• 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.

MA AG situation

zork51 said:
Dumb question. Why hasn't any of the orgs for gun rights in this state sent a lawyer in to file an injunction, counter suit, whatever you want to call it?????
Click to expand...

I'm no lawyer, but perhaps because no one has been charged yet under this new "guidance". At this point, she just stated her opinion, really. But unfortunately for us, that opinion comes with weight and possible consequences.

But there has to be a limit, if she said that she is issuing guidance that all gas powered cars are illegal now in MA because they violate her new interpetation of the clean air act, I don't think they would have to lock up a dealer before there was some sort of challenge.

Could this be considered interfering in interstate commerce?
 
zork51 said:
Dumb question. Why hasn't any of the orgs for gun rights in this state sent a lawyer in to file an injunction, counter suit, whatever you want to call it?????
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure they're pondering their next move, however, they want to make sure it's the *right* move, and they also don't want to tip their hand.
 
An injunction could be filed, but with the courts/judges in this state, they can easily deny any Motion that is filed. Let Comm2a handle it.
 
zork51 said:
Dumb question. Why hasn't any of the orgs for gun rights in this state sent a lawyer in to file an injunction, counter suit, whatever you want to call it?????
Click to expand...

Because filing a lawsuit without having done your homework means you are destined to lose and lose quickly. You only have one bite at that apple -- that loss would create precedent that would make a future lawsuit much more difficult (if possible at all).

Chances are it will be months before a lawsuit is brought and years before it is resolved. Our chances of having it resolved in our favor are probably less than 50-50.
 
zork51 said:
Dumb question. Why hasn't any of the orgs for gun rights in this state sent a lawyer in to file an injunction, counter suit, whatever you want to call it?????
Click to expand...

Good, thoughtful and successful litigation is seldom swift or dramatic. I always admired The Good Wife for their ability to litigate complex legal cases in 60 minutes. In reality, it's downright anti-climactic.
 
Knuckle Dragger said:
Good, thoughtful and successful litigation is seldom swift or dramatic. I always admired The Good Wife for their ability to litigate complex legal cases in 60 minutes. In reality, it's downright anti-climactic.
Click to expand...

Correction . . . 40 minutes, you have to remove the commercials! [laugh]

Everything looks so easy on TV. Too bad real life isn't like a TV show, right?
 
Knuckle Dragger said:
Good, thoughtful and successful litigation is seldom swift or dramatic. I always admired The Good Wife for their ability to litigate complex legal cases in 60 minutes. In reality, it's downright anti-climactic.
Click to expand...

Judge Wapner was faster than that... [rofl]



-Mike
 
Last edited by a moderator:
My sense is the AG's letter, ultimately, will not stand up to judicial review and she knows it. Rather, this attempt at regulation is merely a stall that effectively freezes all transfers while the legal challenges work their way through the system. In the interim I suspect she is hoping new ban legislation will pass at either the state or federal level making the issue moot. It seems pretty clear Baker would probably sign such a bill into law and likely with an emergency preamble so it would go into effect immediately rather than have the normal 90 day implementation period. If Hillary wins in November and she has sufficient coattails to carry either the House and/or the Senate we all know what to expect from the feds. The shame is even though the AG's actions are, ultimately, found to be unlawful the effects will still be the same. She will have cut off transfers and avoided a period of "panic" buying. How any new laws may affect those who already possess the forbidden items remains to be seen. All that leaves very little room for optimism.
 
Thanks for replies. I wasn't paying any attention in 1998 about my rights when Scott Harshbarger made "the list". This recent move however that was the full definition of sneaky dirty politics. Was there ever a challenge to Harshbarger's ruling? And if so by whom?

I hope the whole USA is watching what Hillary's pal is trying to do here. What does it say about the single party rule in Boston, when dealers and citizens comply, obey the law, and register? This should be a talking point for Trump when he's on tour.

