Comm. v. McCollum

[pdm]

Didn't see a thread on this yet. Link from volokh.com (via Instapundit).

Several recent court decisions have concluded that the Second Amendment doesn’t protect gun possession in public places, but only in the home. I think that’s not correct, for reasons I discuss in PDF pp. 74–82 of this article; but today’s Commonwealth v. McCollum (Mass. App. Ct.) decision (you can find it for free here), takes this even further, holding that the Second Amendment doesn’t apply even to possession of a gun at a friend’s — or, presumably, family member’s — home, apparently regardless of whether the resident has given permission...

Interesting read, and I didn't recall a thread on this case prior.

 

[Friday]

The MA courts seem to be doing a good job of painting themselves as targets for SCOTUS....the next few years should be interesting...

 

[terraformer]

Somewhere in that mess are a few posts by me.

This absurdity is because there is a loophole in MA law that allows unlicensed possession of a firearm in ones home. It is something that the legislature has been trying to close but they can’t because it would make criminals out of people who legally purchased their guns under a state law allowing a premises permit to purchase (basically a letter from the local PD). The permit is not required to be kept.

From bad cases comes bad law.

http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Chapter269/Section10
ch 269 §10(a)

This decision is nothing more than legislating from the bench to close a loophole. It is obviously absurd regardless.

 

[pdm]

Were any PTPs even given out?

 

[terraformer]

Were any PTPs even given out?

No one knows. There is (the PTP law is still valid IIRC) no record keeping requirement and so there is no idea who or how many are effected.

 

[Friday]

Affected

 

[terraformer]

Affected

Thanks scrivener...

 

[Friday]

all part of the service....