Skip to comments.Massachusetts gun permit essay rule to buy a gun
Posted on 01/26/2016 8:49:11 AM PST by mikelets456
A new Massachusetts gun permit essay rule has Second Amendment supporters seeing red. Gun owners in the state must now write an essay which will be âgradedâ for approval by the police chief before a carry permit can be issued. A hefty firearms training price tag up to $1,100 will also be levied against those attempting to exercise their right to bear arms in the city of Lowell. Lowell, Massachusetts, is located about 35 miles north of Boston and is home to some 110,000 people. The gun essay law was the brainchild of Police Chief William Taylor and approved by the city council. Applicants for an âunrestrictedâ handgun permit have to detail in writing why they should be granted the Second Amendment credentials. Chief Bill Taylor has sole authority when it comes to deciding which gun permit essays make the grade.
(Excerpt) Read more at inquisitr.com ...
That essay was written over 200 years ago, no need to re-write it.
why they should be granted the Second Amendment credentials.
- - -
Essay, with footnotes:
Because I can(1). The end.
(1) Footnote - US Constitution and Bill of Rights.
-—hummm—and then there used to be “poll taxes” and voter questionaires -—wonder if the Massholes ever heard of those—?
Shall not be infringed.
That is just in Lowell, right?
Because I never did well on essay questions.
I don’t think this is anything new, this has been around for a while, since I got my permit a decade or so ago.
It does irk me that I had to write a letter to get a carry permit, but since that is how business was being done, that is what I did.
What I hate even more than the process of having to write an essay is that the process is at the discretion of the Chief of Police.
If you have a good one, you are in luck. If you have a jerk, you are out of luck, as simple as that.
This can be quickly shot down, by proclaiming the essay rule “racist”.
“Between the 1890s and 1960s, literacy tests were administered to prospective voters and used to disenfranchise racial minorities.”
Gun rights are even more important than voting rights, so obviously the city council and police chief of Lowell, Massachusetts, are bitter racists.
If this isn’t found to be OBVIOUSLY racially discriminatory, I give up.
Another reason why the Constitution should be the supreme law of the land. And anyone in leadership who doesn’t embrace the Constitution, as such, needs to be voted out as soon as possible. We are a republic based on laws, not the whim of man.
In other words:
NO GUNS FOR YOU PROLES!!
Pretty crappy reporting. This is not statewide and only applies to Lowell, MA. The chief in my town would never comply with such a directive.
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.
I had no problem writing a letter (I can post what I wrote here, if you are interested) but the concept of having to do it galls me.
I was lucky, my Chief of Police was very professional and businesslike about it, but...what if you get one that has a hair across his butt about whatever? Maybe he is a lib, maybe he had a bad day, whatever.
Remember the case in the Supreme Court about the guy who made the Hillary Clinton movie (Citizens United v. FEC, I think) and ran afoul of some kind of election law? What I remember most about that was some POS liberal Assistant Attorney General or some other flunky (might have even been now Supreme Court Justice Kagan!) being asked about censorship, and whether or not, given the current laws, could someone be found guilty of something and be sent to jail, and the government flunky said something to the effect of: “Well, they could, but...we wouldn’t prosecute something like that.” (paraphrase) and Justice Scalia leaned over the bench and said something to the effect of “We don’t leave our fates in the hands of bureaucrats to decide what to prosecute and what not to” or something to that effect. (I can’t find the actual exchange, darn it.)
Anyway, that is what we have here. A bureaucrat deciding what rights you will and won’t have.
It clearly must be at the discretion of the Police Chief. My guess is some will ask for it, and some won’t...
Eff them and their dammed permits.
Thanks for pointing that out. Either way, these obvious infringements to inalienable rights is criminal. We need to bring back tar and feathering again as these tyrants only listen to a “well regulated” group of citizens. (Declaration of Independence is very clear on this)
The problem is we’re all complying with this type of BS. Who carries in NJ? NYC? LA? Baltimore? DC? None of us-—because we’re complying with unconstitutional “laws”...we’re part of the problem as well.
‘Anyway, that is what we have here. A bureaucrat deciding what rights you will and wonât have.’
Thats correct and its by design. MA is MAY issue which gives complete discretion to the issuer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.