• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

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

Atlantis said:
To be fair, the states attorney was like a broken record stating that in no way does their proposed order mean they think it should be ordered. I.e. they did not concede anything, they were ordered by the court to draft something, and they did, but took every chance to say "you should not enact this draft, what we did was already good to go".

The judge did tell them, in pretty plain english, that no, they could not do that.
Click to expand...
Actually the state did concede. They stopped being a broken record and dreamed up some ridiculous restrictions.

The judge did nothing but agree with the state.

On the other hand the state could have said something like, “In good conscience we see no way for gun shops to open in this uncertain time.“ Just like the plaintiff took the opposite stand that gun shops were essential and should be allowed to open under existing social distancing guidelines.

I don’t see the judge doing any more than getting the state to admit their broken record wasn’t broken and then conceded to the state’s requirements.
 
Last edited:
From all reports I have read, the judge is wise from a long history of being a judge. IANAL, but from my limited understanding of the judicial system any ruling or determination is only as good as the facts and process used to get there. The more thorough the process and greater understanding of the facts then the more solid the determination. It seems the more legal minded people here and my guess the judge also see a bigger picture than those who can only see and focus on 4/hour. My thought is that the judge had a strategic reason for ruling like he did that comes from wisdom not understood by me, or that I am a naive optimist who needs to justify something to ease my disappointment. Do not confuse disappointment with success. People have every right to be disapoointed in the decision and every right to be disappointed that there was a battle to be had in the first place. Make no mistake that the state was told they overreached. Not only were they wrong this time around, the overeach the .gov took has been taken away in any similar future event.

Lgs's will be open for business tomorrow. As of now there is no stay. Those businesses will be making sales. Gun owners can locally buy guns and ammo and get gunsmithing. The avenue for appeal by the state has narrowed. The state fought this and they lost.
 
headednorth said:
My apologies if its been addressed already or if the answer should be obvious but are there any other businesses being limited to X number of customers per hour? If not, what is the states excuse for wanting to place this burden on gun shops? I know other businesses are limited to the number of customers in the store at any one time but afaik there isnt a time aspect attached to it the way it is with gun shops.

Seems it wouldve been logical to say that each shop can allow X number of customers in at any one time according to the square footage of each shop. Shop A is 1000sf so they can let in X customers, shop B is 10000sf so they can let in Xx10 customers. Im assuming thats how others businesses are operating and dont see why gun shops are being treated differently.

What is the justification for the "customer per hour" limitation being placed solely on businesses that sell guns?
Click to expand...
If the state cannot outright stop all gun purchases, the next best thing is to slow purchases to glacial speed
 
I would guess that one of the reasons that the judge went with the state restrictions is that it makes his order less likely to be overturned on any appeal. Since he gave the state pretty much what it asked for, then they can't argue the terms, only about whether or not the shops should be open. And they're a lot less likely to win on that. So, I think, a decent win. Remember, this is a temporary order and a final order (if it isn't mooted by a general reopening of the state) will only come after additional hearings.
 
I just heard from a LGS owner that the state is working on an appeal. Let's hope the next judge understands that the fundamental RTKBA is more important than golf, ice cream and flowers.
 
JimO said:
I would guess that one of the reasons that the judge went with the state restrictions is that it makes his order less likely to be overturned on any appeal. Since he gave the state pretty much what it asked for, then they can't argue the terms, only about whether or not the shops should be open. And they're a lot less likely to win on that. So, I think, a decent win. Remember, this is a temporary order and a final order (if it isn't mooted by a general reopening of the state) will only come after additional hearings.
Click to expand...

You make an excellent point. This is probably why the state's attorney was hammering the "we don't concede anything" point so hard. They wanted it to be clear that they believe that allowing gun stores to open at all is unacceptable. But, allowing the state to dictate their own terms for allowing reopening closes one avenue of attack they can take when attempting to appeal the order.
 
Clumber32 said:
I think the judge had supper over at Maura Healey's house and they decided what they could live with for now. And the next day the judge gave his order. :p
Click to expand...

If the judge was buddy-buddy with Healey he would have just let the state keep gun stores closed.
 
5811 said:
I just heard from a LGS owner that the state is working on an appeal. Let's hope the next judge understands that the fundamental RTKBA is more important than golf, ice cream and flowers.
Click to expand...
AFAIK the judge refused the state's immediate appeal of his order. The state could be (likely is) appealing to the next level up, whatever that is (IANAL), but that will take time.
In the meantime the $64K question is, is said LGS planning to open, or are they being a "Karen" and waiting more?
 
5811 said:
I just heard from a LGS owner that the state is working on an appeal. Let's hope the next judge understands that the fundamental RTKBA is more important than golf, ice cream and flowers.
Click to expand...
Interesting that the state would burn resources on an appeal if the "lifting of restrictions for all business is imminent" as they stated in their argument. (that's not an exact quote)
 
kevin9 said:
AFAIK the judge refused the state's immediate appeal of his order. The state could be (likely is) appealing to the next level up, whatever that is (IANAL), but that will take time.
In the meantime the $64K question is, is said LGS planning to open, or are they being a "Karen" and waiting more?
Click to expand...


Oh, they are going to open. But they received this info from their town who told them they were confirming with the state whether they can open or not.

It just blows my mind that the state is going to appeal this ruling while starting to open other stuff like flower shops and golf. It doesn't SURPRISE me, it's still just amazing how these people don't see how stupid they look.
 
NewGuyRay said:
With some of the stupid sh*t this state does, it makes it easy for people outside the 2A community to ascribe the Commonwealth's actions to incompetence rather than malice.

Take the order for the reopening of golf courses for instance. Nowhere in that order could I find an exception to the golf cart prohibition that allows/requires the golf courses to provide a small number of regularly sanitized carts for golfers with a physical disability that precludes walking the course. Does this mean that Tall Deval hates disabled people? He's discriminating against them with this order.

Basically, the golf courses are now open to the able-bodied golfer but those with certain physical disabilities are excluded. I don't think it is a tough sell to argue that even during our current state of emergency, providing a small number of carts for disabled golfers would be a reasonable accommodation as required under the ADA. I can't believe it would be too difficult to find an attorney willing to pursue such a case.
Click to expand...

MA Logic:
Grocery carts, touched by dozens of people throughout the day and kept inside surrounded by hordes of people = ok.
Golf carts, touched by one or two people a day, sitting out in the sun = bad.

This state...
 
very disappointing that a RIGHT has more restrictions on sales and purchasing than tampons do during these times, although not in the least bit surprised. Reading the ruling, there is a limit on the number of appointments only, no mention of how appointments are to be run. I know in healthcare, if there are multiple providers/rooms available (sales clerks), there are multiple patients for one appointment time.....
 
Define imminent..
One month, four months, six months, a year, two years, ten years...

That's about a broad as infringed to these types of people![rofl2]
 
It didn't even MAKE the Taunton Guzzle-ette this AM. Above the fold was how excited Tauntonians were to wear masks 24/7. Oh and probably 15 stories/editorials (hard to tell the difference) about how Trump is getting away with murder and how anyone who even utters his name should be unfairly prosecuted by the FBI and Justice Dept.

My wife gets the paper. If it wasn't for the damend Word Jumble and a few of the Funnies, it would be 100% unreadable.
 
Lank said:
If the state cannot outright stop all gun purchases, the next best thing is to slow purchases to glacial speed
Click to expand...
We all know thats the case, but I wouldve thought this judge would have asked why the state wants this put on gun shops when no other business is being forced to operate that way (that I know of at least)
 
Lank said:
If the state cannot outright stop all gun purchases, the next best thing is to slow purchases to glacial speed
Click to expand...
True and make it economically disastrous for the business to reopen.

5811 said:
I just heard from a LGS owner that the state is working on an appeal. Let's hope the next judge understands that the fundamental RTKBA is more important than golf, ice cream and flowers.
Click to expand...
Of course they are.

mlaboss said:
You make an excellent point. This is probably why the state's attorney was hammering the "we don't concede anything" point so hard. They wanted it to be clear that they believe that allowing gun stores to open at all is unacceptable. But, allowing the state to dictate their own terms for allowing reopening closes one avenue of attack they can take when attempting to appeal the order.
Click to expand...
Very likely true.
 
5811 said:
I just heard from a LGS owner that the state is working on an appeal. Let's hope the next judge understands that the fundamental RTKBA is more important than golf, ice cream and flowers.
Click to expand...
(a) Of course the state is working on an appeal. AGs counsel already moved to have the judge stay his own order pending appeal. The request was denied.

(b) The purpose of the TRO is to limit damage while the case proceeds. The court decided that the damage to the plaintiffs by enforcing the order exceeded he damage to the defendant by allowing shops to open.

(c) I'm not sure where the gunshop owner gets info other than speculation. Comm2A has not had gun shop briefings on the internals of the case, and the plaintiff is not in a position to know about the opponents appeal until/if it is filed. We can only surmise based on the request for a stay pending appeal and the jihadist approach the AGs office takes to lawful firearms ownership.

Be careful about "I heards" or info not coming from the public record or parties directly involved in the case.

My proposed regulation:

"Given the crisis, speech and publication regarding Covid-19 shall be limited to official government talking points, or commentary that supports them. This is a temporary and reasonable restriction on 1A rights given the importance of fighting this virus and the danger to police officers, first responders and domestic violence victims posed by dissident speech."
 
Last edited:
Len-2A Training said:
True and make it economically disastrous for the business to reopen.
Click to expand...

In a way, this order is advantageous for smaller shops that were already doing less than 4 sales per hour, as it will force people to find other shops since the "big names" won't be able to service nearly as many customers as they normally do.

Not saying it's a good thing, just saying it'll be interesting how it shakes out.
 
5811 said:
Rob "smartest guy in the room" Boudrie, read post #1123.

LGS heard from town, town heard from State.
Click to expand...
It's kind of vague from the post what exactly the LGS heard from the town. It also lacks specificity, like who from the town? What specific name and agency from the state? What exactly was said? "We are expecting an appeal" or "The office of the AGs office has notified us they are preparing an appeal?". People fill in all sorts of blanks. This is exactly the type of "I heard" that should be viewed with a dose of skepticism.

I have followed up on one situation where I actually saw the written info from the state on the club range closures and it was substantially different from what was being presented "as fact" by "those that had heard".
 
Last edited:
Could you imagine if we just stopped our car blocking all the lanes on the highway.
An police officer pulls up and says "Stop impeding the flow of traffic".
Don't worry officer "I'm not impeding the flow of traffic".
Officer says "You sure as heck are".
"No officer, you can get off the highway and go around me".
Officer says "Move over now, you are infringing on the the drivers right to use the highway".
"No officer, they can just drive on the secondary roads and they will still be able to drive where they are going".
Now while you have the highway blocked, your friends working with you block all the main secondary roads.
Officers from all over the town show up and say "Move it! Your restricting the flow of traffic".
"No officer they can still walk on the side walks or use the bike trail to go about their business". [rofl2]
And this is about driving a car which is not a constitutional right.

Please note IANAL, but that is how I see our rights as protected under our constitution...


This is how our 2A rights are viewed now by the powers that be!

PS. Not acknowledging that I'm infringing on the use of the highway and saying to use the secondary roads is what the Supreme Court does when they refuse to hear a case. LOL
 
Last edited:
oldguy68 said:
Could you imagine if we just stopped our car blocking all the lanes on the highway.
An police officer pulls up and says "Stop impeding the flow of traffic".
Don't worry officer "I'm not impeding the flow of traffic".
Officer says "You sure as heck are".
"No officer, you can get off the highway and go around me".
Officer says "Move over now, you are infringing on the the drivers right to use the highway".
"No officer, they can just drive on the secondary roads and they will still be able to drive where they are going".
Now while you have the highway blocked, you friends working with you block all the main secondary roads.
Officers from all over the town show up and say "Move it! Your restricting the flow of traffic".
"No officer they can still walk on the side walks or use the bike trail to go about their business". [rofl2]
And this is about driving a car which is not a constitutional right.

Please note IANAL, but that is how I see our rights as protected under our constitution...


This is how our 2A rights are viewed now by the powers that be!
Click to expand...
It would suck if 1000 vehicles broke down at once.
 
oldguy68 said:
Could you imagine if we just stopped our car blocking all the lanes on the highway.
Click to expand...
If you were protesting a tax cut the police would be there to make sure the cars did not interfere with your protest. That is EXACTLY what happened when protesters opposing the Prop 2 1/2 tax cut/limitations took to the streets in Boston to protest.
 

Similar threads

ATF Receiver Rule - FPC Granted Cert
Replies
9
Views
459
pastera
pastera
File under: Show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime…
Replies
2
Views
270
ridleyman
R
3rd Circuit Denies Rehearing In SAF Pennsylvania Gun Rights Victory
Replies
1
Views
142
oldguy68
oldguy68
#1 darknet drug market admin blackmailing all its users
Replies
19
Views
564
BoKnowsJack
B
Auto service shop - clues
Replies
11
Views
474
zboys
zboys
Back
Top Bottom