Commonwealth v. Caetano

[777GSOTB]

Smart, but out of character.

Not out of character at all. With the case ending here, and the law that Caetano was charged under remaining on the books, the criminals working for that institution will continue to imprison their citizens for exercising a fundamental right. And lets face it, with all the sheeple living in Masshole, it'll be quite some time to get another stun gun case before the USSC. If I were Caetano, I'd open carry a stun gun everywhere I went once they drop all the charges.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

Not out of character at all. With the case ending here, and the law that Caetano was charged under remaining on the books, the criminals working for that institution will continue to imprison their citizens for exercising a fundamental right. And lets face it, with all the sheeple living in Masshole, it'll be quite some time to get another stun gun case before the USSC. If I were Caetano, I'd open carry a stun gun everywhere I went once they drop all the charges.

You missed the point. They won't back down at all. They'll bend over backwards to find a constitutional justification for keeping the blanket ban in place.

 

[press1280]

New Entry: 06/29/2016 #26 JOINT STATUS LETTER and Suggestion of Mootness from Melissa Weisgold Johnsen (Mass Attorney), A.D.A.and Benjamin Keehn(Caetano Attorney), Esquire. See status on file.

Not sure where the file can be retrieved. "Suggestion of Mootness"? I would think all charges would need to be dropped, no?

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

New Entry: 06/29/2016 #26 JOINT STATUS LETTER and Suggestion of Mootness from Melissa Weisgold Johnsen (Mass Attorney), A.D.A.and Benjamin Keehn(Caetano Attorney), Esquire. See status on file.

Not sure where the file can be retrieved. "Suggestion of Mootness"? I would think all charges would need to be dropped, no?

Charges were dropped. The SJC will not be rehearing the case. The fate of Massachusetts's stun gun ban is still in limbo.

 

[krucam]

Charges were dropped. The SJC will not be rehearing the case. The fate of Massachusetts's stun gun ban is still in limbo.

Yeah, we'll need another Plaintiff to address the stun gun issue. The Per Curiam is still golden however...

 

[wolfwood]

Sounds like you guys need to file a new case in federal court. Sounds like some easy attonrey fees

 

[press1280]

Charges were dropped. The SJC will not be rehearing the case. The fate of Massachusetts's stun gun ban is still in limbo.

So I guess they'll try to leave the ban on the books, harass anyone arrested, and then fold when it gets to court?

 

[Kharn]

Yeah, we'll need another Plaintiff to address the stun gun issue. The Per Curiam is still golden however...

The Kolbe en banc panel's weasel-wording around the per curiam should be interesting reading.

 

[press1280]

The Kolbe en banc panel's weasel-wording around the per curiam should be interesting reading.

I think they'll probably try to tie the AR-15 to the M-16, using the line about M-16s and "the like", using that to eradicate any other points that help us, such as the fact there are far more AR-15s in circulation than stun guns.

 

[777GSOTB]

June 1st, 2016, 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by 777GSOTB View Post
Not out of character at all. With the case ending here, and the law that Caetano was charged under remaining on the books, the criminals working for that institution will continue to imprison their citizens for exercising a fundamental right. And lets face it, with all the sheeple living in Masshole, it'll be quite some time to get another stun gun case before the USSC. If I were Caetano, I'd open carry a stun gun everywhere I went once they drop all the charges.

You missed the point. They won't back down at all. They'll bend over backwards to find a constitutional justification for keeping the blanket ban in place.

Actually my point was dead on, they did exactly what I suspected they would do.

 

[press1280]

Originally Posted by 777GSOTB View Post
Not out of character at all. With the case ending here, and the law that Caetano was charged under remaining on the books, the criminals working for that institution will continue to imprison their citizens for exercising a fundamental right. And lets face it, with all the sheeple living in Masshole, it'll be quite some time to get another stun gun case before the USSC. If I were Caetano, I'd open carry a stun gun everywhere I went once they drop all the charges.



Actually my point was dead on, they did exactly what I suspected they would do.

Couldn't they just file a civil case challenging the ban? I'm sure there's someone in Mass that might want a stun gun (why not have Caetano again)? Probably one of the rare times you file a 2A case and your odds are overwhelming.

