We both know they can find a reason to make you "unsuitable" if they want to. Your avatar is a picture of you threatening, or at least acting carelessly with a flamethrower. No I don't believe this, and the distance probably looks short due to the perspective, but it's enough for a judge in MA to issue an ERPO or revoke a license.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Comm2A Files Amicus in Gun Seizure Case
- Thread starter Comm2A
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,529
- Likes
- 33,559
Plenty of ways to bring them forth in an unthreatening posture.What about those of us who don't have enough cases? Or keep them uncased in a safe?
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2018
- Messages
- 1,957
- Likes
- 2,528
Just so disgusted
I recall that in the LE seminar on gun laws it was stated that ONLY if the suspension/revocation was under appeal could you refuse to turn everything over . . . and because the suspension/revocation is handed to you, there is no possible way for you to have appealed PRIOR to being served and thus, that exemption (to confiscation) is null and void! That is the current police thought-process on this exemption.
Therefore (I'm guessing) since refusal to IMMEDIATELY turn everything over is a felony under C. 269 S. 10, they feel entitled to break into your house/safe to seize everything.
I hope this case succeeds, but being Mass Marsupials ruling on it, I don't have any confidence in that outcome.
Therefore (I'm guessing) since refusal to IMMEDIATELY turn everything over is a felony under C. 269 S. 10, they feel entitled to break into your house/safe to seize everything.
I hope this case succeeds, but being Mass Marsupials ruling on it, I don't have any confidence in that outcome.
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2018
- Messages
- 1,957
- Likes
- 2,528
And they will break into your safe ! They brought mine to the fire department and blew it opened with the jaws of life !!
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,529
- Likes
- 33,559
The question is "Are they allowed to force their way in if your response is no problem, wait here, I'll fetch them from the safe for you?".
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2010
- Messages
- 5,780
- Likes
- 3,068
If they already had seized the gun safe, what was the rationale for destroying the seized property?
Further punishment, to make the person suffer even greater losses. There is no other rationale vs. getting that search warrant and then asking the victim nicely to open it up.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,529
- Likes
- 33,559
Do you know if the owner of the safe refused to open it, or if the police asked for the combination?
Part of the notice posted on my safe states that providing the combination or opening up the safe on police order shall not be considered the granting of consent to entry or search. The downside of providing the combination, even though they will get the contents (even if you have a TRTL60x6 with a Kaba Mas X-11) is that the first argument offered by the prosecution should they find a technical violation is "he consented".
PDs that use jaws are getting sloppy. Dial units can generally be opened by the ITL auto dialer, and the so-called Group I brands name digitals except the Kama-Mas X-## series, the S&G 2740B, and possible some other pricey ones can be opened using the Phoenix is about 15 minutes since these electronics "leak" info (current draw amount, current draw time, time to beeps, etc.) that can be electronically analyzed. The black LE only Phoneix (regular one is orange) adds covert entry that leaves no audit trail on locks with that feature.
I contacted the northeaset regional sales rep for S&G and he was very forthcoming and confirmed that the Phoenix will indeed open the S&G Titan series of electronic locks (one of the most popular on gun safes)
An LTC in MA is, legally speaking, a license to own/possess as well as a license to carry.
That's a good point. If you could see yourself being "at risk" for arbitrary revocation, obtaining both an LTC and FID would be a logical approach. Then again, the law doesn't contemplate having both types of permits I don't think, so the police would probably seize all guns anyway if your LTC was suspended. The rationale being that the law says if an LTC is revoked you have to surrender all guns, and it doesn't have an exception for FID-permitted guns.
Yes, that’s exactly my point.
In Massachusetts a license is required to simply possess a gun, even in your house. The fact that an LTC also allows you to carry doesn’t change that.
You don’t need any permission to own a car, there is no license to do so. You only need a license to drive on public roads.
Just like guns in many states: you don’t need any license to possess guns, only to carry one in public.
Just like a driver’s license, if you lose your CCW permit, you can still keep all your guns.
It's also worth noting, because interfering with a police officer is a common law offense, it has no statutory maximum. So doesn't this conviction (if it stands) make Adams a lifetime federally prohibited person?
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,529
- Likes
- 33,559
Text is more useful than a photo. Tweaks from attorneys welcome.
Remember, the point is not to stop the police (any resistance other than not giving consent will result in very bad juju), but to avoid the usual allegation of "An authorized user of that safe gave us permission so we did not need a warrant. We did not take the guns, they were voluntarily surrendered."
LEGAL NOTICE to POLICE
This safe is the personal property of Robert A. Boudrie. It is not shared property with any other person.
