exempt from MA and US laws

I have a question... are you really this lazy that you can't spend 10 minutes to find it yourself?

Excellent point, if I have burning questions, I usually just do a google search and avoid the passive-aggressive police bashing.

Because the AG regs are so poorly written, many dealers will not sell non-compliant firearms even to LEO's, even with a letter from the Chief!
 
They arent exempt, per se, from traffic laws (including DUI)-but there is certainly a "professional discression" that is applied to the situation.....
 
I wonder what would happen if you were a cop and had high capacity guns that were on the list and you said something about a certain Harvard professor in an e-mail that got into the wrong hands and the powers that be fired you. Would they next come after you to collect your illegal guns because you were no longer a LEO? Just imagine if that happened. Its a good thing we have an AG that believes in the constitution.
 
Not "bashing" anybody. Just asking for some simple information, which is actually state law.

I'm not accusing you of bashing anyone [grin]. What I'm saying is that this topic has "locked thread" written all over it, and that not everyone can seem to apply logic to discussions involving the police on internet gun forums.

Another one, anybody know which law exempts police from the ban on carrying in schools?

(FYI, all the bolded parts of my posts in this thread are clickable links to the Massachusetts General Laws website).

Yes, MGL Chapter 269 Section 10j:

(j) Whoever, not being a law enforcement officer, and notwithstanding any license obtained by him under the provisions of chapter one hundred and forty, carries on his person a firearm as hereinafter defined, loaded or unloaded or other dangerous weapon in any building or on the grounds of any elementary or secondary school, college or university without the written authorization of the board or officer in charge of such elementary or secondary school, college or university shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or both. For the purpose of this paragraph, “firearm” shall mean any pistol, revolver, rifle or smoothbore arm from which a shot, bullet or pellet can be discharged by whatever means.

Any officer in charge of an elementary or secondary school, college or university or any faculty member or administrative officer of an elementary or secondary school, college or university failing to report violations of this paragraph shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and punished by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars.

Also, something I didn't expand on before, MGL 140-131m, the Massachusetts version of the Assault Weapons Ban, exempts law enforcement (but only for use with duty weapons, unless they're retired LE), but it doesn't exampt members of the military from posessing post ban equipment, not even when it was issued to them [thinking]:

Chapter 140: Section 131M. Assault weapon or large capacity feeding device not lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994; sale, transfer or possession; punishment


Section 131M. No person shall sell, offer for sale, transfer or possess an assault weapon or a large capacity feeding device that was not otherwise lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994. Whoever not being licensed under the provisions of section 122 violates the provisions of this section shall be punished, for a first offense, by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000 or by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than ten years, or by both such fine and imprisonment, and for a second offense, by a fine of not less than $5,000 nor more than $15,000 or by imprisonment for not less than five years nor more than 15 years, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

The provisions of this section shall not apply to: (i) the possession by a law enforcement officer for purposes of law enforcement; or (ii) the possession by an individual who is retired from service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited from receiving such a weapon or feeding device from such agency upon retirement.

Also, cops can "carry on their badge," even in Mass. without an LTC. If they carry this way, they are exempt from a few more minor areas of Mass. gun laws.

While on duty, cops are exempt from MGL 140-131c, as I quoted before. But if they were "carrying on their badge" without an LTC off duty then the law also wouldn't apply to them:

Chapter 140: Section 131C. Carrying of firearms in a vehicle


Section 131C. (a) No person carrying a loaded firearm under a Class A license issued under section 131 or 131F shall carry the same in a vehicle unless such firearm while carried therein is under the direct control of such person. Whoever violates the provisions of this subsection shall be punished by a fine of $500.

(b) No person carrying a firearm under a Class B license issued under section 131 or 131F shall possess the same in a vehicle unless such weapon is unloaded and contained within the locked trunk of such vehicle or in a locked case or other secure container. Whoever violates the provisions of this subsection shall be punished by a fine of $500.

(c) No person possessing a large capacity rifle or shotgun under a Class A or Class B license issued under section 131 or 131F shall possess the same in a vehicle unless such weapon is unloaded and contained within the locked trunk of such vehicle or in a locked case or other secure container. Whoever violates the provisions of this subsection shall be punished by a fine of not less than $500 nor more than $5,000.

