BOSTON -- A gun owners group that worked alongside gun control advocates to pass gun violence prevention legislation expressed anger Wednesday over not being invited to the bill-signing.

Gov. Deval Patrick said he hadn’t noticed representatives from the Gun Owners Action League of Massachusetts were not at the ceremony, but he said he was upset to learn they were not invited.

“Somebody somewhere dropped the ball,” he said. “And I know that the team has issued an apology, and I apologize. They were part of getting a good bill.”

Such ceremonies are often an opportunity for bill supporters with different interests to come together in a show of unity around a particular matter.

Oops.
Or maybe it does fit the oft repeated story that gun owners never support gun control and wouldn't want any embarrassing proof that is false.

[upaloopa]

1. I wasn't aware of this gun group.

They should be recognized for their good work. Maybe invite them to a special function at the Capitol.

[NYC_SKP]

2. Further proof that it's not about facts. More often, it's about politics.

Good legislation, all involved are due credit.

Where were the Moms on this?

[Eleanors38]

3. The Narrative™. Somebody's staff is developing a new one right now!

[jimmy the one]

4. NRA opposed the gun group, worse than a snub?

link: Gun group snubbed at signing of law it helped to pass

Well, it's not that big a deal imo, and you never know the preliminary internal wheelings & dealings when a gun group & gun control groups meet. Did they argue much over it?
For instance, the nra vigorously opposed the ban on plastic handguns about 20 years ago, yet when the ban passed they put out a large ad in USA Today claiming how they had supported it & were instrumental in it's passage (disingenuously), due to last minute concessions by them when they realized they were gonna lose.

Here's addendum, so the nra snubbed the Massachusetts gun group too:

The National Rifle Association opposed the Massachusetts bill prior to its passage, arguing government officials could abuse discretionary licensing powers granted under the legislation
Massachusetts has the lowest firearm-fatality rate in the United States and the most comprehensive gun laws in the nation.
http://www.lowellsun.com/news/ci_26334802/patrick-approves-gun-laws-overhaul#ixzz3AO5pcb5r

NRA has no business arguing with Massachusetts, when it comes to gun control.

[sarisataka]

5. Makes the snub all the worse

As a group broke from the supposed iron clad control the NRA has on every gun owner to back the bill.

I don't know the wheeling and dealings either but the governor statement seems to imply it is a big deal. And when MA wants to pass even more gun control, do you really think this is the last one, why should GOAL support any new initiative? They didn't get credit for this and will probably hear how all gun owners oppose every piece of gun control legislation.

NRA has no business arguing with Massachusetts, when it comes to gun control.
Do you say the same about Bloomberg in Colorado, California, Washington...

[jimmy the one]

7. YES, bloomburg would do good in Cal, Col, & Wash

sari: Makes the snub all the worse .. As a group broke from the supposed iron clad control the NRA has on every gun owner to back the bill.

Good point I suppose. Tho NRA not that popular in MA to begin with.

I said: NRA has no business arguing with Massachusetts, when it comes to gun control.
sari said: Do you say the same about Bloomberg in Colorado, California, Washington...

With respect to LA, San Fran, SanDiego, Sacramento, Spokane, Seattle, & Denver, I think bloomburg would do fine.
.. Bloomburg with his gun control work did a fine job in helping lower NYC's violent crime & murder rate, making it exemplar amongst big cities over 500,000.

[Straw Man]

8. Who?

Bloomburg with his gun control work did a fine job in helping lower NYC's violent crime & murder rate, making it exemplar amongst big cities over 500,000.

I don't know who "Bloomburg" is, but Bloomberg was rather partial to "stop and frisk," which he credited for much of the decrease in crime.

"I think it's fair to say that stop-question-and-frisk has been an essential part of the NYPD's work."

--http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/16/nypd-stop-and-frisk-mayor-bloomberg-media-blames_n_1522593.html

So very ... progressive?

[sarisataka]

9. There lies a problem

You are gauging the right of the speaker based on your agreement with the message. I do not have enough nuance to state it is hypocritical but it is at least inconsistent.

The NRA has a right to speak as they claim and can prove to an extent to speak for a number of gun owners in each state. I support their right to speak as at times I agree with their position though the leadership disgusts me.

Bloomberg has a right to speak as he represents groups that claim to represent people in favor of gun control and they can prove such as well. I support their right to speak though I often disagree with the proposals as I believe they would not affect crime in any measurable way.

As for Bloomberg the person, I would like him to go away as I believe he is a GOP supporting wolf in gun control colored sheep clothes. Just my opinion.

NYC also did a fine job reducing crime with racially biased stop and frisk. 90-100% of the city's gun control laws predate bloomberg's reign.
Think about that.
I have always and continue to oppose abrogation of the 4th Amendment or any law that treats one demographic differently than any other.

[jimmy the one]

10. gauged on facts on hand

sari: You are gauging the right of the speaker based on your agreement with the message.

No, I am gauging the words of the speaker contrasted with the facts on hand in Massachusetts, as I posted:

what I wrote/linked: The National Rifle Association opposed the Massachusetts bill prior to its passage, arguing government officials could abuse discretionary licensing powers granted under the legislation
Massachusetts has the lowest firearm-fatality rate in the United States and the most comprehensive gun laws in the nation.

Based upon that tailing, I said the nra had no business advising Massachusetts on gun control (paraphrased).
Based on the facts on hand of what Bloomberg did (& didn't do) in nyc & the crime results, I said bloombg would do fine in those western state's big cities.

[hack89]

11. So you support stop and frisk?

because that is how Bloomberg lowered violent crime in NYC.

There has been a 10% spike in shootings since a court stopped stop and frisk:

The spike in shootings — a 10 percent increase since January — is Bratton's first major challenge since returning to New York this year. Under Bratton, the NYPD has all but suspended stop-and-frisk.

http://www.npr.org/2014/07/03/328120358/top-nypd-cop-stop-and-frisk-is-not-the-problem-or-the-solution

[Glaug-Eldare]

6. NRA exists for one reason and one reason only:

to receive donations. They might have a rabid membership, but they need gun control pushes as desperately as Bloomberg and the Moms need dead kids. Every time there's a gun control push, they get a surge in cash without actually doing or being held accountable for doing anything about it. They're just a bunch of crooks, siphoning away cash from the people trying to get real work done.


Oh, and the Maryland State Rifle and Pistol Association (the NRA's state affiliate) can claim to be our "flagship advocacy group" all they want, but they actually, literally, have never done any advocacy whatsoever. They just run marksmanship competitions and collect donations from people too dumb to know the difference.