Brian Baker: Still more on concealed carry

By Brian Baker

Last update: Monday, December 25th, 2017

The day after my last letter was published regarding Anthony Breznican’s hysterical assertions about reciprocal interstate recognition of CCWs (concealed gun carry licenses) The Signal posted a rebuttal written by him.

The problem for him is that in addition to “misstating” (I’m being kind) the law, as he did in his original letter, in his rebuttal he “misstated” what I had written in my original response.

He wrote: “(Baker) zeroed in on the shorthand use of ‘spousal’ to try to dismiss the very real concerns expressed by law enforcement leaders.”

That’s flat-out false. Actually, I quoted him thusly: “Breznican absurdly claims, ‘Those from other states who might be blocked from carrying a concealed gun in a state like California, which has restrictions on such a license for those with a record of spousal abuse or other criminal behavior, will now be able to enter carrying a loaded weapon with impunity.’”

He’s the one who specifically mentioned “spousal abuse”. That was his argument, not mine. I was quoting his own letter. Everything I wrote was true and correct, and was in direct response to his wild-eyed claims. Just as I wrote, federal law is the superior authority, and those who wouldn’t qualify for basic gun ownership because they’re “prohibited persons” under federal law for having committed some criminal act certainly won’t be qualified to possess CCWs… in any state.

Further, and just as I wrote, the “opinions” of politician/cop “law enforcement leaders” notwithstanding, this is no different from universal reciprocity of drivers’ licenses. Different states also have different licensing requirements for those, too, but every state recognizes every other state’s drivers’ licenses when those residents visit regardless.

Thanks for the opportunity to set the record straight.

Brian Baker is a Saugus resident.

Click here to post a comment

Brian Baker: Still more on concealed carry

The day after my last letter was published regarding Anthony Breznican’s hysterical assertions about reciprocal interstate recognition of CCWs (concealed gun carry licenses) The Signal posted a rebuttal written by him.

The problem for him is that in addition to “misstating” (I’m being kind) the law, as he did in his original letter, in his rebuttal he “misstated” what I had written in my original response.

He wrote: “(Baker) zeroed in on the shorthand use of ‘spousal’ to try to dismiss the very real concerns expressed by law enforcement leaders.”

That’s flat-out false. Actually, I quoted him thusly: “Breznican absurdly claims, ‘Those from other states who might be blocked from carrying a concealed gun in a state like California, which has restrictions on such a license for those with a record of spousal abuse or other criminal behavior, will now be able to enter carrying a loaded weapon with impunity.’”

He’s the one who specifically mentioned “spousal abuse”. That was his argument, not mine. I was quoting his own letter. Everything I wrote was true and correct, and was in direct response to his wild-eyed claims. Just as I wrote, federal law is the superior authority, and those who wouldn’t qualify for basic gun ownership because they’re “prohibited persons” under federal law for having committed some criminal act certainly won’t be qualified to possess CCWs… in any state.

Further, and just as I wrote, the “opinions” of politician/cop “law enforcement leaders” notwithstanding, this is no different from universal reciprocity of drivers’ licenses. Different states also have different licensing requirements for those, too, but every state recognizes every other state’s drivers’ licenses when those residents visit regardless.

Thanks for the opportunity to set the record straight.

Brian Baker is a Saugus resident.

About the author

Brian Baker

Brian Baker

  • Bill Reynolds

    Bravo, Brian. I think it’s entirely appropriate to call out Anthony’s dishonesty. He personally lied to me and then claimed he was a victim when I called him out.

    • Brian Baker

      Thanks, Bill.

      Yes, that seems to be his SOP. He does the same thing here, though not nearly on the same scale, of course. Tries to insult and belittle his opponents, then whines and cries like a little baby when they unload back at him, claiming his “victimhood”.

      It’s why I call him Sir Whinesalot.

    • Ron Bischof

      Mr. Breznican imagines he can twist the printed word with impunity just as he does verbally, Bill.

      Both are intellectually dishonest. However, doing so when anyone can check what he and others have actually written is risibly absurd.

      All we have to do perform like Court Reporters and read the transcript back to him to expose his mendacity.

      • Bill Reynolds

        Truly, I have his text messages that prove his abundant dishonesty.

  • lois eisenberg

    Off Topic: “I LOVE IT”
    “Trump continues one-sided Twitter feud with FBI, digs his OBSTRUCTION hole a little bit deeper”
    In the words of President Obama, “Please proceed ”
    .

  • lois eisenberg

    OFF TOPIC AGAIN: To much going on not to post what is going on ~~~~~
    “Slow-learning Trump repeats lie that Obamacare was repealed in the #GOPTaxScam”
    “The core of the stuff that people love—the subsidies that help about 80 percent of ACA enrollees are still there,
    “In case you missed it, 8.8 million people enrolled in the shortened Obamacare enrollment period ending last Friday. That’s about 96 percent of the enrollment on the federal exchange last year.”
    ” The sabotage isn’t over, but Obamacare is mostly definitely not dead yet.”