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

pastera said:
Bruen has already produced several district level cases on out of staters possessing while traveling - and 4885 contains an exemption now that was highly likely to have been influenced by those cases.
Then step up to the SJC implementation/interpretation of Breun in Canjura

Things are in motion
Click to expand...

Separate issue. But because of Bruen, we can now carry switchblades now. I'm a big fan of OTF switchblades for my tactical Amazon box opening needs.
 
pastera said:
This legislation was punishment for Bruen and an attempt to shift the baseline to a point where we would be happy with just returning to what we had before.
I want my whole cake back, bitch.
Click to expand...
Exactly, my biggest fear is portions of this law will be rolled back and the gun owners of this state will say “look, it’s not as bad as it was before”. And then the goalposts are still shifted further away from freedom but we view it as some type of victory.

If Bruen is interpreted correctly by the courts, there is no reason we can’t be a truly shall issue state with no assault weapon or magazine restrictions. I’m not holding my breath though.
 
WJ406 said:
Exactly, my biggest fear is portions of this law will be rolled back and the gun owners of this state will say “look, it’s not as bad as it was before”. And then the goalposts are still shifted further away from freedom but we view it as some type of victory.

If Bruen is interpreted correctly by the courts, there is no reason we can’t be a truly shall issue state with no assault weapon or magazine restrictions. I’m not holding my breath though.
Click to expand...
Look at the FUDs response here on the signature campaign - OMG you made her sign it so we lost 3 weeks.
No mention of over 100k+ people learning about how screwed up this state actually is.
 
dcmdon said:
What do you mean? How else could it be used?
Click to expand...
I’m sure @pastera will go in more depth, but here is a quick legal update from the MPTC on Canjura. It’s easy to see how this will be used for firearms legislation.

UNCONSTITUTIONAL TO PROHIBIT POSSESSION OF SWITCHBLADES

Also here is an excerpt from the decision:
Bruen requires that we employ a two-part test to determine whether a regulation or restriction passes constitutional muster under the Second Amendment. First, we must determine whether "the Second Amendment's plain text covers an individual's conduct." Bruen, 597 U.S. at 17. If the regulated conduct falls outside the scope of the Second Amendment, our analysis ends. If, on the other hand, we conclude the regulated conduct is covered by the plain text of the Second Amendment, "the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct," and we proceed to the second part of the analysis. Id. In the second part of the analysis, "the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation's historical tradition of [arms] regulation." Id.
Click to expand...

The SJC properly applied Bruen to this case and I’m hopeful they will to future firearm cases.
As someone else on here said, “the SJC doesn’t want to get Caetano’d again by SCOTUS”.
 
Last edited:
dcmdon said:
What do you mean? How else could it be used?
Click to expand...

(my understanding)

The logic used is directly transferable to guns. They only ruled on switchblades because that's what the case was about, but the logic in the SJC's opinion is interchangeable by replacing the word "switchblade" with "firearm", "specific classes of rifles in common use" or "magazine"

@pastera will come up with a more complete answer with more words, but that's the tl;dr of it.
 
WJ406 said:
Exactly, my biggest fear is portions of this law will be rolled back and the gun owners of this state will say “look, it’s not as bad as it was before”. And then the goalposts are still shifted further away from freedom but we view it as some type of victory.

If Bruen is interpreted correctly by the courts, there is no reason we can’t be a truly shall issue state with no assault weapon or magazine restrictions. I’m not holding my breath though.
Click to expand...

We discussed Bruen earlier in this thread and I believe it was reported that the writers of this abomination were very careful not to go fully against Bruen. Instead they worked around the edges, used loopholes and basically did anything they could to restrict us while skirting the bigger ruling. Not a surprise as the SC's decisions are typically very specific, which leaves lots of wiggle room. It would be nice if they gave a decision that was wide sweeping. Not going to happen though.
 
Rockrivr1 said:
We discussed Bruen earlier in this thread and I believe it was reported that the writers of this abomination were very careful not to go fully against Bruen. Instead they worked around the edges, used loopholes and basically did anything they could to restrict us while skirting the bigger ruling. Not a surprise as the SC's decisions are typically very specific, which leaves lots of wiggle room. It would be nice if they gave a decision that was wide sweeping. Not going to happen though.
Click to expand...
I agree that the legislators wrote this bill with their interpretation of Bruen in mind but there is now way registration, assault weapon bans, and high capacity magazines are permissible under Bruen. Let alone Heller, McDonald, Caetano, and now Canjura.
 
pastera said:
Look at the FUDs response here on the signature campaign - OMG you made her sign it so we lost 3 weeks.
No mention of over 100k+ people learning about how screwed up this state actually is.
Click to expand...
If they were FUDDs, they wouldn't have lost 3 weeks because nothing they owned would be banned. There are also those who have given up on hope.
 
Coyote33 said:
Yes, but has "Canjura" come up in any courtroom to date? Even a MENTION of it?
Click to expand...
You're kidding right?
Two months - that's all that it has been out. In the legal world that's yesterday.
You also won't hear about it's use until used in an appeal that's very public.

Since it is controlling in Mass, I'm 100% certain it has been used in cases where we simply don't have visibility.

I'll have to go back and see if you took the same position on bruen, Caetano, McDonald, etc.
 
pastera said:
You're kidding right?
Two months - that's all that it has been out. In the legal world that's yesterday.
You also won't hear about it's use until used in an appeal that's very public.

Since it is controlling in Mass, I'm 100% certain it has been used in cases where we simply don't have visibility.