Consent for police entry or search is NOT GRANTED. No person other than Robert A. Boudrie may grant consent to enter, even if such person has the combination to this locked container.
Entry by another person at the request of police to effect constructive entry is also prohibited.
The surrender of the combination in response to a police or court order shall not be considered consent to entry or search of this container.
This notice shall also serve to establish that no “verbal consent”, “implied consent”, or consent based on “power of attorney” shall be valid. Consent must be obtained in writing from Robert A. Boudrie.
This notice shall also apply to any locked gun cases stored in this residence.
6/1/2018
This safe is the personal property of Robert A. Boudrie. It is not shared property with any other person.
Consent for police entry or search is NOT GRANTED. No person other than Robert A. Boudrie may grant consent to enter, even if such person has the combination to this locked container.
Entry by another person at the request of police to effect constructive entry is also prohibited.
The surrender of the combination in response to a police or court order shall not be considered consent to entry or search of this container.
This notice shall also serve to establish that no “verbal consent”, “implied consent”, or consent based on “power of attorney” shall be valid. Consent must be obtained in writing from Robert A. Boudrie.
This notice shall also apply to any locked gun cases stored in this residence.
6/1/2018
then they remove it and "open" it.
hv55maxx
NES Member
got a dremel? engrave it...
rep308
NES Member
These are available from Gun Safe Declaration
Any comments on what significance they would have if needed?
Any comments on what significance they would have if needed?
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,529
- Likes
- 33,559
About the only thing you can hope to accomplish is preventing the state from successfully asserting that you gave consent for entry/search, or that you voluntarily surrendering the contents rather than had them confiscated.
The "explosive material" warning could actually give cause for an exigent basis warrantless entry - public safety, fire code, etc. and defeat the purpose of the warrant required warning.
That warning is lacking in several respects. Here is a better one:
LEGAL NOTICE to POLICE
This safe is the personal property of <name>. It is not shared property with any other person.
Consent for police entry or search is NOT GRANTED. No person other than <name> may grant consent to enter, even if such person has the combination to this locked container.
Entry by another person at the request of police to effect constructive entry is also prohibited.
The surrender of the combination in response to a police or court order shall not be considered consent to entry or search of this container.
This notice shall also serve to establish that no “verbal consent”, “implied consent”, or consent based on “power of attorney” shall be valid. Consent must be obtained in writing from <name>.
This notice shall also apply to any locked gun cases stored in this residence.
This safe is the personal property of <name>. It is not shared property with any other person.
Consent for police entry or search is NOT GRANTED. No person other than <name> may grant consent to enter, even if such person has the combination to this locked container.
Entry by another person at the request of police to effect constructive entry is also prohibited.
The surrender of the combination in response to a police or court order shall not be considered consent to entry or search of this container.
This notice shall also serve to establish that no “verbal consent”, “implied consent”, or consent based on “power of attorney” shall be valid. Consent must be obtained in writing from <name>.
This notice shall also apply to any locked gun cases stored in this residence.
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2016
- Messages
- 382
- Likes
- 341
So, in the situation where your spouse owns some of the content in the safe, would their name also be on it? Does having your pew pews in a Trust change anything (in my case, the Settlors are my wife & I)?
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,529
- Likes
- 33,559
I have more than one safe in my house. The gun safe contains nothing that does not belong exclusively to me.
Chevy 2 65
NES Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,529
- Likes
- 33,559
This kind of puff piece is deliberately misleading advertising. The vendor picks a very dramatic way of attempting a safe opening (explosive, sledgehammer, dropping from a height, etc.) to create the impression "this safe can survive dynamite, it must be impervious". They didn't even use a proper shaped charge on the side or back door (much thinner than the front door)
A more realistic test would be to use a circular saw with an abrasive cutting wheel; an angle grinder; a cement cutting saw; an ITL Autodialer or a Phoenix electronic lock manipulator; a very long lever to try to spring the door; a cutting torch; burning bar or any one of the numerous other options that will open an RSC (residential security container) like a can of sardines. In addition to being more effective, several of these are far more likely in a home burglary than a poorly orchestrated explosive delivery.
A more realistic test would be to use a circular saw with an abrasive cutting wheel; an angle grinder; a cement cutting saw; an ITL Autodialer or a Phoenix electronic lock manipulator; a very long lever to try to spring the door; a cutting torch; burning bar or any one of the numerous other options that will open an RSC (residential security container) like a can of sardines. In addition to being more effective, several of these are far more likely in a home burglary than a poorly orchestrated explosive delivery.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2018
- Messages
- 1,957
- Likes
- 2,528
Sex sells baby !
Chevy 2 65
NES Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,529
- Likes
- 33,559
By you, yes. I suspect the safe company expected people to take it seriously.
