MA Firearm Safety

Archive for the ‘Blog’ Category

Continued from page 2: People that want to obtain their pistol permits are not the problem, a simple background check is all that is needed to verify that. They need not be treated with, in many cases, contempt. Politicians and the police need to understand that these citizens are not the reason for crime, and treating them badly is not a solution to crime, and never will be.

   There has never been a criminal, that on the threshold of perpetrating a crime, stoped and said,”gee, I think I should obtain a pistol permit first”. There will be police chiefs screaming that they need arbitrary discretion over this issue, no, they do not. They need clear, concise direction from you in the legislature. Arbitrary discretion does a disservice to the public. Not everyone may want to keep a firearm(s) for self defense, but every American should support and honor the constitutional rights of all those who do, by not allowing discretionary tactics to strip away that right, ever.

   I am not a lobbyist, I am only an individual highlighting a problem that exists, a problem that is effecting only the honest people of the state. I am asking as a constituent, for representation that would give relief to all law abiding citizens/constituents in Massachusetts. I thank you in advance for taking the time needed from your busy schedules to consider this outlined problem/proposal. Please, if you have any questions I would be honored to lend any assistance I can. cc: Rep. T.J. O’BRIEN (D) 12Th Plymouth District. Sincerely, Mark Shean–

    [Note; I wrote this and sent it certified mail and received the return receipts. When shown a chance to make a positive impact that would effect good people statewide what we receive instead is no response, none, from either DeMacedo or O’Brien. But when they see a chance to levy a new tax or scheme up a new fee, politicians are johnny- on- the- spot for any opportunity to lighten our wallets. As THOMAS JEFFERSON once said,{“What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?”}

Term limits need to be forced onto the next election cycle for a binding vote!

M. Shean, written 3-9-2006  www.mafirearmsafety.com

Continued from page one: If discretion is the common denominator being exercised by each town and city, then it is far from consistent, and on a broad scale, being used irresponsibly by many in positions of authority. There needs to be simple criteria, set in positive law, from Boston to Lenox and from Gloucester to Province town, without variation, so that anyone anywhere knows what to expect when applying for any gun permit. As it stands now it appears extremely arbitrary, simply because it is.

   The blame for this falls directly at the feet of the legislature, and I am asking you as a legislator, and my Representative, to propose the bill that will correct the problem. I do not believe anyone should point out a problem without offering what could be a viable solution or solutions to a problem. As with an FID, (firearms identification card) there should be set reasons to deny: 1. Having been convicted of a felony within the last five years. 2. Having a record of drug or habitual drunkenness within the last five years. 3. Having been confined to any hospital or institution for mental illness unless he/she has an affidavit from a physician stating that he/she is not disabled in a manner which should prevent his/her possessing a handgun rifle or shotgun. 4. If there is a current restraining order in effect, with gun ownership reinstated after it is vacated or expires. 5. There should be an appeal process should a ‘rogue’ town invent its own law(s) outside of set law. 6. There should be considered an exemption to the age requirement of ’21’ for anyone serving in the armed forces for a pistol permit. These responsible young men and women put their lives on the line daily so that we may enjoy our freedoms, yet they are not shown the courtesy of obtaining a pistol permit in Massachusetts. No veteran, past or present, should need to pay for any firearms permit, they have already paid through their service to our country.

   I would be very surprised if there was not broad bipartisan support for this exemption. There should not be restrictions such as ‘target and hunting only’, “any or all lawful purposes” covers target and hunting if one wishes to do so, and does not infringe on ones right to self defense, as ‘target and hunting only’ does. People have a right to personal protection, and there is no provision in the Constitution for government to arbitrarily place restrictions on that right. This is where law makers have a bipartisan opportunity to demonstrate that they actually understood their oath to office. {Note; continued on page three…..} written 3-9-2006   www.mafirearmsafety.com

State House, Boston: Dear Mr. DeMacedo; Hello, I will try to be as concise as possible concerning the problem herein. I am a basic firearms instructor registered with the state. As such, I have had the opportunity to hear many varied true stories that concern many an honest citizens quest to gain his or her license to carry concealed in this state. I will relay to you the following examples that highlight a few of the road blocks that are being reported to me from people that have taken my safety class, as well as others.

