central mass FFL willing to work with PD...

Is the RO still in effect?

Yes, it's still in effect.

If it is, your friend is barred from regaining them even touching any gun until it's over.

Fixed it for you.

I have no intention of letting him even visit his guns until the RO is lifted.

On that day, but not until that day, we're going to shoot a LOT.
 
Let's put it this way, I've literally been there and done that. Friend of mine lost his LTC, I got all his stuff, we got it all to me in a matter of a week. That said, if he had certain "really hairy" guns those would have still been significantly more difficult.

The problem with the 209a system is that in a lot of shit towns, that stuff will end up in a Bonded Warehouse in a nanosecond.... and the extortion will happen.... I mean none of them were as bad as dowd but I'm sure the others aren't hanging around to make nothing....

That's not what we were talking about. The reference to theft related to firearms already in the hands of a FFL that could not legally be transferred back to the lawful owner.
 
That's not what we were talking about. The reference to theft related to firearms already in the hands of a FFL that could not legally be transferred back to the lawful owner.
Well in my book extortion via Bonded Warehouse is basically theft so there's that aspect of it....
 
Sometimes you just don’t know. People are always shocked when someone they know blows a fuse and kills someone. Nobody ever says “yeah I saw that coming”
i was never interviewed. Actually surprised it took as long as it did for a idiot i knew to kill someone.
that said , at least this PD is giving the option to get them before they ship them off. Also getting guns back from the P D is a royal. If i took the PDs word on it i would have only been returned 1/2 of my families guns. A lawyer was key to making sure everything was returned.
 
I am surprised the PD kept the guns for a year most ship them off to storage pretty quick

You also have the PD's where the officers assume the guns are going to a bonded warehouse, so they might as well take home anything of value, but then you have a licensed person go to the PD to get the guns back and all that is released is the cheap shit. If it wasn't turned in to the evidence's custody you aren't getting it back. Speaking from experience (I was the one the guns were released to).
 
Couple of questions for those who have been through this mess (assuming you have time to get them to an FFL):

-Can u just transfer the lower or frame as the fire arm?
- How long ( ball park) does a 209 RO last? Let’s say in an average divorce scenario with both parties trying to end it asap.
- Didn’t Comm2A just win a case against the bonded warehouses not to long ago?
- What’s the average cost per gun and ammo at an FFL, ball park?

thank god I’m not going through any of this shit, but u never know cuz....WOMEN!!😂😂👍🏻
 
Couple of questions for those who have been through this mess (assuming you have time to get them to an FFL):

-Can u just transfer the lower or frame as the fire arm?

Despite the Mass. legal definition of "firearm, rifle, or shotgun", federal law says you can't have a firearm (fed. definition) while you have a restraining order against you. Fed. law makes it illegal to do what you suggest.

- How long ( ball park) does a 209 RO last? Let’s say in an average divorce scenario with both parties trying to end it asap.

Assuming the red part is true, and the lawyers don't interfere, it could in theory be ended right away. But it never is. The other end of the spectrum is "nearly forever". I have another friend who still has an RO against him despite everyone including the judge and police who have had to deal with it, knowing that she's refusing to let it go out of spite.

- Didn’t Comm2A just win a case against the bonded warehouses not to long ago?

Nope, the courts decided that bonded warehouses are *not* state actors, so they can do whatever they want. (I think, that's the case I remember)

- What’s the average cost per gun and ammo at an FFL, ball park?

How long is a piece of string? This question is meaningless without a ton more context.


thank god I’m not going through any of this shit, but u never know cuz....WOMEN!!😂😂👍🏻

Don't put this on "all women", that's bullshit. It's lawyers and social workers and a f***ed up system. Woman are frequently pressured/encouraged into claiming domestic abuse purely for legal leverage, even when everyone knows there's zero risk of harm, or even that she's more dangerous to him. (this is exactly the case in my friend's situation: he's the one who locks his car and has a go-bag and never lets his phone out of his direct control and has actually been the victim of violence)
 
Despite the Mass. legal definition of "firearm, rifle, or shotgun", federal law says you can't have a firearm (fed. definition) while you have a restraining order against you. Fed. law makes it illegal to do what you suggest.



