Larry Keane - Police revoking licenses for pre 7/20 purchases

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah but the system is very porous at best. You can have guns on file "in your name" that you don't even own anymore. That's why this doesn't make any sense. The system doesn't know whether you have those 5 AR 15s or you sold them all on 7/19.

-Mike
Yet, but the act of acquiring them was itself a super duper crime, so even if you disposed of all those icky assault weapons you're still a criminal.
 
I know dozens of people who still think that their old FIDs are good for life. They've never renewed and never will.
 
Yeah but the system is very porous at best. You can have guns on file "in your name" that you don't even own anymore. That's why this doesn't make any sense. The system doesn't know whether you have those 5 AR 15s or you sold them all on 7/19.

-Mike


except that logic and reason does not apply the bizzarro world of mAss, nice try comrade, now get back in line! [laugh]
 
Last edited:
Mike, I would suggest that you look at post #42 of mine. Which I believe already addressed that.

Sorry, didn't get that far in the thread.

except that logic and reason does not apply the bizzarro world of mAss, nice try comrade, now get back in line! [laugh]

Eventually it will, right around the time people responsible start eating bullets... I'll probably be long out of MA by then, but eventually, someone out there is going to crack.

-Mike
 
If this is in fact happening, in a way it benefits us because they are just adding fuel to the fire. People are going to be understandably upset when they find out that people are having their rights stripped away and their property confiscated for the "crime" of having purchased legal firearms. It will also bolster the argument that the AG's edict is illegal and should be reversed.

Hopefully if it is indeed happening the people it is happening to are already in touch with GOAL/Comm2A.

yup, this is bad in the short term for anyone who gets their LTC revoked, but probably good news long term.

Her FAQ (last I looked) said it doesn't apply to rifles purchased pre 7/20, so her edict shouldn't allow this.
 
Just had a scary thought. Has there ever been an AG appointed to SCOTUS?

Do you actually think Healey can AFFORD to buy that position? You know Obama will get a seat for his exit-office pardon... Next, look for a $50M donation to the Clinton Foundation... SCOTUS seat will require at least a $20M "Donation" She is just another whore... just a higher priced one.
 
yup, this is bad in the short term for anyone who gets their LTC revoked, but probably good news long term.

Her FAQ (last I looked) said it doesn't apply to rifles purchased pre 7/20, so her edict [STRIKE=d]shouldn't allow this[/STRIKE] doesn't require it.
FIFY. Big difference.
Given the scope of MA licensing discretion, a d!<%&#@d#d COP can very easily start doing this on their own, no permission or direction needed.
 
I know dozens of people who still think that their old FIDs are good for life. They've never renewed and never will.

I've been in stores where an old Fudd threw a hissy-fit because they were denied an ammo sale. To which they gripe, "I will just go to New Hampshire to buy then!". They shoot or hunt so little their pre 1998 ammo supply lasted nearly 20 years.
 
Eventually it will, right around the time people responsible start eating bullets... I'll probably be long out of MA by then, but eventually, someone out there is going to crack.

-Mike


It does happen even now, remember the dude who flew a plane into IRS building because they made his life living hell? Well, same deal here, the people who crack get marginalized and painted psychos. It works for few people but when it becomes routine ... well, we won't get there because this selective denials simply can be throttled down, keeping the pressure just under explosion level. And so it will go on.
 
F licenses, remember those old folks that wrote 'shall not be infringed?' Will NOT comply.
 
Yeah but the system is very porous at best. You can have guns on file "in your name" that you don't even own anymore. That's why this doesn't make any sense. The system doesn't know whether you have those 5 AR 15s or you sold them all on 7/19.

-Mike

Please tell us more..
 
Yeah but the system is very porous at best. You can have guns on file "in your name" that you don't even own anymore. That's why this doesn't make any sense. The system doesn't know whether you have those 5 AR 15s or you sold them all on 7/19.

