• 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..

Chevy 2 65 said:
IANAL, but this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_Clause

or this

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/statecommerce.htm
Click to expand...

I agree, there are Commerce Clause issues at play here.

Thing is, it isn't any MA law specifically prohibiting online ammo sales that's standing in the way, it's
Healys (and her predecessors for the last 13 years), willful misinterpretation and abuse of power thats
preventing it.

I for one think a better approach to this situation would be to argue that no such law exists to begin with,
that the AG has exceeded her authority, and wrongfully interpreted MGL's to suit her agenda.

If a more 2nd A friendly AG were ever to hold office here, they could do away with the current policy from day one...
there wouldn't even be any need for any lawsuit.

Same thing with the 7/20 shit, it isn't the law that's the problem, it's the dipshits making their own law that's the problem.
 
42! said:
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.
Click to expand...

I once got banned for posting a pic of two Spanish dudes in a bathtub (no nudity) with a caption that said "Jesus loves you means something different in Mexico."

I was kind of surprised by it considering some of the crap I've seen on here. Do you think what I did is worse than what the GP is accused of?
 
42! said:
Love those snappy comebacks, I'll even send you a rep point [smile]
Click to expand...

LOVE America ! Even tried to join, but they told me at MEPS I was deaf in my left ear? I can hear in that ear, but it's not good.
My father told me stories of the socialist government in Portugal. I say not here !

To me these words are not open for any debate. It's really easy to read and understand. All you real smart PHD types, read it does it make sense?

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

 us-outdoor-poly-max-flag-6x10-or-smaller.jpg
God Bless !
 
Last edited:
In God We Trust said:
I once got banned for posting a pic of two Spanish dudes in a bathtub (no nudity) with a caption that said "Jesus loves you means something different in Mexico."

I was kind of surprised by it considering some of the crap I've seen on here. Do you think what I did is worse than what the GP is accused of?
Click to expand...
I would need to review the rules and see the post, and the thread for proper context before forming an opinion.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
 
TLB said:
One of our previous turd AGs made an interpretation. The legislature passed a law allowing it because people got pissed.
Click to expand...

See, there's that "interpretation" shit again, that's what's really ****ing us over.

The legislature could easily amend the MGL's to specifically allow online ammo sales, but yeah, I know,

I stand a better chance of getting a blumpkin from Maura Healy.
 
What's coming next is a bill to make online sales actually illegal.
The pattern is not very subtle.
The lap dog media get thier orders , give us a piece that we can use to justify our next anti constitutional shit law.
Too bad it's not harder to find someone in the gun community willing to hose the rest of us for a buck.
 
42! said:
Right, and nazis should not be allowed to speak because I dislike what they say.
Click to expand...

Good analogy. /sarc. You might want to find cases of apples to apples, and not compare a regime that exterminated millions of people to a gun store. But hey, as you point out, its a free country.

42! said:
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.
Click to expand...

I am a little confused by who "the site" is here. But if "the site" is TGP, then let me know what they have done to support the BoR? And this is a legit question, not tongue in cheek. I see others putting their name to legal cases against the state, I don't see that from TGP. I see a company that was to selling Glocks and got busted and now is a bitch of the state, and one that goes out their way to harm their fellow gun owners' ability to get market priced ammo. This site doesn't have to support their business by providing access to this forum.

I will freely admit; I have never been to TGP. I work literally 5 minutes from them, and have never been there. Everything they post on this site and their website is not priced what I consider to be competitively and never saw the need to go there. I hope that Derek reconsiders and gives them the boot, they add nothing positive to our community..
 
Post that again I missed it.

In God We Trust said:
I once got banned for posting a pic of two Spanish dudes in a bathtub (no nudity) with a caption that said "Jesus loves you means something different in Mexico."

I was kind of surprised by it considering some of the crap I've seen on here. Do you think what I did is worse than what the GP is accused of?
Click to expand...
 
"Post that again I missed it."

b724dd70e0f5b73719e02a662e36e305ee58f5f54d097662ac8000080f3ce5d7.jpg


Don't do it...
 
42! said:
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.
Click to expand...

The BoR, 1st Amendment, applies to government censorship of speech, not private entities like NES, as myself and many others have been reminded for posting material that does not have the approval of the forum moderators.
 
Last edited:
42! said:
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.
Click to expand...
Step off the soap box and take a breath. The discussions have been regarding this forum. If I wanted to hear what Nazis have to say I'll go find their forum.
 
goodzilla said:
2 Rats. The faster we ID the WCVB employee the better...and what their NES names are...





Hey shitbird, you're "troubled" over something that #1 is not against the law and #2, is a freedom that virtually the rest of the country enjoys...yet somehow civilization has not yet collapsed!
Click to expand...

TL;DR, what if the WCVB employee is someone that got a license SO they can back-check the vague laws/decrees/whatever????

42! said:
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
Click to expand...

They don't care. And they can silence your response within their organization.

Could you imagine if the Right owned the press??? I mean, look how much the Left lost their minds for YEARS that the Right basically owned (read: only people listened to their shows) talk radio. Janine Garaffalo (sp) all but demanded that the government take some of their $ to support the crappy Left-Always-All-The-Time radio network they tried to set up about 15 years ago. LOL
 
AverageJoe said:
The BoR, 1st Amendment, applies to government censorship of speech, not private entities like NES, as myself and many others have been reminded for posting material that does not have the approval of the forum moderators.
Click to expand...

You cut out the part of my post where I specifically acknowledge this.

boilermaker said:
​Originally Posted by 42!: 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.
Click to expand...

I am a little confused by who "the site" is here. But if "the site" is TGP, then let me know what they have done to support the BoR? And this is a legit question, not tongue in cheek. I see others putting their name to legal cases against the state, I don't see that from TGP. I see a company that was to selling Glocks and got busted and now is a bitch of the state, and one that goes out their way to harm their fellow gun owners' ability to get market priced ammo. This site doesn't have to support their business by providing access to this forum. .
Click to expand...

Derek is NES, so the "site" in this context is NES.
 

Similar threads

These Are The Worst States To Be A Gun Owner In 2024
Replies
9
Views
535
Zappa
Zappa
Worcester PD - Going after the guns but how about the perps…
Replies
14
Views
542
houdini
houdini
Guess the kids running the WSJ have gone to the dark side.
Replies
6
Views
483
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Yesterday Was The 10 Year Anniversary Of The Bundy Family Cattle Ranch Standoff Against The BLM
Replies
4
Views
242
Matt_SERE
Matt_SERE
Smart gun will put fingerprint, facial recognition technology to work: Biofire has called it the 'first and only biometric firearm on the market'
2
Replies
40
Views
590
42!
42!
Back
Top Bottom