These examples are not all inclusive. 1. Some are told they need to prove that they have cause to fear for their safety before they will be given an application, and to write a letter to the chief outlining their specific concern. 2. There are those told they must first prove they are members of a gun club before they may apply for any permit for firearms. 3. There are restrictions such as, ‘for target and hunting only’ imposed on people that want a carry permit for personal protection,with no good reason why they can not. 4. There are towns that will not issue carry permits to anyone, including retired police officers. 5. There are towns that tell people they will not issue a class ‘A’ permit to anyone who has not had one before, instead they will issue a class ‘B’ permit for target and hunting only, but, if in six months you have not been in trouble with the law you may come back for reconsideration for the class ‘A’ permit, but this will cost another $100, (never mind that these people have neverbeen in trouble with the law in their lives), this is a scam to fleece people twice by the state. I hope this is not done by design as a ‘back door tax’ to raise additional money for the state? This practice should be investigated and stopped. 7. One town will not give out class ‘A’ permits because the chief claims that two people in the past had firearm related accidents so he no longer gives them out, (how capricious) this is blanket paranoia. Under this police chiefs theory, it should follow that because there have been car accidents in the past no one should be given a drivers license I suppose. 8. There are towns that want an applicant to have a physical exam and a mental evaluation to make sure they are physically and mentally able to handle a gun. Does this mean that someone with a physical handicap need not apply? That sir is discrimination.

Many, but not all of these towns, require any number of letters of reference concerning the applicants character, when in reality the police need only to punch in a persons SS# , as they do at a traffic stop, to know more about a person than anyone writing a letter of reference could possibly know about someones legal background. Hoops? You bet they are. These ‘hoops’ to jump through are simply used as tools of harassment, designed to dissuade people from applying for gun permits. I could cite more examples, but I wanted to point out a few of the obstacles that honest law abiding citizens are made to endure in order to pursue their right to self defense in Massachusetts. There are towns that use multiples of those examples listed, and others not listed.

There is a common thread that runs through all of the afore mentioned examples, that thread being “absurdity”. Then there are towns that only do a background check, and rightly so, that is all that should be required. {Note; to be continued on pages two and three……..} www.mafirearmsafety.com

Dear Sir:

     This letter is in regard to input your dept. is seeking for new rules on guns in national parks. As a citizen I would like to weigh in on this subject. As a concealed carry permit holder from MA. I would like to see wording in these new proposed rules that would encompass all concealed carry permit holders from every state, bar none. Our Constitution already covers this plainly under Article lV, Section l, it reads , in part, “Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records and judicial proceedings of every other state”.

     Why then, should a legal gun permit holder, who is deemed an honest citizen by state ‘A’ be deemed unsuitable to carry concealed in state ‘B’ ? This is nonsensical. It could, and should be argued in court as an unconstitutional infringement when you come down to brass tacks. Under Article lV, Section l, every state already recognizes every other states drivers license, it is no stretch to include legally issued firearm concealed carry permits.

Sincerely, Mark Shean 6-20-2008

{Note; Update, as of 5-20-09 the Senate has voted to restore the Bush administration policy that allowed loaded guns in national parks. The House could pass it soon.}  Update: It is now law.  www.mafirearmsafety.com

Theodore Roosevelt’s ideas on Immigrants and being an American in 1907:

{“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American… There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag…We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language, and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”}.

Note; This was recently floating around the planet and I thought it was worth passing on.

M.Shean, author of GUN SENSE, on Amazon

To the Editor: Draconian taxation legislation has amounted to a chronic case of deprivation of necessities, that in turn will, and is, turning the people against the arrogance of their elected officials. The time of  ‘turning’ seems to be drawing nearer. As in the days of GEORGE WASHINGTON, before the American Revolution, and the taxation’s that became a major factor in the overthrow of an arrogant British occupation, unrest prevailed. Unrest is yet again slowly coming to a seemingly inescapable head. Taxation is now at a much higher percentage than it ever was under British rule before the Colonists put an end to it by going  to war. I guess politicians never read history? My mistake, they don’t read anything before they vote.  

   Apparently greed and power are the only driving factors for politicians in Washington D.C., the only reason they run for office it seems. Americans certainly recognize this in a deepening recession, and are becoming much less tolerant then they would otherwise be. Enough of this enormous drain on the American people! Even now politician’s are dreaming, and scheming up more creative ways to add extra layers of taxation on all of us, just take a minute of your day from other distractions, and watch the news.

   You have to call your public servants and tell them to vote NO to any new taxes, tell them to do away with all the ‘so called’ temporary taxes of the last forty five years, the taxes that have burdened Americans for so long. Tell them to stop pouring billions upon billions, even trillions of OUR money into lost causes brought on by inept, greedy CEO’s. We are all now unwilling share holders of failed corporations, car companies, banks, mortgage institutions, etc.

   The way again to prosperity; allow people their hard earned money, to spend the way they see fit to spend it, then sit back and watch the economy take off! It is a no brainer, if  they had brains. As it has so clearly demonstrated, BIG government only translates into BIG money MISMANAGEMENT and inevitably, attempted  constitutional infringements!

