In Massachusetts, Change Bodes Well for Fight Against Illegal Guns

BOSTON, Jan. 4 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Deval Patrick was sworn in as the new Governor of Massachusetts today, after winning the election in a campaign that stressed the need to fight the flow of guns to criminals.

"We want to congratulate Governor Patrick and his family, and also congratulate the people of Massachusetts for having made such a great choice on Election Day," said Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "We are very excited about the efforts we expect Governor Patrick's new administration to make in the fight against illegal guns, and we pledge our commitment to help in that fight."

The Brady Campaign in March of last year announced an extended, long-term focus on efforts to curb the flow of guns from the legal market to the illegal market. Along with the Massachusetts Against Trafficking Handguns (MATH) Coalition, the organization has worked with Boston Mayor Thomas Menino to build support for legislative and policy changes that would make it tougher for criminals to arm themselves.

The MATH Coalition, with support from the Brady Campaign, will work with Massachusetts lawmakers to pass legislation to help in the fight against illegal gun trafficking by stopping large volume sales of handguns by limiting purchases to one per month. It is possible in Massachusetts for "straw purchasers" and traffickers to buy unlimited numbers of guns to sell to the illegal market.

"Limiting the number of handguns someone can buy at one time stops gun traffickers in their tracks," said Nancy Robinson of the MATH Coalition and President of the Boston Million Mom March Chapter. "A person who buys 30 handguns at a time is not buying them for hunting, but for resale to criminals on the streets."

Governor Patrick voiced support for this legislative proposal during his campaign.

As the nation's largest, non-partisan, grassroots organization leading the fight to prevent gun violence, the Brady Campaign, working with its dedicated network of Million Mom March Chapters, is devoted to creating an America free from gun violence, where all Americans are safe at home, at school, at work, and in our communities.

Gun grabbers are increasingly trying to separate the right to keep and bear arms from its constitutional underpinnings. To everyone but liberals and gun grabbers the word militia implies a body organized for military use. The Supreme Court Miller decision of 1939 held that the militia was 'A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.' And further that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time."

To begin with, only the national government was represented at the trial. With nobody arguing to the contrary, the court followed standard court procedure and assumed that the law was constitutional until proven otherwise. If both sides were present, the outcome may have been much different.

However, since only one party showed up, the case will stand in the court records as is. As to the militia, Mr. Justice McReynolds related the beliefs of the Founding Fathers when commenting historically about the Second Amendment. He stated that, ". . .The common view was that adequate defense of country and laws could be secured through the militia- civilians primarily, soldiers on occasion.

"The significance attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense.

It is clear that the firearms that are most suited for modern-day militia use are those semi automatic military pattern weapons that the yellow press calls "assault weapons". Since nations such as the Swiss trust their citizenry with true selective fire assault rifles, it seems to me that this country ought to be at least able to trust its law-abiding citizenry with the semi automatic version.

Self-defense is a vital corollary benefit of the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. But its primary constitutional reason for being is for service in the well-regulated militia which is necessary to the security of a free state. WE must be prepared to maintain that security against even our own forces that are responding to the orders of a tyrannical government, and the only viable way to counter a standing army's qualitative advantage is with a huge quantitative one. Don't let the gun grabbers and their politician allies separate us from the constitutional reason for the right to keep and bear arms. Miltary pattern weapons are precisly the weapons that should be MOST constitutionally protected. Even defenders of the right often neglect the constitutional aspect of it, and concentrate on their near non-existent use in crime.

If we don't constantly emphasize the constitutional reasons for the Second Amendment than we shall surely lose it, because hunting, while a worthy enterprise, is too trivial a reason to maintain it has a constitutional protection. We need to emphasize to our hunting bretheren that maintenance of the second amendment's constitutional rationale serves to protect their rights to continue to own firearms for hunting. The second amendment is literally the final check for the preservation of our republic from the depredations of untrammeled tyranny. We need to constantly remind the people what the militia in the 2nd amendment is REALLY for..... A citizen body organized for military purposes and by extension, logically equipped with weapons of military utility. Just consider that the founders of our nation had just finished defeating the greatest military power on the planet, thanks in no small part to a citizen militia, armed with military weapons such as the smooth bore Brown Bess musket, and often technologically superior rifled muskets. It is the height of absurdity to think that the second amendment in the Bill of Rights is primarily concerned with shooting bunny rabbits.

The second amendment is literally the final check for the preservation of our republic from the depredations of untrammeled tyranny.

How can someone legally ship a .22 handgun across the country?

This is the method I use to buy guns interstate:

1. Find a cooperative local FFL (Federal Firearms License) dealer.
2. Get a copy of the dealer's FFL, signed by the dealer in other than black ink.
3. Send the signed copy of the FFL, plus payment to the current holder of the gun. This provides CYA for the current holder if he is questioned about what happened to the gun.
4. Have the gun sent to your local dealer, using something other than USPS (so far, all my sellers have used UPS).
5. Have the dealer process the paper work as if he were selling the gun.
6. Pay the dealer a fee for the service. My friendly neighborhood FFL charges me a flat $15.00 plus the $2.00 she pays the state for the name check, regardless of the value of the gun. The fee is negotiable between you and the dealer, so shop around.

I have bought rifles, shotguns and hand guns with this method with no problems. Of course, this won't work at all for machine guns, etc.

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.