 

[777GSOTB]

You missed the point. They won't back down at all. They'll bend over backwards to find a constitutional justification for keeping the blanket ban in place.

Couldn't they just file a civil case challenging the ban? I'm sure there's someone in Mass that might want a stun gun (why not have Caetano again)? Probably one of the rare times you file a 2A case and your odds are overwhelming.

A civil case wasn't enough to get Friedman's cert approval. Though it was for 2 justices, I believe the others want an injury under the right. So, it's up in the air here also. An actual damage is an absolute though and if I were still living back there, I would strap one on in a heart beat...Overwhelming for the win IMHO.

Oooops, I forgot we don't have #9 yet...Standing down...out.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

So I guess they'll try to leave the ban on the books, harass anyone arrested, and then fold when it gets to court?

Pending criminal cases for stun gun possession were dropped almost as quickly the per curiam decision came down. Some, if not all, police department have stopped trying to enforce it.

Couldn't they just file a civil case challenging the ban? I'm sure there's someone in Mass that might want a stun gun (why not have Caetano again)? Probably one of the rare times you file a 2A case and your odds are overwhelming.

And that may very well happen. I do know that someone was putting together a civil challenge a while ago. That effort was put on ice when Caetano showed up. I'm not sure if that civil challenge will be resurrected or even if it got past the idea state.

 

[press1280]

Pending criminal cases for stun gun possession were dropped almost as quickly the per curiam decision came down. Some, if not all, police department have stopped trying to enforce it.

And that may very well happen. I do know that someone was putting together a civil challenge a while ago. That effort was put on ice when Caetano showed up. I'm not sure if that civil challenge will be resurrected or even if it got past the idea state.

There are other states & a few localities with bans as well: http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.co...nts-rights/states-requiring-a-stun-gun-permit

SAF & the NRA may want to think about going after these to try to get some momentum (and maybe $$) since for the most part they've been completely shut down after McDonald.

 

[wolfwood]

There are other states & a few localities with bans as well: http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.co...nts-rights/states-requiring-a-stun-gun-permit

SAF & the NRA may want to think about going after these to try to get some momentum (and maybe $$) since for the most part they've been completely shut down after McDonald.

Someone else already has one planned in D.C. That should get filed soon.

I've got one on appeal in Hawaii and I am about to file one in New Jersey.

SAF should file some though just like they do with the alien cases. Its the easiest case out there right now.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

Someone else already has one planned in D.C. That should get filed soon.

I've got one on appeal in Hawaii and I am about to file one in New Jersey.

SAF should file some though just like they do with the alien cases. Its the easiest case out there right now.

Not only that, a successful stun gun case could be very helpful in overturning a local AWB. The rational offered by the SJC and rejected by SCOTUS for upholding the Massachusetts stun gun ban is very similar to that used for upholding AWBs.

 

[777GSOTB]

Someone else already has one planned in D.C. That should get filed soon.

I've got one on appeal in Hawaii and I am about to file one in New Jersey.

SAF should file some though just like they do with the alien cases. Its the easiest case out there right now.

Wolfwood, will you be asking for a license to carry a stun gun in any of your cases? Since stun guns are not a deadly instrument on the level of a firearm, wouldn't concealed carry of a stun gun be a protected right?

 

[777GSOTB]

Not only that, a successful stun gun case could be very helpful in overturning a local AWB. The rational offered by the SJC and rejected by SCOTUS for upholding the Massachusetts stun gun ban is very similar to that used for upholding AWBs.

If that were the case, wouldn't they have taken Friedman v Highland Park? If they take a civil case on the stun gun issue, scariness of the weapon must be the deciding factor.

 

[wolfwood]

Wolfwood, will you be asking for a license to carry a stun gun in any of your cases? Since stun guns are not a deadly instrument on the level of a firearm, wouldn't concealed carry of a stun gun be a protected right?

It would fall under the same analysis as a handgun. So the same open/concealed argument would apply to it.

In Hawaii we just challenged the inside the home ban on stun guns. I really don't know what we are going to do in NJ yet.

 

[wjackcooper]

Charges dropped in Caetano v. Massachusetts Second Amendment stun gun case - The Washington Post Volokh today:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...massachusetts-second-amendment-stun-gun-case/

Regards
Jack