Carrying in car question

[Metalstamper]

After reading this entire thread, it seems logical to keep your mouth shut.

An interesting thought did cross my mind though. Of the hundreds of thousands of motorists buzzing around MA on any given day, how many of them are licensed and carrying?

And if the number is great, shouldn't LEO be better educuated to the good possibility that Joe-Citizen with a burned out Taiwanese tail-light bulb might just be armed?

 

[M1911]

An interesting thought did cross my mind though. Of the hundreds of thousands of motorists buzzing around MA on any given day, how many of them are licensed and carrying?

And if the number is great,

It's not.

 

[TY43215]

Never mind

 

[Scrivener]

I'm sure one of the lawyers will correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that the arrest happens the second the officer restrains you from leaving. That can be by touching or words. Again, that's the training I received and I'm not aware of any changes to the law since.

If you are not free to leave, you are "in custody." Any questioning by the police in that situation is "custodial interrogation" and requires the "Miranda warning."

The cops may try to claim you were only in "protective custody;" the question then becomes in what way you were incapacitated or otherwise posed a threat to yourself or others.

 

[M1911]

If I understand you correctly, therefore any time you are stopped at the side of the road (in your car, not handcuffed), you are "in custody."

But were you "arrested?"

Or am I missing the boat, as usual?

 

[Garys]

If you are not free to leave, you are "in custody." Any questioning by the police in that situation is "custodial interrogation" and requires the "Miranda warning."

The cops may try to claim you were only in "protective custody;" the question then becomes in what way you were incapacitated or otherwise posed a threat to yourself or others.

I don't know if you've read through the entire thread, but the person in question was cuffed and stuffed into the back seat of the cruiser. He was then uncuffed and sent on his way.

Gary

 

[Len-2A Training]

An interesting extension of this question . . .

Given these circumstances, LTC application or anyone asks "were you ever arrested?" what do you answer to be honest? Explaining it might be fun because you may never have been really given a real reason why you were detained.

 

[Scrivener]

An interesting extension of this question . . .

Given these circumstances, LTC application or anyone asks "were you ever arrested?" what do you answer to be honest? Explaining it might be fun because you may never have been really given a real reason why you were detained.

For the purposes of licensing, the issue becomes whether there is a record of the arrest. Were you arraigned, or even booked?

If the answer is "NO," what is the basis for listing the (non)event on an application?

 

[Len-2A Training]

That was my question!

There should be a complete police report of the event, at least as CYA for the officer if the person sues. No report of the event could look real bad on the agency/officer.

On the other hand, if the detainment was on really shaky grounds, I could also see the officer not reporting anything about it, so he doesn't suffer an administrative reprimand. [In which case he's hoping and praying that nothing comes of it.]

A police report does not equate to an arrest record however.

 

[MaverickNH]

I got pulled over at 6am in Western MA doing 74mph on I90 - a series of troopers doing speeding stops and lining up the cars on the shoulder to process them. Oddly, all cars were from out of state - I guess no voters or constituents to deal with ...

Anyway, when they worked their way back to me, the LEO got my lic/reg and went back to his car. Then a few minutes later, another cruiser pulled up in front of me and another pulled in behind him.

They all got out as the trooper came back to my car and asked if I had any drugs or guns in the car. I said I had no illegal guns or no illegal drugs. He repeat ANY drugs or guns, and I said no - none at all.

He stepped back, spoke on his radio, came back and gave me a ticket and let me go. Could just be I look like a sketchy character ...

I've always wondered if he saw I had a Non-Res LTC-A and called in support. As it turns out, I was driving to Albany, NY and was not carrying or transporting any firearms (and no drugs, of course). Could just be I look like a sketchy character ...

 

[Scrivener]

The officer called for back up, removed them from the car, proned them out, cuffed and stuffed them in the cruiser.

Such an individual is clearly "in custody" and, if interrogated w/o being advised of his rights, could have the entire interrogation suppressed accordingly.

However, there is NO mention of charges being made. I would classify this as an abusive detention by a cop w/some "issues" - like terminal insecurity, 'roid rage or other personality defects. Note that if said detainee was mouthing off w/o provocation, the analysis changes accordingly.

I would NOT classify it as an arrest unless and until charges were made. I would certainly not list it on a firearms license application as an arrest.

 

[M1911]

Scrivener, thanks for the clarification.

 

[TonyD]

Such an individual is clearly "in custody" and, if interrogated w/o being advised of his rights, could have the entire interrogation suppressed accordingly.

However, there is NO mention of charges being made. I would classify this as an abusive detention by a cop w/some "issues" - like terminal insecurity, 'roid rage or other personality defects. Note that if said detainee was mouthing off w/o provocation, the analysis changes accordingly.

I would NOT classify it as an arrest unless and until charges were made. I would certainly not list it on a firearms license application as an arrest.

Scriv - At the risk of being redundant and for my own edification, from a former LEO to a lawyer clarify a few points for me.

1) This issue of officer safety is a judgement call on the LEO's part. Granted, there is some leeway, however, a felony car-stop for an individual who announces he is in lawful possession of a firearm would be over the top. (Given only the info we have.)

2) A routine car stop for speeding would constitute being "in custody".

3) While "in custody" without a Miranda warning anything you disclouse is inadmissable.

4) An arrest does not occur until the LEO announces, "You are under arrest for...".

So, during the routine car stop the LEO asks if you have any illegal drugs and respond in the affirmative. The charges must be dropped from the resulting arrest because you were never Mirandized while simply "in custody"?

 

[Cross-X]

I'm not Scrivener, but I'd like to weigh in. I'll post my comments in blue.

--Darius

Scriv - At the risk of being redundant and for my own edification, from a former LEO to a lawyer clarify a few points for me.

