Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.8
Site Design by Sekimori

« Heads up for Californians | Main | Second Amendment as a teaching tool »

Even the Boston Globe

Posted by David Hardy · 18 July 2006 09:33 AM

Even the Boston Globe is starting to get it. They just need to learn more about firearms and firearms laws before they write a piece on women and shooting ranges.

(Update. Chuckle. They ran a bit of a correction:

"Correction: Because of a reporting error, a story in yesterday's Living/Arts section about a Manchester, N.H., firing range mischaracterized Massachusetts gun laws. Residents with a Class A gun license may purchase semiautomatic weapons. Residents without a Class A license may shoot semiautomatic weapons at a gun range or gun club that holds a Class A license. Certified police firearms instructors or firearms collectors who hold a machine gun license may purchase machine guns. Also, the story should have made clear that US laws prohibit private ownership of fully automatic machine guns manufactured after 1986. The Uzi mentioned in the story was never illegal because it was made before 1986."

· media

3 Comments | Leave a comment

Anthony | July 19, 2006 4:36 PM | Reply

Sweet! I sent him an email explaining that the 1994 AWB laws did not apply to an Uzi. I explained the 86 FOPA, 34NFA, 68GCA, and highlighted his gross mistake. I wonder if I helped prompt the correction?

He neglected to mention that a real Israeli made Uzi would have had to be imported prior to 1968 and that only AMerican clones would have been legal for private ownership. Unless of course the business holds a SOT :)

Jon | July 19, 2006 10:03 PM | Reply

And even their correction isn't quite right... they still didn't get that there is a background investigation for every class 3 purchase.

Rick | July 20, 2006 7:59 AM | Reply

And another error: The bit about "Residents without a Class A license may shoot semiautomatic weapons at a gun range or gun club that holds a Class A license." Residents without a Class A license are free to shoot semiautomatic weapons at any range, gun club, or on private or public property...so long as there is someone with a Class A license present to technically be the "gun owner." (In other words, I can take a friend out to the range or into the deep woods and go shooting.)

Leave a comment