Assuming the red part is true, and the lawyers don't interfere, it could in theory be ended right away. But it never is. The other end of the spectrum is "nearly forever". I have another friend who still has an RO against him despite everyone including the judge and police who have had to deal with it, knowing that she's refusing to let it go out of spite.



Nope, the courts decided that bonded warehouses are *not* state actors, so they can do whatever they want. (I think, that's the case I remember)



How long is a piece of string? This question is meaningless without a ton more context.




Don't put this on "all women", that's bullshit. It's lawyers and social workers and a f***ed up system. Woman are frequently pressured/encouraged into claiming domestic abuse purely for legal leverage, even when everyone knows there's zero risk of harm, or even that she's more dangerous to him. (this is exactly the case in my friend's situation: he's the one who locks his car and has a go-bag and never lets his phone out of his direct control and has actually been the victim of violence)
Not to nit pick, but if you have to turn in the firearm couldn’t you just turn in the AR15 lower for example? Or do you have to turn in the upper attached to it? That sux if u have to turn in the upper if it’s a high end barrel with an expensive rail, optic, PEQ, surefire light, etc..
In the case of your friend with an ex that won’t let the RO go out of spite...How does she control that if it’s proven beyond a reasonable doubt that theres no threat? Can’t he prove to the court that it should be null and void? Granted I’m sure it’s a pretty penny in legal fees for it. Best of luck to the ppl u know dealing with this!👍🏻
-
 
Not to nit pick, but if you have to turn in the firearm couldn’t you just turn in the AR15 lower for example?

You don’t get the chance. They show up at your house without warning and take stuff. It's not like they send a polite letter and wait for you to show up at the police station.

Legally (federally) you're probably correct, in that the serialized portion is the gun, and everything else is unregulated.

Legally, (Mass.) the serialized portion without the upper isn't a "firearm, rifle, or shotgun", so it's not covered by Massachusetts' 209A law. But that doesn't matter, because they show up to take stuff and they don't give you the chance to disassemble everything.

In the case of your friend with an ex that won’t let the RO go out of spite...How does she control that if it’s proven beyond a reasonable doubt that theres no threat? Can’t he prove to the court that it should be null and void?

For any of that to work, you have to have an opportunity to go to court, and the judge has to side with you, and "prove" is really hard to do because so much of it is subjective and hearsay.

They have to cooperate. If you don't get a day in court, the truth is irrelevant.
 
You don’t get the chance. They show up at your house without warning and take stuff.
I know of one person who was arrested for failing to abide by the RO because he told the police he wanted to talk to his lawyer before surrendering his guns. Of course that detail never made it into the police report.
 
You don’t get the chance. They show up at your house without warning and take stuff. It's not like they send a polite letter and wait for you to show up at the police station.

Legally (federally) you're probably correct, in that the serialized portion is the gun, and everything else is unregulated.

Legally, (Mass.) the serialized portion without the upper isn't a "firearm, rifle, or shotgun", so it's not covered by Massachusetts' 209A law. But that doesn't matter, because they show up to take stuff and they don't give you the chance to disassemble everything.



For any of that to work, you have to have an opportunity to go to court, and the judge has to side with you, and "prove" is really hard to do because so much of it is subjective and hearsay.

They have to cooperate. If you don't get a day in court, the truth is irrelevant.
[/QUOTE
What a suck situation something like this is. Good luck to your friends going through this, I know I would spare no expense to fight something like this.👍🏻
 
- Didn’t Comm2A just win a case against the bonded warehouses not to long ago?
The court held that since the bonded warehouse did not actually take the gun (like a tow company does), it is not a similar situation and therefore not subject to any regulation and may set whatever fees and policies it wishes.

It was a total, 100% loss.
 
The court held that since the bonded warehouse did not actually take the gun (like a tow company does), it is not a similar situation and therefore not subject to any regulation and may set whatever fees and policies it wishes.

It was a total, 100% loss.