1) This issue of officer safety is a judgement call on the LEO's part. Granted, there is some leeway, however, a felony car-stop for an individual who announces he is in lawful possession of a firearm would be over the top. (Given only the info we have.)

Agreed

2) A routine car stop for speeding would constitute being "in custody".

Not so in Massachusetts. Here, police may detain a motorist long enough to issue a ticket. If the detention continues, and the motorist is not free to leave, most judges will consider that to be "in custody."

3) While "in custody" without a Miranda warning anything you disclouse is inadmissable.

Not quite. If a motorist, without prompting by the police officer, makes an admission or a confession, those statements are admissible.



4) An arrest does not occur until the LEO announces, "You are under arrest for...".

I disagree. In Massachusetts, an arrest can occur well before the police officer makes such a declaration.

So, during the routine car stop the LEO asks if you have any illegal drugs and respond in the affirmative. The charges must be dropped from the resulting arrest because you were never Mirandized while simply "in custody"?

Again, not so in MA. A police officer is entitled to make a brief threshold inquiry without first advising a motorist of Miranda rights. Once he has developed probable cause, however, he must advise the suspect of his Miranda rights before continuing any questioning.

 

[Garys]

Scrivener, thanks for the clarification.

+1.

Gary

 

[Scrivener]

Don't forget to thank Cross-X as well.

 

[sdavid]

Just to get back on topic:

From memory; during the Basic Pistol Classes from the GOAL Foundation the students are informed of the laws as they are. Because the instructor, in this case Nancy Snow, does not know what kind of license the students will receive the advice given is for the majority of students. If you have anything other than a LTC-A for ALP/ PP (unrestricted) do not carry on your person. If you are transporting any firearm, rifle or shotgun put it unloaded in a locked case and in to your trunk/ storage compartment.

This does a few things:

Out of sight out of mind- no one can see it so it becomes a non-issue,
If for some reason you let the officer or if they have PC to search it is locked, Cross-x would the police need a search warrant to open a locked box?
It protects the firearm, rifle or shotgun from getting marred up from banging around in the truck.

Here is another question to confuse more people: how does someone with a LTC-B carry a revolver on their person?

 

[M1911]

Here is another question to confuse more people: how does someone with a LTC-B carry a revolver on their person?

They don't.

The law prohibits people with an LTC Class B from carrying concealed. See Ch. 140 Section 131, which reads (in part):

(b) A Class B license shall entitle a holder thereof to purchase, rent, lease, borrow, possess and carry: (i) non-large capacity firearms and feeding devices and ammunition therefor, for all lawful purposes, subject to such restrictions relative to the possession, use or carrying of such firearm as the licensing authority deems proper; provided, however, that a Class B license shall not entitle the holder thereof to carry or possess a loaded firearm in a concealed manner in any public way or place;

Full text is here: http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/140-131.htm

It doesn't matter what the reason for issuance or restriction of an LTC Class B says -- it could say "All Lawful Purposes". You still can't carry concealed on it.

 

[Coyote33]

from the other thread:

Snakeye:

why would you offer up/admit to carrying if your licenced [sic]to carry concealed and you werent asked directly? especially in MA....

For some reason, I remember being told to do just that if you are stopped. I guess it is to avoid surprises. I've never been in that situation nor hope to be.

If I understand you correctly, therefore any time you are stopped at the side of the road (in your car, not handcuffed), you are "in custody."

But were you "arrested?"

Or am I missing the boat, as usual?

Don't forget "detained".

Just to get back on topic:

...If you have anything other than a LTC-A for ALP/ PP (unrestricted) do not carry on your person. If you are transporting any firearm, rifle or shotgun put it unloaded in a locked case and in to your trunk/ storage compartment.

This does a few things:

Out of sight out of mind- no one can see it so it becomes a non-issue,
...

What if you have a vehicle, such as a Jeep, without a trunk or storage compartment, just an open back?

They don't.

The law prohibits people with an LTC Class B from carrying concealed. See Ch. 140 Section 131, which reads (in part):

Full text is here: http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/140-131.htm

It doesn't matter what the reason for issuance or restriction of an LTC Class B says -- it could say "All Lawful Purposes". You still can't carry concealed on it.

But it doesn't say you can't carry it open anywhere in the law. Forget the deceptively attractive idea of "causing a disturbance" which many of you keep falling back on, as this is in your own vehicle.

Edit: Unloaded.

 

[M1911]

What if you have a vehicle, such as a Jeep, without a trunk or storage compartment, just an open back?

Locked in a hard case in the back of the vehicle.

But it doesn't say you can't carry it open anywhere in the law. Forget the deceptively attractive idea of "causing a disturbance" which many of you keep falling back on, as this is in your own vehicle.

Ah, you think you can carry a revolver openly on an LTC Class B? I strongly suspect that if someone tries that and their chief finds out, that their LTC will be revoked post-haste.

As you are aware, chiefs have almost unlimited discretion in the issuance of LTCs. If the chief thought it was ok for a person to carry a loaded gun, the chief would have issued that person an unrestricted LTC Class A.

 

[buckeddy]

objective not subjective

Answering the question as to when one is arrested in Massachusetts is next to impossible to answer. As with all law questions the answer is objective in nature. In other words what the police officer intended, or how the subject of the investigation felt does not matter. The fact will be visited by a court, judged on and depending on who is involved may go on to a higher court. The results of these court decisions render "case law". This turns out to be ever changing and could differ from week to week or year to year. Factors that might influence decisions are definitely politically related. Some examples could be Operating under the Influence, Domestic Violence or Drug laws. One minute its ok to block a vehicle in the next it’s considered an arrest. So I would disagree with anyone who attempts to definitely answer that question. There are some definitions of arrest but none apply to changing situations here in Massachusetts.