Comm2A files against the AG on LCIs, Draper v Coakley

[OfficerObie59]

Because MA state judges, up to and including the Supreme Judicial Court, have seen fit to torture "logic" to the point of complete gibberish in order to uphold gun laws. Federal court judges, even in our district, are far more likely to respect SCOTUS decisions (specifically Heller and MacDonald).

To put it another way, the playing field in state court is not even remotely level.

No more among them willing to resort to tortured legal reasoning than Justice Gants who was just today elevated to Chief Justice...

And this coming from me, a guy who thinks terms like "judicial activism" and "legislating from the bench" are over used FAR too frequently.

 

[Ink]

donated.
go get em guys!

 

[JayMcB]

donation sent.....

 

[KMM696]

DEALERS thereby risk an
enforcement action by the defendant ATTORNEY GENERAL for disobeying her vacuous decree
based on a regulation that is constitutionally void for vagueness.

...Costs of suit, including attorney fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983,...

I could just sit here and read these two lines over and over all morning.

Outstanding start to the case, Comm2A. Seeing this stuff coming out makes the monthly donation worth every penny.

 

[falcon123]

Another donation incoming.

BTW, it must have been great to call Martha "vacuous" in a legal document.

That's because you can't use "douchebag" in a legal document.

 

[JoseyWales]

This makes me so happy. I hope Marsha gets what's coming to her.

 

[cekim]

No more among them willing to resort to tortured legal reasoning than Justice Gants who was just today elevated to Chief Justice...

And this coming from me, a guy who thinks terms like "judicial activism" and "legislating from the bench" are over used FAR too frequently.

Takes one to know one?

 

[jar]

I am happy to see this- but why did Comm2A start in a Federal (National) Court?

The Mass constitution has the RKBA.

Because the state courts say the Mass state RKBA is a dead letter.

"A law forbidding the keeping by individuals of arms that were used in the militia service might then have interfered with the effectiveness of the militia and thus offended the art. 17 right. But that situation no longer exists; our militia, of which the backbone is the National Guard, is now equipped and supported by public funds. See, e.g., G. L. c. 33, Section 101 (payment by Commonwealth for clothing and equipment of units of its military forces). Moreover, the statute at bar is part of a large regulatory scheme to promote the public safety, [Note 3] and there is nothing to suggest that, even in early times, due regulation of possession or carrying of firearms, short of some sweeping prohibition, would have been thought to be an improper curtailment of individual liberty or to undercut the militia system." Commonwealth v. Davis, 369 Mass. 886 (1976)

Does that sound like we'd have any chance in state court?

Can we start a gofundme campaign? I would get some corporate sponsors as it costs them money to deal with this BS.

Why pay 8% in fees when comm2a.org/donate is already there?

Just thinking about this. The state of Massachusetts is not the defendant here. The defendant is Martha Coakley. Why would state funds be used to defend her? If the complaint was for insider trading, would our tax money be used to defend her? WTF!

From the first page of the complaint:
MARTHA COAKLEY,
in her official capacity as
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
MASSACHUSETTS
(emphasis added)

Due to the 11th Amendment, you can't sue a state. Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908) found that the 14th amendment due process clause allowed citizens to sue a state actor for an injunction against an unconstitutional state law. IANAL and this isn't legal advice, just what this layman put together with google and wikipedia.

There is a very good reason why we picked to litigate this issue in this way first. I realize there is some faith we ask of folks to not ask us to reveal the sausage making process too much, but when 80% of the judiciary we are bringing cases in front of are probably predisposed to rule against us, we need to box the state in to such a box that the only way out is through a win for us. Hightower (and later Reyes, Chardin and McGowan) was eye opening to us in just how far the judiciary would carry the water of our adversaries.

I designed Wesson to win, but even I didn't think the state would wave the white flag as readily as they did with the judge we pulled in that case. And I actually think that Stearns is one of the more stand up judges we will ever see. While he is likely not an ideological ally, so our case better be tight --Real tight-- but if it is, we will get a fair hearing in front of him. And we prevailed. As I believe we will here too.

