Comm2A, SAF, GOAL and FPC file against Baker admin on shop closures

Well now I see that the governor is reopening florists for mother's day, we should be all set. If getting flowers for a holiday invented by a gift card company is important enough to justify opening, I have to believe the pesky second amendment would be also.
You know he had to do something to help his 80% approval rating among the sheep
 
Federal judge suggests Mass. ban on gun sales may need to be lifted
By: Kris Olson May 5, 2020


If the tenor of the May 4 hearing before U.S. District Court Judge Douglas P. Woodlock is any indication, Massachusetts residents may soon once again be able to buy guns and ammunition — and perhaps practice with them at a shooting range as well.
For nearly three hours, Woodlock pressed Assistant Attorney General Julia E. Kobick for answers as to why Gov. Charlie Baker excluded sellers of guns and ammunition from the state’s list of essential businesses, at least in the list’s final form.
11118_c_Woodlock_NEW
Specifically, Woodlock wondered what could explain — aside from perhaps the liquor lobby’s political clout— the decision to keep liquor stores open while shuttering merchants selling products that implicate a constitutional right.
While Kobick offered a number of explanations, she could not provide what Woodlock seemed to be seeking: a formal justification of the infringement on firearms license holders’ Second Amendment rights by Baker or one of his deputies.
By the conclusion of the hearing, Woodlock asked the parties to attempt to craft an order that would allow sales to resume in some form.
He pointed to an April 10 advisory letter from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which seeks to answer “questions from industry members regarding the legality of firearm sales and deliveries exterior to the brick-and-mortar structure at which the firearms business is licensed.”
Among the answers suggested in the letter is that a gun merchant could conduct business “through a drive-up or walk-up window or doorway where the customer is on the licensee’s property on the exterior of the brick-and-mortar structure.”
The letter also speaks favorably about merchants doing business from a temporary table or booth located in a parking lot or other exterior location on the licensee’s property.
Kobick pointed out that such guidance is contrary to Massachusetts state law, G.L.c. 140, §123, which states that the “building in which the [firearms] business may be carried on under [the license] shall be strictly adhered to.”
Nonetheless, Woodlock asked whether the ATF letter might offer some guidance in terms of finding a way to accommodate the “competing concerns” of wanting to keep people safe during a public health emergency and safeguarding Second Amendment rights.
Woodlock said that one of the purposes of the hearing was to try to ensure the factual record was as complete as possible before he attempted to rule on the petitioners’ request for interlocutory relief.
To that end, in addition to inquiring about any declarations Baker may have made to explain the gun-sale ban, Woodlock drilled down on a number of factual matters.
Among these were the degree to which ammunition continues to be sold at Massachusetts Wal-Mart locations and whether private gun sales provide adequate access to firearms so as to minimize the infringement on Second Amendment rights.
A note that Kobick repeatedly tried to strike was that the governor’s orders halting gun sales are “temporary” or “time bound.”
At one point, that prompted Woodlock to quiz her about how many times the governor’s order had already been extended.
“‘Temporary’ and ‘sustained,’ I would say at this stage,” Woodlock said.
While the petitioners, represented at the hearing by New York City attorney David D. Jensen and Leominster attorney Andrew J. Couture, argued that Woodlock should review the governor’s order under a strict scrutiny standard, Kobick said that every other court that had reviewed a challenge of such a temporary measure had applied intermediate scrutiny, pointing to three recent California cases.
As for shooting ranges, the parties noted a dearth of precedent on point, aside from a scathing dissent by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. in the recent U.S. Supreme Court case New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. City of New York.
While the Supreme Court majority quickly dispatched with the case as moot after the city repealed a regulation that had precluded the transport of firearms out of the city, even to gun ranges, Alito disagreed and authored a 31-page dissent.
Among the language quoted in the hearing before Woodlock was a sentence Alito had cited from a 2011 California federal district court decision, , “The core right [to bear arms] wouldn’t mean much without the training and practice that make it effective.”
Kobick suggested that, in the short term, gun owners might be able to practice with their weapons in their backyards while receiving training through online courses.
But Jensen said that many gun owners in Massachusetts live too close to their neighbors to make backyard practice safe or legal, while Woodlock noted the difference between hands-on practice and online instruction.
Woodlock ordered the parties to file the further submissions he had requested, including a proposed form of order, no later than 5 p.m. on May 6.
He scheduled a further hearing in the matter for 10 a.m. the following morning, May 7.
 
