• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

I need your help, and to help yourselves! *2A Battle*

Rob Boudrie said:
The worst that can happen to many professionals is loss of the professional license. Of course, in the Dr's case we have to distinguish between the two professional licenses :) - the LTC and the LTM (license to practice medicine).

It's interesting that the MA revocation order does not make any allegation of medical errors; patient neglect and that he shows ho record (limited report issued for last 10 years) of hospital discipline or paying/settling any malpractice suits.

The system has not been kind to his dissident behavior: (from docboard.org as of 3 minutes ago) . See details on www.docboard.org
Click to expand...
Really a key point: why revoke his medical license because he has a non violent 2A charge for simple possession?

Seems like the medical license revocation is purely political unless there are some well documented conditions to maintain good standing that the charges violate.

BTW: has he had his day in court yet?
 
Last edited:
safetyfirst2125 said:
why revoke his medical license because he has a non violent 2A charge for simple possession?

Seems like the medical license revocation is purely political
Click to expand...

It is political. It’s also extremely ironic as this entire case revolves around him not having a different license and his argument is that he doesn’t need one because licenses are only required for things professionally, you know, like practicing medicine.

I doubt though that the courts will see the irony or even any parallels, despite how obvious they should be.
 
I just keep thinking. This is the doctor I have to go see…

Maybe send him a screenshot when I stuff my leg through the x-ray machine at work…. I’m shocked I havet actually done this yet I think I’m too fat/heavy. Last thing I want a video of me breaking the f*** an x-ray machine at work.

I’m good, it’s just morbid curiosity at this point.
 
I just did some more reading on Dr. Lu and think I have a bit of a better understanding though lots more questions.

It seems that either one or more of the following apply.

He has some of the worst luck ever.
He is intentionally testing the legitimacy of the system.
He’s been doing someone questionable and suspect things.
He’s been a victim of the adverse and corrupt system.


I’ll expand in a later post, because I think I have some idea of his current mindset and what lead it to become what it is. But I do have an honest question for Dr. Lu.

@Dr. Kang Lu

What was the reason Brookline revoked your LTC for back in 2003, is there even was one?
 
Parker Schreiber said:
Trial courts don't create precedent. If our hero loses and appeals, it may be prudent for a 2A advocacy group to file an Amicus brief.
Click to expand...
I've read this and another of his threads, and I'm just assuming he'll appeal when he loses. So I should have said that. I'm willing to believe he'll push it all the way up to SCOTUS, but they won't take it up.

It's all well and good to oppose the laws in court, but his particular arguments are based on his own assumptions that are both without precedent and lack any supportive evidence. Remember, he is not fighting this as a 2a case, he is claiming that an LTC is a professional license which he does not need to have.

Also, an earlier point I made, was that he had an LTC and was fine with it as required unlit AFTER it was revoked, a significant change that he will likely have to explain. And he hasn't shared the reason behind the revocation, a point that @Bonesinium also mentioned, which will also be considered by the court.

We need to oppose what is unjust, but not in a way that is guaranteed to lose and will be used by the media to make all gun owners look ridiculous. A soldier who runs empty handed across a field at a heavily armed enemy is showing his opposition, but the enemy only sees him as crazy and dead.
 
Bonesinium said:
I just did some more reading on Dr. Lu and think I have a bit of a better understanding though lots more questions.

It seems that either one or more of the following apply.

He has some of the worst luck ever.
He is intentionally testing the legitimacy of the system.
He’s been doing someone questionable and suspect things.
He’s been a victim of the adverse and corrupt system.


I’ll expand in a later post, because I think I have some idea of his current mindset and what lead it to become what it is. But I do have an honest question for Dr. Lu.

@Dr. Kang Lu

What was the reason Brookline revoked your LTC for back in 2003, is there even was one?
Click to expand...
Another question I have: does his deep seated beliefs about 2A come from he or his parents growing up in a communist regime?

I’ve seen Cuban ex-pats for example, that would most of NES to shame in terms of understanding the value of the 2A and why it is so critically important to the survival of humanity (America the last stand for freedom against tyranny). They’ve seen and experienced first hand the terror of tyranny and never want to live under it again, having escaped it once.
 
42! said:
I've read this and another of his threads, and I'm just assuming he'll appeal when he loses. So I should have said that. I'm willing to believe he'll push it all the way up to SCOTUS, but they won't take it up.

