Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

MACHETES AND MASSACHUSETTS
self | January 26, 2008 | swampsniper

Posted on 01/26/2008 8:41:55 PM PST by SWAMPSNIPER

Did Romney have anything to do with this?

AN ACT RELATIVE TO THE POSSESSION OF A MACHETE Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

SECTION 1.

Subsection (b) of section 10 of chapter 269 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2002 Official Edition is hereby amended by inserting after the word “inches”, in line 67, the following word:- , machete.

SECTION 2. Said subsection (b) of said section 10 of said chapter 269, as so appearing, is hereby further amended by adding the following paragraph:-

For purposes of this section, “machete” means “a heavy knife at least 18 inches in length and having a blade at least 1.5 inches wide at its broadest measurement. This subsection shall not apply to carrying a machete on one’s person or in a vehicle if the machete is carried for the purpose of cutting vegetation or if the machete is being transported for the purpose of cutting vegetation. In a prosecution of a violation of this subsection, there shall be a permissible inference that such carrying of a machete is not for the purposes of cutting vegetation. Such presumption may be rebutted.

Any individual who requires a machete for the purposes of cutting vegetation shall register the machete with the local police department on an annual basis and, upon payment of an appropriate annual registration fee as determined by the local granting authority, shall be issued a permit authorizing him to possess the machete solely for the purposes of cutting vegetation.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: banglist; machete; massachusetts; romney
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-62 next last

1 posted on 01/26/2008 8:41:56 PM PST by SWAMPSNIPER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

bttt


2 posted on 01/26/2008 8:43:08 PM PST by DocRock (All they that TAKE the sword shall perish with the sword. Matthew 26:52 Gun grabbers beware.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Saundra Duffy

ping


3 posted on 01/26/2008 8:43:36 PM PST by SWAMPSNIPER (THE SECOND AMENDMENT, A MATTER OF FACT, NOT A MATTER OF OPINION)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

I hope this is a hoax.


4 posted on 01/26/2008 8:46:06 PM PST by BinaryBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

Whoops, I forgot to register my Machete. My buds in MS-13 will forgive me though.


5 posted on 01/26/2008 8:46:25 PM PST by Sawdring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

Darn, guess it’s a good thing I use a old mini gun to mow down MY vegetation huh?

Sigh. This dose of comic indigestion brought to you by “Massholes R Us. Don’t blink - we don’t know what we’ll do next, either.”


6 posted on 01/26/2008 8:47:36 PM PST by Dominnae (When asked by a Persian emissary for his weapons, King Leonidas said "Come and take them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

Umm.. that would likely be from the 98.5 percent of the Retards a.k.a. Dumbocrats who inhabit our legislative body.

I will challenge you a freep pledge if you can find a “D” voter in MA legislators who has an IQ over 90.


7 posted on 01/26/2008 8:48:41 PM PST by acapesket (never had a vote count in all my years here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BinaryBoy
Here it is.
8 posted on 01/26/2008 8:49:49 PM PST by BinaryBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

I noticed you posted this at least once previously. What exactly is the story, if you don’t mind my asking?


9 posted on 01/26/2008 8:49:59 PM PST by ruination
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

It has to be a joke but here in California they keep trying to ban war toys and stuff like that.


10 posted on 01/26/2008 8:51:23 PM PST by Saundra Duffy (Romney rocks!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BinaryBoy

Ain’t no hoax, do a search on machete+massachusetts.
I don’t know the outcome of this bill, the Romney camp doesn’t want to discuss it!


11 posted on 01/26/2008 8:54:14 PM PST by SWAMPSNIPER (THE SECOND AMENDMENT, A MATTER OF FACT, NOT A MATTER OF OPINION)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BinaryBoy

Can some one tell us if this is a bill proposed for a new law or if it is existing state code ?


12 posted on 01/26/2008 8:55:04 PM PST by kbennkc (For those who have fought for it , freedom has a flavor the protected will never know)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER
-—Did Romney have anything to do with this?-—

What do you care? If Mitt sent you a personal affidavit stating that he didn’t want to take your machete away, you wouldn’t believe him. Why don’t you go cry to Hillary or Obama about it? I’m sure they’re willing to help. McCain too, for that matter.