She does this to everyone. Probably because she is married to a judge. Give a LGBT failed European basketball player power and this is what u get. AND SHES FROM NH!!!!!!!!!!!


I'd give a pile of dough to be a server for just one day at a restaurant she came into. Oh gosh I would enjoy the next hour to hour-and-a-half of my time "serving" them with the same alacrity she does.

"It's going to be a few more minutes. We have other things to do around here, you know. We aren't here to just do whatever you want us to do no matter who you are." LOL
 
I'd give a pile of dough to be a server for just one day at a restaurant she came into. Oh gosh I would enjoy the next hour to hour-and-a-half of my time "serving" them with the same alacrity she does.

"It's going to be a few more minutes. We have other things to do around here, you know. We aren't here to just do whatever you want us to do no matter who you are." LOL

Then some soyboy staffer would question in an urgent hushed tone "don't you know who she is"?
 
Kobick suggested that, in the short term, gun owners might be able to practice with their weapons in their backyards

Hey, does this mean a rollback of this?
XIX Chapter 131 Section 58: Shooting upon or across highway; hunting near dwelling Section 58. A person shall not discharge any firearm or release any arrow upon or across any state or hard surfaced highway, or within one hundred and fifty feet, of any such highway, or possess a loaded firearm or hunt by any means on the land of another within five hundred feet of any dwelling in use, except as authorized by the owner or occupant thereof.
 
Hey, does this mean a rollback of this?
XIX Chapter 131 Section 58: Shooting upon or across highway; hunting near dwelling Section 58. A person shall not discharge any firearm or release any arrow upon or across any state or hard surfaced highway, or within one hundred and fifty feet, of any such highway, or possess a loaded firearm or hunt by any means on the land of another within five hundred feet of any dwelling in use, except as authorized by the owner or occupant thereof.
Of course not. She doesn't care about the plebs. If you want to practice your rights, buy enough land to build a safe and legal range. It's hardly her fault you're poor.
 
It's called gun "control"
Hey, does this mean a rollback of this?
XIX Chapter 131 Section 58: Shooting upon or across highway; hunting near dwelling Section 58. A person shall not discharge any firearm or release any arrow upon or across any state or hard surfaced highway, or within one hundred and fifty feet, of any such highway, or possess a loaded firearm or hunt by any means on the land of another within five hundred feet of any dwelling in use, except as authorized by the owner or occupant thereof.
So she reverse all the towns laws that prohibit shooting in their town?
 
Last edited:
Look at Ch 269 Section 12. This is why anyone shooting on their own land withing the proscribed distances would be well advised to set up a shooting range, not just go shooting on their property.

Section 12E: Discharge of a firearm within 500 feet of a dwelling or other building in use; exceptions


Section 12E. Whoever discharges a firearm as defined in section one hundred and twenty-one of chapter one hundred and forty, a rifle or shotgun within five hundred feet of a dwelling or other building in use, except with the consent of the owner or legal occupant thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not less than fifty nor more than one hundred dollars or by imprisonment in a jail or house of correction for not more than three months, or both. The provisions of this section shall not apply to (a) the lawful defense of life and property; (b) any law enforcement officer acting in the discharge of his duties; (c) persons using underground or indoor target or test ranges with the consent of the owner or legal occupant thereof; (d) persons using outdoor skeet, trap, target or test ranges with the consent of the owner or legal occupant of the land on which the range is established; (e) persons using shooting galleries, licensed and defined under the provisions of section fifty-six A of chapter one hundred and forty; and (f) the discharge of blank cartridges for theatrical, athletic, ceremonial, firing squad, or other purposes in accordance with section thirty-nine of chapter one hundred and forty-eight.
-------------------
Ya but.... as I said earlier in this thread, members are owners of their clubs. Does that mean we are ok to go shoot on our own private ranges?????

