Healy on Reciprocity - BS Alarm

[namedpipes]

Right. Reciprocity in your case would solve everything except NY/MA* state. You'd have to FOPA across those cuz they will poop in the pool before they give in.

* assuming you go around NJ, which is always a calming idea.

 

[Paul455]

I think that drivers' licenses should only be valid in their respective states.

No reciprocity....period.

 

[amm5061]

Right. Reciprocity in your case would solve everything except NY/MA* state. You'd have to FOPA across those cuz they will poop in the pool before they give in.

* assuming you go around NJ, which is always a calming idea.

Going through NJ is going full retard. You never go full retard.

 

[allen-1]

Right. Reciprocity in your case would solve everything except NY/MA* state. You'd have to FOPA across those cuz they will poop in the pool before they give in.

* assuming you go around NJ, which is always a calming idea.

Hang on. I'm saying I have two totally separate issues. (let's skip the obvious jokes about mental and sexual deficiency issues, okay?)

One issue is when I go up to CT from GA in the beginning of the summer and then again when I go home in the fall. I rely upon FOPA, and still tend to go through PA rather than through NYC and NJ, (yeah amm5061 - full retard reference noted).

The other issue is that I ride my bike just as much in CT as I do in Georgia. The difference is that here in Georgia when I cross a state line, it's into Fl or SC and I've got permits for those states. In CT, it's into RI, MA or NY and I don't have permits for those states. I might be able to get RI, but MA? Seriously? And definitely not NY. It's kind of difficult to obey FOPA on my bike, 'cause it doesn't have saddlebags. A T-bag really isn't any kind of secure storage.

So - yeah, I'm worried about FIX_NICS - I've read it, I haven't seen anything in it that concerns me, but I'm most definitely not a lawyer. And I don't see anything in Shared Reciprocity that gives the Federal Government any over reach. I see it as them forcing the states to accept each other's permits.

 

[Len-2A Training]

In CT, it's into RI, MA or NY and I don't have permits for those states. I might be able to get RI, but MA? Seriously? And definitely not NY. It's kind of difficult to obey FOPA on my bike, 'cause it doesn't have saddlebags. A T-bag really isn't any kind of secure storage.

Getting a MA NR LTC isn't difficult, it just takes forever and cost money. However, getting an unrestricted NR LTC in MA is a bit tricky as you need specific reasons that put you in the "we'll issue unrestricted" category. But at least with even a restricted NR LTC you can transport it locked in a case (any case) unloaded, so that possession is legal. MA will fight reciprocity so that you'll grow old before (if the law passes) it goes into affect here.

 

[FrugalFannie]

By what criteria would someone be unable to carry under MA law but able to get a permit under another state's laws? This is a B.S. argument. The only prohibiting factor that reciprocity avoids is the local police chief "discretion" that had served as an arbitrary barrier for many.

If you plea to DUI in MA, you become a PP. Anywhere else, not an issue. So all those drunk southerners are also allowed to still own guns and would be able to bring their dangerous selves and their guns to MA. Scare the piss out of those liberals!

 

[FrugalFannie]

Hang on. I'm saying I have two totally separate issues. (let's skip the obvious jokes about mental and sexual deficiency issues, okay?)

One issue is when I go up to CT from GA in the beginning of the summer and then again when I go home in the fall. I rely upon FOPA, and still tend to go through PA rather than through NYC and NJ, (yeah amm5061 - full retard reference noted).

The other issue is that I ride my bike just as much in CT as I do in Georgia. The difference is that here in Georgia when I cross a state line, it's into Fl or SC and I've got permits for those states. In CT, it's into RI, MA or NY and I don't have permits for those states. I might be able to get RI, but MA? Seriously? And definitely not NY. It's kind of difficult to obey FOPA on my bike, 'cause it doesn't have saddlebags. A T-bag really isn't any kind of secure storage.

So - yeah, I'm worried about FIX_NICS - I've read it, I haven't seen anything in it that concerns me, but I'm most definitely not a lawyer. And I don't see anything in Shared Reciprocity that gives the Federal Government any over reach. I see it as them forcing the states to accept each other's permits.

They will need to create a national database of licensed persons so that each state can check the validity of any state's license to carry. Gee, I wonder which congressmen/senators have relatives/constituents who would benefit from such a need....

 

[FrugalFannie]

Even if reciprocity passes, I would still be wary of New York and New Jersey recognizing it

I was just wondering if reciprocity would also allow you to avoid state restrictions like post ban mags (MA) and bullet limits like in NY.

 

[allen-1]

I was just wondering if reciprocity would also allow you to avoid state restrictions like post ban mags (MA) and bullet limits like in NY.

Nope. That part I'm clear on. Right now we have separate agreements between states. If any state recognizes my permit - I'm still bound by their laws. National reciprocity means that all states recognize my permit, but I'm bound by their laws while I'm in their state.

Which is a really critical thing to understand. Simple example - SC has a "must inform" as opposed to Georgia. A lot of my friends cross that border every day, and in casual conversation with them, some of them didn't know that they are required by law to inform SC police officers that they're carrying when stopped. If you're going to cross borders, you've got to know the laws...

And we can talk all day long, (and into tomorrow), about how it ought not to be like that, but reality is the current laws on the book.

 

[42!]

I was just wondering if reciprocity would also allow you to avoid state restrictions like post ban mags (MA) and bullet limits like in NY.

This is a good question since the bill defines handguns as the handgun, magazine, and ammo. So it can easily be said that a magazine, any magazine, that you can posses under a state license, would be legal in any other state.

Now before anyone says this is incorrect, and that a state can still enforce laws regarding mags, consider this. MA regulates ammo possession. If the definition of handgun in the bill doesn't cover ammo then you would be able to carry a gun but not ammo, pretty useless that way. And even the most lib judge isn't going to take the position that the bill covers guns but not ammo. Consequently, since they (mags and ammo) are defined in exactly the same way in the bill, they would both be covered in the same way... At least that's my opinion.

My biggest problem isn't with the bill, it's that it will require a test case to see if MA is going to honor it. I wouldn't want to be the one locked up while it gets settled, and I wouldn't want this to happen to anyone else. So the question, as I see it, is there any way to get an "official" position on this and challenge it in Fed court based on that alone. I thought I read something somewhere where it wasn't necessary to place oneself in legal jeopardy in order to do this, but I can't remember where.

 

[allen-1]

Getting a MA NR LTC isn't difficult, it just takes forever and cost money. However, getting an unrestricted NR LTC in MA is a bit tricky as you need specific reasons that put you in the "we'll issue unrestricted" category. But at least with even a restricted NR LTC you can transport it locked in a case (any case) unloaded, so that possession is legal. MA will fight reciprocity so that you'll grow old before (if the law passes) it goes into affect here.

Hey Len. It's that "just takes forever and cost money". And has to be renewed every year.

But it IS getting better. Non resident now requires in person appearance only every six years, in Chelsea. That's doable.

 

[fishgutzy]

What are the odds she will still direct that all out of state conceal carriers caught with a concealed pistol in MA be arrested, held without bail, and told they can try arguing in court that the federal law protects them? All of the MA courts up to SJC will side with her. It will take years to get to federal court.
NY does the same thing with people passing through while legally transporting firearms between two points where they are legal.

 

[fishgutzy]

My biggest problem isn't with the bill, it's that it will require a test case to see if MA is going to honor it. I wouldn't want to be the one locked up while it gets settled, and I wouldn't want this to happen to anyone else. So the question, as I see it, is there any way to get an "official" position on this and challenge it in Fed court based on that alone. I thought I read something somewhere where it wasn't necessary to place oneself in legal jeopardy in order to do this, but I can't remember where.

Exactly. Though you can bet that Every MA judge is going to side with Healy. The person who becomes the test case will spend several years locked up without bail until the case gets to federal court.
Under Healy law, if one got caught with a Sig P320 with standard 17 round mag and 2 spare mags one could face over 30 years in prison if sentenced consecutively. Healy would use that threat to coerce a guilty plea.
I'll have to look up that "gun definition" in the law. If true, that does bode well. I'd hate to risk life and liberty because I grabbed the 12 round mags for my P320 subcompact instead of 10 before a trip to visit family in MA.
And one would not have to stock up on Guard Dog ammo if travel through NJ or some other state that stupidly bans the much safer hollow point defensive ammo.

 

[42!]

Exactly. Though you can bet that Every MA judge is going to side with Healy. The person who becomes the test case will spend several years locked up without bail until the case gets to federal court.
Under Healy law, if one got caught with a Sig P320 with standard 17 round mag and 2 spare mags one could face over 30 years in prison if sentenced consecutively. Healy would use that threat to coerce a guilty plea.
I'll have to look up that "gun definition" in the law. If true, that does bode well. I'd hate to risk life and liberty because I grabbed the 12 round mags for my P320 subcompact instead of 10 before a trip to visit family in MA.
And one would not have to stock up on Guard Dog ammo if travel through NJ or some other state that stupidly bans the much safer hollow point defensive ammo.

Don't go FR, a possession charge by itself isn't going to get you locked up without bail and you'll probably be free until all the appeals are done. So maybe one overnight, not that that is nothing. It's the money and time to get to the fed court and get a favorable ruling.

 

[namedpipes]

We need a homeless person with no future but no criminal history either and otherwise qualified for gun ownership, provide him with one and entrap the MSP into arresting him (or her, let's not assume).

He'll be well compensated for his sacrifice and if worst comes to worst he's still better off than on the streets.

 

[fishgutzy]

Don't go FR, a possession charge by itself isn't going to get you locked up without bail and you'll probably be free until all the appeals are done. So maybe one overnight, not that that is nothing. It's the money and time to get to the fed court and get a favorable ruling.

"Free" but probably stuck in the state for the duration.
For now, if CCR passes, I'll err on the side of caution and use it as an excuse to buy a VP9SK. The standard mag is 10 round. No accidental 12 round mag

 

[Dadstoys]

That's why the law needs teeth or it's a waste of paper.
NY, NJ or MA. tries to go full retard on someone ?
Immediate arrests for civil rights violations.
Treat it no differently than a black person or a woman being arrested for attempting to vote.

 

[rocket500]

My understanding of the bill is that states will not be able to limit mag capacity or ammo type (I am looking at you NJ).

 

[Whutmeworry]

“In the aftermath of so many mass shootings, it would be tragic for this to become the next deadly loophole in our nation’s gun laws,” said Healey, a Democrat who has aggressively enforced the state’s gun laws in recent years."

More like: "...said Healey, a Democrat who has UNILATERALLY DECREED AND enforced NEW state gun laws in recent years."

 

[wahsben]

“In the aftermath of so many mass shootings, it would be tragic for this to become the next deadly loophole in our nation’s gun laws,” said Healey, a Democrat who has aggressively enforced the state’s gun laws in recent years."

More like: "...said Healey, a Democrat who has UNILATERALLY DECREED AND enforced NEW state gun laws in recent years."

Yeah, gun laws that disarmed the innocent in almost every instance so that they were easily slaughtered.

 

[xero2099]

We need a homeless person with no future but no criminal history either and otherwise qualified for gun ownership, provide him with one and entrap the MSP into arresting him (or her, let's not assume).

He'll be well compensated for his sacrifice and if worst comes to worst he's still better off than on the streets.

a bit heartless but you cant make an omelette with out breaking a few eggs

 

[namedpipes]

a bit heartless but you cant make an omelette with out breaking a few eggs

Well of course I didn't mean setting someone up for a fall! I mean someone willing to risk the consequences. I think someone questioned (in one of these threads) whether someone actually has to be "harmed" to take the state to court, but IANAL.

That said, yeah. I'm not very nice. Ask anyone.

 

[MGnoob]

What i can't figure out is how people have as many as 10 DUIs and are still driving,
But DUIS are such a serious issue that even one can leave you a PP for life.

Im not saying DUI is acceptable, its just one example of slowly moving the goal post till everyone is a PP..

As far as drunk southerners being dangerous... if you look at the statstics the only gun violence they may bring to MA is commiting suicide while here for work or Vacation..which while sad doesnt really have much to do with anything.

 

[Fattman]

Just a reminder... Dan Shores (R) is mounting a run against her. You can donate here http://www.danshores.com

I've said it before, he may not stand a snowball's chance but I've wasted money on much more foolish things.

Donated and urge all to do the same.

 

[Crotchrocket]

So it’s almost 2018 how are we going to get rid of her?

She had roughly twice the campaign dollars and twice the votes last election in 2014. Dollars = votes.

 

[CatSnoutSoup]

Don’t see it mentioned here — Dana Loesch calls out Healey infront of more than a half million Twitter followers.

 

[Boris]

Don’t see it mentioned here — Dana Loesch calls out Healey infront of more than a half million Twitter followers.

this is excellent, where is Cosmic to retweet this back to Mora, we need some back-n-forth fight here. Mora needs some national attention to her antics.

 

[Fattman]

So it’s almost 2018 how are we going to get rid of her?

She had roughly twice the campaign dollars and twice the votes last election in 2014. Dollars = votes.

With your donations.

 

[DispositionMatrix]

What are the odds she will still direct that all out of state conceal carriers caught with a concealed pistol in MA be arrested, held without bail, and told they can try arguing in court that the federal law protects them? All of the MA courts up to SJC will side with her. It will take years to get to federal court.
NY does the same thing with people passing through while legally transporting firearms between two points where they are legal.

I have just been assuming that is what would happen. Ban state AGs would simply nullify the law, each trying to out-PR the other in making as big a show of it as possible to impress the disarmament lobby base and the DNC.

 

[Bfatz]