More CSGV Fascism

I don’t like throwing the “F” word around willy nilly, but I just don’t know what else to call this. Seriously? Exercise one constitutional right and lose another? No guns for those who’s viewpoints someone else finds offensive? I don’t want to live in the world that Coalition to Stop Gun Violence would apparently favor.

6 thoughts on “More CSGV Fascism”

  1. Bah, this concept of trading one’s rights is old news to us massholes.

    Godfrey v. Chief of Police of Wellesley, 616 NE 2d 485 – Mass: Appeals Court 1993

    The police were investigating recent incidents of gunshots having been fired into a school, a private residence, and an automobile. They had attempted to speak with and to question Godfrey about the shootings because they had information that the gun might have belonged to him and that it might have been disposed of near an elementary school.

    Notwithstanding the serious danger that existed, especially to children, Godfrey invoked his constitutional rights and refused to cooperate with the police. The chief stated that while he respected Godfrey’s constitutional entitlements, he also had to recognize the “serious danger which continues to exist.” It is on that basis that the chief determined that Godfrey was “no longer a suitable person to be licensed to carry a firearm.”

    The gun was never found, he was never charged but he lost his gun license.

  2. Sorry, I forgot to quote the two paragraphs from the case. They are the two larger ones and are not my words. The last sentence is mine.

  3. Markie Marxist sez: “Private citizens shouldn’t be allowed to carry guns if they wear lace-up shoes! What if a private gun owner bends over to tie his shoes and the gun falls out and goes off? Someone could get shot! Since anyone at all is allowed to purchase and wear potentially deadly, lace-up shoes, it’s just common sense to prohibit all private citizens from carrying guns! If it saves one life it’s worth it! Let’s do it for the children!”

Comments are closed.