General

Overreaching ‘Enforcement Notice’ Earns Massachusetts a Lawsuit

Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey

Four federally-licensed Massachusetts firearms retailers and the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for the firearms and ammunition industry, filed action in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts this week to challenge on Constitutional grounds the “Enforcement Notice” issued by state Attorney General Maura Healey. The lawsuit states that her office overstepped its legal authority and deprived the retailers of their due process protections guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution. The action seeks declaratory relief and a permanent injunction enjoining enforcement.

Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey The retailers are Pullman Arms Inc. of Worcester; Guns and Gear, LLC of Agawam; Paper City Firearms of Holyoke; and Grrr Gear of Orange.

“Attorney General Maura Healey’s actions were unconstitutional. Firearms retailers in Massachusetts cannot determine the meaning or scope of the Attorney General’s Enforcement Notice and subsequent explanations,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “Because criminal penalties can result due to Attorney General Healey’s unilateral reinterpretation of a state statute done without administrative process or input from affected parties, her office exceeded its lawful authority and retailers were deprived of their due process protections under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.” “In addition, if the Attorney General’s Enforcement Notice is understood as applying to all semi-automatic firearms, it violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendments to keep and bear arms because it bans the manufacture, sale, and possession of a broad range of firearms in common use by the citizens of Massachusetts,” Keane said. “Unfortunately, Attorney General Healy’s unconstitutional action has left us no other option than to seek relief from the courts.” Representing the NSSF and the retailers are the Boston-based law firm of Kenney and Sams, P.C., and Michael Sullivan of the Ashcroft Law Firm, who is a former United States Attorney for the District of Massachusetts and former Acting Director, U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.

Read the Civil Action.

About NSSF

The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the trade association for the firearms industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of more than 13,000 manufacturers, distributors, firearms retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen’s organizations and publishers. For more information, visit nssf.org.

The Mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, The Shooter's Log, is to provide information—not opinions—to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (42)

  1. I’m glad I don’t live in that state. I guess the folks in that state are getting what they voted for…except for those who are actually informed and have a little common sense. Healey has GOT to be living in her own little mind.

    1. @ dprato,

      You can’t undo your words as they will forever remain embarrassingly archived for all to see. Anyone that earnestly takes the time to fully examine our exchange would have no choice but to conclude that you got this one wrong, yet you still chose to act inappropriately towards me. Sure we can shrug it off; after all who cares since it’s just the Internet? So yes, I will have a great day, unlike you who knows deep inside you were proven wrong and still lacked the integrity to admit it or to make things right. That will always be on you. There are some forum members that actually care about these things. They will remember how you acted and will always have doubts about your integrity when reading any of your future posts. The Internet is quite unforgiving that way.

  2. I didn’t have the time to nor the inclination to respond in any kind of detail to your rather lengthy response. Suffice it to say that I know a lot of vets all of whom have ptsd and none of them has ever mentioned either getting the letter or having anyone come to their home. Its unfortunate that you have to be so defensive. I wasn’t questioning that they may have gotten a letter as I said if you can read. I was questioning your statement of thousands losing their firearms. And sorry if you make the statement you furnish the documentation. You are usually on target but you made a mistake and thats fine. I have no
    real issue with most of what you have said here and in other places but I have no intention of being chastised because I questioned you on a point that I think was a gross exaggeration and my follow up “research” does not bear out that thousands of vets have lost their weapons. Sorry but you are not the only one who looks to fact check.
    I sent you another link that debunks what you have said. I am sure you will say they are full of beans. Don’t expect me continue this line because I really don’t feel it warrants an endless back and forth between us. And when you quote someone do it in the total context of the response not just a sound bite.

    1. @ dprato (Please find the time to read all),

      No dprato, I refuse to allow you to twist this into something it is not just because your sensibilities have been triggered. Anyone can scroll back and clearly see that you initiated the exchange. To which I politely responded with sound and irrefutable evidence.

      You didn’t like the evidence because it disproved your point so you escalated the situation by nickel and diming my evidence and then blatantly expanded the scope well outside of your original question posed to me.

      However, in so doing you unwittingly contradicted yourself. This left me no choice but to respond again to point out your glaring contradictions. And no, it wasn’t some out-of-context “sound bite” as you put it, because I copied and pasted the exact sentence you challenged me on which stands clear on its own.

