Massachusetts Just Upped the Ante

[press1280]

This is from the Davis v. Grimes case, but it says the Class B LTC is now dunzo. How does this affect MA law?

 

[jpk1md]

Un-freekin-believable.

Maryland: We Suck Less Than Massachusets.

Thats a toss up really.

There's at least a good chance of getting an LTC in most municipalities in mAss.

The downside is the obvious recent legislation combined with AWB and laws that make possession of ammunition or COMPONENTS a felony without the proscribled mAss permit.

But dont worry.....the progressive tyrants in Md wont allow themselves to be one upped by mAss and you'll probably have the privilege of having to fight against similar legislation in Md next year

 

[jrosenberger]

Thanks for the info. Whttemore is my new hero and as I get older I'm sure he'll mean even that much more to me. Given our history, it's really hard to understand why Massachusetts is not the most staunchly pro-2A state in the union.

If you like Whittemore's story, I recommend going to an Appleseed event. You get some good training in the fundamentals of rifle shooting and some fun revolutionary war history lessons. I also recommend the book they use as a source: http://www.amazon.com/Paul-Reveres-David-Hackett-Fischer/dp/0195098315

 

[Sirex]

I hate when other states come up with great ideas to save our children before our great savior Owe-malley can. We need to up the ante. Tax ammo like cigarettes. Only 350fps airsoft guns can be cash and carry. Must get a government license before you can curse. Mandate leaving your doors unlocked at night so criminals don't hurt themselves breaking your window to gain entry.

 

[john_bud]

I hate when other states come up with great ideas to save our children before our great savior Owe-malley can. We need to up the ante. Tax ammo like cigarettes. Only 350fps airsoft guns can be cash and carry. Must get a government license before you can curse. Mandate leaving your doors unlocked at night so criminals don't hurt themselves breaking your window to gain entry.

Shhhhhhh! Their listening....

 

[diesel-man]

Massachusetts Legislature Breaks New Ground In Gun Control

from the comment section:



The first appellate US court when they are forced to apply the Heller and Palmer decisions of the supreme court and then forced to also apply;
Mudook v. Penn. 319 US 1051943) and Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham Al. 373 US 2621962) Core holdings here are:

No state may convert any secured liberty into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it.” in Mudook:

and

“If the state does convert your right into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it, you can ignore the license and a fee and engage the right with impunity.” Shuttlesworth

-------------------------------------------------------

According to the US Supreme Court it is unconstitutional to :
Charge a fee for the exercising of a right (Harper v Virginia Board of Elections 1966);
Require a precondition on the exercising of a right (Guinn v US 1915, Lane v Wilson 1939);
Require a license (government permission) to exercise a right (Murdock v PA 1943, Lowell v City of Griffin 1939, Freedman v MD 1965, Near v MN 1931, Miranda v AZ 1966);
Delay the exercising of a right (Org. for a Better Austin v Keefe 1971);
Register (record in a government database) the exercising of a right (Thomas v Collins 1945, Lamont v Postmaster General 1965, Haynes v US 1968).
As these things are unconstitutional for one right, they are equally unconstitutional for ANY enumerated right.
-------
Unconstitutional Official Acts - 16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256: The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be In agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:


The General rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it's enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted. Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it.....
A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the lend, it is superseded thereby.
No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.
Jon Roland: Strictly speaking, an unconstitutional statute is not a "law", and should not be called a "law", even if it is sustained by a court, for a finding that a statute or other official act is constitutional does not make it so, or confer any authority to anyone to enforce it.


All citizens and legal residents of the United States, by their presence on the territory of the United States, are subject to the militia duty, the duty of the social compact that creates the society, which requires that each, alone and in concert with others, not only obey the Constitution and constitutional official acts, but help enforce them, if necessary, at the risk of one's life. Any unconstitutional act of an official will at least be a violation of the oath of that official to execute the duties of his office, and therefore grounds for his removal from office. No official immunity or privileges of rank or position survive the commission of unlawful acts. If it violates the rights of individuals, it is also likely to be a crime, and the militia duty obligates anyone aware of such a violation to investigate it, gather evidence for a prosecution, make an arrest, and if necessary, seek an indictment from a grand jury, and if one is obtained, prosecute the offender in a court of law. ------- "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
the RIGHT of the PEOPLE to KEEP and BEAR Arms, shall NOT be infringed."

 

[The sphinx]

That was a good read Diesel-man. Thanks for posting

 

[Inigoes]

Still going

http://michellawyers.com/davis-v-grimes/

 

[DoubleTap007]

I'm sure criminals will by-pass that system, and thus the only burden falls on the law-abider.

 

[BeoBill]

I'm sure criminals will by-pass that system, and thus the only burden falls on the law-abider.

Nothing new there. Except that more "innocent bystanders" will administratively become criminals in MA and other "Founder of Freedom" [/sarc] states.

I'm sure the Founding Fathers are sobbing bitterly over the shambles the NE has made of their concepts and ideals.