I'm civil business, but I will try to translate. Back me up if anyone sees an error.
A 1983 action is how you apply the US Constitution against a state/local government.
Plaintiff alleged a violation of his second amendment rights resulting from his denial.
The court found that the chief had qualifed immunity, and trashed the discretionary/ministerial difference (at least in cases where they like the results).
They then found that there is no Federal right to have a local offical follow state law.
Big one:
Then, they found the denial was in error, but found they don't care because the second amendment is not an absolute right.
Since no right is absolute, this means the state can deny you the right to speech (crowded theater/fire), religion (church zoning and worship hour cases), warrants (the warrant exception cases), movement (the restricted movement cases).
Pretty much either the court panel is either (1) a bunch of anti-gun lying bitches who made up some shit to hurt gun owners; or (2) they just trashed the entire Constitution and every one of the Bill of Rights in the 1st Circuit.
Guess which.
Oh, since the right to reproductive freedom is not absolute (Casey et al) I guess that local Police Chiefs can now blockade abortion clinics in the 1st Circuit. (Any chance the good Judges Torruella, Cyr, and Stahl find that's allowable?)