Supreme Court - NYSRPA v. Bruen - Megathread

[VetteGirlMA]

Matt Hoover and the Auto Key Card.

View attachment 635366

Suit is calling out NFA.


View: https://youtu.be/kahaWSrU5nc

It seems like an amazing case. The fact that they provided quotes from the AG in 1934 and congress shows that the ATF is just making sh*t up.

 

[M1911]

Why would he get arrested if, even prior to Bruen, MGL states that carrying on a restricted license is only a fine and cause for license revocation. Is that really arrestable? And if so, what is the charge called?

do you really expect most beat cops to know or care about the SCOTUS ruling?

 

[MAJoe]

As a holder of the "green card", I can tell you that it had the term "restriction" on it and they printed either collector or police firearms instructor in that spot. Unsure if that will go away or not post-Bruen, but either CMR or MGL has those restrictions in print. Just my opinion, but I don't think USSC will stretch their ruling to MGs.

Makes sense, thanks!

 

[drgrant]

You know this got me thinking about MA machine gun licenses. Wouldn't Bruen also impact these licenses as well? Why do I need an FFL as a prerequisite to applying for the license?

Because of the "bona fide collector" BS in the law. The C&R is an affirmation of that. Now that being said some chiefs probably don't give a shit and ignore that requirement. Not really worth fighting when a C&R FFL is practically 30? Bucks and basically shall issue. I doubt the courts will ever consider that a huge burden.

 

[PappyM3]

do you really expect most beat cops to know or care about the SCOTUS ruling?

When there is a groundbreaking ruling about civil rights that directly affects their profession… then yes, I do. Professional competence and awareness of things affecting your job is something I expect of people. I’m not surprised when people fail to meet those expectations, but I still have those expectations.

 

[Waher]

OK, a whole lot of reading here. Can I ask something? What impact does the Bruen/NYSRPA case have on Massachusetts today?

New/replacement licenses all say "restrictions:none". Certain places like Boston will lift restrictions with a simple phone call/email request now.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Why would he get arrested if, even prior to Bruen, MGL states that carrying on a restricted license is only a fine and cause for license revocation. Is that really arrestable? And if so, what is the charge called?

Violation of MGL Chapter 140 Section 131a.

 

[Dadstoys]

I just want to point something out that’s amazing.

For years now, we’ve said on this forum that winning cases is great, but what we really need is for SCOTUS to declare the 2A deserves strict scrutiny instead of intermediate.

Sure, NYSPRA got may issue to be unconstitutional, but we got even even better than strict scrutiny! Text and history, baby.

I just can’t get over how great this is. Shall issue across the land and strict+ scrutiny for future cases.

I can see it taking some time , but I think it will lead to bigger and better things in the future.
Nothing moves as fast as we all would like , but our kids and grand kids may live in a more 2A friendly world and I'm at peace with that.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Plaintiffs are deemed suitable or not by the Comm2A Chief of Litigation.

This is correct, though I think the term "intake specialist" or "one man thinktank" would be more appropriate - and no, it is not me.

Comm2a is playing the game to win, not posture in court or represent any particular individual (though when we pay for someone's attorney, that attorney's first obligation is to that client)4

Sure, someone may feel we are not being "fair" by not using plaintiffs with three or 4 dropped domestic violence charges or an nolle prossed assault charge in their history, but it comes back to that "playing to win" thing.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I can see it taking some time , but I think it will lead to bigger and better things in the future.
Nothing moves as fast as we all would like , but our kids and grand kids may live in a more 2A friendly world and I'm at peace with that.

It is astounding that the state acted so quickly with the AG guidance on restrictions, and that the FRB almost immediately stopped even printing restricted LTCs.'

Sure, there is cleanup work to be done - like the reissuance of existing junior varsity licenses, but things are moving.

GOAL is also doing its thing as gun owners' goalie, working to prevent the opposition from slamming the gun control puck into the scoring net. We are well served having them work to avoid garbage like "lets make LTCs useless NY style". They can also be a voice of reason helping the legislature understand that very little has change in MA as far as the number of people carrying - well under 10% of LTCs (last I checked) were restricted and not much has really changed in this state in that regard.