13 posted on 01/26/2008 9:00:13 PM PST by claudiustg (You know it. I know it. I'm optiMITTstic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

He didnt get elected till Nov 2002

And took office in Jan 2003


14 posted on 01/26/2008 9:01:30 PM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ruination
"I noticed you posted this at least once previously. What exactly is the story, if you don’t mind my asking". ----------------------------------------------

I'm gonna post it, over and over, until I get an answer. Did Romney support this POS concept? Did Romney sign on to it?

I don't know, but I'm gonna find out!

I can make up my own questions, don't try to give me a script, Governor Romney! Just answer the damned question, did you, or didn't you?

15 posted on 01/26/2008 9:04:04 PM PST by SWAMPSNIPER (THE SECOND AMENDMENT, A MATTER OF FACT, NOT A MATTER OF OPINION)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

I guess all the Cuban and Colombian thugs better find a new tool to work with in the bay state...

oh wait a min they already have chainsaws...


16 posted on 01/26/2008 9:10:03 PM PST by Schwaeky (The Republic--Shall be reorganized into the first American EMPIRE, for a safe and secure Society!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: claudiustg
"What do you care? If Mitt sent you a personal affidavit stating that he didn’t want to take your machete away, you wouldn’t believe him. Why don’t you go cry to Hillary or Obama about it? I’m sure they’re willing to help. McCain too, for that matter".

We ain't talking abut "Hilary or Obama", we are talking about Mitt! Don't try to dump your spin on this, you ain't smart enough to pull it off!

Just answer the damned question, did he, or didn't he?

17 posted on 01/26/2008 9:10:42 PM PST by SWAMPSNIPER (THE SECOND AMENDMENT, A MATTER OF FACT, NOT A MATTER OF OPINION)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: kbennkc
Can some one tell us if this is a bill proposed for a new law or if it is existing state code ?

According to the link above, the bill was passed by the MA legislature in 2005.

Was Romney the governor then? Based on an earlier post that the Romney campaign didn't want to discuss it, I'm guessing that 1) he was in office at the time and that 2) he signed it into law. Had he vetoed the bill, I'm sure that they would be more than happy to talk about it, even if his veto had been overridden.

18 posted on 01/26/2008 9:11:17 PM PST by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

Answer your own question.
DUH/


19 posted on 01/26/2008 9:13:00 PM PST by acapesket (never had a vote count in all my years here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

I refer the learned gentleman to the answer I gave some moments ago.


20 posted on 01/26/2008 9:14:14 PM PST by claudiustg (You know it. I know it. I'm optiMITTstic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

Just answer the damned question, did you, or didn’t you?

no i didn’t.


21 posted on 01/26/2008 9:16:09 PM PST by libbylu (Why vote for a democrat with an R next to his name? I'm a MITTen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER
Your not doing any research on this, are you? If you had gone to the State of Massachusetts web site and taken a look at Section 10, Chapter 269, subsection B, you would have seen that this law never took effect. Why? Do not know yet. Maybe it was vetoed by the Governor???

For your information:

http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/269-10.htm

Subsection b states:

(b) Whoever, except as provided by law, carries on his person, or carries on his person or under his control in a vehicle, any stiletto, dagger or a device or case which enables a knife with a locking blade to be drawn at a locked position, any ballistic knife, or any knife with a detachable blade capable of being propelled by any mechanism, dirk knife, any knife having a double-edged blade, or a switch knife, or any knife having an automatic spring release device by which the blade is released from the handle, having a blade of over one and one-half inches, or a slung shot, blowgun, blackjack, metallic knuckles or knuckles of any substance which could be put to the same use with the same or similar effect as metallic knuckles, nunchaku, zoobow, also known as klackers or kung fu sticks, or any similar weapon consisting of two sticks of wood, plastic or metal connected at one end by a length of rope, chain, wire or leather, a shuriken or any similar pointed starlike object intended to injure a person when thrown, or any armband, made with leather which has metallic spikes, points or studs or any similar device made from any other substance or a cestus or similar material weighted with metal or other substance and worn on the hand, or a manrikigusari or similar length of chain having weighted ends; or whoever, when arrested upon a warrant for an alleged crime, or when arrested while committing a breach or disturbance of the public peace, is armed with or has on his person, or has on his person or under his control in a vehicle, a billy or other dangerous weapon other than those herein mentioned and those mentioned in paragraph (a), shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two and one-half years nor more than five years in the state prison, or for not less than six months nor more than two and one-half years in a jail or house of correction, except that, if the court finds that the defendant has not been previously convicted of a felony, he may be punished by a fine of not more than fifty dollars or by imprisonment for not more than two and one-half years in a jail or house of correction.