NOTE: A word from THOMAS JEFFERSON, {” My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government”}  

-Mark Shean– www.mafirearmsafety.com

This is a quote from Cesare Beccaria a well known lawyer of his day in Italy, circa 1770’s. Thomas Jefferson borrowed portions of this quote himself, that says allot.

{“ False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides. for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man”}. 

Cesare Baccaria 1770

Note; Why is it that men of Cesare Baccaria’s day could understand this as the simple truth, yet this truth is utterly lost on the politicians of today? Has intelligence not advanced? Men have gone to the moon, computers are on the scene to stay, medicine has lengthened lives, technology advances in leaps and bounds, but politicians are now clueless?

http://www.nagr.org/UNTreaty_Pledge1.aspx?pid=4b

M. Shean,  www.mafirearmsafety.com submitted 5-30-2009

    If you, or anyone you know are planning a trip to any of our fine U.S. National Parks, please be advised; In light of the frequency of human vs. grizzly/black bear conflicts, the National Park Service is advising hikers, hunters, campers and fishermen to take extra precautions by keeping alert for bears while in the field. We do advise that while outdoors, people should wear noisy little bells on their clothing so as not to startle bears that aren’t expecting them. If bears hear you coming from a distance they are far more apt to leave the area before you even realize they were ever there.

   We also advise that while visiting our scenic parks, for people to carry pepper/OC spray with them for protection in case of a chance encounter with a bear. It is also a very good idea to watch out for fresh signs of bear activity. While in the bears habitat, people should be able to recognize the differences between black bear and grizzly bear feces. There is a pamphlet available at all Park Headquarters describing these distinctions in very clear concise terms using close-up pictures to illustrate. In short, black bear feces are small and contain lots of berries and bits of fur from small fuzzy animals. Grizzly bear feces are large, contain little bells, bits of tent/clothing material, and smell like pepper spray. We hope you enjoy all your outdoor adventures while visiting our parks. Warden H. Winked  www.mafirearmsafety.com

   To the Editor: It is quite evident to me that God bestowed the incredible foresight that was historically known as the Declaration of Rights of Virginia, written by George Mason in 1776, later to become the law of the land on December 15, 1791, as the Bill of Rights.

    To assemble an instrument of such lasting proportions, by men from a simpler time, men of fortitude, religious ethics, high moral standards and great courage, a time all but forgotten by the ‘leaders’ of our country today. ‘Leaders’ that don’t understand or respect the sheer courage our Founding Fathers showed to even pen their names to such a ‘treasonous’ document. A document that snubbed the might of English dominance and placed all they owned in peril, including their very lives. As aptly illustrated by BENJAMIN FRANKLIN:(“We must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately”). This kind of courage is easily overlooked by a majority of pampered politicians whose only ‘peril’ lay in how to trick enough people to vote them into yet another unproductive term of office. It is a sad affair when voters realize that they must weigh which politician is least dishonest prior to voting.

   The British were adept at ignoring, but over taxing the colonists, that was one of the main reasons the American Revolution ensued. In our not to distant future, the middle class will vanish and there will only be the elite and those who believe they are ‘entitled’ to government handouts. If you would listen to a few of the ‘silver spoons’ in office now, ‘leaders’ who want to rewrite parts of the Constitution so as to suit their own personal little short sighted agendas, then you should reflect and ask yourself if these ‘leaders’ would put their very lives on the line for the United States of America?-(as our Founding Fathers did) If you were to honestly answer that question you should become saddened by the road this country is now on.

   When legislators support and write laws that arbitrarily strip away any of the Amendments in the Bill of Rights, (the Second and Fourth are under attack now) and take away due process from law abiding citizens, as a 209-A restraining order does, then these legislators should not consider running for office in these United States. Instead they may be more at home with one of the many dictators in the world, where individual rights would not hamper their little agendas. To name a few who would love to strip away your constitutional rights are the Clinton’s, Janet Reno, Congressmen Charles Schemer, Major Owens and Joe Kennedy, Senators Daniel P. Moynihan, Howard Metzenbaum , Dianne Feinstein, Terry Murray, and Ted Kennedy. The list goes on and on, it is truly unbelievable. Their number 1 target is our Second Amendment. Their voting records prove that. It would appear that their motto is; Now that we are in office, to Hell with the Constitution! To Hell with the Bill of Rights! To Hell with the constituents!  http://www.nagr.org/UNTreaty_Pledge1.aspx?pid=4b

   The media gets all bent out of shape if their cameras are not allowed into a court room claiming that their First Amendment rights are being violated, what concerns me is that the media will overlook infringements on the Second and Fourth Amendments, and others. By overlook, I mean by not taking a stand, but don’t touch the First Amendment by God! We as a nation are all in this together, every last American, and the media had better wake up and become more objective, stand with American citizens and all of our rights! Once the Second and Fourth Amendments are written out of the Bill of Rights it will not be long until certain “dictator want-to-be” politicians with their one world government agenda, set their sights on the First Amendment with a vengeance. Believe it! I am certain our Founding Fathers are turning over in their graves!

