Agawam Revolver Club points to ponder

The Board of The Agawam Revolver Club has published a comprehensive list of talking points along with the petition language. There is a lot of good information contained below. Many thanks to The Agawam Revolver Club Board for their support of these issues that affect us all.


Longmeadow, MA Proposed New FA’s Laws Article 26 – would ban lawful carry of firearms in all town buildings and recreation areas. Fine $300. 1. Would the ban also apply to all town property? What then is defined as town property? Sidewalks, streets if driving a motor vehicle? If sidewalks and town roads are included then major issues are applicable and possible. 2. There is no exemption/exception for law enforcement whether on duty or off duty. Would it apply to federal, state and local law enforcement if in Longmeadow on business, whether official or personal? 3. How will this law be implemented? Will there will be new Longmeadow PD getting hired? Is the law merely a revenue builder? 4. Will the law result in profiling of all persons by LPD to determine if any person possesses a firearm in those designated restricted areas? Possibility of warrantless searches, stop & frisks resulting. 5. Where will the funding come from to implement this law? 6. Will there be a new Longmeadow law for anyone illegally possessing a firearm without a LTC, which is already a state criminal act? Will Longmeadow now impose a $300 fine on that person? 7. Law is an attempt to place additional burdens on law abiding citizens who have MA LTC’s. 8. Nothing planned to deal with criminals who gravitate to Longmeadow to possibly commit unlawful acts. 9. When seconds count, the police are minutes away. Law is establishing additional gun free zones. 10. Per most recent Supreme Court case – 577 U.S. – (2016) Supreme Court of the United States, Jaime Caetano v. Massachusetts, 3-21-2016 – “A State’s most basic responsibility is to keep its people safe. ….If the fundamental right of self-defense does not protect a law abiding citizen, then the safety of all Americans is left to the mercy of state authorities who may be more concerned about disarming the people than about keeping them safe”. (Applicable to Longmeadow proposed firearms laws.) Article 27 – Require gun registration upon application of LTC and upon renewal as well as certify safe storage of every firearm. Fine of $300.00 per firearm if fail to register and fine of $300.00 for fail to certify re: safe storage. 1. How will this law be implemented and funded? Who will be responsible to gather the information regarding all registered firearms? Law enforcement or a civilian Longmeadow employee? Will the keeper of the records be required to certify that the registration records for every Longmeadow resident will not be shared with anyone outside of law enforcement? If the records would be shared with someone other than law enforcement, will there be a criminal penalty for the keeper of the records? 2. Are the fines another means of getting revenue for Longmeadow? 3. This law is redundant. All law abiding citizens who possess either an LTC or an FID card already have their firearms registered/listed with the state of MA. Longmeadow PD has the capability and resources to retrieve that information when necessary. 4. All law abiding citizens who possess an LTC/FID are already subject to both criminal and administrative penalties for failure to store firearms in a safe manner. 5. Will Longmeadow residents expect to have Longmeadow PD officers do “knock and talks” at their residences to verify the law abiding citizen has the firearm previously registered? Or will LPD commence to swear out search warrants to conduct searches to do same? 6. Where will the funding come from for LPD to implement the above or any other options to enforce this law? 7. Will there be an additional Longmeadow criminal penalty created for those without either an LTC/FID found illegally in possession of firearms in Longmeadow or is this law an attempt to PLACE ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS ON LAW ABIDING CITIZENS? 8. Will Longmeadow residents who are employed in either federal, state or local enforcement agencies, other than Longmeadow PD, be required to register his/her official duty weapons if those duty weapons are brought home on a daily basis? Article 28 – $300.00 fine per day to possess an assault weapon or large capacity feeding device; to be effective 9-1-16; eliminates pre-ban exemption if legally possessed on 9-13-94. 1. This law would make a law abiding citizen of Longmeadow who is already legal both under federal and state law to possess the above described “alleged contraband” in violation and subject to the fines listed.. 2. This law is arbitrary and capricious. 3. What is the Longmeadow definition of an assault weapon? The law refers to the MA definition of an assault weapon. If one is already legal in MA with either of the two items, then why now would there be a need to make either illegal in Longmeadow? 4. Is this law another attempt to place undue burdens on law abiding Longmeadow gun owners? 