(d) The provisions of this section shall not apply to (i) any officer, agent or employee of the commonwealth or any state or the United States; (ii) any member of the military or other service of any state or of the United States; (iii) any duly authorized law enforcement officer, agent or employee of any municipality of the commonwealth; provided, however, that any such person described in clauses (i) to (iii), inclusive, is authorized by a competent authority to carry or possess the weapon so carried or possessed and is acting within the scope of his duties.

(e) A conviction of a violation of this section shall be reported forthwith by the court or magistrate to the licensing authority who shall immediately revoke the card or license of the person so convicted. No new such card or license may be issued to any such person until one year after the date of revocation.

If a cop were carrying off duty on their badge without an LTC, then they would be exempt from MGL 269-10h, which makes it illegal to carry a gun while under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

Chapter 269: Section 10H. Carrying loaded firearm while under influence of liquor, marijuana, narcotic drugs, depressants or stimulant substances; punishment


Section 10H. Whoever, having in effect a license to carry firearms issued under section 131 or 131F of chapter 140, carries on his person, or has under his control in a vehicle, a loaded firearm, as defined in section 121 of said chapter 140, while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or marijuana, narcotic drugs, depressants or stimulant substances, all as defined in section 1 of chapter 94C, or the vapors of glue shall be punished by a fine of not more than $5,000 or by imprisonment in the house of correction for not more than two and one-half years, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

And finally, if a cop were carrying off duty on the badge without an LTC, they would be exempt from the last part of MGL 140-129C(u):

Any person who, while not being within the limits of his own property or residence, or such person whose property or residence is under lawful search, and who is not exempt under this section, shall on demand of a police officer or other law enforcement officer, exhibit his license to carry firearms, or his firearm identification card or receipt for fee paid for such card, or, after January first, nineteen hundred and seventy, exhibit a valid hunting license issued to him which shall bear the number officially inscribed of such license to carry or card if any. Upon failure to do so such person may be required to surrender to such officer said firearm, rifle or shotgun which shall be taken into custody as under the provisions of section one hundred and twenty-nine D, except that such firearm, rifle or shotgun shall be returned forthwith upon presentation within thirty days of said license to carry firearms, firearm identification card or receipt for fee paid for such card or hunting license as hereinbefore described. Any person subject to the conditions of this paragraph may, even though no firearm, rifle or shotgun was surrendered, be required to produce within thirty days said license to carry firearms, firearm identification card or receipt for fee paid for such card, or said hunting license, failing which the conditions of section one hundred and twenty-nine D will apply. Nothing in this section shall prevent any person from being prosecuted for any violation of this chapter.

So theoretically, a cop carrying off duty on their badge without an LTC in Mass. could do so drunk, with the gun out of their direct control in a vehicle, and not disclose upon demand without breaking any laws or getting the gun taken away.

But, before anyone freaks out, most (if not all) departments require that an officer maintain an LTC, so in real life I doubt this ever happens.

They arent exempt, per se, from traffic laws (including DUI)-but there is certainly a "professional discression" that is applied to the situation.....

I know of way more cops who've been unjustly arrested by other cops than have been let go in Mass. Like anything else that's a coin toss, but with all the inter-agency rivalries and such, cops shouldn't expect to get away with anything.
 
I wonder what would happen if you were a cop and had high capacity guns that were on the list and you said something about a certain Harvard professor in an e-mail that got into the wrong hands and the powers that be fired you. Would they next come after you to collect your illegal guns because you were no longer a LEO? Just imagine if that happened. Its a good thing we have an AG that believes in the constitution.

I don;t know exactly what you're talking about, but I'll take a stab at it.

If the cop had pistols that s/he bought using their LEO ID to exempt them from the AG nonsense, then they would get to keep them if they lost their job (provided their LTC was intact), because the restrictions on handguns in Mass. are on what a dealer can sell, not on what a person can buy FTF or posess. But, if those guns had post-ban high cap mags, or were post-ban configured AR's, AK's, etc., then it would not be legal for a police officer to posess them unless they were for work purposes (which typically means issued to them by their agency). And if they had been issued by the agency, then they would be taken back when they lost their job.