22 posted on 01/26/2008 9:16:12 PM PST by technomage (Radical Islam gives me the urge to go to the bathroom and drop a big mohammed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

Romney joined NRA in August

Was advocate of gun control

Presidential candidate Mitt Romney was a former advocate of gun control. Presidential candidate Mitt Romney was a former advocate of gun control.

By David Abel, Globe Staff | February 19, 2007

Mitt Romney, who has touted his support of gun owners since launching his presidential campaign, yesterday acknowledged he did not become a member of the National Rifle Association until last August, campaign officials said.

A former advocate of gun control, Romney during his 1994 run for the US Senate backed measures the gun-rights group opposed, such as a five-day waiting period on gun sales and a ban on certain assault weapons.

The former Massachusetts governor has been criticized for changing his positions to appeal to social conservatives voting in Republican primaries. In a nationally broadcast interview yesterday, he also had to explain his switch to a conservative stance on abortion and why he once voted for Democrats in Massachusetts primaries.

Spokesman Kevin Madden said Romney did not join the NRA just to court gun owners, who are considered a force in Republican primary politics.

“He joined the NRA because, like millions of Americans, he supports the group’s advocacy of the Second Amendment and its commitment to education programs promoting the safe use of firearms by law-abiding gun owners,” Madden said.
More coverage of the 2008 presidential race

Asked why Romney joined only a few months before declaring his candidacy, Madden said: “I would argue not many Americans care when you join, but why you join, and I think I’ve made that clear.”

Speaking on ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos,” Romney said he signed up for a life long membership “within the last year.”

“I think they’re doing good things, and I believe in supporting the right to bear arms,” Romney said.

Not all gun advocates are convinced of Romney’s commitment to their cause.

“His past votes have been anti-gun and I feel like it may just be a campaign strategy that we’re not going to fall for,” said Gerald Stoudemire, president of Gun Owners of South Carolina, an NRA state association. “I’ve never seen a politician change their way of thinking 180 degrees, except when they were running for office.”

In the interview, Romney also explained why he was a registered independent in the early 1990s and voted for former senator Paul Tsongas in the 1992 Democratic presidential primary. He said it was a tactical maneuver, his effort to get the weakest Democratic nominee.

“In Massachusetts, if you register as an independent, you can vote on either the Republican or Democratic primary,” Romney said. “When there was no real contest in the Republican primary, I’d vote in the Democrat primary, vote for the person who I thought would be the weakest opponent for a Republican.”

But in a 1994 Globe story, Romney said he voted for Tsongas because he was from Massachusetts and “because he favored his ideas over those of Bill Clinton,” according to the story.Continued...

In yesterday’s interview on ABC, Romney added: “Let me tell you, in the general election I don’t recall ever once voting for anyone other than a Republican. So, yeah, as an independent I’ll go in and play in their primary. But I’m a Republican and have been through my life.”

Romney’s explanation that he voted for Tsongas because he would be a weaker opponent for George H.W. Bush struck Northeastern University political science professor William Mayer as odd. “It would have been a strange election to cross over,” he said, noting it’s rare for more than 4 percent of voters to “raid” an opposing party’s primary. “Everyone had conceded it to Tsongas.”

He added: “His explanation gets to his basic problem. He’s always trying to figure out what’s in his best political interest and is willing to cut and trim his behavior to what’s in his short-term interests.”

In the interview, in which Stephanopoulos questioned the governor’s “conversions of convenience,” Romney, a former supporter of abortion rights, refused to say which punishment he thought would be appropriate for women who have abortions. In recent months, Romney has campaigned strongly against abortion rights.

“Well, I’m not about punishment,” Romney said. “That’s not what I’m considering. I’m saying that, in my view, we should let the states make that decision, and I am in favor of life and in favor of choosing life.”

With his wife, Ann, on ABC, Romney also said his faith as a Mormon would not hinder his ability to govern.