AKA the "cuz it involves guns" legal doctrine.... [sad]
 
IMO an RO without an actual criminal charge is a bullshit RO.

Assault is a crime, threatening harm to another is a crime, stalking, trespassing, all that etc etc. If the police/judge/DA do not see evidence of a crime there shouldn't be evidence for an RO. If the protected person doesn't want to press charges but wants an RO I guess that's nice but it shouldn't just trail on for months to a year. Really ought to be a shit or get off the pot situation.

Not to mention the truly dangerous people aren't going to be deterred by an RO anyway, it only really works on honest and sane folks who are just annoying anyway.

If there is a crime involved well the disposition eventually will determine the status.
 
IMO an RO without an actual criminal charge is a bullshit RO.

Assault is a crime, threatening harm to another is a crime, stalking, trespassing, all that etc etc. If the police/judge/DA do not see evidence of a crime there shouldn't be evidence for an RO. If the protected person doesn't want to press charges but wants an RO I guess that's nice but it shouldn't just trail on for months to a year. Really ought to be a shit or get off the pot situation.

Not to mention the truly dangerous people aren't going to be deterred by an RO anyway, it only really works on honest and sane folks who are just annoying anyway.

If there is a crime involved well the disposition eventually will determine the status.
The good news in MA and many other states, and nationally if the democraps win the senate, is we have red flag laws with even lower standards to forcibly remove your guns from your possession based on the flimsiest of assertions by someone you maybe met once back when you stayed at a holiday inn express. No need to worry about ROs and standards for ROs anymore. We have the solution!
 
Anybody have any positive stories like beating a bogus RO filed against you??😂😂👍🏻

I have heard such stories, but they're third hand at best. It wouldn't surprise me that it has happened, but it would shock me if they were anything more than rare outliers.
 
The good news in MA and many other states, and nationally if the democraps win the senate, is we have red flag laws with even lower standards to forcibly remove your guns from your possession based on the flimsiest of assertions by someone you maybe met once back when you stayed at a holiday inn express. No need to worry about ROs and standards for ROs anymore. We have the solution!

Yep and they will also likely use the whole cluster of laws together - potentially some poor sucker will end up with a red flag (to get the guns instantly), followed by an RO based on a bogus red flag (to keep them from the guns). Then somehow both will be separate matters to seek relief from.

You guys in MA have all this much worse of course. At least in free states usually an RO is treated differently, as would likely any "red flag" law imposed by the feds. Although it can happen and under federal & say NH law some RO situations do require one to relinquish their guns (but not all situations is my understanding), usually from what I have seen is it's up to the person served the RO to follow the law. Ie provided nothing aggravates the situation police often do not actually come to take your guns.

Of course the police don't necessarily know who is a gun owner to begin with in a free state either, certainly not what guns that person owns. Then of course even if the police did, when you have legal permitless ammunition & private sales, the whole idea of disarming someone forcefully doesn't really have much logic - if a free person wants to break the law and be armed they can easily be hours after all their guns were taken.
 
I have heard such stories, but they're third hand at best. It wouldn't surprise me that it has happened, but it would shock me if they were anything more than rare outliers.
According to my friend, the Northampton PD is fully aware of the economic rape that happens at bonded warehouses, and does their best to avoid that pitfall.
This is great.

Other departments are aware of the rape and will make a call to the thefthouse "Better hurry, the owner is on his way with an attorney and a dealer".
 
You guys in MA have all this much worse of course. At least in free states usually an RO is treated differently, as would likely any "red flag" law imposed by the feds.

If the Feds pass some red flag shit, it's going to be just like the DV ROs.. it will become bullshit similar to Lautenberg amendment, nobody will be immune regardless of state laws.

Otherwise think about it for more than 10 seconds, there is no point to a fed ERPO if it's just a "suggestion". They want Fed ERPO so they can create another category of
prohibited persons. (Just like Lautenberg does).
 