Is that what you were asking?
 
so, if one were in the postion to lets say hypothetically, married to a LEO, what, if any, benefits could one take advantage of under MA law? EG would it help to register all hicap and long guns under their name so new magazines could be owned? etc...
 
so, if one were in the postion to lets say hypothetically, married to a LEO, what, if any, benefits could one take advantage of under MA law? EG would it help to register all hicap and long guns under their name so new magazines could be owned? etc...

There are no advantages, at least not on paper. Those items can only be lawfully possessed by the person with the badge. If that person is not there physically, the other person is then violating the law.


-Mike
 
so, if one were in the postion to lets say hypothetically, married to a LEO, what, if any, benefits could one take advantage of under MA law? EG would it help to register all hicap and long guns under their name so new magazines could be owned? etc...

As the others said, it gives you no legal advantage, since it's illegal to straw purchase a gun no matter who you are, and the Mass. assault weapons/high cap ban exemption only applies to cops with their duty (and sometimes approved off-duty) guns, or guns they're allowed to retire with.

MGL 140-131m

Chapter 140: Section 131M. Assault weapon or large capacity feeding device not lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994; sale, transfer or possession; punishment


Section 131M. No person shall sell, offer for sale, transfer or possess an assault weapon or a large capacity feeding device that was not otherwise lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994. Whoever not being licensed under the provisions of section 122 violates the provisions of this section shall be punished, for a first offense, by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000 or by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than ten years, or by both such fine and imprisonment, and for a second offense, by a fine of not less than $5,000 nor more than $15,000 or by imprisonment for not less than five years nor more than 15 years, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

The provisions of this section shall not apply to: (i) the possession by a law enforcement officer for purposes of law enforcement; or (ii) the possession by an individual who is retired from service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited from receiving such a weapon or feeding device from such agency upon retirement.

Meaning it's still a felony for a cop to have post 94 AWB high cap mags for guns other than work guns.
 
Can a LEO purchase a non MA complient pistol and then transfer it FTF to a regular citizen? For example, a S&W M&P 45c?

Not in quick succession as that is a straw purchase. But if they were to tire of said firearm, then yes they can transfer it via FTF.
 
Not in quick succession as that is a straw purchase. But if they were to tire of said firearm, then yes they can transfer it via FTF.

Not trying to be nitpicky, just trying to help people avoid felony charges...a straw purchase isn't determined by how quickly the gun is resold, it's determined by the intent of the purchaser to buy a gun for someone else that's not a gift. How quickly the gun was resold could be an element in determining whether or not a purchase was a "straw purchase," but it's not the only determining factor.

I say this because it's possible to buy a gun, shoot it that day and hate it beyond belief, especially if it's a painful titanium .357 snub or just a gun that one couldn't hit the side of a barn with for whatever reason.
 
Unless it has changed recently a LEO can get a purchase order or letter authorizing the firearm purchase from his/her department and order it direct from a distributor having it sent, I would imagine to the PD address or possibly even to their own address, completely bypassing any local dealers. I would imagine they are also exempt from the background check using this method.
 
Unless it has changed recently a LEO can get a purchase order or letter authorizing the firearm purchase from his/her department and order it direct from a distributor having it sent, I would imagine to the PD address or possibly even to their own address, completely bypassing any local dealers. I would imagine they are also exempt from the background check using this method.

it would have to be ordered by the agency, not just authorized. And it would be sent to the agency, not the officer's home
 
it would have to be ordered by the agency, not just authorized. And it would be sent to the agency, not the officer's home

It can also be sent to a remote FFL. IIRC there is a provision in US code that allows for this- eg, a LEO in some other state can obtain a handgun from an FFL on "official business" even if that
state is not his state of residence. I imagine this is rarely done, though.

-Mike
 
It can also be sent to a remote FFL. IIRC there is a provision in US code that allows for this- eg, a LEO in some other state can obtain a handgun from an FFL on "official business" even if that
state is not his state of residence. I imagine this is rarely done, though.

-Mike

Yup, agency purchases can be made at any FFL, including handguns.
 
Leo are just exempt from the ag regs if the firearm is on the eops list and there useing it in the corse of there employment

Here lies the perfect reason to get your idiotic approved gun list removed. If there were any smart lawyers in the state of Ma. they would use the argument "if it is good enough for the police,it should be good enough for the citizens".
 
Back
Top Bottom