New Massachusetts decision on prohibited person status

[nstassel]

This decision was brought to my attention and it is interesting to see a Mass Court apply Binderup.

 

[Freddy B]

This is great news! What is it with Westfield CLEO's?

 

[DJBrad]

Very good that the court of Westfield granted the decision to stipulate the difference between a crime of violence and that of oui or some other innocuous crime wrt to firearms ownership.

 

[Palladin]

Nice. the only downside, is the court ruled on the constitutionality of the Fed law, ONLY as it apples to this guy.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

This is but one step of many in a very protracted battle. There is the separate matter of the Feds refusal to recognize gun ownership as a civil right. The ATF position is that it is a right, but not a civil one, therefore, getting gun rights back is not a restoration of civil rights. See Logan v. US where voting, holding public office and service on a jury are cited ... and quoted by the ATF as an exhaustive enumeration of "civil" rights rather than a list of examples.

The decision is limited, and even has a "legal fee protection" clause for the attorneys:

Nice. the only downside, is the court ruled on the constitutionality of the Fed law, ONLY as it apples to this guy

Not the only downside, unfortunately.

It is also not binding on the feds, and provides absolutely no protection against a federal "Felon in Possession" prosecution. And before you cite entrapment by estoppel, note that the courts have held that this does not transcend the state/federal boundary (a state official telling you something is legal is not a defense to federal prosecution if that statement is inaccurate).

 

[TayNinh_66]

Nice. the only downside, is the court ruled on the constitutionality of the Fed law, ONLY as it apples to this guy.

The other downside is the decision can't be used as precedent in any court. Not even the same District Court.
(although probably moot because application will never get past state level checks)
but it is nice to see a judge take a reasonable approach distinguishing violent offences from non-violent.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Not all precedents are the ones you find on the books. Decisions like this help build momentum for our side and, even if not cited as precedents, are often known to courts hearing other cases. No judge wants to go first. When people petitioned the king in days of old, it was sometimes done on a circular scroll, so the king could not tell what troublemaker signed first.

What cases like this do is move this type of decision out of the realm of "unthinkable". For the most part, the long term standing of the PP statutes have made it "unthinkable" that any reasonable person or court would go against such "obviously good" public policy.

Wins like this help in the long term, just as non-precedent setting losses can hurt us.

 

[RKG]

I don't get the dump on the Westfield COP. My read is that he did what he could to help the guy.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I don't get the dump on the Westfield COP. My read is that he did what he could to help the guy.

It's a matter of how the process works.