I sent this letter out today. It will be interesting to see what response I get:
Mr. Wayne LaPierre
National Rifle Association of America
11250 Waples Mill Road
Fairfax, VA 22030
Attention NRA Staff: I realize that a high profile such as Mr. LaPierre probably does not read all of his email personally, however, I would request that you ask him to take a brief look at this letter himself.
Dear Mr. La Pierre:
Congratulations on your successful legal action regarding the gun confiscations in New Orleans.
I wish to bring your attention to another matter in which NRA legal action can benefit both NRA members and gun owners in general. Although the specific situation I am reporting is currently in Massachusetts, the practice, if allowed to stand, can have national repercussions. New approaches to “backdoor gun control” must be nipped in the bud before they can spread to other jurisdictions.
Massachusetts Attorney General Tom Reilly has declared that a mail order sale of ammunition or reloading components takes place in Massachusetts, even if the vendor is located out of state and shipping via common carrier. The AG uses this reasoning to assert that any firm processing such a mail order from a Massachusetts resident may be prosecuted for violating MA law – for an action that takes place completely out of state.
The Massachusetts AG’s assertion is inconsistent with both the uniform commercial code and the concept of FOB. This questionable position is being used to blackmail mail order firms into making MA a “no-sale” state for virtually all mail order ammo and reloading component suppliers
The Massachusetts AG runs regular sting operations in which an operative orders ammunition as his direction. Once the ammunition arrives, the AG contacts the vendor and offers a choice: Pay a $5000 settlement and agree to a ban all sales to Massachusetts residents, or prepare for trail in a Massachusetts court for “selling ammunition without a Massachusetts license to sell ammunition.”
Since Massachusetts is a relatively small state. it is not cost effective for any one vendor to retain counsel to try a Massachusetts case, as well as a possible federal case. As you can easily imagine, even in clear cut cases, there is a very real possibility that a Massachusetts court would first determine the “desired outcome” and then engage in legal gymnastics to fit the decision and accompanying legal reasoning to this outcome. Welcome to America, Ted Kennedy style.
This is definitely an area where NRA backed legal action can help. I anticipate that the NRA would need to bring this case on behalf of several Massachusetts residents who have been denied such sales in order to have standing to file an action. I am very confident that many Massachusetts based NRA members would be honored to participate as plaintiffs if the NRA brings an action bring a halt to attempt to extend laws in one anti-gun state to vendors throughout the nation.
While the ability of gun owners in one small state to mail order ammunition may not seem like a big deal, the principle is. If one state is permitted to interfere with lawful interstate commerce in this manner by extending their laws across state lines, it can only be a matter of time before others follow.
I request that the NRA take up this cause, and initiate legal action to correct this situation. I would very much like to hear your thoughts of the merits of such an undertaking.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Yours in freedom
...