      I also find it obnoxious that I’ve seen you spend long pages upon pages bantering on with others when it suits your needs but when I do it it’s suddenly considered a “rather lengthy response” as if not worthy of your “time to nor the inclination to respond in any kind of detail”. Can you not see your own hypocrisy in that? It severely tarnishes your credibility.

      Now I must address the link you offered in support of your position; it is not really your fault, but if you were a vet whom regularly uses the V.A. you’d have known better than to post anything from this discredited site. Most vets (including myself) have been warned not to use this site. It is well documented that this site is a hoax and does not represent U.S. vets in any official capacity.

      Furthermore, the “Veterans Today” site you referenced has been exposed as heavily conspiratorial in nature and takes money to write articles which suit the interests of the highest bidders. They’ve also been proven to have clandestine supporting ties to Iran, Russia, and Pakistan and often bash Israel in support of Palestine, amongst many other controversial geo-political issues. No legitimate V.A. support site would dabble in such biased clandestine affairs; it is merely their agenda used to feed their propaganda to the veteran masses under the pretense of false veteran support. Please stay away from them.

      Most importantly I will close by pointing out that at no time did I ever write that, “… thousands of firearms have been collected from vets”, as you claim I did. Please go back and re-read what I actually wrote on page 1 and then I expect an apology for your unnecessary stink created over something you miss-read.

      What I actually wrote was that Obama had hundreds of thousands of veterans discreetly entered into the NICS system without any adjudication. That is an indisputable fact that has been in the mainstream news and is being investigated by Congress as we speak. Look it up.

      Now follow me here; because I never did state “all veterans” were entered in the NICS system, obviously that leaves me referring only to the thousands that had been unlawfully entered into NICS by Obama. I then went on to state “all” of those veterans (entered in the NICS by the V.A.) thereafter received a form letter by the V.A. ordering them to turn their weapons in for confiscation or face a forceful removal by federal agents. This is a standard letter required to be sent out by law and thus you can be guaranteed “all” vets entered into NICS by the V.A. had one sent out. That is also indisputable, and as a federal agent I can vouch that these letters do get sent out regularly.

      So where does this leave us? It goes back to your original question which only ever questioned one single thing I wrote, of which I now directly quote you as writing, “I would have to question one statement you made about the letter from the VA telling veterans to turn in their weapons or face confiscation.”

      You very specifically only EVER questioned the letter of confiscation sent from the V.A. and nothing else. So I very specifically answered you back with a heavily documented story which overwhelmingly proved such letters are sent by the V.A.

      You never asked about anything beyond this until after I proved you wrong. Thereafter you began to blow everything out of proportion and then placed the blame on me. That is unacceptable and I truly feel you owe me an apology.

  3. I would be far more convinced if you had some stats on the number of vets who have in fact been disarmed. You send me a link about one person with whom they were unsuccessful and I gave you one example of where no one said a thing to my farrier. You did make the comment I believe that thousands of firearms have been collected from vets. I would like to see those stats in writing somewhere. One article is not verification of succes only intent which I don’t and never doubted for a second,

    1. @ dprato,

      Well it is unfortunate you think I’ve somehow failed you. Etiquette customarily dictates the challenger is to bear the burden of proof, not the other way around. Ordinarily I tell a person to stop being lazy and go do their own research, but this time around I decided to extend you the courtesy by doing your work for you. I won’t make that mistake again.

      In the end it would be remiss of me if I failed to point out your glaring contradiction that launched this entire exchange to begin with; in which you wrote, “I would have to question one statement you made about the letter from the VA telling veterans to turn in their weapons or face confiscation.” But then respond a second time by saying you, “never doubted for a second”. If your first post doesn’t reek of doubt, then I don’t know what does. That my friend is what we call an explicit contradiction.

      Furthermore, you never asked me for stats or proof of thousands, instead you quite specifically questioned whether there was ever – “the letter from the VA telling veterans to turn in their weapons or face confiscation.” To which I responded with overwhelming and profound documentation in support of my claim, to which any reasonable person must agree easily puts your question to rest.

      Regardless, I am going to go out on a limb here and say most people would tend to bet on my substantially documented evidence which proves the VA has in-fact initiated such actions under the Obama administration, as opposed to your hearsay claim by one friend that he hasn’t.

      But in your need to be right rather than real, what bothers me most is your apparent lack of shock or concern over such an event even if you are gullible enough to believe it only happened once. That alone should make you outraged enough to drop any future challenges to its veracity and instead warn your friend that maybe the V.A. just hadn’t got to him yet.

