You spent all that time typing up your history about how awesome you are in court and how much youve done for everyie else ....and NONE of it means your opinion on this subject has more weight than anyone else's.
Sorry.....I stand by this
1. The whole ltc thing is unconstitutional.
What is and isn't constitutional is a matter decided by whoever is in power at a given time. The constitution was written by man and isn't some magic god given document, Personally I support it as it limits the actions of government... in theory. But make no mistake, what it means is decided by man. And clearly, limits have been allowed, not always for the better.
The existence of an LTC may not be unconstitutional, but rather it's the conditions it sets, Bruen made this clear. It could even be said that in the past some form of LTC was a practical solution to the problem of verifying non-PP status, But that use has past as tech for instant checks now exists. So now an LTC serves no purpose, and can only be a medium for non-constitutional conditions. Simply put, there is no benefit side to a cost/benefit comparison,
2. In the face of the ltc system a cop should not have the ability to deny a non pp an ltc because of shit his family does
I absolutely agree that the law should be changed and suitability removed, but I say this while still recognizing that there are people and situations where a gun is a bad idea. Of someone can come up with a fair way to insure this I would support it. The problem is that so far I haven't seen a way to do this that would even be effective, let alone fair. In the past this wasn't a problem. Communities were small, everyone knew every else and they would simply self regulate, no need even for a law. Jimmy down the way is a little off so nobody lets him have a gun, no law, just a community taking care of itself. Unfortunately, the small town community is long gone. So we are left with this mess.
Your clearly in favor of the cops decision in the case were discussing "cuz community"......and "if it saves one life it's ok"
You'll never hear me say this so don't be making lying quotes.
Yeah f*** all that a cop should not be able to skip due process by a f***ing jury of his peers and just deny a man his rights.....even worse.....to use a man's family's behavior as the determination of unsuitability.
Well we agree here, I don't like MA suitability, but if you people can't get rid of it, at least make it more clearly defined and give it due process with a real trial with rules of evidence and testimony. It's hard to hit a moving target and in a suitability hearing the PD's lawyer can say anything he wants and shift focus however he wants, and doesn't need to back up any of it with verifiable, challengeable evidence.
And by the sounds of it you've probably never been called for jury duty cuz after all the time you've spent suing others your on a black list.
Lear to read, hardly any time at all. A small claims suit when I was 18 is hardly black list worthy. And this may come as a surprise to you but you don't really have a choice if they want you to testify as a witness. and that was twice (a traffic and a DUI thing) in 57 years. The expert witness, yup I had a choice there, get pay to sit and talk for an hour at something like 100x what I was making an hour. Would have loved to do more but that was when I was injured and had to leave the profession.
And a year ago I accused my local CoP of a violation of NH RSA, I guess I could have been a "Model Citizen" like you and done nothing, just bitched on the internet while accepting his actions. But I challenged him despite the fact that his decision had little practical affect on me, but it was outside his authority and authority needs to be checked. And I really doubt something that happened last year can explain decades of never being called for jury duty.
As for being on list, ya quite a few at this point., But I'm not a "Model Citizen" like you. I'm not the good boy satisfied to do nothing more than bitch on the internet.
you might want to learn to read.
Ok so.....you didn't say the cop should deny this guys ltc? Did I read that wrong?
Your first post on this thread you said and I quote:
"I'm with the chief in this one"
What did I miss?
The law requires the CoP to make a decision, and whether he agrees with the law or not, if it goes horribly wrong (which I think it will in this case) the media, the public, and the politicians will destroy his life (right or wrong he'll be the scapegoat). We don't even know if he personally agrees with suitability. He in a no win situation. And in this case the subjects judgement seems poor to the point of being dangerous.
So ideally the LTC is denied AND the subject get a real trial with proper rules of evidence (due process).
But for now we have to live in the real world. And imagine he is given the LTC and the inevitable conflict happens. The issue will be held up to the press and the people of MA as a reason for more gun control, and you will get it.
