Empty holster social experiment question

[rcinma]

Correct, non-residents can bring in non-large capacity rifles and shotguns as long as they are unloaded and enclosed in a case while transporting them. I would further recommend they be in a locked trunk, though this is not legally necessary. Large capacity anything and/or any handguns are not allowed without an LTC. There is a clause that allows non-large capacity handguns for formal competitions, but that doesn't apply here.

The mandatory minimums for violating C. 269 § 10(a) (Unlawful carrying or possession of a firearm, rifle, or shotgun) are 1 year HOC or 2 1/2 years Prison. But you won't be in violation if you have "complied with the requirements imposed by section one hundred and twenty-nine C of chapter one hundred and forty upon ownership or possession of rifles and shotguns"

However, as always, you should contact a lawyer for actual legal advice, and I am not a lawyer.

It may also help to talk to the Chief in the town you are visiting/may some day inherit about what you need to get a non-res LTC. Especially if you plan on moving here someday.

I would like to think being a known commodity to the local police would help you get the permit (and being a Veteren cannot hurt your cause - thanks for that by the way).

Does you father have a permit?

If he is willing it wouldn't be a bad idea for him to have one as that would take any question about keeping guns in the house for you to use while you are there.

 

[richc]

Only Cops,military,and Brinks guys should own guns.How bout Mall Ninjas?

Yup, definitely Mall Ninjas!!!

 

[jdubois]

Does you father have a permit?

If he is willing it wouldn't be a bad idea for him to have one as that would take any question about keeping guns in the house for you to use while you are there.

+1. If he's got a permit, it would at least keep LEOs who don't know the intricacies of non-resident exemptions from digging any deeper.

 

[Mattitude]

My dad does have a LTC...so he would be able to "hold" some firearms?

Does you father have a permit?

 

[GSG]

MA has gun owners so under its thumb...AND YOU ACCEPT IT!!! You piss away your rights down to privilages and you start to take on the attitudes of the citizenry around you.

Unless gun owners are doing something to get their rights back then they accept their situation. Throwing your pocket change at an organization to "let them handle it" doesn't remove your own personal responsibility. Nothing changes overnight. People should have to fear their police chief of taking away their "privlige" to own firearms, because it is no longer your right.

From what you said here I still see denial about actual rights...because you don't have any firearm rights. If your chief can take away your LTC for any reason at will then it is a privilge. You lost your rights a long time ago and because your fear not only your chief but your neighbors and fellow residents that you do nothing and accept pissing away what little priviges you have.

You (gun owners) already resign the fight by saying you don't have the numbers or the money or support groups that let your privliges erode slowly instead of all at once. Take some responsibility for your situation and do something about it. Passing it off to someone else or a group puts your future with everyone but you. There is nothing wrong with drawing attention to an empty holster...it's harmless and possibly the more people see it, the more at ease they may feel or grow used to it. That is a small thing to do that could very well have big effects in the long term. Throwing away rights can happen overnight, but getting them back takes a long time. Put some effort into it because it is worth it.

There were only a few participants in the Heller case yet they changed the laws of DC that most thought were unchangable. Are they heroes? Do you think that other DC gun owners said that not only what they were trying to do would NEVER work but would most likely make things worse? I bet very few were behind them, but it was those few that changed the laws of so many.

Hey there Mattitude.

1st off, thanks for the VTAC sling, I'm really glad I was able to pick that up from you.

But now for the real reason that I'm responding to your post...

Mass. gun laws suck. I've lived in this state for most of my life, but I haven't been blinded to that. I am deeply offended by the gun laws in this state.

However, I think that a lot of gun owners will be offended by the way you're saying a lot of these things. I agree with drgrant, there's a lot more to this than you'd think.

Let's say for a week NC decides to adopt discretionary licensing similar to Mass. If you chose to open carry and had your LTC revoked for suitability, ytou'd still be able to keep your guns in your house, buy ammo, etc. etc. Depending on your lifestyle, revocation of your LTC might not make a lot of difference in your life, because you're allowed to keep guns in your home in NC.