      At least do your friend a favor and share that which I have proven to be true so he can at least have a heads-up and remain on guard.

      One final technical note: Please learn to reply under the specific comment rather than starting an entirely new thread with each post. Thank you.

  4. Guns, guns, guns, there is more to the Rights than guns, 2nd Amendment is for protection from possability of an oppressive government that is over stepping any aspect of is Constitutonal boundaries.
    We must not let them stray even minutely from those limitations in any way.
    For far too long they have done so by ising money as incentive to bribe populace into letting them husband us like livestock.
    Get educated in othrr interest that are harmful to our founging ideals and fight againet them as well.

  5. She is the monster that prosecuted the Amirault Family and the withcraft trial of the Fells acres day care. She put an innocent man in prison for 17 years for crimes that never occurred. Ditto his wife and mother – who died imprisoned. She did everything in her power to assure that the Amiraults were deprived of their rights and faked charges of child abuse.
    I can only hope that she one day will be imprisoned for her multiple crimes against humanity.

  6. I’ve said it before, and I’ll repeat it here: it’s WAY past time for the entire firearms community – guns, ammunition and accessories manufacturers, distributors and dealers – to refuse to sell ANY guns, ammo, parts and/or accessories – as well as providing ANY repair services (outside those required by existing warranty policies, of course) to any and all governmental entities and employees – in both their official and individual capacities – in any state where state, county, municipal and special district governments pass and/or enforce anti-2nd Amendment laws, regulations or ordinances.

    Choke off their supplies and they’ll start hammering on their law makers to end such gun control laws – laws that ALWAYS exempt the government itself!

    Industry figures reveal that the industry receives only 40%(+/–) of its revenue from governmental sales.

    That means that 60% of the revenue comes from you and me: ‘Joe Average Citizen’.

    The industry, by and large, needs to come to the realization that the Bloomberg/Soros/Clinton/Schumer/Feinstein/et al. gun control cabal’s ultimate goal is to eliminate ALL possession and sales of firearms, ammunition and accessories – and most especially all “large-capacity magazines” and “armor-piercing/‘cop-killer’ ammunition.”

    IOW: they want that “40%” to end up being “100%” of the revenue received by that part of the industry that survives anti-gun Democrat legislation and regulation.

    We, as Americans, cannot allow the anti-gun LibSoc SJWs to continually “INFRINGE” on our 2nd Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms – ALL arms!

    Molṑn labé
    http://www.ammoland.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Molon-Labe.jpg

  7. These kinds of people are always pushing for more laws, like back ground checks. I thought we already had back ground check as the guns I have been buying for years have all run back ground checks on me! What we need is back ground checks on ANYONE running for office! A form they would have to fill out to be determined by the gun community and if after being elected and if they introduced any bill/law that went against The Constitution is an AUTOMATIC ten years in prison, MINIMUM, and NO EARLY PAROLE. All incurred cost would have to be paid for by them or their family!
    I’ll bet this kind of behavior would drop off dramatically.

  8. I would have to question one statement you made about the letter from the VA telling veterans to turn in their weapons or face confiscation. I have a farrier who is a former Army Ranger who served in Bosnia, Iraq and Afghanistan. He returned as many of them do with ptsd and he has his firearms as we talk about shooting every time he is out to trim my horses feet. He is also not the type of guy who is going to comply with something like that and quite frankly I pity the people who go to his home and try to take his firearms.

  9. Your so called FELLOW AMERICANS/FELLOW PATRIOTS.

    They only want the best for who.

    YOU or THEM?

    And Remember these are also your neighbors and your co-works too.

    Again they only want the best for who.

    YOU or THEM?

    You all know this oath. RIGHT?

    I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

    Time to step up…..

  10. There seems to be several schools of thought on confiscation ranging from they can and will do it directly to they will use the long game of passing restrictive related laws that ultimately over a long period of time will phase out gun ownership. I disagree with both extremes for the following reasons:

    Second Amendment Manifesto

    There seems to be great concern that somehow the Supreme Court will indirectly declare the 2nd Amendment null and void. Allow me to outline a strategy that might be employed to preempt any effort to do that.

