In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

My letter to MA attorney general

DeRoche117DeRoche117 Member Posts: 10 ✭✭
edited May 2008 in Gun Rights and Constitutional Law
Dear Ms. Coakley,

As a police officer and a citizen who is lawfully licensed to carry firearms in the state of Massachusetts, I'm disappointed at my inability to order any ammunition or ammunition components on-line and have them delivered to my residence in Massachusetts. This includes the simple lead ammunition balls, for use with an antique firearm, that I recently tried to order and was denied. To categorize lead ball antique ammunition with modern ammunition and restrict both equally is irresponsible, thoughtless, and downright disturbing.
As the Chief Law Enforcement Officer in the Commonwealth, I request you lift this unneccesary restriction on antique ammuntion and allow the lawfully licensed residents of this state to enjoy their constitutional freedoms.

Joel M. DeRoche
Edgartown
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427 ✭
    edited November -1
    Good luck with that.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DeRoche117DeRoche117 Member Posts: 10 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I need support, not to be chastised
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • pickenuppickenup Member Posts: 22,844 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    First off, welcome to the forum..........but.........

    quote:Originally posted by DeRoche117
    I need support, not to be chastised
    Sorry, the way "I" read what you wrote, you are limiting your request to lift restrictions, to only antique ammo. It might appear to some, that by NOT condemning the restriction on ALL ammo, you condone the restriction on modern ammo. Can't let the "public" get any of THAT ammo.

    As an LEO, being REQUIRED to periodically qualify, and/or practice, you (somehow) have access to modern ammunition, through official channels, if need be. Thus, no complaint from you about that ammo being restricted.

    So, now that you want to play with your "toys" (that do not fit into your available ammo requirements) you are running into the same kind of ammo frustrations that "regular" people are faced with on a DAILY basis.

    A taste of what happens outside your "regular" little circle, if you will. Has a foul taste to it, doesn't it.

    Joel, don't want to run you off, and I encourage you to continue your campaign. Just giving you a different perspective on what you wrote. If you are going to base your requests on constitutional freedoms, why so narrow?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427 ✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by DeRoche117
    I need support, not to be chastised


    OK.
    If you want MY support, you better know the difference between constitutional rights, and a matter of inconvenience.

    The infringements on your rights are much more than "antique" ammo in concerned.
    Well, perhaps I should say "the citizens rights" and not include LEO's as most seem to be able to retain rights that citizens can't.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DeRoche117DeRoche117 Member Posts: 10 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I must admit, the animosity towards LEOs caught me off guard a little. I wasn't expecting that, especially on a site like this. That said,I do agree with you both to some degree. Maybe the "antique" ammo's scope was a little too narrow but the letter was meant as a starting point. Also, the assumption that LEOs have unlimited access to firearms is incorrect. Unless LEOs are acting in their official capacity with duty firearms, then the restrictions on firearms and ammo apply to them just like they would to anyone else. Where are these special priviledges meantioned over and over in these posts? I hope this doesn't turn into a cop bashing thing.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • pickenuppickenup Member Posts: 22,844 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    NOT a cop bashing thing as far as I'm concerned. I would critique "anyone's" letter honestly.

    You are the one that "repeatedly" uses the fact that you are an LEO, in your letter.



    On a different note, or maybe the same.
    You said in your letter,

    "and allow the lawfully licensed residents of this state to enjoy their constitutional freedoms."

    lawfully licensed............meaning???
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • pickenuppickenup Member Posts: 22,844 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by DeRoche117
    Also, the assumption that LEOs have unlimited access to firearms is incorrect.
    If I may ask, will you point it out to me, who made that statement about firearms?

    I thought we were ALL still just talking about ammo.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • kyplumberkyplumber Member Posts: 11,111
    edited November -1
    We appreciate your effort in the gun RIGHTS fight, We the people wish you were not so vague as to your coverage and intentions. We the people are all in this together, for better or worse.

    There will be no cop bashing in this thread, at least from me; As you have demonstrated that you too feel belittled by your govt, and you are supposedly one of them.

    Stand up for us and we will stand up for you! I await the day that cops start standing up to their superiors and call bulls hit exactly that.

    Good luck and God bless!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ruger41ruger41 Member Posts: 14,665 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    As I have stated before in other threads--there is no constitutional right to own ammunition and the anti's have taken this and are running with it big time. They will tax, restrict and ban it as they see fit. They don't care if it is for reloading or antiques or competition or hunting. We need some form of legislation to protect our right to own ammo as well as firearms. Maybe a lawsuit due to these nimrods trying restricting lawful commerce?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DeRoche117DeRoche117 Member Posts: 10 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    All good points. Maybe I should have left the PO thing out of my letter but I thought the AG might be surprised that a LEO would be upset at the strict gun/ammo laws. I take pride at seperating myself from my career during my time off and as such, I'm willing to stick my neck out and write letters where many in my position would not. The obsurdity of these laws, written and passed by legislators whom have no experience or knowledge of firearms/ammunition whatsoever, upsets me just as much as it does you guys. Just trying to help.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • BlairweescotBlairweescot Member Posts: 2,014 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by DeRoche117


    Dear Ms. Coakley,

    As a police officer and a citizen who is lawfully licensed to carry firearms in the state of Massachusetts, I'm disappointed at my inability to order any ammunition or ammunition components on-line and have them delivered to my residence in Massachusetts. This includes the simple lead ammunition balls, for use with an antique firearm, that I recently tried to order and was denied. To categorize lead ball antique ammunition with modern ammunition and restrict both equally is irresponsible, thoughtless, and downright disturbing.
    As the Chief Law Enforcement Officer in the Commonwealth, I request you lift this unneccesary restriction on antique ammuntion and allow the lawfully licensed residents of this state to enjoy their constitutional freedoms.

    Joel M. DeRoche
    Edgartown



    Hi there Joel

    I'm a Boston resident. Cap and ball shooter too...and I am waiting on my LTC to be delivered to me. Three more weeks. After all the hoops I jumped through I feel like a circus performer

    I am relieved and glad to read your letter. Incidentally, as a private citizen, it has been disturbing to me that law enforcement has been given the authority to effectively interpret the Constitution, and your letter is a welcome example of the fact that our Constitution's well-being is in the thoughts of LEOs in the Commonwealth

    I don't see how it hurts your efforts to make a point of mentioning you are a Police Officer. Coakley will not be drafting Law in reply to your letter; it is one of hopefully many she receives that tell her there's a problem with our Laws. In my opinion, this letter shows another citizen who happens to be a LEO expressing disappointment with an idiotic Massachusetts law. The profession of the citizen is important but it is not the focus, as many people here seem to think

    I think it takes a certain amount of guts and character to put your name on a letter like this, telling the AG of the Commonwealth you live in that she's in error- especially when the AG is part of the hierarchy that is in charge of your profession.

    I support your efforts 100%.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.