Comm2A, SAF, GOAL and FPC file against Baker admin on shop closures

Boston4567 said:
Yeah, this. I don't understand why plaintiffs didn't push much harder on the four transaction per hour rule. That said, the standards for a TRO are very stringent (I'm actually not totally clear whether this is a TRO or an injunction), and this is a ruling that I feel confident won't be overturned by the First Circus.

You have to figure the judge is playing the long game here. He doesn't want to issue an overbroad ruling and have it be completely overturned. This is not the end. It's the beginning of a long process. Especially if it's just a TRO, and an injunction is to follow, there is room for changing it.
Click to expand...


There is no risk of an overbroad ruling when the states case is not grounded in one single aspect of law.

They couldn't even defend their own position, so how would a proper ruling (treat FFL and ranges like other essential businesses) be considered "overbroad"?

It's not like the judge would be giving the shops and ranges additional privileges above and beyond what other essential businesses currently enjoy.

He would just be leveling the playing field and arguably he is still narrowly constraining these entities given they are Constitutionally protected and other businesses are not.

I see this ruling as nothing but a big FU to gun owners.

The state must be f***ing high fiving each other. They knew they had shit and I bet they felt none of their demands would be met.

But what does this judge do? He gives them everything they want. Judicial arbitrage wins again.

Just pathetic.
 
beach said:
Obviously the state is going to be watching gun stores to make sure that they adhere to the restrictions. Does it make any legal sense to have a number of us stop by the location of a gun store and sign affidavit that on such and such a date visited a gun store and was unable to enter because of the four appointments per our transaction. We could document us being at the gun shop parking lot by picture it would be evidence that we are being infringed just a thought
Click to expand...

Well at least we will make a few State workers earn their pay.
 
USAirborne said:
Good luck getting an “appointment”...
Click to expand...

This. 4 appointments per hour and by appointment only means a majority of us are going to have to wait until the ban is lifted altogether anyways. If LGS institute appointments like salons and dentists, you can bet they’ll be booked right up past the 18th and into June by the end of Saturday.
 
Tinkermatic said:
This. 4 appointments per hour and by appointment only means a majority of us are going to have to wait until the ban is lifted altogether anyways. If LGS institute appointments like salons and dentists, you can bet they’ll be booked right up past the 18th and into June by the end of Saturday.
Click to expand...

Thing is with appointments backing up for months, there would be documentation to proceed with another lawsuit that the state's restrictions have demonstrated themselves to be a significant burden on X number of people. That's about the only positive spin I can think of. Demonstration of a right delayed would be demonstration of a right denied.
 
Waher said:
Thing is with appointments backing up for months, there would be documentation to proceed with another lawsuit that the state's restrictions have demonstrated themselves to be a significant burden on X number of people. That's about the only positive spin I can think of. Demonstration of a right delayed would be demonstration of a right denied.
Click to expand...

Christ, I hope you’re right but I fear it’s wishful thinking.
 
Wow, I bet Walmart is going to be pretty upset when they have to only allow one person into the store at a time starting Saturday at Noon. And can only serve 4 customers an hour. Fairly certain this ruling from a judge that is exactly what the State Attorney General proposed would trump any guidelines from the governor regarding walmart. Walmart is an FFL/gun store. Unless they all decide to forfeit their FFL by Saturday morning they should follow this ruling.
 
Behind Enemy Lines said:
LTC holders vs active and engaged LTC holders is a big gap. We could barely get 1000 of them to show up to protest 07/20/16. How many LTC holders are members of GOAL? How many have even heard of Comm2A(or the peacock 2A attorney who is claiming victory on FB)?
Click to expand...
DFA1094B-B087-4B93-8DCE-9CBFCCE93E57.png
Yeah it’s far from a victory but a slight bump in the needle moving. No offense to him but Jensen did 99% of the talking.
 
Tinkermatic said:
This. 4 appointments per hour and by appointment only means a majority of us are going to have to wait until the ban is lifted altogether anyways. If LGS institute appointments like salons and dentists, you can bet they’ll be booked right up past the 18th and into June by the end of Saturday.
Click to expand...
well Faker can come out tomorrow and say normal operation in June any win is a good win
 
andrew1220 said:
View attachment 355060
Yeah it’s far from a victory but a slight bump in the needle moving. No offense to him but Jensen did 99% of the talking.
Click to expand...