They are not members of the public, workers, or customers and therefore not covered by the order, except under the doctrine of "it means what some bureaucrat wants it to mean, not what is says". The order also allows outside activity and mandates closure of all brick and mortar facilities (an un-necessary qualifying clause if the order covered everything, and words in statutes and orders are presumed to have meaning).
 
Last edited:
Politicizing Public Health has been a priority to end run around civil liberties protections and the normal legislative process in favor of regulatory fiat. Why do you think they've been talking up 'Gun violence' as a disease, virus, epidemic, etc making everything a 'public health' issue. This case is a chance for the state's ability restrict the 2A during a "public health" emergency to be curtailed and the Governor/AG/Speaker's puppet masters don't like it.
Bingo!
 
He pointed to an April 10 advisory letter from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which seeks to answer “questions from industry members regarding the legality of firearm sales and deliveries exterior to the brick-and-mortar structure at which the firearms business is licensed.”
Among the answers suggested in the letter is that a gun merchant could conduct business “through a drive-up or walk-up window or doorway where the customer is on the licensee’s property on the exterior of the brick-and-mortar structure.”
The letter also speaks favorably about merchants doing business from a temporary table or booth located in a parking lot or other exterior location on the licensee’s property.
Kobick pointed out that such guidance is contrary to Massachusetts state law, G.L.c. 140, §123, which states that the “building in which the [firearms] business may be carried on under [the license] shall be strictly adhered to.”
Nonetheless, Woodlock asked whether the ATF letter might offer some guidance in terms of finding a way to accommodate the “competing concerns” of wanting to keep people safe during a public health emergency and safeguarding Second Amendment rights.

So multiple people can peruse the meat case at a grocery store looking for the last package of chicken but I have to stand in a parking lot to exercise my 2A rights?
 
If anyone needed further proof of the Left's hatred of the 2A and us then I don't no whatever proof could convince them. This decree is so blatant even they can't seriously defend their position. The Judge must be shaking his head in his Chambers over the total disregard the Faker Admin/AG office has for it's citizens rights. and to actually think that they thought that they could win a court hearing. They are drunk with power.
 
So multiple people can peruse the meat case at a grocery store looking for the last package of chicken but I have to stand in a parking lot to exercise my 2A rights?
You can order flowers for your mom?

 
I may be disappointed down the line , but it sure sounds like the Judge isn't buying the fake halos and the "Gee we are just looking out for the health of the public" line of total horse shit.
That and I don't think he's gullible enough to think that May 18th date means squat.
 
If anyone needed further proof of the Left's hatred of the 2A and us then I don't no whatever proof could convince them. This decree is so blatant even they can't seriously defend their position. The Judge must be shaking his head in his Chambers over the total disregard the Faker Admin/AG office has for it's citizens rights. and to actually think that they thought that they could win a court hearing. They are drunk with power.
More likely shaking his head over "I can't believe the AGs counsel thinks I am that stupid"
 
Never forget:

“Gun shops and shooting ranges are NOT essential businesses during a public health emergency. We cannot undermine the safety of our police officers, first responders, and domestic violence victims.

The horrible irony to this statement about the protection of domestic violence victims is the number of children being put at risk of harm due to the lockdown. Something on the order of 80% of all reports of child physical abuse are made by outside third-parties who have regular contact with the children. Now, at-risk children are denied access to this protective layer of third-party contacts in their lives due to the quarantine. Not to mention, most physical abuse occurs in the home, meaning these at-risk children are locked away at home with their abusers.

But by all means, Maura, let's maintain our focus on protecting the masses from the massive crime wave perpetrated by licensed gun owners in the Commonwealth. Anyone who believes that people like Maura care about the well-being of anyone outside of their inner circle is a f*cking idiot. It is all for show in support of their insatiable lust for power and control over others.