Sometimes I want to buy another small house or cabin out in the woods in another state, winterize the plumbing, keep the power turned on, set up security cameras, alarm system, and internet and just use it for gun storage with a nice big reinforced concrete vault room in the basement, put the ownership of the house under a corporation or something so it isn't directly tied to my name or something. Then when/if some bullshit happens my answer will be "sorry officer I don't have any firearms other than this old double barrel shotgun that Joe Biden told me to get , they were all demilled/destroyed in compliance with the law and disposed of, I changed my view on owning evil weapons of war and decided to destroy them so that they couldn't get into the hands of someone else."
 
If the Feds pass some red flag shit, it's going to be just like the DV ROs.. it will become bullshit similar to Lautenberg amendment, nobody will be immune regardless of state laws.

Otherwise think about it for more than 10 seconds, there is no point to a fed ERPO if it's just a "suggestion". They want Fed ERPO so they can create another category of
prohibited persons. (Just like Lautenberg does).

I don't disagree just saying a NH RO doesn't often seem to result in forceful search/disarmament/confiscation. The federal legal implications are no different but the gun owner is (often) able to transfer their property on their own terms. In those situations then at least usually the property isn't stolen. In MA it sounds like confiscation is a defined part of the process, and given they know what you own already they will strive to take every last gun.

As far as red flag laws, what is unclear, and I guess I should go read federal red flag bills, is if the state creates no such law I don't see how they are implemented. I guess such could be filed federally, but federal courts & enforcement are not exactly aligned for that purpose.

Even if in say NH they came to serve a red flag order, they really don't know what guns they are coming to collect. Similarly the legal implications might be the same but it's possible a NH red flag order would result in being handed a piece of paper to comply with.
 
I don't disagree just saying a NH RO doesn't often seem to result in forceful search/disarmament/confiscation. The federal legal implications are no different but the gun owner is (often) able to transfer their property on their own terms. In those situations then at least usually the property isn't stolen. In MA it sounds like confiscation is a defined part of the process, and given they know what you own already they will strive to take every last gun.

As far as red flag laws, what is unclear, and I guess I should go read federal red flag bills, is if the state creates no such law I don't see how they are implemented. I guess such could be filed federally, but federal courts & enforcement are not exactly aligned for that purpose.

My point was if the feds go for Fed ERPO no state will really be able to "opt out of it". The person will become a prohibited person and that's the end of that. You are flagged in NICS and other systems like that, and you are done- if you get arrested with a gun at that point (after having been served with the ERPO) and the kopsch want to be dicks they can kick you to the feds, you could then indicted for felon in possession. In a best case scenario a state could have a law saying they won't refer someone for prosecution by the feds (like those 2A sanctuary state things) but that's unlikely because most people are faggots and suck for ERPO as being a "good idea". States that don't pass companion ERPO laws that dovetail with the fed one will likely get penalized by the feds, over time. (like they try to do with seatbelt/helmet bullshit. )

As an example, I'm not aware of a single state that has state laws for DV ROs etc that do not effectively "channel lautenberg" in some way or another.

Lol and BTW even NH fully honors Lautenberg, although the process is different (and usually, somewhat less abusive) from MA. We had a guy here who lived in NH and his bonkers Ex in MA filed an RO against him, and he got served by NH cops, who then took all his guns. Lautenberg shit "travels across borders. " This ERPO shit will, too, if they pass it.

There's no way they're going to file the legislation without doing that. Their goal is to reduce the number of people who can have guns. The only way to do that is to put teeth in
it like that. State ERPOs, as they exist now, are basically a joke that you can drive away from if you needed to. The antis know that and don't like that.
 
There's no way they're going to file the legislation without doing that. Their goal is to reduce the number of people who can have guns.

I read a thing recently that struck a chord, and I've been repeating it to anyone who will listen. It's particularly relevant here, as *we" are the criminals they intend to create:


If you really care about preventing government tyranny, your #1 priority
must be making sure criminals have rights.

And that’s not a joke or an exaggeration.

If criminals don’t have rights, then all the government has to do is find
some excuse to label people as criminals, and those people will no longer
have rights. It’s what literally every tyrannical government in all of history
has done.

If you believe that people who break the law should forfeit their rights,
you’re literally as pro-tyranny as a person can get.
 
Back
Top Bottom