There needs to be a sit down with GOA over their Leroy Jenkins crap. Every time I want to like the GOA they step on their own dicks and we almost got f***ed because of them.
 
milktree said:
I was thinking the same thing. If a range has 12 lanes, does that mean only five can be used, or does that mean since the official capacity of the range is something like 30 (12 shooting, 12 scoring, 12 waiting their turn, or whatever) then 40% of that is 12 people?

And mostly I don't see the ranges at either of the clubs I'm a member filled to more than 50% capacity anyway, even before the apocalypse.
Click to expand...


This ambiguity right here is why the judge was not willing to enter an order at this time on reopening ranges.

I feel okay assigning blame for the failure to the attorney for the Cedrone party. Challenging the range closers was their complaint. They should have been better prepared to put evidence in the record to give the judge what he needed to issue a specific, narrow order. A vague, ambiguous order as part of a TRO was never going to fly. Not to mention, the judge once again expressed his displeasure at the Cedrone party for their pointless ex parte TRO filing at the start of the case.

There are still several issues to be litigated. For now, the judge was clearly focussed on relieving the immediate burden on the right to purchase firearms and ammo.
 
DrewG8572 said:
There are ~1.5 million LTC holders in MA. Let's say there's 100 firearms stores in MA, open 7 days a week for 12 hours a day at 4 transactions per hour. It would take 45 weeks for every LTC holder to be able to get an appointment. Nope no infringement here.
Click to expand...

Where did you get the figure 1.5 LTC holders in MA? The latest available figures in December of last year (according to the MA Sec. of State’s website) were from June 2018. At that time the total number of ALL firearms license holders in MA was listed as 434,000. Has there been a 200% increase in firearms licenses issued in less than 2 years?
 
Last edited:
Waher said:
Thing is with appointments backing up for months, there would be documentation to proceed with another lawsuit that the state's restrictions have demonstrated themselves to be a significant burden on X number of people. That's about the only positive spin I can think of. Demonstration of a right delayed would be demonstration of a right denied.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and that case would take how long? There is very little winning here.
 
SBrackett said:
Where did you get the figure 1.5 LTC holders in MA? The latest available figures in December of last year (according to the MA Sec. of State’s website) were from June 2018. At that time the total number of ALL firearms license holders in MA was listed as 434,000. Has there been a 200% increase in firearms licenses issued in less than 2 years?
Click to expand...
My mistake - I'm an idiot and misread the article. 434,000 is right.
 
BriMac said:
So what happens if the State appeals the order? Back to shut down ?
Click to expand...
Yes. And they will, you can count on it.

426wedge said:
40 percent on the ranges? My club has over a thousand members, maybe more. So does that mean you can have 400 people there? On a busy day there is nowhere near that. so if this is the case, what does it matter?
Click to expand...
No, it says 40% of the occupancy permit. AFAIK there are no such things for outdoors use (someone please correct me if I'm wrong), only for buildings. For instance, the occupancy permit for Mansfield F&G restricts us to 50 people in the clubroom and 10 people (IIRC) on the indoor range (which is being built). The club has ~600 members. So this bogus approval would only allow a total of 20 people on the property! BS!!!!
 
jeepchute said:
Wow, I bet Walmart is going to be pretty upset when they have to only allow one person into the store at a time starting Saturday at Noon. And can only serve 4 customers an hour. Fairly certain this ruling from a judge that is exactly what the State Attorney General proposed would trump any guidelines from the governor regarding walmart. Walmart is an FFL/gun store. Unless they all decide to forfeit their FFL by Saturday morning they should follow this ruling.
Click to expand...
Why they get special treatment to sell everything and sporting goods stores get the shaft is beyond me
 
Called my local gun shop. Said they would not set appointments due to expectation of immediate appeal. Not sure if the particular person I spoke with was not well informed or if he knows something I don’t.