Mark Shean-Written Oct. 1994 –

   {Note; A word from THOMAS JEFFERSON:{“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 tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual”.}

   *Update; As of 11-08 I believe we will all start to really understand what Thomas Jefferson is trying to warn us about. As earlier, I hope everyone took notice when Bush actually signed the McCain/Finegold bill, the First Amendment was put under a harsh attack, with bipartisan approval of Congress! This bill was made simply to protect their politically corrupt lives from scrutiny around election time! How clever. Our very sovereignty will become another target soon, and the excuse will center around the world economy! Truly unbeliveable, these are more good reasons for us to force term limits on these long term corrupt human ticks feeding off us all!

M.Shean-   www.mafirearmsafety.com

   To the Editor: Maybe someone can explain to me what exactly is wrong with this picture? We hear about confirmed illegal campaign contributions from communist China for the Clinton/Gore re-election bid in 1996. Foreign policy decisions dealing with Red China are compromised and can jeopardize our national security because of this.

   Communist China will expect concessions for that money, leverage they would not have had, should not have had otherwise. Illegal contributions accepted from communist China to buy power in our White House had better cast serious doubts on the integrity of the Clinton/Gore administration. Is the White House for sale to the highest bidder? Just how might the Red’s benefit from giving Bill and Al money? I think it is plain to see how China is already getting a return on their investment. Fact: U.S. national security is gravely compromised when sensitive missile guiding technology is transferred to communist China with a presidential nod of approval from this administration. Fact: Clinton’s open denunciation of Taiwanese democracy status in a statement to Red China. Fact: The communist Chinese demand that the White House stop Congress from passing the Taiwan Security Enhancement Act (TSEA). Fact: This threat was closely followed by Clinton’s threat to veto that legislation, (obviously for his Chinese pals). Fact: The (TSEA) would have helped Taiwan to better defend itself against communist China.

   I have been of the impression that it has always been U.S. policy to aid emerging fellow democracies under the imminent threat of communist aggression. Am I wrong? Fact: At the same time the Clinton administration seems to be abandoning Taiwan, it is pushing hard for global trade membership status for Red China, even though Russia is aiding Red China to build its nuclear weapons arsenal, an arsenal Red China is aiming at the U.S.! Fact: Clinton will not support building a missile defense system even while he knows Red China is targeting the United States! It appears that the Clinton/Gore administration would sell Taiwan, and the security of the United States down the river for illegal communist campaign contributions. Americans everywhere should be wondering just whose side the Clinton/Gore White House is on!? Is ‘party’ before the People/Nation that important!? No, not from where I stand. Fact: From the pages of the Washington Times come stories about recent threats from communist China to launch a nuclear strike against the U.S. mainland if we dare to interfere with China’s presumed right to enslave Taiwan. This story was not mentioned by the vast majority of the media. Fact: Another ominous story hidden by all except the Washington Times, tells of Red China’s so called ‘White Paper’, this is their plan to build the Peoples Liberation Army, (PLA) to the point that by 2030 China will be ready to “crush” the United States. The Pentagon is fully aware of the ‘White Paper’.

   Why is the major media moot on these stories? Maybe the White House, with the help of the media think it is in the nations best interest to cover up these threats? Maybe some people think it will upset the apple cart of the robust economy inherited from Reagan? I have one teeny weeny concern about hiding nuclear strike and invasion threats made by a country crazy enough and able enough to make good on those threats. What good will our robust economy be when the PLA is goose stepping down Wall St.? Maybe nuclear strike threats are no longer a news worthy story these days?

   Maybe we shouldn’t keep our heads buried, (like an ostrich in the sand) between the pages of the Wall Street Journal and the sports section all the time and start paying attention to what our enemies are up to.

  {Update; Fact: As of the present time, 2009, China is a larger threat than ever, especially to our economy, we owe China trillions of dollars in loans and interest, China may not need the PLA to ultimately “crush” the U.S.,  debt will do that first.

This letter was originally submitted on 3-17-2000, but of course it was, ‘censored’ and not printed by the liberal ‘fish wrappers’. Mark Shean  www.mafirearmsafety.com