I live in Massachusetts. If I get my LTC revoked for suitability, the police will show up at my house and take every single gun in my posession. As soon as it's revoked, I can no longer posess even a single empty .22 shell casing in my home. I can't even keep a can of pepper spray in my home if my LTC is revoked.

I really like guns. I carry all day every day, and I'm a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment. But if I'm at the grocery store and my shirt rides up over my carry piece accidentally, my chief can deem me unsuitable and strip me of every firearm and bullet that I own. Granted, I can fight the chief's decision in court, but this will cost me thousands of dollars, and for the many years that it's going on, I'll have no legal way to defend myself, not even in my home.

Even if the district court judge agrees with me and orders that my LTC be re-issued, the chief can appeal this decision to Superior court, and if they rule in my favor there, the chief can appeal it again. The chief has city-paid lawyers, and thanks to LEOSA, he can carry in all 50 states just on his badge. He won't lose any sleep, any money, or any gun rights. He'll never be left defenseless at 3 a.m. when a window is smashed in my house in the middle of the night. He won't go through the humiliation of having to beg in court for his constitutional rights. He won't have to wonder if he'll lose his job because he lost his LTC (I'm an armed guard, the ability to carry a gun is how I eat, and in today's economy a career change isn't likely).

The chief's life and finances won't be affected, not even a little bit, the whole time that I'm going through hell to try and just live my life the way that I choose to.

There's countless cases on here where people have had their rights stripped over nothing. I've read a lot of them, and I'll read about more.

Is all of that worth carrying an empty holster exposed on your belt? It's not worth it to me. Because as bad as things are here in Mass., I can still own & carry guns to defend my life and put food on the table.

On top of this, you referenced the Heller case and how those residents changed the gun laws of D.C.

Here's an explanation of how to purchase a gun in D.C. that was recently linked to in a post here on NES.

Now that two people have asked me to write down my DC gun registration adventures, I've finally decided to do so (I also have the morning off).

Step 1: Google "gun stores metro Washington DC" result: Atlantic guns, Silver Spring, MD. It was metro-accessible and had a sale on Glock pistols the weekend of February 20-21. I took the bus (30 minute ride + 5 minute walk) and put down a deposit on a Glock model 17. A week later I changed it to a model 34 because it has adjustable sights, a larger magazine release, a larger slide stop release, and a longer barrel. About a month later they called me and told me it had arrived and had taken a long time because they had to order it with special 10-round DC-certified magazines.

Step 2: Go to Washington DC police headquarters and pick up all paperwork to start filling it out.

Step 3: Take another bus ride to Silver Spring, MD and pay for the whole thing. Keep in mind I had to leave it at the store.

Step 4: Call the only person in the District who does firearms transfers (there are no gun stores in the District and I can't bring it into the city on my own if it isn't registered) and tell him to go pick it up at Atlantic Guns.

Step 5: Take all the paperwork to Anacostia on the green line and meet with Charles Sykes, the guy who does the transfer. We filled out his portion of the paperwork.

Step 6: Take all this to the police station. They fingerprinted me. Then I was given a little form for fees and they told me to take this down to the basement and pay at window 1040-B (NOT 1040-A).

Step 7: Take my receipt from window 1040-B and go BACK to the firearms registration office. She took one copy and gave me the other. An officer there said OK, now take this form, fill it out, and get it notarized. "Do you have a notary public in the building?" "No, but they have one next door at the courthouse."

Step 8: Take latest form and go over to the courthouse, found the notary. "It's $2." "I only have a $5 note." "We don't make change." Went next door to a cafe and bought a Nantucket Nectars Big Cranberry (it was really tasty). Now I had $2 exactly.

Step 9: Return to police station with notarized form. "OK, there is a 10 day waiting period. Come back on the 27th."

Step 10: Arrive at police station, pick up all paperwork. Jump back on the metro and go to Charles Sykes's office in Anacostia. Gave him paperwork. He handed over the gun.

Step 11: Stood at the bus stop with my $730 gun in the middle of the worst section of DC. Took bus to metro, took metro to police station.

Step 12: Handed my gun over to the police to do a ballistics test. They told me it would be about 40 minutes, so I went and got a sandwich at Au Bon Pain. It was really yummy. I think I got a turkey club.

Step 13: Returned to police station, picked up my gun, went home. Put it in my safe.

Yes, the laws were changed in D.C., but is that really a victory for the 2nd Amendment? After all that time and money, and look at the tiny step that they took.

I'm not saying we shouldn't fight, I'm not saying we should roll over and take these laws with a smile on our face.

All I'm saying is that we have a huge legal battle ahead of us, and I for one would like to see it fought and won in a way that doesn't cost me everything.

That's all.

 

[GSG]

Oh, and by the way, thank you for your service Mattitude. I really appreciate that.

 

[Pilgrim]

thanks for a very good discussion.

+3

 

[jdubois]

My dad does have a LTC...so he would be able to "hold" some firearms?

It's a bit gray, involves both state and federal law and it's too complicated to give a simple yes or no with cites. But basically, on the legal side, you're allowed by both federal and state law to have the guns, and on the practical side, if he's with you and has an LTC nobody is going to harass you about the guns. (We're still talking rifles and shotguns here, not handguns)

 

[livefreeorhere]

I live in Massachusetts. If I get my LTC revoked for suitability, the police will show up at my house and take every single gun in my posession. As soon as it's revoked, I can no longer posess even a single empty .22 shell casing in my home. I can't even keep a can of pepper spray in my home if my LTC is revoked.

I really like guns. I carry all day every day, and I'm a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment. But if I'm at the grocery store and my shirt rides up over my carry piece accidentally, my chief can deem me unsuitable and strip me of every firearm and bullet that I own. Granted, I can fight the chief's decision in court, but this will cost me thousands of dollars, and for the many years that it's going on, I'll have no legal way to defend myself, not even in my home.

Even if the district court judge agrees with me and orders that my LTC be re-issued, the chief can appeal this decision to Superior court, and if they rule in my favor there, the chief can appeal it again. The chief has city-paid lawyers, and thanks to LEOSA, he can carry in all 50 states just on his badge. He won't lose any sleep, any money, or any gun rights. He'll never be left defenseless at 3 a.m. when a window is smashed in my house in the middle of the night. He won't go through the humiliation of having to beg in court for his constitutional rights. He won't have to wonder if he'll lose his job because he lost his LTC (I'm an armed guard, the ability to carry a gun is how I eat, and in today's economy a career change isn't likely).

The chief's life and finances won't be affected, not even a little bit, the whole time that I'm going through hell to try and just live my life the way that I choose to.

There's countless cases on here where people have had their rights stripped over nothing. I've read a lot of them, and I'll read about more.

Is all of that worth carrying an empty holster exposed on your belt? It's not worth it to me. Because as bad as things are here in Mass., I can still own & carry guns to defend my life and put food on the table.

this is the root of the problem for me. I just got my LTC and went and bought a few guns the same day. I got home and showed them to my Fiance who said to me that she'd read about some of these gun laws and realized that if the gun I just bought was in the car unloaded in a locked box with her and she got pulled over and questioned about it, she'd be in trouble. I told her that first of all, I'm not going to store the gun in the car. Second of all, if somebody broke into the house and attempted to cause her great bodily harm, if i wasn't there she'd be going to jail if she shot him with this gun. She was surprised by this naturally.

This is EXTREMELY aggrevating for me and everybody else in this forum. This is the most blatant violation of the second amendment of all. This also is the root behind the fear that most law abiding citizens of MA have when they're protesting gun rights. If we lose our LTC we're screwed. If you can't leave the state of MA because of your job (i'm definitely in that category) then you're stuck trying to fight laws that violate the constitution and all the while you're worried one wrong move and you don't have the means to protect yourself and your family.

 

[GSG]

If you can't leave the state of MA because of your job (i'm definitely in that category) then you're stuck trying to fight laws that violate the constitution and all the while you're worried one wrong move and you don't have the means to protect yourself and your family.

Yup. Mass. isn't that great, but it'd be a heckuva lot worse if I served the rest of my sentence here unarmed.

 

[Mattitude]

Glad you like the VTAC sling, they are awesome and I have them on all of my long guns & SBR's. BTW I only have 2 left out of 167.

I'm not here to offend anyone, just engage in discussion and maybe get some people to think. Maybe offended isn't the correct word...frustrated might be better. I'm just stating the obvious/my observations and I don't think some people like it because it is like a constant reminder. I can understand that the chief really might not give a damn about your situation and has a city appointed attorney. What I do see is your deep fear that you already assume that wearing an empty holster will cause your chief to pull your LTC because of unsuitability. You aren't the only one with this fear, but don't you see that MA has instilled this fear in just about every caring gun owner??

How could you get in any trouble for not doing anything illegal???? If you are even approched by an LE officer, you don't have to give your name or any information...even if they ask you nicely. How can you be arrested for doing absolutely nothing wrong?? I am going to say that I am conducting a social experiment (which is true) to observe the attitudes towards the gun culture. How can you voice your opinions about your rights if you are so fearful of opening your mouth? You already lost your 2A rights...and the state has already used fear to suppress your 1A rights. Unfortunate and sad.

DC is a PITA, but it is getting better. Is the small improvement worth it? Of course it is! Things will continue to get better in time...it seems to take more time to get rights back than it does to lose them. Every small step is worth the trouble in the long run, but if you take the attitude that the small gains in the short term is too bothersome then you might as well hang it up right now.

You are directly responsible for your rights, so if you choose to keep your mouth shut/avoid attention/"it is what it is" attitude/accept what ever is handed to you then you shouldn't complain one bit that your rights have been pissed down to privilges. The state has put the fear in you and you have accepted that. I'm not going to say "if you don't like it then move" because that is such a cop out and it doesn't fix anything. It's ironic that the ideas of freedom started in MA but her citizens now are controlled with fear.

Hey there Mattitude.

1st off, thanks for the VTAC sling, I'm really glad I was able to pick that up from you.

But now for the real reason that I'm responding to your post...

Mass. gun laws suck. I've lived in this state for most of my life, but I haven't been blinded to that. I am deeply offended by the gun laws in this state.

However, I think that a lot of gun owners will be offended by the way you're saying a lot of these things. I agree with drgrant, there's a lot more to this than you'd think.

Let's say for a week NC decides to adopt discretionary licensing similar to Mass. If you chose to open carry and had your LTC revoked for suitability, ytou'd still be able to keep your guns in your house, buy ammo, etc. etc. Depending on your lifestyle, revocation of your LTC might not make a lot of difference in your life, because you're allowed to keep guns in your home in NC.

I live in Massachusetts. If I get my LTC revoked for suitability, the police will show up at my house and take every single gun in my posession. As soon as it's revoked, I can no longer posess even a single empty .22 shell casing in my home. I can't even keep a can of pepper spray in my home if my LTC is revoked.

I really like guns. I carry all day every day, and I'm a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment. But if I'm at the grocery store and my shirt rides up over my carry piece accidentally, my chief can deem me unsuitable and strip me of every firearm and bullet that I own. Granted, I can fight the chief's decision in court, but this will cost me thousands of dollars, and for the many years that it's going on, I'll have no legal way to defend myself, not even in my home.

Even if the district court judge agrees with me and orders that my LTC be re-issued, the chief can appeal this decision to Superior court, and if they rule in my favor there, the chief can appeal it again. The chief has city-paid lawyers, and thanks to LEOSA, he can carry in all 50 states just on his badge. He won't lose any sleep, any money, or any gun rights. He'll never be left defenseless at 3 a.m. when a window is smashed in my house in the middle of the night. He won't go through the humiliation of having to beg in court for his constitutional rights. He won't have to wonder if he'll lose his job because he lost his LTC (I'm an armed guard, the ability to carry a gun is how I eat, and in today's economy a career change isn't likely).

The chief's life and finances won't be affected, not even a little bit, the whole time that I'm going through hell to try and just live my life the way that I choose to.

There's countless cases on here where people have had their rights stripped over nothing. I've read a lot of them, and I'll read about more.

Is all of that worth carrying an empty holster exposed on your belt? It's not worth it to me. Because as bad as things are here in Mass., I can still own & carry guns to defend my life and put food on the table.

On top of this, you referenced the Heller case and how those residents changed the gun laws of D.C.

Here's an explanation of how to purchase a gun in D.C. that was recently linked to in a post here on NES.




Yes, the laws were changed in D.C., but is that really a victory for the 2nd Amendment? After all that time and money, and look at the tiny step that they took.

I'm not saying we shouldn't fight, I'm not saying we should roll over and take these laws with a smile on our face.

All I'm saying is that we have a huge legal battle ahead of us, and I for one would like to see it fought and won in a way that doesn't cost me everything.

That's all.

 

[GSG]

How could you get in any trouble for not doing anything illegal????

That's exactly it. We're presumed guilty until proven innocent here. It's not just gun rights that Mass. has us over the barrel with.

I'm not scared of my police chief, I got my LTC from a very gun friendly chief who I doubt would pull the "suitability" BS on anyone.

I agree with you on your points about this state, there's a few battles here that have already been lost. But as I see it, something like an open holster protest/statement isn't going to further our cause any. A few more court cases in our favor couldn't hurt, but there's not many gun friendly politicians in our state right now.

Our best bet is to vote and educate others, and to do everything in our power to change the laws here.

 

[Mattitude]

Pull up a chair and put in your .02!

thanks for a very good discussion.

+3

 

[Viper22]

I'm tempted to open carry an empty holster at work, since after much discussion, the president and vice pres decided "they dont like guns" and don't want people to have them on the property.

On the other hand, I don't want to ruffle any feathers and get fired.

 

[Mattitude]

If there is no gun in your holster, then I don't see how you can get fired since you aren't violating any company rules for posessing a gun on company property. It is an accessory like a handbag or eyeglass case...hell clip your cell phone in it.

I'm tempted to open carry an empty holster at work, since after much discussion, the president and vice pres decided "they dont like guns" and don't want people to have them on the property.

On the other hand, I don't want to ruffle any feathers and get fired.

 

[Du510]

If I can jump in here.... in CT you can just about be guaranteed an encounter with an LEO, and likely being charged wih Breach of Peace.

This is our ubiquitous, all encompassing law in which many people get caught.

http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?selected=94&bold=||||

 

[HooVooLoo]

The General Laws of Mass are a joke, honestly. It is a shame that they mean everything when they work FOR the state prosecution's cases, but are determined to be irrelevant during civil defense...


Fornication.—Sexual intercourse between an unmarried male and an unmarried female.

Section 18. Whoever commits fornication shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than three months or by a fine of not more than thirty dollars.

 

[tbear6357]

Lived there, Didn't do that

Hi,
I lived in North Carolina for awhile and I can't seem to remember anyone who carried open, everyone just got their CCW and spent the bucks. Having just moved to Massachusetts (and still trying to figure out the laws up here) I'd say open carry of just a holster might not be the best idea.

 

[Mattitude]

The breach of peace gives the example of brandishing a pistol. A holster is a harmless accessory...like a purse or cell phone carrier. There isn't anything that an LEO can do. Anyone can buy a holster w/o a license, permit or whatever. Cash and carry.

If I can jump in here.... in CT you can just about be guaranteed an encounter with an LEO, and likely being charged wih Breach of Peace.

This is our ubiquitous, all encompassing law in which many people get caught.

http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?selected=94&bold=||||

 

[Mattitude]

Having the mindset of it "not being the best idea" gives me the impression that the instilled fear is pretty deep. Making the asumption that a person would lose their LTC or possible arrest for wearing an EMPTY HOLSTER is insane. It is NOT a weapon of any kind. You CANNOT pull a holster on someone and hold them up. Try and get over the fear.

Hi,
I lived in North Carolina for awhile and I can't seem to remember anyone who carried open, everyone just got their CCW and spent the bucks. Having just moved to Massachusetts (and still trying to figure out the laws up here) I'd say open carry of just a holster might not be the best idea.

 

[Alchemist17]

Having the mindset of it "not being the best idea" gives me the impression that the instilled fear is pretty deep. Making the asumption that a person would lose their LTC or possible arrest for wearing an EMPTY HOLSTER is insane. It is NOT a weapon of any kind. You CANNOT pull a holster on someone and hold them up. Try and get over the fear.

I think the vast majority of the members here are going to agree with you in principle - one shouldn't have to be afraid that a spare bit of leather is going to result in denying your constitutional rights.

Unfortunately the process here is arbitrary and capricious - the CLEO does not need any defensible reason for a denial of an LTC, just a statement that you are not a "suitable person" in their opinion, so you're taking a real risk if you do something that offends them or causes them extra work. At times this is worth it - defense of self and family being the best example, but in general the nail that stands out gets hammered.

You also need to realize that Massachusetts really isn't that far from a People's Republic, as we have a one-party state that doesn't trust the citizens to tie their own shoes, and a populace so intelligent and open-minded that they can't mark a ballot for anything other than a "D". That isn't to knock all legislators - my state rep and Senator are very good on 2nd amendment issues despite the "D". But you're not talking about small changes here - you need a massive realignment of popular opinion within the state to have any real effect. It is a sad state, but it's where we are now.

I'm always tempted when confronted with anti-gun liberals to ask just how comfortable they were during the Bush administration with the government owning all the guns ...

 

[livefreeorhere]

The General Laws of Mass are a joke, honestly. It is a shame that they mean everything when they work FOR the state prosecution's cases, but are determined to be irrelevant during civil defense...


Fornication.—Sexual intercourse between an unmarried male and an unmarried female.

Section 18. Whoever commits fornication shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than three months or by a fine of not more than thirty dollars.

gee thanks, there goes my plausible deniability claim.

 

[ochmude]

Unfortunately the process here is arbitrary and capricious - the CLEO does not need any defensible reason for a denial of an LTC, just a statement that you are not a "suitable person" in their opinion, so you're taking a real risk if you do something that offends them or causes them extra work. At times this is worth it - defense of self and family being the best example, but in general the nail that stands out gets hammered.

That really sums it up right there. I am a Massachusetts resident. In principle I have the right to bear arms. In reality, I do not. I can have the "right" to own a gun stripped away from me if I wear plaid shirts and my CLEO has a personal hatred of that particular pattern. I'm not kidding about that. A license to carry in MA is a misnomer. It is a license to own. It can be revoked without cause. It can be restricted without cause. That's just how it is here.

 

[jdubois]

Section 18. Whoever commits fornication shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than three months or by a fine of not more than thirty dollars.

That law is still on the books, but after Fort v. Fort (1981) and AG v. Desilets (1994), it is long dead and buried.

 

[Mattitude]

It is a "privlige" to own a firearm in MA and that is totally wrong. I am not a MA resident...yet but I have family that has lived there for 40+ years and still own a small piece of the Berkshires. I am surprised that most people are afraid to fight for their rights, espically after Heller in DC. Some other states have been challanged with their laws and even CA is facing a suit because handgun approval is basically "bought" by the manufacturers. They are fighting the fact that for example they can legally buy a black XD, but a green one is illegal because that version, even though it is the same model & caliber has not been submitted for "testing." I would think that Constitutional lawyers in MA would be all over this. MA was the place where freedom started, now her "citizens" accept the fear that has been put in them. I don't understand how a LTC holder wouldn't be enraged if their police chief pulled their LTC for any non-legal reason...instead they are fearful of "what ifs" that they won't even try to challange their "system" with something that isn't a firearm, isn't illegal and something that anyone can buy. I do welcome this discussion as I am learning quite a bit about the social attudes & thoughts of MA (and some CT) gun owners.

That really sums it up right there. I am a Massachusetts resident. In principle I have the right to bear arms. In reality, I do not. I can have the "right" to own a gun stripped away from me if I wear plaid shirts and my CLEO has a personal hatred of that particular pattern. I'm not kidding about that. A license to carry in MA is a misnomer. It is a license to own. It can be revoked without cause. It can be restricted without cause. That's just how it is here.

 

[MasterShinken]

One of the biggest things we have going against us is we are being so defensive. Being offencive is the only way to win, or keep from slowly loosing.

What we need is a new advertising agent, lol. People are scared because they dont know, and unfortunatly it is very risky to become that gigantic figure that helps everyone learn. It takes money and influence to make change.

I wonder if instead of saying "no, what you say is a lie" to politicians and taking steps to weed out deception, we go strait to the public and make the state answer our questions and remarks. Blame them for the down turn of a lot of this stuff, and make them answer for why their plans have not worked, but made things worse.

I think now is a great time, look at the rest of the country, look at how much those people are buying guns, states are threatening to leave the union due to AWB talk. MA people have to see this a bit and it gives our case more strength as the way things are in other states is starting to become more publicly known to the MA populus.

my $0.02 now a penny for your thoughts, but I expect change

 

[Pete85]

Mattitude, there is one thing you need to realize about living in MA that I'm not sure you experience living in NC. The media in the Boston area goes out of the way to make it look like the guns are the cause of violence and crimes, to the point where there are people who legitimately believe that crime would not occur if there were no guns. There was a period of a week or so last summer where a few people got stabbed to death in some random act of violence, and a lady who was losing her house to forclosure killed herself with her husband's "high powered" rifle. The suicide was talked about for days, the murders didn't even make the evening news. The Boston Globe still reports that the "Assault Weapons" Ban only affects fully automatic machine guns.

Our politicians and our legal system aren't any better. Gang bangers with a rap sheet a mile long will get community service for "gun crimes", while our Governor wants to make it 10 years in prison for committing a misdemeanor while carrying. People have been arrested for a breach of the peace because they printed or part of their gun became exposed and some moonbat overreacted and called the police to report a "guy with a gun".

Your social experiment may not seem like a bad idea, but you really need to know what you're up against in MA.

 

[Mike-Mike]

We need to pass 3 laws.

1. Every law passed needs to have the article of the state/fed Constitution quoted to justify law.

2. LEO's who deny an eligible applicant an LTC can be held liable if something happens to citizen and they couldn't defend themselves.

3. Private businesses who deny an employee from carrying can be held liable if something happens to employee and the company couldn't protect them.

 

[Alchemist17]

I don't understand how a LTC holder wouldn't be enraged if their police chief pulled their LTC for any non-legal reason...instead they are fearful of "what ifs" that they won't even try to challange their "system" with something that isn't a firearm, isn't illegal and something that anyone can buy. I do welcome this discussion as I am learning quite a bit about the social attudes & thoughts of MA (and some CT) gun owners.

I think you go a bit too far here. Assume that in fact 100% of MA gun laws constitute unconstitutional infringement of our rights, and would be struck down by the courts. It is still the case that in order to mount a challenge with proper standing you need to actually have been denied something. If you've been denied an unrestricted LTC-A but have restricted one, are you willing to lose that right for 5 years or so while the case winds through the courts, especially with the world in the state it's in now? There's far more at stake here for those with restrictive CLEOs and no ability for legal challenge for those with permissive CLEOs. We do fight for changes in the law, but unfortunately public opinion is not with us - for many reasons. So when options are limited and the stakes are high, people either keep their head down if they've successfully navigated the system, or flee to more reasonable states.

 

[livefreeorhere]

I think Mattitude raises some interesting points. I also feel the same way many of the posters from MA feel - I've spent a lot of time and money so that I can exercise my second amendment right and I don't want to lose it. I think that MA needs people who aren't afraid to lose this right for standing up to the government, but I think it remains to be seen if Mattitude will walk the walk as a MA resident.