I want one of two specific guns and I know they have one of them in-store, but I guess it’s time to start calling around. Mass FFL phone lines must be red hot this afternoon.
 
milktree said:
I was thinking the same thing. If a range has 12 lanes, does that mean only five can be used, or does that mean since the official capacity of the range is something like 30 (12 shooting, 12 scoring, 12 waiting their turn, or whatever) then 40% of that is 12 people?

And mostly I don't see the ranges at either of the clubs I'm a member filled to more than 50% capacity anyway, even before the apocalypse.
Click to expand...

The reality is, I don't think Maura gives a shit about social distancing at ranges. Their proposed order on that was pretty damned simple and it was based on 40% of municipal occupancy maximums, which would probably leave every stall full.

All they care about restricting gun ownership and sticking it to gun owners. They wanted to limit shops because they want less people being able to buy guns. They don't want this crisis to drive up the numbers and thus increase gun owners' political clout.

For ranges, once you get past the post of "ranges can open", Maura isn't going to care about measures that stop coronavirus, because none of this was about coronavirus. I doubt she gives a crap if the ranges get packed full of people and everyone gets it. Hell, that would reduce the number of gun owners, at the end of the day, which is what she wants ;)
 
This is a game of chess at this point, not checkers. I realize this doesn't feel like a win, but there are a lot of moving parts here. I can't speak to many of them because I am not going to give the state what I am thinking for free but the basics of a PI/TRO case is that there is post TRO/PI motion discovery and then a subsequent final order is made. That final order can modify the earlier order. And there is the whole issue of appeal from TRO/PI and appeal from the final SJ in a case. With interlocutory appeals to CA1, this gets real complicated real fast. We are only in the first corner of the first lap right now.

I will also point out that Woodlock is the author of one of most influential 2A decisions in this country short of Heller and Macdonald. Wesson v. Woods has been used and cited by judges all over the country. And he didn't have to decide Wesson on the 2A. He could have hid behind EP, but he didn't.
 
csobrien said:
Called my local gun shop. Said they would not set appointments due to expectation of immediate appeal. Not sure if the particular person I spoke with was not well informed or if he knows something I don’t.

I want one of two specific guns and I know they have one of them in-store, but I guess it’s time to start calling around. Mass FFL phone lines must be red hot this afternoon.
Click to expand...
Find another shop - The Judge denied the states request for a stay pending appeal
 
terraformer said:
I will also point out that Woodlock is the author of one of most influential 2A decisions in this country short of Heller and Macdonald. Wesson v. Woods has been used and cited by judges all over the country. And he didn't have to decide Wesson on the 2A. He could have hid behind EP, but he didn't.
Click to expand...

What case is this? Just searched google and got :

No results found for "Wesson v. Woods" woodlock

Found a Wasson v. Woods 100 years ago. Interested to see what the case you are referencing is.
 
terraformer said:
This is a game of chess at this point, not checkers. I realize this doesn't feel like a win, but there are a lot of moving parts here. I can't speak to many of them because I am not going to give the state what I am thinking for free but the basics of a PI/TRO case is that there is post TRO/PI motion discovery and then a subsequent final order is made. That final order can modify the earlier order. And there is the whole issue of appeal from TRO/PI and appeal from the final SJ in a case. With interlocutory appeals to CA1, this gets real complicated real fast. We are only in the first corner of the first lap right now.

I will also point out that Woodlock is the author of one of most influential 2A decisions in this country short of Heller and Macdonald. Wesson v. Woods has been used and cited by judges all over the country. And he didn't have to decide Wesson on the 2A. He could have hid behind EP, but he didn't.
Click to expand...

Play it like poker and don't show them your cards till you win.[wink]
 

Similar threads

Brief Update on GOAL Litigation
Replies
1
Views
159
jek
jek
DOJ Files Charges against State of NY, Hochul, James, and NY DMV head
Replies
11
Views
434
peter_nh
P
MA Liberals on Reddit Need Firearms and 2A To Defend Against Mean Tweets
5 6 7
Replies
185
Views
5K
Junior314
Junior314
Verdict against Sig Sauer
Replies
11
Views
473
Tartakovsky
Tartakovsky
GOAL Issues Warning to Non-residents
Replies
16
Views
589
Road_Clam
R
Back
Top Bottom