    1. Can the Supreme Court Rule any Constitutional Amendment Unconstitutional

    Cliff Gilley, Studied Constitutional Law at Seattle University

    No, for the simple fact that any amendment becomes part of the Constitution itself, upon its passing. Any contradictions between content or intent within the Constitution might require interpretation and holdings of the Court, but it would be impossible to declare a part of the Constitution “unconstitutional”.

    2. When you consider that from the time of our creation as a Country our people have legally been able to bear arms for the purposes of hunting and self protection of self and Country. It would be rather difficult for the Supreme Court to explain how 150 million people in this Country acquired over 300 million firearms. During Obama’s Administration the average number of background checks alone averaged 2.4 million per month for the past 7 years.

    3. When the issue of confiscation comes up no one seems to answer the question of who and how will they be confiscated? There are only about 6 million law enforcement and military in the Country and at this time probably around 150 million firearm owners. Furthermore, most folks in the Military and in Law Enforcement hate Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. The military and law enforcement take an oath to uphold the Constitution They also tend to be people along with their friends, families and relatives to be gun owners. So confronted with the dangerous job of collecting firearms ( residents of NY and CT refused to register their firearms and both States backed away from enforcing those laws) they are unlikely to agree to collect firearms for two reasons. First, they want to go home to their families at night and many of them will not make it if they go door to door trying to collect 300 million firearms from 150 million people. Second, they will have to consider that if they are taking our guns who is breaking down the doors of their families, friends and relatives to do the same task. Recently in the State of Washington over a 1000 “armed” citizens openly protested new gun control laws at the State Capitol without incident. The numbers are on our side and if they ever tried that they could not even contend with the loss of 1 person for every 10 citizens as we outnumber them by over 25 to 1. Consider the difficulty they have containing a riot when no one is shooting at them and consider what has happened recently when they have been ambushed, They are more likely to turn on the people who are trying to confiscate firearms than on those of us who own them. It is a far too dangerous and illegal an act to risk one’s life. You know as well as I do that Obama, Lynch, and Clinton and all their big mouth liberal anti gun friends certainly are not going to do it.

    4. There is no provision in the Constitution for Supreme Court Decisions to be enforced except by the Executive Branch which can in fact ignore doing so and there is precedent for that although it has rarely happened in our Country’s history.

    5. Certainly if they tried there would be civil war and I believe the military and law enforcement will mostly side with the Citizens of this Country and stand down. Confiscating firearms from criminals is a different situation entirely.

    Therefore, I would suggest to start promoting these talking points now to start letting people know how gun owners feel and let them know that under no circumstances will we obey, by force if necessary, any infringement on our right to bear arms or any de facto efforts to circumvent the intent of the Constitution. Remember one thing when the argument comes up. When militia’s first came into existence before you could join a militia you had to furnish your own firearm. There were no provisions for anyone to furnish them for you. So militia members had their firearms BEFORE a militia could be formed.

    As an aside I asked two veteran police officers that I know both of whom are city cops in two different cities what they would do if ordered to confiscate firearms. One replied “call in sick” and the other
    replied “a great many police are going to get shot”.

    There are a great many people in this Country who feel as I do that we will fight if necessary so they better tread lightly because this will not be a rock throwing riot that they can’t control it will be a civil war where people shoot back. Quite a different story entirely.

  11. Maybe if other companies jumped on the anti constitutional and commerce laws that started “banning” shipping firearms related goods we might not be in this position.
    Many years ago Cheaper than dirt and many many many other vendors caved in to a simular threat to stop shipping to Massachusetts.

    There is not a single law or regulation that bans shipment of guns or ammo into the state of Massachusetts but all these companies just caved to the AG …….
    It sucks and now MA is full of one of the largest Felony in waiting groups of people.

  12. Until legislation can be put into effect that requires civil action against those “personally” responsible for violation of the Constitution and violation of citizens rights maybe they would think twice before overstepping their bounds when trying to steal people’s rights away.

  13. They; gun confiscators; have one tactic that we weapon holders cannot surmount and that is almost unlimited funds; while they use paid statist we have to use our individual coins.
    They can fail millions of times and lose no sleep over the cost; and until we can figure a way to remove them and make them pay for their tra sgressions upon our Rights we will continue to be defeated.
    Anyone who. Thinks police and military will not fire upo those who will not surrender their arms is sadly mistaken.
    A study of our nations history and one will find a myriad of events where .military, police and private security groups have gotten trigger ti.e agai st the America. Populace.

