The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old February 12, 2013, 09:52 AM   #1
Gary L. Griffiths
Senior Member
Join Date: April 7, 2000
Location: AZ, WA
Posts: 1,412
Davis V. Grimes, MA re: Arbitrary Denials of LTC

Commonwealth Second Amendment, a MA gun rights group, has filed suit against four MA police chiefs for violating Second Amendment rights by imposing unreasonable and unlawful restrictions on concealed carry applicants.

Read about it here:

This one looks like it might have legs....
Violence is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and valorous feeling which believes that nothing is worth violence is much worse. Those who have nothing for which they are willing to fight; nothing they care about more than their own personal safety; are miserable creatures who have no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of those better than themselves. Gary L. Griffiths, Chief Instructor, Advanced Force Tactics, Inc. (Paraphrasing John Stuart Mill)
Gary L. Griffiths is offline  
Old February 12, 2013, 10:04 AM   #2
Senior Member
Join Date: August 28, 2011
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Posts: 370
Outstanding... looks like a team effort in the right direction.
SamNavy is offline  
Old February 12, 2013, 10:41 AM   #3
Senior Member
Join Date: January 15, 2013
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 1,372
Maybe a few with more time and money than I will follow suit in NJ.
2ndsojourn is offline  
Old February 12, 2013, 01:15 PM   #4
Tom Servo
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 12,153
The argument:

This suit challenges Defendants’ imposition of “sporting,” “hunting,” and/or “target” restrictions on handgun licenses. These restrictions prevent Plaintiffs from using handguns for the purpose self-protection, which contravenes “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” that the Second Amendment secures.
Heller recognized a "right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation." Restricting the carriage of weapons to "sporting" or "hunting" uses would violate that.
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old February 12, 2013, 04:10 PM   #5
Al Norris
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,540
I've just RECAPPED the case and it will appear within a few minutes. I'm also about to enter the initial data into the Current 2A Cases thread.

The complaint was originally filed on Feb. 7, 2013. The complaint referenced in the blog (and located at the Comm2A website) is actually a FAC (First Amended Complaint) and was filed on Feb. 10th.

This appears to be a second attempt (with otherwise "clean" plaintiffs). unlike the ill-fated Hightower case. The reasons that the CA1 rejected Hightower are not precedential here and do not apply.

David Jensen, a protege of Alan Gura, will be the lead attorney.
Al Norris is offline  
Old February 12, 2013, 04:21 PM   #6
Al Norris
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,540
Case entered and may be referenced at the Internet Archive.
Al Norris is offline  
Old April 3, 2014, 11:45 AM   #7
Senior Member
Join Date: May 17, 2012
Posts: 228,49

Order is out. Case is being certified to MA Supreme Judicial Court. Judge notes the policies of these police chiefs may violate MA state laws, and wants to avoid the 2A question.
These chiefs have a policy of not issuing unrestricted licenses to first time applicants, no matter their reason.
The order also notes the split with Peruta/Moore and CA2-4. When first reading it I got the strong impression the judge would rule in our favor. But he seems reluctant to pull the trigger.
I see this as a signal that he's allowing the MA state court to make this case go away.
press1280 is offline  
Old April 3, 2014, 06:52 PM   #8
Senior Member
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 8,389
Looks like the judge is punting the ball down the road and hoping it is either resolved by a referral to the state courts or a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court specifically addressing the right to carry outside the home.
KyJim is offline  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:49 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2016 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent:
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.05827 seconds with 9 queries