-Mike

Couldn't they query the manufacturer and serial number if you subsequently FA-10'd it as the seller to sort of maybe prove you sold it? Assuming the mfr and serial number fields are entered correctly and consistently, which probably happens 3% of the time.
 
My COP said nothing changes with regards to his officers and "on the street" enforcement until EOPSS issues an enforcement letter. We know that Healy turned her nose up at EOPSS' request for more info, so I doubt we'll see an enforcement letter from them anytime soon.

-JR

That gives me a warm fuzzy feeling inside knowing that there are a bunch of cops just waiting on orders.
 
I could see them revoking your license on paper, not notifying you, relying on you to understand your activity was actually illegal

Who the hell would conclude that their activity was "actually illegal" when they followed all laws? [rolleyes] Give our regards to your boss. [laugh]
 
It's probably something like this. Somone got freaked about about something someone said and we're off, the sky is falling in. Unless we have something definitive, I wouldn't be running to the bathroom with the running shits.

Or maybe some lawyers got ahold of it and dont want to flash any cards before the betting starts...
 
That gives me a warm fuzzy feeling inside knowing that there are a bunch of cops just waiting on orders.

Ideally a chief of police would rely on the plain language of the law and reject such an EOPSS letter. I know that sounds naive.
 
I've got plenty of space in the basement and over 30 acres of easy diggin soil if anyone feels the need to send something down for safe keeping.[smile]
 
Also, was GOAL's twitter response (shown in OP) just a bot or something? Do we actually know a human at GOAL acknowledged it? I don't really know how twitter works, but it seems weird to say "thank you" in response to the dude dropping a bomb like that.
 
Yeah bro. TRUMP needs to win. I hate the 4th Amendment and want stop and frisk back. We need to control access to and what is posted on the internet. We don't need the first amendment, it's for our own good. Also, we should integrate the no-fly list into NICS, because due process, especially when it comes to 2A, has no place in our current world.

Trump4Eva coz guns and freedom.

Mike


If you don't see the supreme court is literally all that matters, there is pretty much no happening to you. Everything you described is about 10x better than a stacked court of liberal justices wittling down the 2a to a joke, just like we have in MA. I'm sure you'll sleep tight knowing you threw away your vote (not really because we live in a deep blue state anyway) on a 3rd party with a VP that is objectively more anti 2a than trump has ever been. Get real, fool.
 
Don't care if wild rumor or not, moving up plans to change residency. I was going to wait till I sold the house in MA so I could still enjoy the MA carry permit but **** it, I have a place in NH now I'm making it official.
 
Also, was GOAL's twitter response (shown in OP) just a bot or something? Do we actually know a human at GOAL acknowledged it? I don't really know how twitter works, but it seems weird to say "thank you" in response to the dude dropping a bomb like that.

A human runs their twitter account... [rofl]
 
If you don't see the supreme court is literally all that matters, there is pretty much no happening to you. Everything you described is about 10x better than a stacked court of liberal justices wittling down the 2a to a joke, just like we have in MA. I'm sure you'll sleep tight knowing you threw away your vote (not really because we live in a deep blue state anyway) on a 3rd party with a VP that is objectively more anti 2a than trump has ever been. Get real, fool.

So the Trump nominees would be Anti 1A, Anti 4A, and Anti due-process, even as applied to 2A, as far as your "SCOTUS" argument goes. Furthermore, you call me a fool, but my guess is you have no idea how SCOTUS has been treating the constitution, under liberal and conservative justices, for the past century. All the while, you acknowledge I am voting in a deep blue state.

Johnson's not my perfect candidate, but Trump and Hillary are both terrible on constitutional rights, Trump may even be more-so. I'll "waste" my vote on Johnson, because apparently if I don't vote for him it will magically help all my "Trump" friends get Trump elected and all my "Hillary" friends get Hillary elected.

Being a fool is getting tiring, with all these brilliant people around me who support the two fine people sharing the stage last night.

Mike
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom