Supreme court case against MA on guns

[Amputee Marksman]

They should be honoring other states LTCs. Article IV, section I of the US Constitution, the full faith and credit clause is the justification for recognition of other states marriage licenses, drivers licenses, etc. Setting aside the obvious infringement that a pistol permit is for a moment, why don’t other states recognize them? Why has nobody ever used this in a court case where someone got pinched with a gun in an anti state?

Drivers license reciprocity wasn't always around. I was a GI brat and back in the 60s I remember both my Mom and Dad have multiple DLs. They each had one for their state of legal residence and then they would get one for whatever state we were living in. We had just moved from CA to Arkansas and my Dad got pulled over. He had a CA and MA DL. I remember him giving the cop the MA license because at the time MA was his official residence. Not sure when all they changed, probably soon after.

 

[rali]

I’m sure he was too busy f***ing a goat or something like that to care. he’s not even a real “mover” anti, he basically hard panders to them for political purposes because it’s pretty obvious there are a lot of anti voters in his district….. most of his legislation is garbage and he even knows that upfront he just files it so that the antis will jerk off over it and tell him what a “nice guy” he is. Considering that those types of people are usually dumber than boxes of rocks his ruse works on them pretty well more than likely…..

Gratuitous swipe: Eldridge is Linsky Lite.

 

[Orangeneck]

Jared should know that stuff. Very disappointing if he doesn't.

Jared is not a lawyer.

Tucker on TV is a right wing bully looking to sell your eyeballs to advertisers. He's an ass on TV. He's not that guy in real life. It's an act just like O'Really was.



Stun guns. Broadswords. Automatic-open knives. Ninja stars. Suddenly, all of the stupid carry laws in all the states could be eliminated.



I'm enjoying the SC making hte mASS SJC irrelevant. "Sorry. You're just wrong. Go back to your waterfront mansion and sip you creaaaahnberry juuze."



I can't watch Armed Scholar. It's like watching Patrick from Sponge Bob. He's just not dynamic at all.

I tend to watch Langley Outdoors most often b/c his schtick is predictable so I can FF easily to the meat of the story.

Try Four Boxes Dinner. Host is a constitutional lawyer and a member of the SCOTUS bar. He has much more insights into how SCOTUS works. For example, he noticed that the latest bump stock ruling may not be a defeat. Someone at SCOTUS kept this case alive by re-calendaring it 20 times. None of the other 2A channels even noticed this fact.

 

[Drix]

Drivers license reciprocity wasn't always around. I was a GI brat and back in the 60s I remember both my Mom and Dad have multiple DLs. They each had one for their state of legal residence and then they would get one for whatever state we were living in. We had just moved from CA to Arkansas and my Dad got pulled over. He had a CA and MA DL. I remember him giving the cop the MA license because at the time MA was his official residence. Not sure when all they changed, probably soon after.

I'm wondering if we're going to return to this as a country. MA has question 4 for drivers licenses for illegal aliens on the ballot- I'm wondering if in the future we'll see states start to not accept licenses for illegals.

Admittedly, I don't know how they would tease that information out and if there's a leg to stand on, but I imagine Florida and Texas absolutely would not accept it if they knew.

 

[appraiser]

well if you have a CDL you can only have one license, that is a Federal law

It may even be for regular too, as Florida used to issue "in state only" licenses to us snowbirds that owned property so we could get the resident discounts at theme parks and such, but that stopped.... you can't even get a Florida State ID if you have a valid drivers license in another state.

 

[Amputee Marksman]

I'm wondering if we're going to return to this as a country. MA has question 4 for drivers licenses for illegal aliens on the ballot- I'm wondering if in the future we'll see states start to not accept licenses for illegals.

And that is exactly the slippery slope we are on with LTCs. Some states "don't trust" the other states to do a good job determining who should have a license or they believe no one should so there is no real reciprocity. If you look at the history of DLs it was the same way until the Feds stepped in and put a stop to it.

 

[Amputee Marksman]

well if you have a CDL you can only have one license, that is a Federal law

It may even be for regular too, as Florida used to issue "in state only" licenses to us snowbirds that owned property so we could get the resident discounts at theme parks and such, but that stopped.... you can't even get a Florida State ID if you have a valid drivers license in another state.

I move to CA way back 90. Went to the DMV to get a DL. They asked if I had a DL and I said yes, from MA. I took the test and got my CA DL. They told me send your old one back to MA but they never took it. I never sent it back. I was back in MA enough to renew the MA DL. For the next 6 or 7 years I had 2 DLs. Totally against the law from what I understand.

 

[Len-2A Training]

well if you have a CDL you can only have one license, that is a Federal law

It may even be for regular too, as Florida used to issue "in state only" licenses to us snowbirds that owned property so we could get the resident discounts at theme parks and such, but that stopped.... you can't even get a Florida State ID if you have a valid drivers license in another state.

It is Fed law that you can only have 1 DL OR non-driver ID. It became law a long time ago now as truckers frequently had many DLs and if they lost their DL in one state, they just used a different one. Of course this was before CDLs and all the computerization of everything.