It's all well and good to oppose the laws in court, but his particular arguments are based on his own assumptions that are both without precedent and lack any supportive evidence. Remember, he is not fighting this as a 2a case, he is claiming that an LTC is a professional license which he does not need to have.

Also, an earlier point I made, was that he had an LTC and was fine with it as required unlit AFTER it was revoked, a significant change that he will likely have to explain. And he hasn't shared the reason behind the revocation, a point that @Bonesinium also mentioned, which will also be considered by the court.

We need to oppose what is unjust, but not in a way that is guaranteed to lose and will be used by the media to make all gun owners look ridiculous. A soldier who runs empty handed across a field at a heavily armed enemy is showing his opposition, but the enemy only sees him as crazy and dead.
Click to expand...


Its not worth getting frothed up about... because it's not getting legs.
 
safetyfirst2125 said:
Another question I have: does his deep seated beliefs about 2A come from he or his parents growing up in a communist regime?

I’ve seen Cuban ex-pats for example, that would most of NES to shame in terms of understanding the value of the 2A and why it is so critically important to the survival of humanity (America the last stand for freedom against tyranny). They’ve seen and experienced first hand the terror of tyranny and never want to live under it again, having escaped it once.
Click to expand...

I don't know but I suspect that it's actually a result of how he's been treated here in the US, mainly, in Massachusetts.
 
42! said:
I've read this and another of his threads, and I'm just assuming he'll appeal when he loses. So I should have said that. I'm willing to believe he'll push it all the way up to SCOTUS, but they won't take it up.

It's all well and good to oppose the laws in court, but his particular arguments are based on his own assumptions that are both without precedent and lack any supportive evidence. Remember, he is not fighting this as a 2a case, he is claiming that an LTC is a professional license which he does not need to have.
Click to expand...
The problem arises if he raises a legitimate issue on appeal (even by accident) and then fails to support that claim. You really don't want to give the 1st circuit an opportunity to punch loopholes in whatever framework the Supreme Court sets in NYSRPA.
 
Bonesinium said:
What was the reason Brookline revoked your LTC for back in 2003, is there even was one?
Click to expand...
See 2005 Brookline Tab Stories and Complaints -- documenting the revocation of my LTC, attached.

Of course at that time, I was unaware that the "Purpose and Scope" of the CORI check required for the LTC is for "evaluating applicants for employment, volunteer opportunities, or professional licensing," and the "fingerprint submission requirement [is] for applicants for licenses in specified occupations." See 803 CMR 2.01 (https://www.mass.gov/doc/803-cmr-2-criminal-offender-record-information-cori/download) and MGL 6 § 172B.5 (General Law - Part I, Title II, Chapter 6, Section 172B.5).

Had I known that I would've never applied for an LTC -- unless I was going to work "as a private detective, private investigator, watchman, guard or patrolman, or other person, who for hire or reward protect persons or property..." MGL 147 § 22 (General Law - Part I, Title XX, Chapter 147, Section 22)

Guys, stop oppressing yourselves: you have a right to keep and bear Arms! (There are no mag limits, or full auto-bans on your "military arms, uniform and equipment," see MGL 60 § 24 (General Law - Part I, Title IX, Chapter 60, Section 24). You only need an LTC if you carry a "firearm" in the performance of duties. There is no such thing as a license to bear arms!
 

Attachments

  • 2005 Brookline Tab Stories and complaints.pdf
    1.3 MB · Views: 18
Bonesinium said:
I don't know but I suspect that it's actually a result of how he's been treated here in the US, mainly, in Massachusetts.
Click to expand...

The "US" has treated me fine!

It's the purported 'supporters' of the Second Amendment,
who insist that I get a "license to bear arms,"
when no such thing exists, who I've had a problem with!

Dudes, again -- there's NO LICENSE for Our right to keep and bear arms for personal use! See MGL 62C § 55A (General Law - Part I, Title IX, Chapter 62C, Section 55A).
 
You don't have to tell me. I know that licenses to carry and all other forms of gun control are unconstitutional. The government has no lawful authority to license a right or convert the exercise of a right into a crime. It's bogus. It's without merit. It's unlawful and any laws doing ought to be unenforceable. Yet here we are, with a corrupt government who doesn't care.

Again, I wish you the best of luck. I find it admirable that despite all the bullshit the government has pulled on you, that you still are fighting for your rights and ours. I know most people wouldn't be so steadfast and persistent under similar circumstances as you've faced.
 
