• 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.

I need your help, and to help yourselves! *2A Battle*

I hope all went well at the hearing. Unfortunately, in this state there are only like what 15% of the population who have LTC/FID? I am assuming most of these LTC holders dont even EDC and are soccer mom and dads who got their LTC to just have one gun in the home for HD or hunting. They are completely fine or with the MGL or just do not care enough to fight it.. So it is most likely a small percentage of the gun owners who really care about the 2nd amendment. With the amount of people who are liberals and low percentage of people who believe in constitutional carry in this state just doesnt bode well for anyone willing to fight this.

Again, I hope it goes well Dr. Lu. Until something changes most of the people who EDC will always be a little paranoid that they are breaking the law somehow.
 

Attachments

  • 200-2.gif
    200-2.gif
    809.1 KB · Views: 0
The problem here (and it’s not just Massachusetts) is that we really, truly are NOT a nation of laws. Nor have we ever been so. We are a nation of political will. We will ALWAYS be a nation of political will. This was made clearer than ever for me after recently serving with several different European nations (NATO) in the Balkians. Our side just has to want what we want more than the other side, and to be willing to risk it all to do so. Laws (or the lack thereof) are just a reflection of political will, and are only enforced (or not enforced) by those who are most willing to put up a fight over them.

/rant
 
This is what I'm wondering about to. No way I'd want to tackle this without a VERY experienced 2a attorney and/or Comm2a etc.
I suspect they weren't interested and if that's true, it's probably because they don't want bad case law?

Just spitballing
There is also the blast radius danger. I believe that's what most firearms shingle holders are most concerned about. The case is the case. But the precident SET by a case impacts far more than parties in the case.

If an argument is too open and is used, even a win could cause negative consequences far down the line.

The OPs fight seems just. I just fear it's got a scary potential if it goes sideways.
 
I’m still free and fighting.
I have a lot of work to do,
putting some things together.
I will be keeping you posted.

God bless the people,
Long live the Republic!
where's the video of the hearing? it's you right to record it, you are recording it aren't you?
 
I only read three pages. Most of the articles are behind a pay wall. Doctor, Why didn’t you call me and let me know you were coming to town. I could’ve just stood there and It would have been legal…. Then we could’ve flown to a legal whorehouse..

Or even better stayed in Westfield and perverted on the trashy college kids..for free.

Send me a PM next time you come to town.

I’m not sure if you shoot in New Hampshire but I can come up there too.

Fight the good fight, That’s what I would do
 
I think what a lot of people are missing in the thread and in court is, you get to define what “winnning” is.

I’ve “won” more times then I can count. I definitely don’t feel like a “winner”

Sometimes representing yourself is a good idea…unless you loose.

I’m a f***ing moron and I’ve had serious criminal charges dropped in 3 days. You get the lawyers involved uoull be going to court for five or six years.

You could rape children or murder somebody and be out much quicker then going to court. Just pleed guilty! That’s what they’re counting on
 
There is exactly one case where representing yourself makes sense - when you want to try for a win, but would rather lose than pay the legal fees.
What’s the worst thing that could happen?
He’s a Doctor Who makes a fortune and will not be federally prohibited from owning a gun.

His punishment is that he should never come to Massachusetts again. I feel like that’s a win in itself..

My situation is no one ever making me leave my town, my house, my city, my state.

Sometimes you just have to say no and mean it
 
What’s the worst thing that could happen?
He’s a Doctor Who makes a fortune and will not be federally prohibited from owning a gun.

His punishment is that he should never come to Massachusetts again. I feel like that’s a win in itself..

My situation is no one ever making me leave my town, my house, my city, my state.

Sometimes you just have to say no and mean it
Pretty sure the worst that could happen is he is he becomes a convicted felon, Fed PP, and Prison.
I wouldn't be surprised if he lost his license to practice medicine as well, but that's minor in comparison.
 
Pretty sure the worst that could happen is he is he becomes a convicted felon, Fed PP, and Prison.
I wouldn't be surprised if he lost his license to practice medicine as well, but that's minor in comparison.
The worst that can happen to many professionals is loss of the professional license. Of course, in the Dr's case we have to distinguish between the two professional licenses :) - the LTC and the LTM (license to practice medicine).

It's interesting that the MA revocation order does not make any allegation of medical errors; patient neglect and that he shows ho record (limited report issued for last 10 years) of hospital discipline or paying/settling any malpractice suits.

The system has not been kind to his dissident behavior: (from docboard.org as of 3 minutes ago) . See details on www.docboard.org
 
Late to the party and I’m no lawyer but I wish the doc the best.

Hope he’s got a real 2A lawyer and not just a dude who charges $400/hr to sit and type up 9000 word legal docs nobody in MA judicial system is going to read.
 
Late to the party and I’m no lawyer but I wish the doc the best.

Hope he’s got a real 2A lawyer and not just a dude who charges $400/hr to sit and type up 9000 word legal docs nobody in MA judicial system is going to read.
He doesn't have a lawyer, representing himself according to the good DR.
 
I think the big question is, when the Doc loses will it just be him or will it set a precedent that will harm others as well.
 
I think the big question is, when the Doc loses will it just be him or will it set a precedent that will harm others as well.

Doubt, he's not the first guy that did this sort of thing in MA and wont be the last.
 
The worst that can happen to many professionals is loss of the professional license. Of course, in the Dr's case we have to distinguish between the two professional licenses :) - the LTC and the LTM (license to practice medicine).

It's interesting that the MA revocation order does not make any allegation of medical errors; patient neglect and that he shows ho record (limited report issued for last 10 years) of hospital discipline or paying/settling any malpractice suits.

The system has not been kind to his dissident behavior: (from docboard.org as of 3 minutes ago) . See details on www.docboard.org
Wish that link worked… Probably a good read
 
I think the big question is, when the Doc loses will it just be him or will it set a precedent that will harm others as well.
Trial courts don't create precedent. If our hero loses and appeals, it may be prudent for a 2A advocacy group to file an Amicus brief.
 
The good doctor should be lauded for not just talking about exercising his rights but actually doing so and not caving when challenged. We could all learn a lot from him. It’s easy to say that statutes violate the second amendment or that the 2A is my permit but it’s another thing entirely to do it.

If only we all could be as brave and actually stand on our convictions/beliefs.

I wish him the best of luck. I’m sure he knows how corrupt the judiciary is and how little they care about the constitution, laws, and people’s rights.
 
Back
Top Bottom