This seems like it’s got all the makings of a class action interstate Commerce lawsuit against Healey.
-
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.
The Gun Parlor helping the antis..
- Thread starter Lip
- Start date
Chevy 2 65
NES Member
not in a corrupt court system of this state. these are the same courts that said the 2nd did not apply to the states
The only place we have any shot ever is federal courts. If something like that can be done federal maybe it has a chance, but IANAL and have no idea if this would even be a case. I'm sure the legal experts have seen this thread, but they don't (And shouldn't) make public any ideas they might have about new litigation.
Except now we have evidence that the AG is breaking interstate commerce laws. Before we all knew it but couldn’t prove it.
IANAL, but would we even having any standing to make a case?
If anyone should file a lawsuit, it needs to be the out of state vendors, but since MA is such a small market, and given the time
and expense of bringing any greivences to court, it's doubtful any of them ever will.
Chevy 2 65
NES Member
Why wouldn't we have standing? 95% of the country does it without issue, why is it that citizens in free states can, but we can't? Is there not an amendment for equal rights?
How would it fly if the state of Rhode Island said mASSachusetts drivers license is no longer valid, you will be arrested if you don't have a RI license.
Someone explain to me how not buying ammo online keeps out of the hands of criminals. Just look at all the blood in the free states OMG!!
Last edited:
Just a guess here, but we're not being financially harmed for one thing, and it's not like we're being
denied the ability to purchase any ammo at all.
Like I posted, the best chance of anything being done about this has to come from the vendors,
and I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.
im ready for the "fundme" to start.
I really would like to know if what Mass is doing to the out of state vendors is a violation of ethics ? to bad we could not sway trump to send a special federal prosecutor to dig into the Un Constitutional and un ethical ways mass gov oes things. After all it is and was the primary reason to have a federal government anyway. Right?
I'm being financially harmed. Try finding any precision round in the state at a reasonable price- god help you if that round is obscure. 303 brit soft point boat tails? Good f'ing luck.
Chevy 2 65
NES Member
You are now not allowed to by arrows or bows online. The AG just said so.
beaker
NES Member
Maybe you aren't being financially harmed, but you aren't everyone. Try buying supplies to reload. This is JBT behavior sponsored by our state government and paid for by anyone who works and pays taxes.
That citizen bewildered by being able to buy ammo online was likely a dealer upset with the competition. Is it wrong to say it is suspicious that WCVB found it necessary to come all the way to Worcester to get a comment?
You can try using 'it's harming me financially because I'm missing out on the better deals by buying the same thing online',
but I don't think that argument will carry much sway with a judge... same thing for buying obscure or hard to find ammo.
We have a right to purchase and own ammunition (even in this ****ed up state), but we don't have a right to cheap, inexpensive
ammunition.
I'm interested in seeing what's going to happen when
Californina's ammunition sales law goes into full effect.
Knowing the CalGuns people they already have something in the works.
They won round one sometime ago, but even if they succeed further on down the road, any court ruling isn't going
to apply in this state.
You mean censor them because they said something you didn't like? How Antifa of you.
How about we just let the market decide?
"no financial harm" is total bullshit. This means we have to pay retail as the only solution, i.e. 50% or whatever markup for no ****ing good reason.
Those who shoot a lot, this adds up very quickly. This affects not fixed ammo but every component, bullets, lead, powder and primers.
Mora has gone ****ing full retard, to the point that it looks like at least double digit of her efforts are focused on 2a. Besides the Exxon fiasco I have no idea what else she actually does (aside from campaigning)
I'm still not picking Faker over this **** next year.
Those who shoot a lot, this adds up very quickly. This affects not fixed ammo but every component, bullets, lead, powder and primers.
Mora has gone ****ing full retard, to the point that it looks like at least double digit of her efforts are focused on 2a. Besides the Exxon fiasco I have no idea what else she actually does (aside from campaigning)
I'm still not picking Faker over this **** next year.
Chevy 2 65
NES Member
You are missing it
DPR
NES Member
Go ahead and ban them. Gun owners need to be either anti-gun or pro-gun. What they did...in this state...with anti-gun media...with anti-gun legislation behind us and still ahead of us...is ANTI-GUN. You can keep taking the high road and wait for their side or wait to hear all the facts. I don't need to wait, what they did was anti-gun and I won't support shops that are anti-gun. People need to choose what side they are on and understand that middle ground is almost non-existent in this state. The market will decide and if I owned the market they ain't coming in.
Beretta92FS
NES Member
They effectively censored all online ammo coming into the state by their actions. How Antifa of them.
How about they get a dose of their own medicine and get banned.
Chevy 2 65
NES Member
Go to 6:15
[video=youtube_share;Z2pI6DVaOf8]http://youtu.be/Z2pI6DVaOf8?t=377[/video]
[video=youtube_share;Z2pI6DVaOf8]http://youtu.be/Z2pI6DVaOf8?t=377[/video]
I would give a few hundred to the defense fund of an online vendor willing to defy the AG today. She already converred me to a diamond sponsor of Comm2A with her 7/20 bullshit. I honestly hope she falls down the stairs and breaks her neck. She deserves it.
Chevy 2 65
NES Member
I would donate a few hundred myself.
Not saying that I'm right (that's why I posted about having "standing" in the form of a question).
But, lets say we use the added cost of doing business here over ordering online offense
(buying hard to find ammo too).
Do you really think that's the best argument to base any lawsuit on?
'It's not right that I have to pay twice as much for a brick of CCI Blazers, or can't find any 6.5 Carcano locally'
Is there any legal precedent set anywhere based on the same argument (doesn't have to be firearms related), that
could be used in this situation?
If we do lose on that argument, it's going to make it next to impossible for anyone else to pursue another lawsuit.
Rockrivr1
NES Member
Would seem that anything that puts gun owners and our abilities at risk is not as anti as we thought seeing this site is still allowing them to be a dealer here and do sales. Anti only means anti when it doesn't affect incoming cash flow. I get it, their site their decision. Though if I'm following the flow of this thread correctly we should now be turning on NES itself for supporting TGP. Think this falls into the friend of my enemy is still my friend, so should my enemy be my enemy? Or something like that. Yes, I'm confused...
I've hated TGP long before this as I've stated in previous posts, so not spending a cent there is no problem for me.
I've hated TGP long before this as I've stated in previous posts, so not spending a cent there is no problem for me.
Right, and nazis should not be allowed to speak because I dislike what they say. And it's ok that the AG overstepped her authority because it accomplished the goal (a real conversation I had with a Dem). Truly supporting the BoR and our free market system means everyone has the right to speak and promote themselves, even when what they say is disliked. Derek is certainly within his rights to close their account, and ban whoever he wants, but it's a slippery slope given that the site is one that supports the BoR. You can't pick and choose when you support the BoR and when you don't and still claim to support it.
And you don't have to support them. No one is making you purchase anything from anyone. This is how the system works.
I for one like to hear/see others expressing themselves. It's how you keep up on what is going on in the real world. Living in an echo chamber didn't work out so well for Hillary, it won't help us either.
Go ahead, ban and block everyone that offends you. Eventually you'll only see what you want to see and will have no knowledge of those opposing you until, surprise, they are on you front steps (figuratively). I'd rather see them coming.
Chevy 2 65
NES Member
Last edited:
Sent a comment and question to wcvb and got this;
Final-Recipient: rfc822;[email protected]
Action: failed
Status: 4.4.1 (no answer from host)
Remote-MTA: dns;thebostonchannel.com (204.74.99.100)
X-PowerMTA-BounceCategory: no-answer-from-host
Final-Recipient: rfc822;[email protected]
Action: failed
Status: 4.4.1 (no answer from host)
Remote-MTA: dns;thebostonchannel.com (204.74.99.100)
X-PowerMTA-BounceCategory: no-answer-from-host
Wait, what? Did you just make that up, or is it a real thing?
McClatchy said:
How would that work? My understanding is that FFLs are legally prevented (like, it's a felony) from doing a NICS check on someone who is *not* in the process of purchasing a gun. (or receiving a transfer of a gun) What kind of background check could an FFL do that wouldn't put them in legal jeopardy?
Chevy 2 65
NES Member
You're drunk, go home.
![[smile]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/001.gif "Smile [smile]")
Similar threads
