Massachusetts - Governor introduces anti-gun legislation

[tombogan03884]

It's not the guns fault.. (singing to the choir here) but then I keep hearing......there should be huge fines or prison time for the responsible adult if a juvenile gets hold of a weapon and something terrible happens.

There is ..to me.... a whole kettle of fish simmering on this one.
what is considered juvenile age.. what is the circumstance involved.. granted..adults need to be responsible.. but to be thrown in jail?
Had a heated conversation the other evening with some one over this.

That depends, if they are deciding what age to allow abortions with out parental consent it's around 12, but when they are compiling statistics on children's gun related deaths  I believe the age is around 30.

[fightingquaker13]

That depends, if they are deciding what age to allow abortions with out parental consent it's around 12, but when they are compiling statistics on children's gun related deaths  I believe the age is around 30.

Its true. This is one of those things that should be regulated by common sense rather than law. Sadly commonsense is scarce on the ground. I want to strangle some of these idiots that leave a loaded gun unsecured when they have a 5 year old in the house. On the other hand Tom's 12 year old is old enough to know better. I am really at a loss on where to draw the legal line on this one.
FQ13

[twyacht]

When you need something passed, just say those famous words:

Its for the children OR It will reduce crime and punish the criminals,..

All that other stuff at the end,,, well that's not nearly as important as protecting children, and punishing criminals..

[Sgt Z Squad]

Well let us face it. You can't expect too much from a state that elected a U.S. Senator who can't drive over a bridge and the other who can't seem to shoot an M-79 without getting hit by his own shrapnel and then gets decorated for it.

[tombogan03884]

Well let us face it. You can't expect too much from a state that elected a U.S. Senator who can't drive over a bridge and the other who can't seem to shoot an M-79 without getting hit by his own shrapnel and then gets decorated for it.

And the third one didn't know his boyfriend was running a gay prostitution ring

[Sponsor]

[fullautovalmet76]

Timothy (and others)
Unless you're writing an "atta boy" to a politcian, you're wasting your time with email. If you're trying to get them to change their mind, they need to know that there is a constituent out there motivated enough to put pen to paper, buy a stamp and walk to the post office. This is the same amount of effort required to vote absentee and they know it. You may not change their mind but you will get a response.
FQ13

Quaker,
Not to quibble (but I guess I will anyway ;-) ), I have had a good response from Senator Bill Nelson (D) but a lousy response from Senator Mel Martinez (R) when it comes to correspondence by e-mail. In fact, Senators Baucus and Tester responded to me via e-mail and I am not one of their constituents! However, I do agree with you that a letter might be more effective because of the reason you gave above. I think e-mail has its place and has emerged as the default form of correspondence in business, personal and political relationships, so we should not dissuade its use.

[tombogan03884]

Its true. This is one of those things that should be regulated by common sense rather than law. Sadly commonsense is scarce on the ground. I want to strangle some of these idiots that leave a loaded gun unsecured when they have a 5 year old in the house. On the other hand Tom's 12 year old is old enough to know better. I am really at a loss on where to draw the legal line on this one.
FQ13

Shea Porter(D) responds by E Mail, Judd Gregg (R) (former Gov) replies by snail mail, Jeanne Sheheen, (D) (another former Gov)is the only one who has never replied.