  14. While I understand what you are saying I have to say that going the long game runs its risks as well. People are fed up already and calling for more than just a rock throwing demonstration. If things start to go south there may not be a long game because we will be knee deep in a civil war. I am not so sure folks are going to put up with much more even under the guise of laws which today only apply to us and not to those who make them. They are, in my opinion, playing a very dangerous game. And who is to say that they will be around for the long game?????

  15. Let me understand….Healey is trying to ban semiautomatic firearms by promulgating an administrative regulation?
    Huh, whatever happened to the requirement that administrative regulations be subject to a public hearing? Is this rule by fiat? Or, does it require notice and public hearing?
    If Healey is looking for an appointment to a federal position, perhaps, she should wait for the election!

  16. Let’s all call the anti-gun, anti-constitutional, b*tch and let her know what we think:

    AGO Office Locations
    Boston
    One Ashburton Place
    Boston, MA 02108-1518
    Phone: (617) 727-2200

  17. Well at one at a time it will take them a 100 or so years to accomplish their goal and by that time I think the rest of us will have caught on and be ready to fight back in groups not individually. So I have to respectfully disagree and go with my original supposition

  18. You could be next.

    Being ruled by words and then the words being called laws.

    The written “Rule of Law”.

    Words that can be changed and are changed as needed by your fellow

    human kind w/ titles given to them by you.

    Titles: President, Congressman, Councilman, Mayor, Judge, AG, DA, Police etc. etc..

    To do as they want, say and wish for. AND not as you want, say and wish for.

    “Ain’t Freedom Grand”……………….Don’t EVER mess with the MAN.

  19. No one is coming for your guns. We need to be super clear on this and put that false boogey-man to rest. Not Obama. Not Hillary. Not the ATF. No one. While the prospect of a “Remember the Alamo” shootout of a lone homeowner defending his gun safe to the last of his bulk purchased, steel cased Wolf ammo sounds romantic and stirs up the “hell yeah! Me too!” feeling, it is a total waste of thought. There won’t even be more Waco/Ruby Ridge events. The more time put into those fantasies, the less time put into real threats. And that is part of their game. Get you focused on the threat that isn’t going to happen so you are distracted from the real one. You do realize that over the last four years you were more likely to die by lightning than a terrorist attack? http://reason.com/archives/2011/09/06/how-scared-of-terrorism-should

    Now, I say this to raise your ire about the real threat. The real threat is the long game. Make things like “Universal Background Checks” seem reasonable. Make a “Training class prior to CCW” seem reasonable. And within one or two generations people buy golf clubs because it is easier than acquiring a decent AR for 3gun. They are fighting a war of attrition. “We’re winning! There’s more new shooters and women than ever before!” – Yes, but how many fall to the “reasonable, common sense” lie…and what does that mean for the next generation? This BS of everyone stockpiling up “I got mine.” has go to stop. “I got my nine AR lowers in case they ban them.” What about the next generation? Eventually firearm ownership goes the way of typewriter ownership. No one cares.

    So, if you are focusing on S&W’s stock this month, or the number of CCW permits applied for in the last six months, all you are doing is tying up the wide receivers saying “They aren’t getting a touchdown on this play!” while they are going for the short 3-4 yard gain. Just one more first down.

    And if you think Trump is going to win you are delusional- and even if he does he’s no guarantee of our rights. Don’t get me wrong, I hope I am mistaken and I’ll be pulling the R lever all the way down in November- but he’s not even trying.

    1. @ Jeff,

      Aside from being absurdly ridiculous, your “false boogey-man” comments are insultingly offensive and do a disservice to the hundreds of thousands of citizens that have actually had their guns unlawfully confiscated by the government.

      Try selling your uninformed “boogey-man” theory to the literal hundreds of thousands of veterans who proudly served their country and were repaid by Obama when he had them discreetly entered into the NICS system without any adjudication. All of them received a form letter by the V.A. ordering them to turn their weapons in for confiscation or face a forceful removal by federal agents.

      In addition, anyone receiving federal social security benefits is next on Obama’s hit-list to be entered into NICS. He is pushing to complete this effort before leaving office or have Hillary continue it should she win the presidency.

      Now add in the thousands of citizens across this Country that are affected on a daily bases by various confiscation laws which order gun removal and raids on homes (most often by mistake) for the most inane reasons. One fine example is the relatively recent California law which allows anyone to tell a cop they think a person might be dangerous and the police are authorized to immediately confiscate all guns from the home without questioning the owner.