“I’m not running for pastor-in-chief; I’m running for commander-in-chief,” Romney said.

Asked whether his Mormonism would alienate evangelical voters, Romney said: “I think we are, if you will, one family of humanity.”

When asked how Muslims might view Mormon doctrine, which holds that Jesus will return to the United States and reign for 1,000 years, Romney said “that doesn’t happen to be a doctrine of my church.”

“Our belief is just as it says in the Bible, that the messiah will come to Jerusalem, stand on the Mount of Olives, and that the Mount of Olives will be the place for the great gathering and so forth,” he said.

Michael Purdy, a spokesman for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, said Mormons believe Jesus will return to both the “old Jerusalem” and “new Jerusalem,” which Mormons believe is somewhere in the state of Missouri.

“When Christ appears, we believe there will be people of many faiths on the Earth, and no one will be compelled to change their faith,” Purdy said.

Globe correspondent Michael Naughton contributed to this report. David Abel can be reached at dabel@globe.com.
© Copyright 2007 Globe Newspaper Company.
1


23 posted on 01/26/2008 9:17:33 PM PST by Rome2000 (Peace is not an option)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BinaryBoy

No hoax... I lived there when this damn law was passed.

My buddy and I used to backpack in Western MA, around heavily wooded “mountainous” areas. We each carried, among our other pieces of “equipment,” a survival machete... a weapon of last resort, if, after the sun went down, you were short on ammo and a pack of coyotes surrounded your sorry ass.

This is typical Massachusetts legislation. It’s a freaking’ no-holds-barred police state... no matter where you go. That is why I left the accursed hell hole. When the invasion comes, I truly hope that miserable piece of real estate gets nuked.

I don’t think Romney was governor when this “law” passed. Someone correct me if I am wrong.


24 posted on 01/26/2008 9:20:39 PM PST by RTO (What will you do without freedom?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RTO

25 posted on 01/26/2008 9:22:27 PM PST by Rome2000 (Peace is not an option)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: RTO
No hoax... I lived there when this damn law was passed.

This 'law' is not listed in the General Laws Of Massachusetts web site:

http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/

Do a search.

26 posted on 01/26/2008 9:23:40 PM PST by technomage (Radical Islam gives me the urge to go to the bathroom and drop a big mohammed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: technomage
"Maybe it was vetoed by the Governor"?

Was it? Hell, I do all I can to stay away from Massachusetts politics, I get sick to my stomach and throw up really easy! If it was "vetoed by the governor", why don't you tell us about it!

27 posted on 01/26/2008 9:24:45 PM PST by SWAMPSNIPER (THE SECOND AMENDMENT, A MATTER OF FACT, NOT A MATTER OF OPINION)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: technomage

“This ‘law’ is not listed in the General Laws Of Massachusetts web site:...”

Somebody had better tell the jack-booted thugs on the Westfield Storm Troo...er ah, I mean “Police force” that piece of info, ‘cause they WERE ENFORCING THIS “BAN”... as was Connecticut. Trust me... I found out the “hard” way.


28 posted on 01/26/2008 9:34:28 PM PST by RTO (What will you do without freedom?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER
If it was "vetoed by the governor", why don't you tell us about it!

You really need to relax a bit. If you can, go back and re-read my post. I NEVER stated as FACT that it was vetoed by the governor. That is why I posted that as a QUESTION. And right before that I ASKED WHY it was not passed and answered that with I DO NOT KNOW.

All I am telling you, and I will type SLOWLY so you can UNDERSTAND me is: THIS LAW IS NOT LISTED ON THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS WEB SITE. Why? I DO NOT KNOW YET.

Man, you are sure letting your HATRED of Romney blind you to facts.

29 posted on 01/26/2008 9:34:40 PM PST by technomage (Radical Islam gives me the urge to go to the bathroom and drop a big mohammed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: technomage
Since the bill was passed in 2005 and is not in the current law, I can only think of three possibilities:

1) It was vetoed by the governor and the veto was not overridden by the legislature.

or

2) It was withdrawn by the legislature.

or

3) It was voided by some court action.

30 posted on 01/26/2008 9:42:20 PM PST by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Bob

I would agree with you. Trouble is, up to this point, I cannot verify it one or the other.


31 posted on 01/26/2008 9:44:30 PM PST by technomage (Radical Islam gives me the urge to go to the bathroom and drop a big mohammed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: technomage
I would agree with you. Trouble is, up to this point, I cannot verify it one or the other.

No luck on my part either.

I did think of a fourth possibility. I don't know that MA law provides for a 'pocket veto' like the federal system does. If a bill is passed at the end of a congressional session, the president's refusal to sign the bill effectively vetoes it without him actually doing so. As I say, though, I don't know if MA law has this provision.

32 posted on 01/26/2008 9:52:19 PM PST by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: technomage

“...Man, you are sure letting your HATRED of Romney blind you to facts”

Let me ask you this: Do you live in Massachusetts? Have you ever lived there? Unless you experience this cozy Commie-wealth, then you will never “Get it.”

Who is governor does not matter squat. Cause the state legislature is packed with perverts, philanderers, parasites, perfidious poltroons, and prevaricators. The court system is a frigging wasteland of red tape and Marxist malfeasance. And the political machinery from Province town to Pittsfield is riddled with favoritism, nepotism, and corruption.

NO-ONE gets “elected” to the corner office... but the “chosen” disciples of the NYT/Boston Globe elite. Romney may talk conservative NOW... but he sure did not get into the governor’s mansion by BEING conservative THEN. If you think otherwise, then you’re drinking RINO Kool-aid.

The Mass legislature and the SJC rule the roost. Period. The damn fascists blatantly break the State Constitution, and get away with it... long enough to shove whatever sh*t they please down the throats of the unfortunate saps whom “live” there... if you call servitude under a socialist reprobate dictatorship “living”.

You want to know how things work in the Gay State? Read or listen to Howie Carr... That guy knows the sordid secrets of Fagachusetts more than any other individual on the planet. You might also check out www.massnews.com The ONLY conservative paper in the Commonwealth.


33 posted on 01/26/2008 10:00:44 PM PST by RTO (What will you do without freedom?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Bob
As I say, though, I don't know if MA law has this provision.

I am in the same boat as you. Maybe someone in MA will chime in sometime to let us know exactly what happened here.

The only other thing I have been able to locate was some law maker named Donato evidently was involved with this bill. But, finding info on why the amendment never saw the light of day?? No luck so far.

34 posted on 01/26/2008 10:05:49 PM PST by technomage (Radical Islam gives me the urge to go to the bathroom and drop a big mohammed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: RTO
Thank you for the rant, but it has absolutely nothing to do with what we were discussing: The bill you posted is not a law, at least according to the State of Massachusetts web site. The secondary point was: Why did the bill evidently fail?

Maybe you should start a thread where people who hate Massachusetts can post?

35 posted on 01/26/2008 10:11:37 PM PST by technomage (Radical Islam gives me the urge to go to the bathroom and drop a big mohammed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: technomage
Whoops, I see that I said you made the original post. You did not. Sorry about that part.

By the way, who the governor was at the time was the entire reason for the post in the first place.

36 posted on 01/26/2008 10:14:03 PM PST by technomage (Radical Islam gives me the urge to go to the bathroom and drop a big mohammed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: technomage

“The secondary point was: Why did the bill evidently fail?”

This might give a clue...

http://www.mass.gov/legis/bills/senate/185/st01/st01384.htm


37 posted on 01/26/2008 10:27:31 PM PST by RTO (What will you do without freedom?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

Comment #38 Removed by Moderator

To: JMack

“Weapon of Unusual Lethality?”

Especially to vegetation...

That’s a confusing phrase when we’re discussing MA politicians.


39 posted on 01/26/2008 11:06:08 PM PST by Dominnae (When asked by a Persian emissary for his weapons, King Leonidas said "Come and take them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: kbennkc
Can some one tell us if this is a bill proposed for a new law or if it is existing state code ?

About twenty years ago some nut in a traffic altercation on the route 128, the beltway around Boston, went nuts and began whacking others on the roadside with a machete. Given that no one uses machetes for ordinary work in Massachusetts (we are a service economy - manufacturing and farming are gone), I suspect the Great and General Court (the legislature) instituted a new law on possession of machetes. This was long, long before anyone knew of Mitt Romney. In Massachusetts we have rules on everything. Mitt did not add to them. He worked in the executive branch of the government, not the legislative. The Rudy, Paul, and McCain followers are grasping.

40 posted on 01/26/2008 11:08:22 PM PST by LoneRangerMassachusetts (<I>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: LoneRangerMassachusetts

According to the link in post #8, this change was passed by the MA legislature in 2005. For some unknown reason, the change wasn’t incorporated into the statutes.


41 posted on 01/27/2008 12:48:03 AM PST by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Bob

I don’t see where the link in #8 says that the bill was passed and signed into law. Every bill submitted in any session probably starts with the phrase “be it enacted”.

Here in Virginia the legislative website shows all the bills that are proposed, even if they never make it out of committee. However they do have links that will show the entire legislative process for each bill.


42 posted on 01/27/2008 1:47:25 AM PST by deks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

Dear Lord God, please look down on our country and send us some officials who have the preservation of it as their priority. Our help comes from You Lord. We are failing and flailing and we can’t stop the “bleeding”. We have lost our way. We need You so much. America will cease to exist if we are left to manage her ourselves. Evil has swept into every corner of our lives. Please send us Your loving mercy. We love America, or at least, what she once was. You brought her into being. She is Your’s Lord and there are still those of us who know she can not survive without Your loving hand on her. Absurdity has taken the place of prayerful thought. Change hearts to caring for each other. Take the “do unto others before they do unto you” attitudes and send them to hell. We need a change of heart and we need it yesterday. I’m still in love with America and I know others who are so I know there are more like us out there. We don’t want it to go under. Hear our prayer O Lord. Amen


43 posted on 01/27/2008 1:48:46 AM PST by Picklezz (Congressman HUNTER, many of us were counting on you being our President and saving America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: deks
I don’t see where the link in #8 says that the bill was passed and signed into law. Every bill submitted in any session probably starts with the phrase “be it enacted”.

You could be right. Time to dig in a different direction. Thanks.

44 posted on 01/27/2008 1:50:06 AM PST by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

The founding fathers really knew what they were doing when writing the constitution’ If the American people would wake up, we might even be able to hold onto our freedoms.


45 posted on 01/27/2008 1:56:23 AM PST by exnavy ( note to islamists,God means love, not hate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

Here’s the summary of a nutty bill just introduced in Virginia(SB379)...and defeated in committee 15-0.

Concealed weapons; box cutters; penalty. Adds box cutters to the list of weapons that are prohibited from being carried concealed and allows the court to exclude certain weapons from being prohibited if such item was carried for a legitimate occupational, recreational, or personal reason.


46 posted on 01/27/2008 2:22:06 AM PST by deks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BinaryBoy
“I hope this is a hoax.”

No, it’s not. It’s an attempt to crack down on the vile and vicious hispanic gang MS-13, as the machete is its weapon of choice.

47 posted on 01/27/2008 4:35:28 AM PST by ought-six
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bob
The attached link should give you more background on the machete in Massachusetts

machete, culture, gangs, Massachusetts

48 posted on 01/27/2008 6:50:58 AM PST by LoneRangerMassachusetts (<I>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER
I don’t know the outcome of this bill, the Romney camp doesn’t want to discuss it!

Looks like it never passed. Besides it was in 2005, and introduced by Senator Charles E. Shannon, DemonRat, so probably didn't have a thing to with then governor Romney. It never got to his desk.

49 posted on 01/27/2008 12:05:02 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER
For purposes of this section, “machete” means “a heavy knife at least 18 inches in length and having a blade at least 1.5 inches wide at its broadest measurement.

Well...since they are so keen on clearly defining what is, and is not, a machete....perhaps they could spend a few minutes to clearly define what the words "keep and bear arms" and "shall not be infringed" mean.
It really shouldn't take more than a few minutes. Really.

Any individual who requires a machete for the purposes of cutting vegetation shall register the machete with the local police department on an annual basis and, upon payment of an appropriate annual registration fee as determined by the local granting authority, shall be issued a permit authorizing him to possess the machete solely for the purposes of cutting vegetation.

50 posted on 01/27/2008 12:11:05 PM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts (Bureaucracy is a parasite that preys on Free Thought and suffocates Free Spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-62 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson