What do we agree on? Current LTC/COP cases

depicts

Army Veteran
NES Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2006
Messages
4,627
Likes
527
Location
Massachusetts
Feedback: 20 / 0 / 0
In reading 80+ pages of posts in one thread alone, I see a lot of differences of opinion and points of view concerning laws, rights, permits, authority and more.

Some people have even said to "Stop Bickering" in those posts.

Well I want to know what we all can agree on. I don't know if this can help protect our rights, but I think I'd like to know what others feel are common areas of concern. I'll begin.

1.) Massachusetts licensing procedures are arbitrary and unfair.

2.) A law abiding citizen, who has not been shown to be a threat to society, or of diminished capacity has the right to possess firearms for self defense or any other reason.

3.) Blacks, women and minorities should all be treated the same. So should white people.

4.) A Chief of Police should not be the only person to grant a LTC. An impartial method needs to be established.

5.) None of us like getting pushed around, but we will take on this challenge to defend our rights as Ladies and Gentlemen. Let's be better than THEY are!


Can anyone add any or disagree with me?
 
Most would like to have Vermont law
with silencer/suppressor allowed

That would be ideal, but more realistically I'd settle for no license for purchase, owning, possession of a firearm (and ammo).

"Shall issue" for CCW; and by that I mean, no excessive fees, no burdensome or BS requirements, a simple background check and basic safety course should suffice (I know I'll probably get flamed by some for that [wink]).

National Reciprocity Licensing legislation (because realistically... MA will never honor other states CCW permits on it's own).
 
I think:

1) Convicted felons lose their right to own firearms

2) Crimes committed with a firearm should be punished HARSHLY.

Also, I think in this case the fed should require reciprocity (sp?) between the states.
 
Most would like to have Vermont law
with silencer/suppressor allowed
This: No license required.

"Shall issue" is a compromise, one that is common out in the free world and that would be far better than what we have now, but still a compromise.
 
I agree on no license.

Prohibited can only be by conviction of the act of a violent offense. No conspiracy BS.

Murder should be punished as murder, with or w/out a gun. Same for all other crimes, I don't support additional penalties for "hate crimes" or use of a "scary" tool.
 
I would be all for the same laws apply to all people across the USA and that they be fact based and impartial. The laws must be based on the premise that people have a right to self protection and self preservation. In other words 2A across the USA for all lawfull citizens. 2A being the right of individuals!
 
I think we should compile all of the gun laws across the country, take the lowest common denominators, and apply that. Essentially.....Vermont law, with suppressors. Done. Kind of like, ummmm, "the right to keep and bear arms", period.
 
This: No license required.

"Shall issue" is a compromise, one that is common out in the free world and that would be far better than what we have now, but still a compromise.

well said. the ultimate goal should not be a compromise. there will be stops along the way to the goal likely, but that doesn't mean we should loose track of the ultimate goal.
 
In my personal opinion, I will say that if a Driver License is good for all the states as well as a HS diploma, a bachelor diploma, etc, etc. a LTC or CCW should be the same, but once again that’s just my opinion.

Ish.
 
I'd love to see federal gun laws rolled back to 1933, Vermont carry for all, and Texas deadly force law for all. That said, we're not going to get that all at once. Here's what it would take for MA law to not piss me off every single day: Shall issue LTC-A no restrictions, no more handgun compliance BS, no more AWB, no more suppressor ban. I'd still keep trying to move further, but that would get me 90% of the way there.
 
I agree with all 5 of those depicts and the others as well. I am a pushover I guess. By the time I think of one there will be many already posted. It has taken very little to realize that I know nothing of the laws of the land and I am ashamed of that.

The actual lawyers and those who could be lawyers enlighten the masses which is great reading, and that will have to be enough for now. My hat is off to those who fight the fight in the courts and on the boards.
 
I'm with Jar, may issue, AWB, and handgun compliance are the three worst parts of this state. Ultimately, I'd like to see the NFA eliminated, but that won't happen overnight.
 
I'd love to see federal gun laws rolled back to 1933, Vermont carry for all, and Texas deadly force law for all.

Agreed. Then on to the state laws that also violate the Constitution.

I am probably in the minority but I don't agree with the prior felony conviction as a disqualifier... for several reasons.

-First, it is a useless gesture, purely political; guns are easily obtainable (just look at gangs, etc.)
-Second, I believe it violates the Constitution.
-Third, if we really believe these people are that dangerous they need to be kept in prison.

This is the way it used to be, and people weren't blowing each other away right and left. I may support the idea of having to be a citizen, or someone who is here from overseas legally to purchase and own a firearm. But that stems from my belief that illegals should be sent to jail and then deported asap. Flame away!
 
Most would like to have Vermont law
with silencer/suppressor allowed

For this to happen, correct me if I'm wrong, we'd also need for the MA AWB to be dropped to allow threaded barrels.

Getting silencer/suppressors to be allowed in MA is definitely a huge chunk of work since our NFA laws would need to be adjusted as well as the AWB.
 
Murder should be punished as murder, with or w/out a gun. Same for all other crimes, I don't support additional penalties for "hate crimes" or use of a "scary" tool.

This I agree with you on. If you kill, injure or rob someone with a knife, gun, bat brick or salad tong, it should be the same charge.

Here's what it would take for MA law to not piss me off every single day:

Maybe it's a good thing that the laws keep you pissed off, tha way you're less likely to be a frog basking in his slowly boiling pot of water...

Agreed. Then on to the state laws that also violate the Constitution.

I am probably in the minority but I don't agree with the prior felony conviction as a disqualifier... for several reasons.

-First, it is a useless gesture, purely political; guns are easily obtainable (just look at gangs, etc.)
-Second, I believe it violates the Constitution.
-Third, if we really believe these people are that dangerous they need to be kept in prison.

This is the way it used to be, and people weren't blowing each other away right and left. I may support the idea of having to be a citizen, or someone who is here from overseas legally to purchase and own a firearm. But that stems from my belief that illegals should be sent to jail and then deported asap. Flame away!

+1 to it all.

The 2A is easily the most important right we have because it holds the government in check. To allow the government to pass laws that prevent certain people from bearing arms goes directly against the spirit and purpose of the 2A.

To those who disagree with me, a little FYI for you, our founding fathers would all be federally prohibited persons today, because they committed violent felonies with their guns.

If a felon is so dangerous, there's no reason to ever let them out of prison. If they are out of prison, like every other human being they have basic human rights.

I'd like to see guns regulated as closely as shovels in the US. Freely available tools, no government involvement required to build, buy, carry modify or posess them, but harsh criminal penalties if one used it as a weapon against another.

Import bans, approved firearms rosters, licenses, 922 compliant rifle configurations and pre/post ban mags are all blatant violations of the 2A.
 
I'd like to see guns regulated as closely as shovels in the US. Freely available tools, no government involvement required to build, buy, carry modify or posess them, but harsh criminal penalties if one used it as a weapon against another.

You obviously haven't read up on your laws regarding short handled shovels as well as collapsible handles like camping shovels. [rofl]
 
This: No license required.

"Shall issue" is a compromise, one that is common out in the free world and that would be far better than what we have now, but still a compromise.

Agree!

If you compromise on a shall issue then you give them the wiggle room to get to where we are now.
 
Back
Top Bottom