Sure I'd love to see "constitutional carry" in MA, I'd love to see it in FL, thank God we have it in NH and something like 30 other states.
As much as the good Doctor wants to tilt at the windmills known as the Commonwealth of MA, he is ignoring the decisions of the U S Supreme Court.
We, as a group and as individuals have had some favorable rulings over the last 15 years from the U S Supreme Court.
Granted none have been slam dunk in our favor, but I'll take the small gains when I can get them and hope for more.
Even in the Bruen case, which most have seen as a giant leap in restoring 2A rights, it still allows, as in Heller, the States to have licensing for firearms.
What Bruen did was void limitations on carrying outside of the home, affirming that you have a right to bear arms outside your home.
It also removed discretionary licensing... for the most part.
If you are not a PP, felon, or have some other statutory disqualifier, you should be able to get, if required in your home state, a license or permit to carry concealed subject to the limitations as laid out in various Supreme Court decisions.
As for out of state... good question.... that is still being debated.... personally if you are licensed in one state, it should be good for all, but not all licenses are valid across state lines.... my drivers license is, my Appraisers license is not.
MA will never be a constitutional carry state until they are forced to be by a Supreme Court decision, but states are free to adapt constitutional carry if they wish.
We all hoped Bruen would be the decision that finally stopped the BS, but unfortunately compromises are made when arguing law, and although many suggest Justice Thomas wanted to rip the states a new rear facing bodily orifice, in order to get six Justices to hand down the decision we got, a middle ground was found among them as to the rule of law.
The Good Doctors case is not going to be settled in the MA courts in our favor. Never. Ever.
And his chances of getting into the Federal Courts and getting a decision in his favor are currently IMHO zero, at least in this district.
There is a one in about 500,000 chance that his case could make it to the Supreme Court and be accepted.
He better hope it can be done before the ideological makeup of the court changes.
Even then he is going to need a group with deep pockets on his side.
I don't see GOAL, the NRA, Pink Pistols, or any other group rushing to his side.
Frankly he is not the person we want as the face of such a monumental task.
He is not going to get the sympathy of many people.
Russell Booker and Michael Wyman were the wrong people to be the face of a challenge to Lautenberg, and we lost that one in a big way..... yes or no have you stopped beating your wife..... I have expressed my opinions on Lautenberg before..... it has stripped more law abiding citizens of their gun rights without due process or even having criminal charges filed.... than any other law in American history.
When dealing with high stakes decisions, it helps to have a sympathetic plaintiff.
In the good Doctors case, even if for the sake of conversation say that he is correct in his position and the law is wrong, he is not IMHO the right person to be the face of that battle.
The guy who got nabbed the other day by BPD for "carrying concealed in violation of his T&H restrictions " would be a much better face to put in front of the public IMHO
As much as the good Doctor wants to tilt at the windmills known as the Commonwealth of MA, he is ignoring the decisions of the U S Supreme Court.
We, as a group and as individuals have had some favorable rulings over the last 15 years from the U S Supreme Court.
Granted none have been slam dunk in our favor, but I'll take the small gains when I can get them and hope for more.
Even in the Bruen case, which most have seen as a giant leap in restoring 2A rights, it still allows, as in Heller, the States to have licensing for firearms.
What Bruen did was void limitations on carrying outside of the home, affirming that you have a right to bear arms outside your home.
It also removed discretionary licensing... for the most part.
If you are not a PP, felon, or have some other statutory disqualifier, you should be able to get, if required in your home state, a license or permit to carry concealed subject to the limitations as laid out in various Supreme Court decisions.
As for out of state... good question.... that is still being debated.... personally if you are licensed in one state, it should be good for all, but not all licenses are valid across state lines.... my drivers license is, my Appraisers license is not.
MA will never be a constitutional carry state until they are forced to be by a Supreme Court decision, but states are free to adapt constitutional carry if they wish.
We all hoped Bruen would be the decision that finally stopped the BS, but unfortunately compromises are made when arguing law, and although many suggest Justice Thomas wanted to rip the states a new rear facing bodily orifice, in order to get six Justices to hand down the decision we got, a middle ground was found among them as to the rule of law.
The Good Doctors case is not going to be settled in the MA courts in our favor. Never. Ever.
And his chances of getting into the Federal Courts and getting a decision in his favor are currently IMHO zero, at least in this district.
There is a one in about 500,000 chance that his case could make it to the Supreme Court and be accepted.
He better hope it can be done before the ideological makeup of the court changes.
Even then he is going to need a group with deep pockets on his side.
I don't see GOAL, the NRA, Pink Pistols, or any other group rushing to his side.
Frankly he is not the person we want as the face of such a monumental task.
He is not going to get the sympathy of many people.
Russell Booker and Michael Wyman were the wrong people to be the face of a challenge to Lautenberg, and we lost that one in a big way..... yes or no have you stopped beating your wife..... I have expressed my opinions on Lautenberg before..... it has stripped more law abiding citizens of their gun rights without due process or even having criminal charges filed.... than any other law in American history.
When dealing with high stakes decisions, it helps to have a sympathetic plaintiff.
In the good Doctors case, even if for the sake of conversation say that he is correct in his position and the law is wrong, he is not IMHO the right person to be the face of that battle.
The guy who got nabbed the other day by BPD for "carrying concealed in violation of his T&H restrictions " would be a much better face to put in front of the public IMHO