 

[Dadstoys]

Medford PD only gives out LTC's to connected individuals. If you know an officer you can get one. Otherwise, you are SOL. Saw this first hand with a friend. Dbags in charge there are precisely the reason why Bruen was brought forth.

They only have to look in the mirror to see why it came about.
You can't give mental midgets authority and not expect them to abuse it.
Someone told me this one years ago...
If you hand a chimp a gun and it shoots someone, is it the chimps fault ?

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

I believe he has had more SCOTUS appearances than anyone else.

Nope, Clement only has 110 appearances. Ed Needler beats him with 151 appearances before the justices.

 

[Dadstoys]

It is astounding that the state acted so quickly with the AG guidance on restrictions, and that the FRB almost immediately stopped even printing restricted LTCs.'

Sure, there is cleanup work to be done - like the reissuance of existing junior varsity licenses, but things are moving.

GOAL is also doing its thing as gun owners' goalie, working to prevent the opposition from slamming the gun control puck into the scoring net. We are well served having them work to avoid garbage like "lets make LTCs useless NY style". They can also be a voice of reason helping the legislature understand that very little has change in MA as far as the number of people carrying - well under 10% of LTCs (last I checked) were restricted and not much has really changed in this state in that regard.

I would think you will see a big uptick in applications now that the jumping through flaming hoops portion of the process is gone.
There was a Chief in Haverhill back in I think the 80's that wouldn't even give out an application till you took him to court to the tune of about $1200 bucks.
The Judge would tell him to give you the application and he would then deny the permit.
He was pretty up front about saying , "No one but my officers will be carrying in this city. "
I would imagine it's going to take a lawsuit or two to get the worst offenders in line.

 

[M1911]

When there is a groundbreaking ruling about civil rights that directly affects their profession… then yes, I do. Professional competence and awareness of things affecting your job is something I expect of people. I’m not surprised when people fail to meet those expectations, but I still have those expectations.

Cops aren't lawyers. If they are well informed, then they've heard about 1) the AG's guidance that only unrestricted licenses should be issued and 2) the DCJIS guidance about how to a department should go about removing restrictions. But neither of those guidance letters state that they should consider restricted licenses to be unrestricted. Most cops probably believe that the AG's office and the DCJIS have attorneys who understand the SCOTUS decision better than they do, so they will follow the guidance they get from the AG, the DCJIS, and their department (if they've received any).

I fully agree with you that the restrictions are unconstitutional. But I suspect that many cops haven't heard about the ruling or if they have, have only received the guidance referred to above.

 

[42!]

This is correct, though I think the term "intake specialist" or "one man thinktank" would be more appropriate - and no, it is not me.

Comm2a is playing the game to win, not posture in court or represent any particular individual (though when we pay for someone's attorney, that attorney's first obligation is to that client)4

Sure, someone may feel we are not being "fair" by not using plaintiffs with three or 4 dropped domestic violence charges or an nolle prossed assault charge in their history, but it comes back to that "playing to win" thing.

But let's be fair, Comm2a passes over plaintiffs for a lot less than that. Maybe if people knew what the criteria was, you know, not that it's just a subjective opinion, which is all anyone knows. Kinda sounds similar to how LTCs were done till now.

 

[Dadstoys]

do you really expect most beat cops to know or care about the SCOTUS ruling?

I would think it's been the subject of staff meetings.
The caring part ? Depends on the town I would guess.
Not many care to be on the receiving end of a civil rights lawsuit.

 

[crispnipz]

Violation of MGL Chapter 140 Section 131a.

So any violation of anything in MGL is cause for arrest? That section just says a fine, nothing about imprisonment, unless I'm reading it wrong?

 

[M1911]

I would think it's been the subject of staff meetings.
The caring part ? Depends on the town I would guess.
Not many care to be on the receiving end of a civil rights lawsuit.

Even if it has been discussed in roll call meetings, what advice do you think was given to them? I'd bet it was based on the letters from the AG and/or DCJIS. Once again, the cops aren't lawyers. They've gotten advice from lawyers (bad advice, but still advice that they can point to).

As for a civil rights lawsuit, 1) they will be defended by their department, 2) their defense in the lawsuit will be that they followed the advice given to them by the AG's office and the DCJIS. That's a pretty good defense that they did not knowingly infringe on someone's civil rights, particularly given the courts here in MA (even the federal court).