When judges are ideologically predisposed to rule against you, a good argument isn't enough. You have to back them in to such a corner that all the ideological gymnastics in the world won't allow them to rule against you. That was clearly accomplished in Wesson, and looks likely to be accomplished here.

 

[jefftk]

I could just sit here and read these two lines over and over all morning.

Outstanding start to the case, Comm2A. Seeing this stuff coming out makes the monthly donation worth every penny.

This was one of my favorites

The Defendant Attorney General's deflection of questions regarding regulatory compliance to a private party is an unlawful abdication of her governmental authority and inherent state police power vested solely in her public office as the Attorney General of Massachusetts.

 

[daveshrews]

Nice! Comm2A just earned themselves another donation from me. This is outstanding.

 

[Noreaster]

Due to the 11th Amendment, you can't sue a state. Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908) found that the 14th amendment due process clause allowed citizens to sue a state actor for an injunction against an unconstitutional state law. IANAL and this isn't legal advice, just what this layman put together with google and wikipedia.

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[P-14]

Donated even more to Comm2A. You guys ROCK! Kick the AG's butt.

 

[ggboy]

DOnation sent out today.
GO 2A!!
ggboy

 

[FrugalFannie]

BTW, this is the first in a multi step process. This isn't the end, this is just the beginning.

from what I read this case specifically is about the new gen Glocks. I might venture a guess as to the next step if Comm2A prevails in this case.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Why pay 8% in fees when comm2a.org/donate is already there?

I set up my monthly donation directly thru my bank. That way there are ZERO fees that Comm2A has to pay to receive the money . . . and since I despise PayPal (part of eBay and anti-2A), I feel all the better about it.

 

[exo]

I am currently a bronze sponsor, how do I upgrade?

 

[pdm]

That said, I'm wondering why Comm2A didn't go after the AG regs in a broader way, like how the enforcement of them is so capricious.

How do you eat an elephant?

One bite at a time.

 

[92G]

How do you eat an elephant?

One bite at a time.

exactly.
if there is any room for interpretation, many judges will bend the logic in any way to continue enforcing our draconian laws.
IMO Comm2A is being very wise by selectively pursuing specific issues that can be strongly argued, as opposed to pursuing everything and wasting time+$$.

 

[Night_solstice]

Donated, working on monthly auto.

 

[marinesniper81]

I really like how this was put together. First with the "Connally v. General Constr. Co., 269 U.S. 385, 391, 46 S.Ct. 126, 70 L.Ed. 322 (1926) (“[A] statute which either forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application, violates the first essential of due process of law” followed up by 14. “Unless considerations of stare decisis counsel otherwise, a provision of the Bill of Rights that protects a right that is fundamental from an American perspective applies equally to the Federal Government and the States,” and therefore “the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment right recognized in Heller.” McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025, 3046 (2010).

This will be interesting to watch!

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

Thank you for all the kind response and show of support. (Except for post #4. Usually it's only the state that's so quick to dismiss Comm2A).

This action has been years in the making and we're very pleased with how we were able to zero in on one of the regulation's biggest weaknesses.

Just switched from randomly donating to a Gold Member, keep up the great work Comm2A!

(still gonna go buy a Gen 4 G21 at a retard price cuz I'm impatient )

Thank you and everyone else who became sustaining Comm2A supporters. We would have drifted into irrelevance years ago if we'd had to go hat-in-hand to gun owners every time we wanted start a new project. Recurring (tax-deductible - hint-hint) donations have enabled us to start building a war chest without which we'd not be able to take a bite as big as this. This renewed level of support is critically important as we have a couple other big bites simmering on the back burner. And we're hungry!

Yup. Figured more shops would be listed.
There one shop that told me flat out he's scared to join this fight. I have not stepped foot in that store since.

This was a major hurdle to get over. FFL after FFL told me our our attorney flat out that they didn't want to attract attention including some major new players who would have been stellar plaintiffs. To be fair, there are at least two other shops out there who were willing participants but we decided for tactical reasons not to use (at least not yet). If we're successful EVERY shop in Massachusetts will benefit financially from what we've done. When that happens feel free to solicit a Comm2A donation from your favorite FFL.

I'm reading the complaint right now. Many hours of work went into this. Amazing.

^You have no idea. Add heartburn, anguish, nail biting, etc.

Another bonus is this lawsuit is coming as her Gubernatorial run is in it's infancy.

I'd love to think our suit might play a role in the races for both Governor and Attorney General. But I'm a little more grounded than that. It's a non-issue.

In all seriousness, I would have loved to have seen a dormant commerce clause challenge here, but you would have to have some more evidence that this was an anti-competitive measure and not just misguided public safety policy.

That and you'd likely need a out-of-state gun manufacturer to join the suit in order to have standing. Me thinks that would cloud the suit too much and force the court to take their eye off the ball.

Great job by Alex on compliant, btw.

Can you say legal wonk? If you wanted to get into a commerce clause case you might thinking about a Massachusetts business with a license to sell ammunition who also wants to ship ammo to customers in other states. MA prevents anyone with an ammo license to engage in retail interstate ammunition commerce.

from what I read this case specifically is about the new gen Glocks. I might venture a guess as to the next step if Comm2A prevails in this case.

You can guess, but you'll have to be satisfied with that for the time being.

How do you eat an elephant?

One bite at a time.

^that's my line.

exactly.
if there is any room for interpretation, many judges will bend the logic in any way to continue enforcing our draconian laws.
IMO Comm2A is being very wise by selectively pursuing specific issues that can be strongly argued, as opposed to pursuing everything and wasting time+$$.

You don't do judges or your case any favors by dumpinga big steaming pile of confusion on the court. Judges like clear, logical cases. That's why 2A cases are so hard for most of them - there's virtually nothing for them to use as guideposts. Here the issue is simple. An agency can regulate all they want as authorized by law, but the regulations, like the law, cannot be so vague and subject to interpretation that people can't understand them.

 

[terraformer]

Can you say legal wonk? If you wanted to get into a commerce clause case you might thinking about a Massachusetts business with a license to sell ammunition who also wants to ship ammo to customers in other states. MA prevents anyone with an ammo license to engage in retail interstate ammunition commerce.

Ammo isn't a commerce clause issue either. I won't get into the details, but that is going to turn on another issue.

 

[warwickben]

Ammo isn't a commerce clause issue either. I won't get into the details, but that is going to turn on another issue.

I don't know what you just said but sounds like you have a plan for dealers selling out of state and out side dealers selling to is minions.

Keep up the good fight .

 

[terraformer]

I don't know what you just said but sounds like you have a plan for dealers selling out of state and out dude selling to is minions.

Keep up the good fight .

Yes. We almost moved on this early on but had to pull back. We will get there.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Comm2A is doing an awesome job for all of us. Keep up the good work . . . and everyone keep up the donations!

 

[hv55maxx]

thanks guys, hoping for the best, will be starting the monthly donation (and simultaneously pissing off my pregnant wife, ut oh) but its for the greater good

ps i love the fact that the AG has this papercut under the fingernail while running for higher office

 

[jefftk]

Was just poking around the comm2a site, thought this was kind of amusing:
"Donations made to Comm2A are fully tax deductable to the extent permitted by law. We are also full registered with the Public Charities division of the Massachusetts Attorney General."

 

[Bison]

Donation sent. I like this approach of picking clearly defined problems to attack.

Here is one I want to attack and really need to attack. I like to take my children shooting. But, I have to buy two or more guns or lowers because I cannot adjust the stock legally! MA is making me render my gun functionally inoperative in a substantive manner. To me this is the same as a poll tax and severely infringes on my and my family's civil rights.

I did not get a chance to read the lawsuit yet, but I hope it includes references to our natural God given rights which supersede anything this state calls a law or regulation. To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, the government exists to ensure our natural rights not to take them from us. In his day, it was a widely held belief that the first law of nature is the right to self defense. I believe strongly in our natural rights.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

Boston Herald

 

[goodzilla]

Boston Herald

Nice press, horribly written. Story fails to mention these are very widely held and safely used pistols across the country, and that the Glocks HAVE loaded chamber indicator but still deemed "unfair or deceptive".