No offense taken Sal1950 I know you're speaking the truth
. There are a handful of Massachusetts legislators from both parties who understand and really get it about MA firearms laws. They know because they're firearm owners themselves, and they spend a lot of time talking with their firearm-owning constituencies, shooting with them, and really looking at what the effect of the laws here have been. But they're a minority in the Legislature here, at least right now.
It's a problem of education and dialogue, and I've told all my State Representatives in person that I'm interested in fostering and continuing that dialogue so that we can all arrive at better outcomes that are defensible, and I regularly cross partisan lines to support them on that issue.
But it's something you have to be very conscious of and active about in a state like this Commonwealth, and you need to convince people with real arguments and civil persuasion rather than bluster and anger. To put it a little luridly, you can't come off as being pro-gun here and be perceived as "foaming at the mouth" even though the laws as they currently exist are misguided. You have to *convince* people, not just whap them upside the head and tell them to "wake up." The "wake up" message looks funny on TV and in the movies, but it doesn't get you very far with people who actually have their political careers at stake. Instead, you have to give them reasons to defend their positions in front of the voters, and help to articulate them sensibly, as messages they can defend, and as something someone could discuss over lunch or at a fundraiser. Boring, I know. But that's how it *is*. That is where politicians interact with their supporters, and that's how the political process works, and it doesn't really matter if the existing laws aren't what you'd prefer. You go to them and make your case, and it had better be something they can use and defend, not something their opponent can paint as "freaky."
If someone on the House Ways and Means Committee in the Massachusetts Legislature needs to defend their vote in your favor, you need to have the answer well thought through, because the first thing they're going to ask you -- particularly when their vote opposes the express wishes of the Governor of Massachusetts -- is: "How do I defend this vote?" (Or nonvote, as the case may be).
Like it or not, think it's sensible or not, agree with it or not, that's a large part of how politics really works. It's not just money, although a lot of cynics think it's all money, it really isn't: there really is a hard core of defensibility that you have to establish in order to convince legislators in an adverse state like MA to vote in your favor. We need the money *and* the brains, so to speak. Too often we have one without the other.
The good thing is that that means that people without large sums to give really do have a voice. At least that is what I've found. People would be surprised, I think, at what a persistent and thoughtful letter-writing campaign can do, but you have to walk the walk.
I was active in opposing H.4102 here in Massachusetts and I'm glad I was, because it was a terrible law. In the end, the legislators agreed with me, even though it went right to the wire, but enough of them understood that it was a bad law not to allow it to reach the floor, even as a horse-trade.
- and I will report back whatever I learn.