5. There is no exemption/exception for law enforcement. What if either a federal, state or local law enforcement officer from another jurisdiction but resides in Longmeadow and brings his/her duty service patrol rifle and high capacity magazines home for safe storage or secures in their vehicle in a locked container, are they now in violation of this law? The same would apply for an employee of either a firearms manufacturer, Security Company or licensed firearms dealer. 6. Will Longmeadow PD be conducting roadside vehicle checkpoints for those nonresidents of Longmeadow who may be driving thru the town and may be in possession of lawful items per state law? 7. Will Longmeadow PD conduct “Knock and talks” at the homes of law abiding citizens to determine if the citizens still possess the alleged “assault weapons” per the MA State database/registry? How will LPD determine if any law abiding Longmeadow firearms owner is in possession of large capacity feeding devices in violation of this article? 8. Will there be a massive hiring of LPD officers to deal with this law? 9. How will this law be funded and implemented? 10. There is no provision for law abiding Longmeadow citizens, who are presently authorized and legal to possess per state law, to dispose of either article if this law would be approved. Should not the Town, if the law would be approved, provide funding to purchase the items at fair MA state market value because any firearm that one possesses prior to 9-13-94 has a HIGHER VALUE WITHIN STATE than other firearms? 11. All law abiding Longmeadow citizens who possess the items listed above consider them paramount for self-defense. Per most recent Supreme Court case decided on March 21, 2016 – 577U.S. – (2016) Jaime Caetano v. Massachusetts, “A State’s most basic responsibility is to keep its people safe. ….If the fundamental right of self-defense does not protect a law abiding citizen, then the safety of all Americans is left to the mercy of state authorities who may be more concerned about disarming the people than about keeping them safe.” Is the intent of this law to keep Longmeadow citizens safe or rather to disarm law abiding citizens? Articles 26 & 28 are placing the citizens of Longmeadow at greater risk post the San Bernardino attacks and other nationwide Active Shooter events. Has the Town considered additional funding for Longmeadow PD to receive additional Active Shooter training (more than 1 day a year and concentration inside a school) as well as additional gear to make them safe to include every officer equipped with a patrol rifle with 3 large capacity feeding devices; patrol rifle equipped with a light; Level IV ballistic plates(to withstand a rifle round of .223/5.56mm, 7.62X39 and ballistic helmet for each officer; halligan tool (forced entry tool) for every LPD vehicle to gain access to an ongoing and active shooting area, to include other than a school. The Chief of San Bernardino recently stated during the week of March 17, 2016, that his officers were ill-equipped to deal with those shooters as not all his officers were equipped with patrol rifles, L-IV body armor and ballistic helmets. Why are these issues not on the Town agenda? Instead articles are drawn up not to keep Longmeadow residents safe but rather disarm law abiding citizens. All Longmeadow LTC possessors must take a live-fire course in order to have the LTC with NO RESTRICTIONS. That mandate forces a law abiding Longmeadow citizen to expend an additional $300-400 out of pocket to comply with the LPD mandate and make him/her more skillful in gun handling, presentation and safety. Now Longmeadow is attempting to establish new laws that disarm their residents who are legal federally and state to possess firearms. Please note that these three proposed laws discriminate against people who are law abiding citizens because they choose to own firearms. Gun ownership is a right per the 2nd Amendment. The placing of additional burdens on licensed law abiding Longmeadow gun owners will do NOTHING to address crime perpetrated by persons who illegally possess firearms per federal, state and local laws. The author of these three articles should already know the above since he is a federal prosecutor and may have prosecuted individuals for violations of federal firearms laws. These proposed laws will have no effect on crime in Longmeadow and in fact will target Longmeadow residents by those who illegally acquire firearms and chose to carry out crimes and acts of violence in Longmeadow. Please do not accept any of the three articles. AGAWAM REVOLVER CLUB Board of Directors 3-26-2016

2 responses to “Agawam Revolver Club points to ponder

  1. Another “Point to Ponder” Requiring all gun owning town residents leaves them more vulnerable to break-ins and thefts due to knowledge of who and where residents have guns; a very attractive target for thieves

  2. grammatical error of ommission: Requiring all gun owning residents to “re-register and delineate each firearm’ leaves them…….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *