City of Lowell Storage Alert

[DaveB]

If this flies, Boston, Worcester and Springfield aren't far behind. I can just smell it in the wind. And you can be sure that Marcia will put her stamp of approval on it too!

It doesn't end there.

Murphy, a Lowell Democrat whose district includes Dublin Street, said the city was wise to take the home-rule route because it would be much more difficult to pass statewide legislation with similar provisions. If the petition makes it through the legislative process and proves successful in stemming gun violence in Lowell, it could become a statewide model, he said.

These a-holes are full of failure.

Secure storage of the guns should help prevent thefts, and the alarm systems would enable police to respond quickly to potential thefts and keep the guns out of criminals' hands, said Lavallee.

Should? WTF! What an ass clown. Police don't monitor alarm systems by the time they get the call from the monitoring service, it's to late. FAIL

Police would also benefit from knowing if they are entering a home where the homeowner or potential thieves are armed, an important ability Lavallee compared to firefighters knowing if the homes and facilities they enter are housing hazardous chemicals.

Huh? When is the last time the FD was in your house pre-inspecting for chemicals or you reported hazmat to them? When I called the FD about the ammuntion storage they had no clue. FAIL

Bottom line. They can't control criminals so they control citizens.

Read more: http://www.lowellsun.com/ci_18007364?source=rss_viewed#ixzz1LyyTrnaH

 

[cekim]

It doesn't end there.

Which is why we cannot ignore this and write it off to "Oh its Lowell" This crap needs to be crapped back down their metaphorical throats every time it comes out or it won't stop.

 

[Dziner]

OK, lets address the real issue here... who has room to put up a fellow NESr currently stuck in Lowell?? Seriously, anyone willing to take me, my girl, two dogs, and my "arsenal"???

this is stupid. I have been waiting for Lowell to pull something like this. It is definitely a kneejerk reaction to the 40 guns taken from the Lowell house last year, just as several of you have said. I first heard of this wonderful news from NRA on Facebook. And as someone here quoted, the vault that the 40 guns were stored in was deemed to be pretty solid and the guys had to have a long time to work on it. So its not a vault issue, its an alarm "monitoring" issue. I need to get the hell out of here, BAD.

 

[kingfisher]

OK, lets address the real issue here... who has room to put up a fellow NESr currently stuck in Lowell?? Seriously, anyone willing to take me, my girl, two dogs, and my "arsenal"???

<snip>

I need to get the hell out of here, BAD.

IF this passes and moving is not feasible for you right away, one option would be to sell a firearm.

The Lowell Sun article where everyone is apparently getting their information states, "Lowell also wants to require all owners of more than five firearms in the city to store them in a locked safe or vault." If your "arsenal" is made up of the six listed in your sig line and no more, then selling one gun would seem to put you just below the limit.

Personally, though, I don't put much stock in the accuracy of the media. At various places in the article it also says, "require owners of 10 or more firearms" and "require owners of more than 10 firearms" (addressing two different provisions of the petition). That leads me to believe that it could be 5 or more and not "more than 5" as was published, in which case you'd have to get your arsenal down to four for this to work.

 

[mark056]

Well this is just "step 1"...the next step is for you to keep all your firearms in the Police Armory at the nearest police station...just like in the UK...and we know what happened there...

Mark L.

 

[CLMN]

I'm still waiting for the legal definition of "vault" to come out. If the loony lefty moonbats get their way and this eventually spreads to the entire PRM, we'll all be in the market for a "vault" meeting the moonbat's definition!

CLMN

 

[glide]

we'll all be in the market for a "vault" meeting the moonbat's definition!

CLMN

Nope. At that point I would just say 'F-it'.

 

[yanici]

You know, it doesn't hurt to contact your Statehouse people to let them know that this petition is coming their way and that you strongly object to it.

 

[CIby1012]

Im a relatively new gun owner in lowell (3 years) and it has been nothing but a headache so far. I have 9, and Im definitely not buying the 10th I was thinking about now!

In all seriousness, what does this mean for us who are stuck here? Whats the timeline and probability for this bill going through? Is search & seizure a real fear for us? I do NOT have the means to move out of Lowell for a few more years.....This sucks.

 

[kingfisher]

I would like to contact the legislators who will be considering the home-rule petition, but I'm wondering who that is exactly. Here are some quotes from the Lowell Sun Online article where unfortunately we're getting our information:

The City Council voted unanimously Tuesday night to send the home-rule petition to the state Legislature.

But further down the page, the reporter wrote:

Murphy, a Lowell Democrat whose district includes Dublin Street, said the city was wise to take the home-rule route because it would be much more difficult to pass statewide legislation ... it could become a statewide model, he said.

So does that mean it will be heard by a committee only, and if so, which committee? I guess I'll have to do some research on home-rule petitions because I don't know how they work.

Additionally, would the police inspect the vaults in everyone's home to make sure they're in compliance? It kinda sounds that way:

Machado also cautioned that the law will only be effective if it calls for gun owners to place their weapons in safes and vaults that are extremely difficult to penetrate. A lock box where people typically place their insurance papers should not qualify, he said.

...and the alarm systems would enable police to respond quickly to potential thefts and keep the guns out of criminals' hands, said Lavallee.

What if they respond to an alarm and there is no obvious sign of break-in? Will they assume that it's a false alarm? Lowell's Alarm Ordinance is lengthy and can be found here. They do charge for false alarms, by the way.

Or will they kick in your door and enter your home to make sure there are no criminals there and to check for proper firearm/ammo storage?

Hopefully, we'll get more information about this while there's still time to do something about it.

 

[rlee]

But because the Massachusetts Constitution denies towns the right to define felonies or impose imprisonment, wouldn't this require a Senate or House bill?

 

[KilgoreTrout]

But because the Massachusetts Constitution denies towns the right to define felonies or impose imprisonment, wouldn't this require a Senate or House bill?

Massachusetts is a Home Rule state.

 

[glide]

Massachusetts is a Home Rule state.

Home Rule States, an amendment to the state constitution grants cities, municipalities, and/or counties the ability to pass laws to govern themselves as they see fit (so long as they obey the state and federal constitutions)

What am I missing?

 

[rlee]

Home Rule States, an amendment to the state constitution grants cities, municipalities, and/or counties the ability to pass laws to govern themselves as they see fit (so long as they obey the state and federal constitutions)

What am I missing?

From http://www.malegislature.gov/laws/constitution

Section 7. Limitations on Local Powers. - Nothing in this article shall be deemed to grant to any city or town the power to (1) regulate elections other than those prescribed by sections three and four; (2) to levy, assess and collect taxes; (3) to borrow money or pledge the credit of the city or town; (4) to dispose of park land; (5) to enact private or civil law governing civil relationships except as an incident to an exercise of an independent municipal power; or (6) to define and provide for the punishment of a felony or to impose imprisonment as a punishment for any violation of law; provided, however, that the foregoing enumerated powers may be granted by the general court in conformity with the constitution and with the powers reserved to the general court by section eight; nor shall the provisions of this article be deemed to diminish the powers of the judicial department of the commonwealth.

 

[Ben Cartwright SASS]

I wonder if like the LTC aps the "vault" will be up to the discretion of the chief in each town?

I am starting to save for a Fort Knox or similar safe that I was thinking of keeping in my garage, bolted to the floor, although I hate to let my gun (I won't admit to any more than one!) get cold in the winter. The size that I could fit in the basement, through the bulkhead is limited so would need at least two and the associated moving costs.
I was thinking a 6' wide 6' tall set in concrete and with a false wall built around it in the garage. The downside is I couldn't sit in front of it in the winter time and fondle my gun, I mean look at my gun.

 

[firestorm]

I wonder if like the LTC aps the "vault" will be up to the discretion of the chief in each town?

I am starting to save for a Fort Knox or similar safe that I was thinking of keeping in my garage, bolted to the floor, although I hate to let my gun (I won't admit to any more than one!) get cold in the winter. The size that I could fit in the basement, through the bulkhead is limited so would need at least two and the associated moving costs.
I was thinking a 6' wide 6' tall set in concrete and with a false wall built around it in the garage. The downside is I couldn't sit in front of it in the winter time and fondle my gun, I mean look at my gun.

Well if you are already building it a little room simply dig a tunnel from your basement out to the garage, into the little room. Put some vault doors securing the tunnel, maybe booby traps. Then you can heat the little room too, and keep your one and only gun warm during the winter.

 

[Ben Cartwright SASS]

ROFL!

I could also put cable out there so that the gun could watch the Outdoor channel!

 

[drgrant]

Massachusetts is a Home Rule state.

It is, but there is something in the law that generally allows the towns/cities to only create "pansy" offenses. That's why the knife ordinances are not really felonies or misdemeanors. Of course the idea in Lowell will probably be that non compliance = unsuitable, which is, in functional terms, far worse than any stupid knife ordinance in this state.

-Mike

 

[kingfisher]

I just read an article about this petition (An Act To Provide For The Secure Storage Of Large Numbers Of Firearms) recently printed in The Outdoor Message, and Jim Wallace makes an interesting statement:

The confusion regarding the legislation being local or state comes from the following. The legislation seeks to amend state law, not local ordinance so if passed would affect all gun owners in Massachusetts. The proposal also has gun owners reporting to the Chief of Police in Lowell, thus the quandary.

The original Lowell Sun article did quote Rep. Kevin Murphy, saying "it could become a statewide model," so I'll take him at his word that's what they're going for.

Another thing I noticed in the petition itself (printed in the same article):

The secretary of the executive office of public safety may by regulation prescribe commercially available containers which meet the definition of “safe or vault” contained above.

I guess they'll do some of the legwork up front to help the gun owners in MA buy something that will pass inspection. I feel so much better. [bs1]

 

[cekim]

We need: An Act To Provide For The Secure Storage Of Large Numbers Of Politicians.

If you have any more than 5 politicians, you must store them in a secure facility subject to inspection by the COP...

It must be secure enough to stop "all but the most determined" attempt to release them.

 

[EC1]

Why is it that when more politicians gather their group intelligence seems to decrease?

 

[cekim]

Why is it that when more politicians gather their group intelligence seems to decrease?

True of all people, but they are starting with less...

 

[Len-2A Training]

We need: An Act To Provide For The Secure Storage Of Large Numbers Of Politicians.

If you have any more than 5 politicians, you must store them in a secure facility subject to inspection by the COP...

It must be secure enough to stop "all but the most determined" attempt to release them.

Where do I sign up to push for sponsoring this one?

 

[cekim]

Where do I sign up to push for sponsoring this one?

Well, it certainly isn't coming out of my moonbat reps... Jeff Johnson (the name you know) Tsongas and CORI Atkins are busy filing lunatic gun grabbing bills...

 

[jamesvt]

I'm still waiting for the legal definition of "vault" to come out. If the loony lefty moonbats get their way and this eventually spreads to the entire PRM, we'll all be in the market for a "vault" meeting the moonbat's definition!

CLMN

Anything less secure then this is not acceptable.When you are storing weapons of mass destruction you can never be too safe.

 

[cekim]

Anything less secure then this is not acceptable. You are storing weapons on mass destruction you can never be to safe.

Hey, you could stuff a lot of politicians in there...

 

[yanici]

Soooo... Anything happening on this Home Rule Petition? I know my Rep in an abutting town is against it.

 

[Radtekk]

Anything less secure then this is not acceptable.When you are storing weapons of mass destruction you can never be too safe.

No expense is to great to protect the children...

 

[mark056]

No expense is to great to protect the children...

Damn straight which is why I'm buying a former nuclear missile silo in North Dakota to store my guns in.

 

[jcr]

Nancy Robison, executive director of Citizens for Safety, countered that supporting restrictions on gun ownership is not tantamount to abridging Second Amendment rights.

Why does Nancy use the word "abridging"?

No form of that word appears in the Second Amendment.

Is she a moron who doesn't know the text of the Amendment; or is she a liar substituting for the word "infringed" because it is obvious that her "restrictions" would obviously infringe the right?

--jcr