Mark Shean

Archive for October, 2009

     On Oct. 27th in the news, a vicious knife attack occurred at the Ma. General Hospital in Boston, wherein the victim of this attack, Astrid Desrosiers, a doctor, was stabbed multiple times by a psychiatric patient, Jay Carciero, 37, who was there for a scheduled appointment. Also on the same floor at the time of the attack was an armed off duty, (note, civilian) security officer, Paul Langone. District Attorney Daniel Conley, in his news conference described the actions of Paul Langone as ‘under investigation’ but reluctantly conceded Mr. Langone’s actions likely saved the life of the doctor and possibly others as well.

   When I heard this story on the channel 7 evening news, (which I rarely watch) the thing that stood out to me, in crystal clear fashion, was the questions directed to the A.G. by the media. They were all along the lines of why did Paul Langone have a gun, instead of how did the assailant get the knife, or what is the condition of the doctor? Did Langone have a permit for that gun? Why was he there on that floor? Are you going to file charges against Mr. Langone for carrying a gun? Can he legally carry a gun in Boston? Did he have the right to shoot the assailant? The District Attorney looked like he was walking on a tightrope twenty stories high with no net in thirty mile an hour gusts. It was obvious to me that he would have loved to say that he wanted to hang Mr. Langone from the highest tree, but could not say it.

   When all is said and done, to his chagrin, the A.G. will probably have to pin a medal on Mr. Langone, and the media will have the uncomfortable and distasteful job of covering the ceremony of a legal gun owning hero. Something tells me that the doctor he saved will not be trying to second guess Langone’s actions, or find fault in legal gun ownership after she recovers, I would be happy to give her the gun safety course putting her on the right path to gun ownership, so that if there is ever a next time she will not need to hope for another miracle to save her.

   The next day in the Boston Herald this story was back on page five, the front cover was completely taken up by a story about city workers visiting Facebook while they work! Shock of shocks! Almost all of page two was concerned with some big baby Celtic basketball player that broke his thumb in a fight, real news worthy stuff. Page three was devoted to the dead pervert waco Jaco’s movie review, the Herald certainly has its priorities straight! Page four was a carry over from from the front page about city workers using Facebook during work hours, big big news! And finally on page five a small article about the stabbing victim,(doctor) being saved by a citizen with a legal gun. I guarantee that if the doctor had died at the hands of the madman, and there had been no one to stop him, that it would have been front page news, without a shadow of a doubt! What do you think?

   The National Enquirer looks more credible than the Boston Herald, and has for quite some time, sad. It has been ruled in court, (at least ten times across the country and in the Supreme Court) that the state has no obligation to protect the individual from being murdered by criminals or madmen. That is a loud and clear message that we are on our own! The thing that burns me to no end is this, places that deny you your right to gun ownership, or strictly restrict it, will also state that you or your surviving family have no case against the city or state if you are murdered, officials take no responsibility, but they will do their best to throw you in jail if you disobey their “reasonable gun control measures”.

    I would like to hear your comments on this, or any of my articles. I strongly suggest that all incumbents are voted OUT of office, that we may start fresh with people that are not afraid of our Second Amendment! Please send your prayers for the Doctors speedy recovery. Mark Shean www.mafirearmsafety.com  written 10-31-2009 

 Note: An April 1st 2010 article, (blurb) in the Boston Hearld,( No Charges for hero off-duty officer who shot knife wielding man at MGH). Almost 7 months after the fact, the D.A. Daniel Conley finally says, following the ‘investigation’, that Langone acted to defend himself and Dr. Astrid Desrosiers when he fired the three shots. (It took me ten seconds to figure that out back in Oct.) M.S. 4-1-2010

     In Massachusetts if you go through the ‘hoops that many towns in the state force you to jump through in order to exercise your right to self defense, and are not successful in gaining your LTC or FID, the police must, (by law) within 40 days send to you a written notification stating the reason(s) that you are being denied. If you do not agree with the reason(s) stated than you have at your disposal a remedy in which to challenge the police decision.

    This remedy is called a Petition for Judicial Review. You would need to go to your areas District Court, to the ‘clerks’ office at the courthouse to file a petition for judicial review based on the letter that the police sent to deny you your permit. The law states that you would need to show that the refusal was {arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion} that wording is straight from the law. You would want to state that there is nothing in your police record that would raise to the level of denying you your Constitutional, or God given right to self defense. You would want to attach a copy of your record, you may obtain that from the Criminal History Systems Board in Chelsea Ma., www.mass.gov/chsb  (617-660-4780, or-4600)  ’for a nominal fee of course’, to use as evidence to strengthen your argument, also attach the letter from the police that denied you.

    Once you file your petition you will be given a date and time to go before a judge, the police will send a representative. The judge is supposed to make a ruling based on FACTS, if the police are short on facts and long on hearsay, you should win. If you are not denied a gun permit but instead are given a restriction such as “for target and hunting only” or “for employment reasons only” or maybe a “class B license” then technically, if you accept it,  you have no grounds for a Judicial Review because you have not been denied a permit. Please read #19, ‘Reason’ Letter for class ‘A’ LTC,  before you even go to submit an application for a permit, this may help you. In those cases it would be wise to contact your selectmen or your state Representative and lodge a complaint, have them work for you, that is their job, but you need to let them know.

    Now, apart from the ‘afore mentioned, if you had a gun permit in the past and would like to have it reinstated after losing it due to a past misdemeanor conviction, a new law in 2004 created a seven member review board with the authority to look at your case,see # 20 Been Denied your Gun Permit, the burden is on you to show why you should get your permit back, the review board can recommend reinstatement of the permit based on the circumstances that surround your case, of course each individual case is different. Many gun owners with certain criminal records may now get the licenses that they were denied prior to the new 2004 laws. The best way to keep your rights is to know your rights.

Mark Shean, www.mafirearmsafety.com written 10-18-2009.  

    Note: A word from a Founding Father; {“Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law’ because law is often but the Tyrants will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual” } THOMAS JEFFERSON-

Your comments/insights are welcomed.

    Gun control, sounds reasonable when politicians speak on it and the media lets the phrase slide on by without any questions. Gun control has nothing what-so-ever to do with crime, or guns, it is one hundred percent about attempting political control over our lives. You see, there are plenty of laws already on the books dealing with crime, yet crime happens, laws cannot stop evil intent, and when a particularly brutal crime grabs the headlines most politicians see an opportunity to get their mugs in the paper or on television to push their anti gun , anti Second Amendment agenda/crap. The billionaire socialist Bloomberg, mayor of New York city is one such example, all high profile New York/Ma./Ca./Chicago politicians are examples.

      The politicians and police, in their frustration to stop crime focus their attention on an easy target, you. This is why the NRA is the hated organization of many socialist leaning politicians, because the NRA comes to your defense. The NRA has over 4 million members and fights extremely hard to preserve our Second Amendment freedoms. Is the NRA relevant? You bet your freedom it is. There is an estimated 100 million law abiding gun owners in the United States, if they were to all suddenly join the NRA, politicians would never dare speak of gun control again, it would become political suicide to do so. Is the NRA relevant, again, you bet your freedom it is. And because so many politicians hate the NRA that is all the endorsement I need to be a proud member.

Mark Shean www.mafirearmsafety.com  written 10-10-2009