For those wondering why he might take just a little bit of an issue with MA government

He's been pulled over and arrested no fewer than three times and had at least 13 charges levied against him. 12 of the 13 were dismissed while one appears to have been reduced to a simple civil infraction. It seems the basis for the stops were questionable in the first place and the basis for the arrests even worse...as in, there wasn't any.

I'd be pretty upset too if I kept getting stopped and arrested despite having violated no laws and committed no crimes. But this is how government treats our military officers and medical doctors. It's pretty darn perverse if you ask me.
 
safetyfirst2125 said:
Really a key point: why revoke his medical license because he has a non violent 2A charge for simple possession?

Seems like the medical license revocation is purely political unless there are some well documented conditions to maintain good standing that the charges violate.
Click to expand...
Most professional licensing has a requirement that one be "of good character", which is subjective. More commonly, those convicted of any felony can't hold any professional license.

California prison inmates who fight wildfires are barred by state law from being firefighters after their release. The same is often true for nurses, teachers, and certainly doctors and lawyers.

Is it right? No. But it is, still.
 
Greg said:
Its just a digital copy of an official court document, mildly interesting reading the states opinions.
Click to expand...
What makes you think the document contains one jot or tittle of prosecution commentary?
The blue text is nothing but the defendant's strawmen.

Bonesinium said:
The good doctor should be lauded for not just talking about exercising his rights but actually doing so and not caving when challenged. We could all learn a lot from him. It’s easy to say that statutes violate the second amendment or that the 2A is my permit but it’s another thing entirely to do it.
Click to expand...
Not a day goes by that I don't see dozens of NESers
praise Jack Miller for the epic case law
that his case bravely established for us all.

42! said:
I've read this and another of his threads, and I'm just assuming he'll appeal when he loses. So I should have said that. I'm willing to believe he'll push it all the way up to SCOTUS, but they won't take it up.
Click to expand...
The higher the level of court which ultimately rules on a gun case,
the broader the umbrella of justice which will cover us for years to come.
Good and hard.
 
Hey @Dr. Kang Lu in light of the decision that came from SCOTUS the other day in the Bruen case, I am wondering if you think that this decision gives you a powerful tool in fighting the charges in MA? There may be enough wiggle room here in the decision that simply possessing a weapon outside of the house may nullify the charges. Even if and I hope it never happens that there is a conviction, but there is a case for saying that any conviction is invalid. Just tossing some thoughts your way.
 
there are several good 2A attorneys on this board

I don't know if I would send the good Dr their way.

this is the one time I would advise someone to go Pro Se
 
Dr. Kang Lu said:
Anyone who knows a serious 2A attorney, please send him my way!
Thank you! Send emails to LibertyWithoutLicense@gmail.com.
Click to expand...
So what happened? Judge tell you to cut out the crazy?

You've laid out your position pretty clearly both publicly and in court, IANAL but I'm betting a good firearms lawyer is going to stay clear of this now. Might want to focus on staying out of jail and giving up on the gun ownership thing.
 
I wonder if he has 10K for a retainer?

At $250 an hour, that will cover the first 35 hours, plus records requests and filing fees.

Make that 20K, no lawyer in his/her right mind is going to do this for less than $500/hr.

Just the consultation alone will send most good competent Attorneys running the other way..... it just isn't worth the hassle.
 
Bonesinium said:
Give up the "gun ownership thing"?
The right to keep and bear arms isn't worth the hassle?
WTF is wrong with you guys tonight?
Click to expand...
read both his threads and look at what he's already put to the courts. he dug his own hole and he dug deep. probably had half a chance if he had kept his mouth shut and gone the good lawyer route from the beginning.

Or maybe not carried a gun after his LTC was revoked, and gotten a lawyer to deal with that. Would have been a lot easier to fight the revocation if he hadn't gone out and got himself a possession charge.
PSGWSP

ETA: could have probably gotten a CWOF on the possession and stayed out of jail. Wouldn't leave him in an easy position to get the LTC back, but better than where he'll end up now with a conviction.
 

Similar threads

Help identify
Replies
4
Views
202
Taipan01
Taipan01
  • Poll
Help me decide
2 3
Replies
73
Views
1K
Supermoto
Supermoto
Need a good 2A attorney for a friend
2 3 4
Replies
96
Views
3K
Len-2A Training
Len-2A Training
Help me ID this bit of ammo
Replies
10
Views
377
straightshooterjake
S
Help me learn to love .22
3 4 5
Replies
145
Views
3K
PATRON
PATRON
Back
Top Bottom