BTW, Clinton Cash is showing for free on www.breitbart.com , now THAT is really scary.
 
aeromarine said:
My sense is the AG's letter, ultimately, will not stand up to judicial review and she knows it. Rather, this attempt at regulation is merely a stall that effectively freezes all transfers while the legal challenges work their way through the system. In the interim I suspect she is hoping new ban legislation will pass at either the state or federal level making the issue moot. It seems pretty clear Baker would probably sign such a bill into law and likely with an emergency preamble so it would go into effect immediately rather than have the normal 90 day implementation period. If Hillary wins in November and she has sufficient coattails to carry either the House and/or the Senate we all know what to expect from the feds. The shame is even though the AG's actions are, ultimately, found to be unlawful the effects will still be the same. She will have cut off transfers and avoided a period of "panic" buying. How any new laws may affect those who already possess the forbidden items remains to be seen. All that leaves very little room for optimism.
Click to expand...


If HRC wins, she doesn't need the house/senate. All she needs to do is appoint anti-gun progressive justices to SCOTUS and they will do the dirty work for her.
 
Was there ever a challenge to Harshbarger's ruling? And if so by whom?
Click to expand...
Comm2a brought a challenge, which was rejected by both the federal district court and the 3 judge appellate panel. En Banc review was denied.

The decision, particularly the appellate one, made it clear that no argument would get the court to issue a pro-gun ruling. The original court (single judge) started out saying that he "found the AG's argument compelling" before he even heard testimony.
 
Hope is lost. Grab what you can and hunker down. Econmic crash and ww3 is coming. The only thing that makes me happy about it is that Trump has exposed everyone and this will happen on obama/hrc watch. Maybe when we emerge from this shitstorm in 2025 we can go back and follow the constitution as we were intended to
 
VetteGirlMA said:
Isn't that happening now with Baker having an opportunity to shape the court in a way that no other governor has been able to do in the past? Maybe there is some hope left after all.
Click to expand...
This is the Baker who supports the ban. This is the Baker who doesn't care that thousands of law abiding citizens are now potential felons. This is the Baker who didn't listen to the same people cry for help and did nothing. This is the same Baker who...

Yeah he's going to appoint some "winners". Ed King of Governors ("Making it in Massachusetts").
 
Rob Boudrie said:
Comm2a brought a challenge, which was rejected by both the federal district court and the 3 judge appellate panel. En Banc review was denied.

The decision, particularly the appellate one, made it clear that no argument would get the court to issue a pro-gun ruling. The original court (single judge) started out saying that he "found the AG's argument compelling" before he even heard testimony.
Click to expand...

Rob, I don't think he was referring to the Glock case via Comm2A. If I read him correctly he was referring to a challenge back ~1998 . . . that was GOAL with a dying org called American Shooting <something or other, don't recall the rest of the name> which we lost . . . GOAL was dismissed from the lawsuit as having no standing and the other org died, so no appeal was filed.
 
snax said:
Hope is lost. Grab what you can and hunker down. Econmic crash and ww3 is coming. The only thing that makes me happy about it is that Trump has exposed everyone and this will happen on obama/hrc watch. Maybe when we emerge from this shitstorm in 2025 we can go back and follow the constitution as we were intended to
Click to expand...

2025??? Wow that's not even a whole decade from now! I can do that standing on my head. So what you're saying is the AG ban won't even last as long as the federal AWB![laugh]
 

Similar threads

MA compliant uppers - in Mil or shipped to MA
Replies
26
Views
546
Spartan65
Spartan65
Turkey Hunting in MA
Replies
29
Views
553
HorizontalHunter
HorizontalHunter
Shipping gold chain from Fla to Ma?
2
Replies
57
Views
760
Sentenza
S
Ma. gun auction on-line based Worcester, Ma.
2
Replies
54
Views
2K
Reptile
Reptile
MA Out of state LTC
Replies
19
Views
352
drgrant
drgrant
Back
Top Bottom