I went to pick up a gallon of paint from Sherwin Williams at curbside. How the FFF is paint more essential than guns? ... or lawn care for that matter. If this some sort of real doom and EMT and cops and nurses are dying, but painting your walls with designer paint is ok, just like having people turn up a f***ing dust cloud cutting and blowing lawns ... that's not very doom scenario.

In my case with curb pick up, dude stepped out and put my paint on the table. Yes he had to take my credit card etc. I don't see how f***ing contact is avoided here, it was just plain retarded to see this dance.

Similar, in all the Walmarts, Targets ... if these were open for trully essential items, the aisles with toys/furniture/cosmetics could be easily blocked, but they are not, people go and shop there for shit that's absolutely non-essential by any f***ing definition, but certainly not something a small, dedicated business can no longer compete in.

I needed to make a stop at the Home Depot in Reading this afternoon to pick up a garden hose adapter. For all who were not aware, this is what essential looks like in the Commonwealth:

CF285036-ED6C-4A0D-9CF7-4E3C203BD428.jpeg

There was a pretty constant line of about 30 people waiting to get inside. Most of them buying flowers to plant in their yard. Don't think for a moment that the government hasn't done its homework on understanding the psychology of the masses. They fully understand what levers to pull to keep the sheep compliant while controlling them.
 
I wonder if the useful idiot realizes yet that his puppeteers with throw his ass under the bus at the the speed of sound if things don't go well.
 
The horrible irony to this statement about the protection of domestic violence victims is the number of children being put at risk of harm due to the lockdown. Something on the order of 80% of all reports of child physical abuse are made by outside third-parties who have regular contact with the children. Now, at-risk children are denied access to this protective layer of third-party contacts in their lives due to the quarantine. Not to mention, most physical abuse occurs in the home, meaning these at-risk children are locked away at home with their abusers.

But by all means, Maura, let's maintain our focus on protecting the masses from the massive crime wave perpetrated by licensed gun owners in the Commonwealth. Anyone who believes that people like Maura care about the well-being of anyone outside of their inner circle is a f*cking idiot. It is all for show in support of their insatiable lust for power and control over others.




I needed to make a stop at the Home Depot in Reading this afternoon to pick up a garden hose adapter. For all who were not aware, this is what essential looks like in the Commonwealth:

View attachment 354561

There was a pretty constant line of about 30 people waiting to get inside. Most of them buying flowers to plant in their yard. Don't think for a moment that the government hasn't done its homework on understanding the psychology of the masses. They fully understand what levers to pull to keep the sheep compliant while controlling them.
I had to run to one and people were arguing over plants in line. Im here as a contractor trying to finish a job and they are loaded with BS.
 
Yup! They are so used to having activist, complacent Judges in their pockets.
That cuck lawyer should he fired for gross incompetence. I hope this judge decimates the arrogant states attorney when he hands down the ruling.
 
Last edited:
How about "Gun shops shall be subject to the same restrictions as grocery stores". Imagine though Four Seasons having to have a one hour "seniors and vulnerable only" hour at the beginning of each shopping day.

I think if anything, gun stores should be subject to much less stringent restrictions than grocery stores... you have to be more careful with grocery stores because 100% of people need them, but with guns people get to make their own choice based on their personal risk tolerance. The market can sort it out based on different stores catering to different clientele.

What will be interesting is whether the judge will retain ongoing jurisdiction over the order through the pandemic if he rules in favor of the gun shops, and how the order will evolve over time. Presumably public health guidance is going to change over time, and both parties will have the ability to petition the judge to amend the order based on changes in macro conditions.
 
both parties will have the ability to petition the judge to amend the order based on changes in macro conditions
This is why tying the gun shop restrictions to that of a commodity vendor whose essentiality is beyond question allows for the dynamicism of which you speak without repeated court appearances.
 
Back
Top Bottom