Second Amendment Advocates Fight Back in Massachusetts

Massachusetts’ new gun control law, known as Chapter 135, has ignited a full-blown resistance from Second Amendment advocates. According to Bearing Arms host Cam Edwards and Jim Wallace, executive director of the Gun Owners’ Action League (GOAL), this legislation didn’t just sneak into law – it was forced in with questionable tactics and almost no transparency. As Wallace put it, the way this law was written, signed, and now being enforced is “infuriating.”

While many residents and gun owners are still trying to understand what’s in the bill, the state is already moving to suspend or delay several key provisions. According to Wallace during his appearance on Bearing Arms Cam & Co, that’s not a coincidence. He believes state officials can’t explain the law without revealing its flaws – and that’s exactly why they’ve gone silent.

Mysterious “Emergency” Powers Used

One of the most troubling elements is how Governor Maura Healey used an emergency preamble to rush Chapter 135 into effect. Cam Edwards noted that the law was signed in October, but two months later, Healey issued the emergency action to bypass a voter-led suspension effort. Without it, the law would’ve been on hold until the November 2026 ballot.

This move prevented the Coalition for Civil Rights, which had collected enough signatures for a repeal vote, from stopping the law. As Jim Wallace explained, this backdoor strategy shows how far the state is willing to go to avoid public input, adding, “The abuse of the legislative system in Massachusetts is staggering.”

Ethics Questions Surround AG’s Involvement

Another part of the story that’s drawing heat is the role of Attorney General Andrea Campbell. According to Edwards and Wallace, the AG made a $50,000 donation to a group called Massachusetts Coalition to Prevent Gun Violence, which just so happens to be led by the chair of the “Vote Yes for a Safe Massachusetts” campaign.

That’s raised eyebrows – and more than a few ethics complaints. The Civil Rights Coalition has officially requested an investigation, claiming this was a way for the AG to fund political activism with state resources. Strangely, major news outlets like Boston.com reported on the campaign’s formation but didn’t mention the donation controversy at all.

No Answers for Hunters or Non-Residents

Gun owners aren’t the only ones left in the dark. As Wallace shared, Safari Club International sent a letter months ago asking how the new law affects out-of-state hunters. Juvenile hunting, temporary carry permits, and basic questions about transporting firearms have all gone unanswered. Not a single official response has come from the Attorney General’s office.

Wallace pointed out that even the Secretary of Public Safety, who had been releasing occasional “guidance,” stopped issuing any public updates after last November. This silence, Wallace believes, isn’t by accident – it’s because every time the state tries to clarify the law, they accidentally weaken it.

Lawsuits Met with Tactical Delays

When GOAL prepares to sue over specific parts of the law, state officials respond by simply suspending those parts. It’s like a game of legal whack-a-mole, Wallace said. They spent thousands preparing to challenge the law’s training requirements – then those requirements were delayed. The same happened with proposed long gun testing rules. As soon as GOAL readied legal action, the state hit pause.

Worse, when GOAL agreed to temporarily suspend a case, the AG’s office tried to dismiss it “with prejudice” – a legal term that would block them from refiling it later. Fortunately, GOAL beat that maneuver in court. But the back-and-forth has drained resources and left gun owners wondering what laws are even enforceable.

A “Slush Fund” Behind the Politics?

Wallace went further, accusing the Attorney General’s office of using lawsuit settlements as a private cash pool. When corporations like CVS settle out of court, those funds reportedly don’t go to the state treasury – they go into a discretionary fund controlled by the AG. From there, grants are awarded to political allies under the banner of fighting “gun violence.”

It’s a troubling cycle: sue a company, keep the money, and give it to activist groups that support your political agenda. Wallace called this system “a slush fund,” and Cam Edwards agreed it shows just how deeply entrenched partisan politics are in Massachusetts’ justice system.

Police Left Confused and Frustrated

Even local law enforcement doesn’t know how to enforce Chapter 135. Wallace said police departments have received no clear guidance. In fact, he said, some officers have told GOAL directly that they don’t understand what’s legal anymore, especially when it comes to non-resident firearms.

Take the example of Minute Man Sportsmen’s Club, which used to host championship shooting events. They had to cancel because competitors from other states were afraid to bring their shotguns into Massachusetts. Wallace asked, “How are they supposed to get their gun to the range?” No one had an answer.

Out-of-State Gun Owners: Stay Away

Due to the law’s confusing language and lack of clear exceptions, GOAL now advises non-resident gun owners not to bring firearms into Massachusetts at all – even for legal hunting. There’s an exemption for passing through the state, but not for entering it.

And since the law was reportedly drafted by anti-gun group Everytown for Gun Safety, Wallace argues it was always meant to entrap people. The bill wasn’t written by the legislature – it was written by activists. And now, real people are paying the price with their freedoms.

People Are Giving Up

One of the most alarming trends Wallace sees is apathy. Gun owners are becoming so overwhelmed and discouraged that many have stopped trying to comply altogether. “You can’t comply,” Wallace said. “It’s impossible because it can be interpreted in so many ways.”

This, he argues, is a recipe for disaster. If people no longer care what the law says, because it’s too confusing to follow, then society starts to break down. Wallace said aggressive district attorneys are already targeting lawful gun owners, and more news about those cases is coming soon.

A Call for Civil Protest

Cam Edwards asked what gun owners can do next. Wallace’s answer? It may be time to start showing up. Not violently, but visibly. Attend public events, follow politicians to photo ops, and bring signs and voices. Wallace admitted this kind of peaceful protest is new territory for the gun rights community, which is made up mostly of working people, not paid activists.

But something has to change. “We’ve tried everything else,” Wallace said. And he’s right – the state controls all three branches of government, so the usual channels aren’t working.

National Help Might Be on the Way

There is a sliver of hope. Wallace says they’re in the early stages of asking the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division to investigate what’s happening in Massachusetts. With other states like New York already under scrutiny, it’s not impossible.

But with the DOJ overwhelmed, Wallace knows it’s a long shot. Still, it’s worth trying. “Even the police are frustrated,” he said. “They don’t know what they’re supposed to be doing.”

Why This Matters More Than You Think

What’s happening in Massachusetts may seem like a local issue, but it’s a warning for the rest of the country. When one state rewrites gun laws without clarity, transparency, or public input, and then plays shell games with enforcement, it sets a dangerous precedent. If gun rights can be eroded in silence there, it can happen anywhere.

And the fact that lawsuits are being met with delays instead of decisions? That’s not democracy – that’s dodgeball. Whether you agree with gun rights or not, no one should be comfortable with government laws that are too vague to follow and too slippery to challenge. That’s why the fight in Massachusetts matters to everyone.