I'll have to go back and see if you took the same position on bruen, Caetano, McDonald, etc.
Click to expand...
He did. Specificaly WRT footnote 9
 
Several people have already given a few tidbits of why canjura is good.
Another is it opens with a comparison of the lethality of an automatic knife being no different than a manual folding knives therefore an automatic knife is no more dangerous than a non-banned folder.
Taking this comparison and directly substituting a mini-14 or bolt action 223 and an AR platform for the knives places ARs outside the the states ability to ban.

Then the SJC proscribes three tests for a weapons commonality that again extinguish the states ability to ban guns - and when defining unusual firearms the SJC uses the term "assault rifles" to clearly call out that anything less than select fire arms are protected.
 
pastera said:
I'll have to go back and see if you took the same position on bruen, Caetano, McDonald, etc.
Click to expand...
Are you talking about me here? Ha ha.

Mesatchornug said:
He did. Specificaly WRT footnote 9
Click to expand...
Ditto? You guys crack me up. I don't remember what I said about any of this, not sure how you find the time to go back and dig around. Best of luck to you. I might even change my mind from time to time, or even multiple times a day. Who cares really? By the way, I don't think that was the case here.

In the end, our intentions, best wishes, and hopes are all heading in the same direction. I guess my mind refuses to believe why the legal process is so mired down.
 
Coyote33 said:
Are you talking about me here? Ha ha.


Ditto? You guys crack me up. I don't remember what I said about any of this, not sure how you find the time to go back and dig around. Best of luck to you. I might even change my mind from time to time, or even multiple times a day. Who cares really? By the way, I don't think that was the case here.

In the end, our intentions, best wishes, and hopes are all heading in the same direction. I guess my mind refuses to believe why the legal process is so mired down.
Click to expand...
I hope you’re enjoying those ar pistol builds🙂


It does relieve a lot of stress sending fireballs down range.
 
DJBrad said:
I hope you’re enjoying those ar pistol builds🙂
It does relieve a lot of stress sending fireballs down range.
Click to expand...
Think you got the wrong guy. But, I'd like to check one out some time. Maybe in the future, after all this legal mumbo jumbo falls apart.
 
Coyote33 said:
Are you talking about me here? Ha ha.


Ditto? You guys crack me up. I don't remember what I said about any of this, not sure how you find the time to go back and dig around. Best of luck to you. I might even change my mind from time to time, or even multiple times a day. Who cares really? By the way, I don't think that was the case here.

In the end, our intentions, best wishes, and hopes are all heading in the same direction. I guess my mind refuses to believe why the legal process is so mired down.
Click to expand...
Needn't look it up. We've been having this conversation with you every time you join these threads. This includes explaining why the process is so slow; and why, despite our preferences otherwise, this is a good thing.
 
Mesatchornug said:
Needn't look it up. We've been having this conversation with you every time you join these threads. This includes explaining why the process is so slow; and why, despite our preferences otherwise, this is a good thing.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, clawing back our rights is a less of a marathon vs sprint as it is a sprint vs triathlon.

There are multiple venues where the process is worked, some are similar in setting, some are faster, some are grueling and arduous. Federal courts are like the running portion, slow and steady. State courts are like the cycling portion, same sort of terrain as the running portion, but a little bit faster, often with a greater distance to cover. The legislative process/electoral process is like the swim. Grueling and slow, often with something pushing back against your slim progress.

Sometimes we catch a windfall where the judges realize/recognize our rights and respect precedent. More often than not, we have to structure the case to be more watertight than a duck's cloaca.
 
WJ406 said:
How is Bruen helping us in Massachusetts now with this new legislation? Yeah maybe 5+ years from now it may make a difference in some long drawn out court case but in the interim it’s not doing anything substantial.

Anyone thinking Bruen is going to save us is delusional. Look at how many people on here are worried about making sure all their firearms are registered even though the system hasn’t been built yet. The vast majority of gun owners in this state do not have the desire to stand up and defend their God-given, Constitutionally protected rights.
Click to expand...
Because of Bruen, the Mass SJC has ruled switchblades are protected arms under the 2nd Ammendment.

In 1976, the Mass SJC ruled that handguns were not protected arms under the Second Ammendment.

The tide is turning.
 
Coyote33 said:
Are you talking about me here? Ha ha.


Ditto? You guys crack me up. I don't remember what I said about any of this, not sure how you find the time to go back and dig around. Best of luck to you. I might even change my mind from time to time, or even multiple times a day. Who cares really? By the way, I don't think that was the case here.

In the end, our intentions, best wishes, and hopes are all heading in the same direction. I guess my mind refuses to believe why the legal process is so mired down.
Click to expand...
literally the same conversation WRT Bruen footnote 9
Coyote33 said:
Only if you stop bombarding us with solutions which have never been used, and don't have much supporting that they will be used. Otherwise, all your talk is indeed just vapor and opinion, not fact or past practice. Sorry if the truth hurts. I call 'em like I see 'em. I honestly hope I am wrong and you are right, but to date, this is not the case.
Click to expand...
Mesatchornug said:
They haven't been used because the decision is barely a year old. Seriously, learn patience.
Click to expand...
 
Cap'n Mike said:
Because of Bruen, the Mass SJC has ruled switchblades are protected arms under the 2nd Ammendment.

In 1976, the Mass SJC ruled that handguns were not protected arms under the Second Ammendment.

The tide is turning.
Click to expand...

Yes, the tide is turning. IN THE COURTS. Support litigation. The ballot box is not the solution. Its simple. The majority of voters in MA support gun control and by extension, gun control candidates.
 
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Brief Update on GOAL Litigation
Replies
1
Views
160
jek
jek
DOJ Files Charges against State of NY, Hochul, James, and NY DMV head
Replies
11
Views
435
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
476
Tartakovsky
Tartakovsky
GOAL Issues Warning to Non-residents
2
Replies
38
Views
1K
Mark from ?
M
Back
Top Bottom