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.
>
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.
(post is archived)