When my Wife and I moved to CT back in early 1970s, we kept our MA DL and both got CT DLs. We used my Parents' address and renewed as needed. When we moved back to MA a few years later, we just let our CT DL die a natural death and continued on. When we moved to NH, NH DMV confiscated the MA DLs and issued us NH DLs.

 

[Coyote33]

I can't watch Armed Scholar. It's like watching Patrick from Sponge Bob. He's just not dynamic at all.

I tend to watch Langley Outdoors most often b/c his schtick is predictable so I can FF easily to the meat of the story.

Jared is not a lawyer.

Try Four Boxes Dinner. Host is a constitutional lawyer and a member of the SCOTUS bar. He has much more insights into how SCOTUS works. For example, he noticed that the latest bump stock ruling may not be a defeat. Someone at SCOTUS kept this case alive by re-calendaring it 20 times. None of the other 2A channels even noticed this fact.

Go back and see this post, and the ones a couple after:

Supreme Court - NYSRPA v. Bruen - Megathread

View: https://youtu.be/cIrPazXSfoA?t=58 Silly question, who ARE all these guys doing these videos? What kind of credentials do they have? How correct, or serious, are they? Are these just one person's opinion? There's probably at least 5 different ones in this thread alone. Sure, they provide...

www.northeastshooters.com

 

[connor]

Drivers license reciprocity wasn't always around. I was a GI brat and back in the 60s I remember both my Mom and Dad have multiple DLs. They each had one for their state of legal residence and then they would get one for whatever state we were living in. We had just moved from CA to Arkansas and my Dad got pulled over. He had a CA and MA DL. I remember him giving the cop the MA license because at the time MA was his official residence. Not sure when all they changed, probably soon after.

License plates didn’t used to be legal either. Long haul truckers would have a little plate for every state they were gonna go through, eventually they got smart and you got a plate from your home state and one plate all subdivided out with embossed borders and a sticker for each state. They were called stickerboxes, bingo boards or prorate plates.

 

[Brad.in.IL]

Look closer at the shirt...

How about this shirt ??

Clarence Thomas Hope T-shirt

He's the brave leader who brought this nation hope and change: Clarence Thomas. Show the world you support this based icon with this beautiful design. • 100% combed and ring-spun cotton (Heather colors contain polyester) • Fabric weight: 4.2 oz/yd² (142 g/m²) • Pre-shrunk fabric • Side-seamed...

shop.babylonbee.com

 

[pastera]

For all the talk of driver's licenses not having federal reciprocity - strawman.

2nd amendment is an incorporated right. No other civil right is allowed to be infringed and eclipsed for simply not being in your state of residence.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

For all the talk of driver's licenses not having federal reciprocity - strawman.

2nd amendment is an incorporated right. No other civil right is allowed to be infringed and eclipsed for simply not being in your state of residence.

Nor does any other enumerated right require a license to exercise.

 

[pastera]

Nor does any other enumerated right require a license to exercise.

Which is why I believe all permit to possess schema will fall quickly (<3 years)
Licenses for public carry should fall but the pesky training stuff may preclude that unless firearms training is added to basic educational curriculum.

 

[Garys]

What is the training required to vote or write a letter to the editor?

Which is why I believe all permit to possess schema will fall quickly (<3 years)
Licenses for public carry should fall but the pesky training stuff may preclude that unless firearms training is added to basic educational curriculum.

 

[pastera]

What is the training required to vote or write a letter to the editor?

I already covered that
Kids go to compulsory education where they get education in reading comprehension and writing skills along with civics and social studies.
There is also that pesky prefatory clause in the 2nd that speaks to well regulated which means trained.

Don't shoot the messenger - I don't like it either but training for public carry will very likely be found constitutional because the framers found it important enough to mention its necessity to the state.

 

[Garys]

Based on the number of semi coherent medical reports I read every week I see no reason to believe the schools teach reading or writing.

Training doesn't mean formal instruction. Especially since just about everyone owned guns at the time the Constitution was written.

I already covered that
Kids go to compulsory education where they get education in reading comprehension and writing skills along with civics and social studies.
There is also that pesky prefatory clause in the 2nd that speaks to well regulated which means trained.

Don't shoot the messenger - I don't like it either but training for public carry will very likely be found constitutional because the framers found it important enough to mention its necessity to the state.

 

[pastera]

Based on the number of semi coherent medical reports I read every week I see no reason to believe the schools teach reading or writing.

Training doesn't mean formal instruction. Especially since just about everyone owned guns at the time the Constitution was written.

Did you read the Judge's TRO?
If you did then you would understand why Iam making these statements
In his denial of restraint for the training requirement he specifically calls out that in the time of the founding handling of arms was common knowledge however it is not today.

Since I homeschooled my children and had them compete in speech and debate, I am completely aware of how bad the schools are. The government doesn't care about achievement, only can the jobsworth checking your paperwork check off all of the boxes.

 

[Coyote33]

There is also that pesky prefatory clause in the 2nd that speaks to well regulated which means trained.

Trained in militia things. Maybe like maneuvers, group things?

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Trained in militia things. Maybe like maneuvers, group things?

Greenoch, perhaps?