Finally, I know an attorney who sued a local police department. I can tell you that he received frequent retribution from the department -- he was given bogus traffic tickets many times by officers in that department. He also received threatening phone calls, hangup calls, and his house was vandalized.

ETA: please realize that I'm not saying that I like what I predict will happen, because I don't. But that is what I expect will happen.

 

[Dadstoys]

Even if it has been discussed in roll call meetings, what advice do you think was given to them? I'd bet it was based on the letters from the AG and/or DCJIS. Once again, the cops aren't lawyers. They've gotten advice from lawyers (bad advice, but still advice that they can point to).

As for a civil rights lawsuit, 1) they will be defended by their department, 2) their defense in the lawsuit will be that they followed the advice given to them by the AG's office and the DCJIS. That's a pretty good defense that they did not knowingly infringe on someone's civil rights, particularly given the courts here in MA (even the federal court).

Finally, I know an attorney who sued a local police department. I can tell you that he received frequent retribution from the department -- he was given bogus traffic tickets many times by officers in that department. He also received threatening phone calls, hangup calls, and his house was vandalized.

ETA: please realize that I'm not saying that I like what I predict will happen, because I don't. But that is what I expect will happen.

I wouldn't be surprised in some towns if it did.

 

[Chevy 2 65]

 

[Chevy 2 65]

Tell that to Medford PD. They seem to basically be ignoring the requests after telling people "no" who didn't meet their pre-Bruen criteria of having a restricted LTC for 1 year and then being able to request removal (which itself was inconsistent).

Just carry and be happy. It's really OK now, the evil men and women can't hurt you anymore.



View: https://youtu.be/d-diB65scQU

 

[M1911]

I wouldn't be surprised in some towns if it did.

It's my understanding that there are over 300 police departments in Massachusetts and that 70% of them have no more than 10 sworn officers.

 

[vickers]

This thread reminds me to donate to Comm2A.

You should setup a monthly auto donation. That way you won't forget!

 

[Chevy 2 65]

Question for all the wicked smart legal types on here. You too @Knuckle Dragger.

Does this comment mean every state? Outside the home can be anywhere in the USA.

Moreover, the Second Amendment guarantees an “individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation,” id., at 592, and confrontation can surely take place outside the home. Pp. 23–24. "






REPLY

 

[Chevy 2 65]

You should setup a monthly auto donation. That way you won't forget!

And Amazon smile.

 

[M1911]

Question for all the wicked smart legal types on here. You too @Knuckle Dragger.

Does this comment mean every state? Outside the home can be anywhere in the USA.

Moreover, the Second Amendment guarantees an “individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation,” id., at 592, and confrontation can surely take place outside the home. Pp. 23–24. "

It is my understanding that the decision did not address reciprocity, but IANAL and I didn't stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.

 

[Coyote33]

do you really expect most beat cops to know or care about the SCOTUS ruling?

Ignorance of the law is not an excuse from the law. Isn't that what they tell us?

And Amazon smile.

It would be nice if there were a page somewhere on their website where we could send people to know how to do this. Ditto one explaining what they do. It is a lot of work trying to explain over and over and over again.

 

[DungeBerry63]

I was thinking it might also be because he asked before the AG’s guidance came down? I think he sent his request that very first day.

u are right i also called two other times since and haven't even gotten a simple call back just only a nice straight to voicemail ive called even after the AG guidance

 

[Picton]

This is correct, though I think the term "intake specialist" or "one man thinktank" would be more appropriate - and no, it is not me.

Comm2a is playing the game to win, not posture in court or represent any particular individual (though when we pay for someone's attorney, that attorney's first obligation is to that client)4

Sure, someone may feel we are not being "fair" by not using plaintiffs with three or 4 dropped domestic violence charges or an nolle prossed assault charge in their history, but it comes back to that "playing to win" thing.

That's the wise way to play the game, straight out of the NAACP playbook from the '60s.

This is how you get courts to affirm basic civil rights: systematically. Layering the cake. Making sure the foundation is firm. It's what the pro-choicers neglected to do in 1972.

 

[M1911]

Ignorance of the law is not an excuse from the law. Isn't that what they tell us?

I suspect that the police would argue that they were acting in good faith, based on the legal advice that they had received from the AG's office.