Pandemic prompts Nantucket police to hit pause on some gun permit applications

The Nantucket Police Department says it will not be processing gun permit applications requiring fingerprinting until further notice due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.

In a tweet on Wednesday that was later taken down, officials wrote, “Our permit office will not be doing firearms permit applications, fingerprints, or photos until further notice due to COVID-19.”

“This action was taken after employees responsible for obtaining these fingerprints expressed their concern that they could not safely do their jobs with the workplace safety procedures we have in place,” the statement read. “Because of the processes involved in obtaining these permits, it is impossible to do while following state guidelines for social distancing in the workplace.”

This is in Massachusetts where to own a gun requires a FID.

The government just paused issuing permits which means new owners are blocked for buying a gun.

The bureaucrats got scared of dealing with the public because of COVID so now their Second Amendment rights are void.

This needs to be challenged all the way up to the Supreme Court.

This is exactly what we always said would happen with permits to own.  The government could find an excuse to stop processing the paperwork and now citizens are banned from owning guns by default.

Spread the love

By J. Kb

10 thoughts on “This is why permits to own are unconstitutional”
    1. That argument is stronger in “shall-issue” states than it is in “may-issue” states like Massachusetts, but I like the cut of your jib. 🙂

      You could say the same for all government-issued licenses. Drivers licenses, alcohol licenses, business licenses … all of it.

      The only difference I see is, driving, running a business, serving alcohol, etc., are not Constitutionally-protected rights. Owning a firearm is. So if there must be licensing for firearm owners, there is even less wiggle-room for the government to delay or deny those licenses.

      This should be a wake-up call to the citizens of that state that their gun laws are terrible, but knowing the general New England region, it won’t be.

      (To be clear, the concept of having to apply and beg for a license to exercise a Constitutionally-protected right is deeply offensive to me, and those laws should be struck down with extreme prejudice. But until they are struck down, unless we want to risk felony convictions, we have to work within the system, as awful as that is.)

  1. Right now guns are too expensive anyway. Borrow one from a friend or scrounge an old shotgun for now. There are always private individuals to buy from, but it will be expensive.

    1. Roger: At present, you can’t posses a handgun without an LTC (License to Carry). You are subject, if convicted, to a mandatory 1 year in jail (Bartley-Fox Act). Just sayin’.

    1. NH has constitutional carry, open carry, and no state permits of any kind. Also preemption, banning towns from imposing anything. I believe town officials are personally liable for violations.

      1. Small correction, NH does have a carry permit for reciprocity purposes. $15, full out the application, wait no more than two weeks, pickup your permit.

  2. Sheeeit, Washington State has had that going on for months now – mostly heard Wetsiders grumping, but I’m in Spokane and Spokane PD was not doing anything that wasn’t via mail. (Last I heard, in early October, they’d opened for appointments – and were backlogged until late May.)

    Renewed mine in April, about a month late, via mail. Took ’em forever to get back to me, too – when I first got my CHL, I got it in under a week – was still waiting for my holster to ship. :V

  3. If the govt employees can’t do fingerprints for a Constitutionally guaranteed right due to “safety concerns”, then why are they still fingerprinting criminals?

Only one rule: Don't be a dick.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.