 

[pastera]

Trained in militia things. Maybe like maneuvers, group things?

And all of military training is drill&ceremony?
Oh, and a bunch of diversity stuff too.

Again, I'm a messenger interpreting what I see in the recent cases. I don't agree with the message but I'm not going to stick my head in the sand and pretend it doesn't exist.
Bruen says an analog must exist in TH&T. The antis have dropped the idea that "regulated" means restrictions in law and picked up on the true meaning of trained. Courts love to split the baby so training and sensitive places are the part given to appease them (they are never appeased but thats a different discussion)

 

[Picton]

Based on the number of semi coherent medical reports I read every week I see no reason to believe the schools teach reading or writing.

Training doesn't mean formal instruction. Especially since just about everyone owned guns at the time the Constitution was written.

@pastera is not advocating what you seem to think he's advocating. He's simply telling us what the rulings say, which most of us (myself included) lack the time and attention span to read and report back. He is. That's a tremendous service he's providing.

The key is to actually listen to what he's saying. Your quibbles on this issue are not with Pastera, they're with the courts. Including SCOTUS. They're the ones who said some level (any level) of training and licensure are constitutional. And because they said it, those requirements are not going anywhere, no matter what you and I feel about it.

 

[SFC13557]

@pastera is not advocating what you seem to think he's advocating. He's simply telling us what the rulings say, which most of us (myself included) lack the time and attention span to read and report back. He is. That's a tremendous service he's providing.

The key is to actually listen to what he's saying. Your quibbles on this issue are not with Pastera, they're with the courts. Including SCOTUS. They're the ones who said some level (any level) of training and licensure are constitutional. And because they said it, those requirements are not going anywhere, no matter what you and I feel about it.

Great assessment of his posts.

 

[babygorilla]

Bruen says an analog must exist in TH&T. The antis have dropped the idea that "regulated" means restrictions in law and picked up on the true meaning of trained. Courts love to split the baby so training and sensitive places are the part given to appease them (they are never appeased but thats a different discussion)

The one glaring pro2a advocates have is that any "training" conducted in the use of firearms in preparation for being part of a militia was not provided by .gov or .mil historically, but by father to son when they came of age to hunt and defend the family. Hell, they were expected to show up with their own arms and ammo.

 

[pastera]

The one glaring pro2a advocates have is that any "training" conducted in the use of firearms in preparation for being part of a militia was not provided by .gov or .mil historically, but by father to son when they came of age to hunt and defend the family. Hell, they were expected to show up with their own arms and ammo.

True - the judge noted that training was part of culture in years past.

 

[babygorilla]

True - the judge noted that training was part of culture in years past.

And since Bruen forces them to consider historical precedent, not balancing, they cannot enforce formal training.

 

[Picton]

And since Bruen forces them to consider historical precedent, not balancing, they cannot enforce formal training.

Well, but that's not quite what the Court said.

 

[babygorilla]

Well, but that's not quite what the Court said.

In the RO. Which is preliminary and not a judgement of the facts of the case.
Meaning, the judge looked at very little evidence, used his discretionary judgement and said yeah, that ain't gonna fly. A smart lawyer will show that prior to the inception of the NRA there was no formal education in the use of firearms provided to the GP / members of the militia.

 

[Picton]

In the RO. Which is preliminary and not a judgement of the facts of the case.
Meaning, the judge looked at very little evidence, used his discretionary judgement and said yeah, that ain't gonna fly. A smart lawyer will show that prior to the inception of the NRA there was no formal education in the use of firearms provided to the GP / members of the militia.

I was talking about Bruen.

 

[Chevy 2 65]

They should be honoring other states LTCs. Article IV, section I of the US Constitution, the full faith and credit clause is the justification for recognition of other states marriage licenses, drivers licenses, etc. Setting aside the obvious infringement that a pistol permit is for a moment, why don’t other states recognize them? Why has nobody ever used this in a court case where someone got pinched with a gun in an anti state?

It truly is ridiculous that people can not carry a pistol in all 50 states. It is a right like all others, but everyone ignores it.
There really is no valid argument on why people can't carry in all 50 states. To me it's plain as day. Which other rights do you lose when crossing a made up line.
Answer : NONE.

Bill of Rights​

• First Amendment [Religion, Speech, Press, Assembly, Petition (1791)] (see explanation)
• Second Amendment [Right to Bear Arms (1791)] (see explanation)
• Third Amendment [Quartering of Troops (1791)] (see explanation)
• Fourth Amendment [Search and Seizure (1791)] (see explanation)
• Fifth Amendment [Grand Jury, Double Jeopardy, Self-Incrimination, Due Process (1791)] (see explanation)
• Sixth Amendment [Criminal Prosecutions - Jury Trial, Right to Confront and to Counsel (1791)] (see explanation)
• Seventh Amendment [Common Law Suits - Jury Trial (1791)] (see explanation)
• Eighth Amendment [Excess Bail or Fines, Cruel and Unusual Punishment (1791)] (see explanation)
• Ninth Amendment [Non-Enumerated Rights (1791)] (see explanation)
• Tenth Amendment [Rights Reserved to States or People (1791)] (see explanation)