      Or take a recent look back historically during Hurricane Katrina in which hundreds of victims had their guns unlawfully confiscated in-mass by the government. Sure the NRA sued to force their return, but the mass door-to-door confiscation by the government still actually happened.

      Government gun confiscation is a substantially growing threat. So just because it has not happened to you… yet, doesn’t make it any less real for the hundreds of thousands currently battling the courts for the return of their unlawfully confiscated guns.

  20. Really want to drive the ‘gun-grabbers’ crazy. Especially those that want to ban all semiautomatics? If you have the wherewithal, buy a Gatling Gun. Yep, that’s right, a Gatling Gun. 6 or 10 barrel, both are being offered, but around $30-40,000. According to BAFTE, they are semiautomatic, unless, off course, you attach an electric motor to one. 6 barrels fire about 800 rounds a minute, 10 barrel about 1,000. Give the ‘gun-grabbing goons’ nightmares about hundreds of citizens armed with legal semi-autos that spray approx. a 1,000 rpm when they come for your legally owned guns.

  21. I will speak for myself although I know I speak for many. No one is coming to my home to take my firearms and get them without a fight. There are over 100 million firearm owners in this Country and only around 6 or 7 military and law enforcement. Most law enforcement hate Obama and Clinton and in my opinion would not take part in an unconstitutional act like collecting from the general public their firearms. They have enough trouble dealing with rock throwing rioters without having to deal with being outnumbered 20 to 1 and having to get into a fire fight with the millions of us who will in fact fight back.
    If they want a civil war that would be as good an excuse as any because they will definite get one. Trump is going to win and we are not going to have to worry about it.

    1. The only issue I have with your statement is the fact that the government goons will assault one individual at a time enmasse and being the cowards they are they will not assault a group or ARMED PATRIOTS

    2. Indeed ‘they’ shall tactically neutralize those in the path of ‘most resistance’, one by one, and by all means necessary. This is where the power of numbers making coordinated efforts in strategic planning within local communities is critical.

  22. Like I’ve always said, the regressive liberals are like children that don’t think things through before acting upon their immature feel-good impulses; and their harebrained schemes inevitably always end up causing more confusion and damage than it ever hoped to resolve. It will simply never end.

    1. I refuse to label these MORONS as simply “regressive liberals” I refer to those clowns as One Dimensional Regressive Hypocritical Politically Correct Lieberals emphasis on LIE

  23. All semi-automatic weapons. Yep, just wait, Hillary will back her, the attorney general all the way and include the ban for all of the U.S.
    Sadly, my dad’s 100 year old Remington .22 would be outlawed too. Plus it’s ‘high capacity’ tubular magazine holds 15 rounds. Hold on to your bloomers, boys and girls, it’s gonna get a lot worse for gun owners during Hillary’s reign as POTUS. She may well make this bitch, ‘Gun Czar’ and give her the power to go around with BATFE Storm Troopers confiscating guns. You know, like they did in Prewar Germany,right after Hilter came to power.

    1. To think I care about whether or not I am in compliance with some non-constitutional administrative ruling will be the least of my concerns, instead of listening to fools and traitors I exercise ALL my God Given Constitutional rights not caring what some one dimensional regressive politically correct lieberal bureaucrat wants!!! Instead I will focus on center mass, maintaining fire discipline, and assessing immediate threat vectors!

      Let me make one thing perfectly clear, yes I am a Christian, and yes I carry a gun. One might think I carry a gun because I don’t trust God. Well you would be wrong. I have complete faith in my Lord; it’s an oppressive government that believes it has the right to dictate what I can and cannot have, can and cannot think or say, can and cannot eat or drink etc., I have no trust in!

      ”Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars.”
      “Taking my gun away because I might shoot someone is like cutting my tongue out because I might yell `Fire!’ in a crowded theater.”
      We don’t have a gun problem we have hearts without God, homes without discipline, schools without prayer, and courts without justice
      I have recently relabeled my ammunition stockpile I no longer refer to ammunition as bullets but now I call them “freedom seeds”

  24. Hope Californica will file the same suit and recall old moonbeam!
    Trump said he would short universal reciprocity for carry permits, and that would also mean Hawaii too!

  25. I hope they bury her in court and teach her and anyone else who has these crazy notions that they can do whatever they like that we are not going to take it.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Time limit exceeded. Please click the reload button and complete the captcha once again.

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.