We all know that an American’s Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms shouldn’t stop just because he or she crosses a state line. However, in far too many cases, differing carry laws can scuttle travelers’ ability to protect themselves when on the road.
Such is the case with Massachusetts, which has one of the most oppressive concealed carry permit laws for nonresidents. That has prompted the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) to file a lawsuit challenging the provisions of the law.
On August 13, SAF and partners filed Lawson v. Campbell, which challenging the commonwealth’s process for non-residents to acquire a license to carry (LTC). As SAF pointed out in a press release announcing the court action, the process of acquiring and maintaining a Massachusetts non-resident permit is “wrought with burden, cost and delay. The initial permit application process often takes six months or more and includes repeated mandatory in-person visits to the commonwealth, creating an unconstitutional barrier to an applicant’s right to carry for self-defense.
“To add insult to constitutional injury, Massachusetts non-resident permits are only good for one year (while in-state permits are good for 6 years), requiring permit holders to file their renewals every year mere months after having received their permit, as the renewal process is plagued by the very same unconstitutional delays and the challenged laws provide no grace period for expired permits that are pending renewal,” SAF said in the press release.
This new lawsuit requests that the court step in and hold the commonwealth accountable for their tactics of unconstitutional burden and delay, and for singling out non-residents for particularly harsh treatment.
“Thanks to the Massachusetts permitting regime, non-residents who travel to—or even through—the state for business or vacation must follow the extremely long permit process or risk arrest and prosecution,” said Adam Kraut, SAF executive director. “The Second and Fourteenth Amendments clearly protect the right of ‘ordinary, law-abiding citizens’ to carry handguns for self-defense, and the state is violating the constitutional rights of non-residents with such a burdensome process to receive and renew a license to carry.”
SAF is joined in the lawsuit by the Gun Owners Action League (GOAL) and three individuals in the midst of the state’s onerous permit application or renewal process.
Alan M. Gottlieb, SAF founder and executive vice president, said his organization has proved in California, and will prove again in Massachusetts, that you cannot force someone to give up their Second Amendment because they cross a state line.
“The Second Amendment applies to all Americans in all states, period,” Gottlieb added. “With this lawsuit we aim to restore the right to keep and bear arms for everyone who wants to travel to Massachusetts, and we look forward to showing why this law is in clear violation of the Second Amendment.”
The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/38/text
Pass this and repeal the “gun free school zone act” from 1994 and good
Another discrimination (exept permit in it) is that only an resident can get an enhanced permit in arkansas and missisippi (idaho should worked for non resident) that can leftwings adressed
A non-resident Massachusetts permit would be great since we like visiting Boston. The city has gotten bad over the last 15 years so when we do go I carry mace. The last time a woman in the next subway car started screaming that she was going to kill people.
Fortunately, we arrived at a stop and two cops were waiting to arrest her.
Not going back without real protection. I can’t imagine releasing pepper gel in a subway car and having to wait for the next stop to get out of it.
No state should be able to have laws in such opposition to the US Constitution and Bill of Rights that you can’t drive through it without becoming a criminal.
I appreciate SAF for its work on this and the dozen or so OTHER things it has been involved in since the beginning of the year. SOMEBODY has to do the Lord’s work while NRA is waiting for something to happen way over at the other end of the country in the 9th Circuit.
Oklahoma is a gun friendly state. Some states don’t even need a concealed permit to carry concealed there.
That’s Real Constitutional Carry by by golly
The second largest problem with non-resident concealed carry licenses is that a person could, in theory, have to acquire 49 different licenses just to travel in the continental United States while possessing effective self-defense. That should be grounds alone to nix ALL state permitting.
(In case you are interested, the first largest problem with non-resident concealed carry licenses is that we should NOT have to obtain any licenses–resident, non-resident, or otherwise–to legally carry firearms for righteous self-defense.)
Yes, interstate concealed carry should be like interstate travel: a driver’s license from any state allows travel to, or through, any other state. I believe restrictive states are missing out on millions of tourist dollars because of this system. Congress and POTUS, pass a nationwide CC law now!
There are several permits that offer reciprocity (e.g., AZ, FL, UT), so your assertion is a bit hyperbolic.
That said, one should not need government permission to exercise a Constitutionally-protected Right.
“There are several permits that offer reciprocity (e.g., AZ, FL, UT), so your assertion is a bit hyperbolic.”
Those permits only offer reciprocity to a small and rapidly diminishing list of states. I have a Florida non-resident CCW permit, but the list of states with reciprocity with Florida has declined so much, and the process of renewing a Florida CCW permit has grown so complex and expensive that I’ve decided to let my Florida permit expire rather than pay about $200 to renew it including new fingerprinting fees for new sets of fingerprints. You see Florida, in its infinite wisdom, recently decreed that to renew your CCW permit, CCW holders must pay AGAIN to get fingerprinted AGAIN at our own expense(because they think human fingerprints change every five years?!? Why should fingerprints expire, ever?) . Florida also decreed that the only place out-of-state CCW holders are allowed to get fingerprinted is at our local police station, but my local police department no longer does fingerprints themselves and has outsourced fingerprinting to a private company in a different town, making it impossible for me to renew my Florida CCW permit! I suppose I could argue with my police department to make an exception, but that tends to antagonize the police, and antagonizing the police is not something that is conducive to the health and safety of my family. So goodbye, Florida CCW permit.
One would think an original colony would welcome the armed citizen.
Wouldn’t one?
The Cradle of Liberty is rotten. 8~(
Mostly why I escaped.