Gun Confiscation Begins In Massachusetts

[namedpipes]

Is there case law that clarifies whether possession (in this case) means "actual/physical" possession or includes "constructive" possession (because you could drive to another state where you are licensed and take actual possession)?

And doesn't this effectively impose MA law on other states?

And what about those with dual residency?

 

[Rob Boudrie]

It would be interesting to argue that disclosing a location and derivative info therefrom cannot be used against one because of the protection against self-incrimination combined with mandatory non-silence (if, for example, a gun is not legal in the DPRM and discovered because the subject disclosed the location to avoid being criminally charged).

 

[HuntMaine]

WTF. Guess it’s time he get a good lawyer

 

[namedpipes]

It would be interesting to argue that disclosing a location and derivative info therefrom cannot be used against one because of the protection against self-incrimination combined with mandatory non-silence (if, for example, a gun is not legal in the DPRM and discovered because the subject disclosed the location to avoid being criminally charged).

Kind of diabolical. I like it.

 

[Boris]

Is there case law that clarifies whether possession (in this case) means "actual/physical" possession or includes "constructive" possession (because you could drive to another state where you are licensed and take actual possession)?

And doesn't this effectively impose MA law on other states?

And what about those with dual residency?

I think that residency you need is of a country without extradition treaty to the US of A

 

[CCW]

Good lord you are a huge faggot.

I don’t think I’ve heard someone throw that insult out there since maybe third grade. Just like the typical little baby bully on the playground. I am a huge pile of sticks? Pretty funny how these brave heroes such as yourself are triggered by mere words. What hurts you the most is the words are the truth and you know it.

 

[cpt_en]

In my case, my license was not suspended or revoked. I was not handed a C. 209A/ERPO or any other paperwork. So I don't think I was required by law to tell them anything. Also, I think laws requiring to tell authorities anything could be challenged in court as a violation of your 5th amendment rights.

 

[Matt_SERE]

In my case, my license was not suspended or revoked. I was not handed a C. 209A/ERPO or any other paperwork. So I don't think I was required by law to tell them anything. Also, I think laws requiring to tell authorities anything could be challenged in court as a violation of your 5th amendment rights.

Godfrey v. Wellesley, MA appellate court 1993

Here is an easier to read summary than the usual legalese.

Godfrey v. Chief of Police of Wellesley

Godfrey v. Chief of Police of Wellesley - 35 Mass. App. Ct. 42, 616 N.E.2d 485

law.justia.com

The District Court record shows that Godfrey, in the face of what the chief reasonably deemed to be a continuing and *48 serious danger to the safety of the public, especially young children, refused to cooperate with the police investigation and respond to questions. Although Godfrey might have been well within his rights in declining to answer, and although he might be entitled to some remedy upon proof of his claim that the revocation was "in retaliation" for his assertion of his rights, cf. Rzeznik v. Chief of Police of Southampton, 374 Mass. 475, 484-486 (1978), that remedy is not reinstatement of his firearms license. The record shows that Godfrey did not sustain his burden of showing that the chief's decision was arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion.

Judgment affirmed.

 

[amm5061]

In my case, my license was not suspended or revoked. I was not handed a C. 209A/ERPO or any other paperwork. So I don't think I was required by law to tell them anything. Also, I think laws requiring to tell authorities anything could be challenged in court as a violation of your 5th amendment rights.

Here is an easier to read summary than the usual legalese.

Godfrey v. Chief of Police of Wellesley

Godfrey v. Chief of Police of Wellesley - 35 Mass. App. Ct. 42, 616 N.E.2d 485

law.justia.com

The District Court record shows that Godfrey, in the face of what the chief reasonably deemed to be a continuing and *48 serious danger to the safety of the public, especially young children, refused to cooperate with the police investigation and respond to questions. Although Godfrey might have been well within his rights in declining to answer, and although he might be entitled to some remedy upon proof of his claim that the revocation was "in retaliation" for his assertion of his rights, cf. Rzeznik v. Chief of Police of Southampton, 374 Mass. 475, 484-486 (1978), that remedy is not reinstatement of his firearms license. The record shows that Godfrey did not sustain his burden of showing that the chief's decision was arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion.

Judgment affirmed.

Like I said, you give up your 5th amendment rights by owning firearms in this state. Welcome to the Commiewealth comrade.

 

[Prepper]

I see.

Or should I say EYE see.

General Law - Part IV, Title I, Chapter 269, Section 10

malegislature.gov

(i) Whoever knowingly fails to deliver or surrender a revoked or suspended license to carry or possess firearms or machine guns issued under the provisions of section one hundred and thirty-one or one hundred and thirty-one F of chapter one hundred and forty, or firearm identification card, or receipt for the fee for such card, or a firearm, rifle, shotgun or machine gun, as provided in section one hundred and twenty-nine D of chapter one hundred and forty, unless an appeal is pending, shall be punished by imprisonment in a jail or house of correction for not more than two and one-half years or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars.

Section 10(i) is distinct from Section 10 I.

What kind of a frigging moron wrote this sewage?

Still, parsed...

(i) Whoever knowingly fails to deliver or surrender a revoked or suspended license to carry or possess firearms or machine guns issued under the provisions of section one hundred and thirty-one or one hundred and thirty-one F of chapter one hundred and forty, or firearm identification card, or receipt for the fee for such card, or a firearm, rifle, shotgun or machine gun, as provided in section one hundred and twenty-nine D of chapter one hundred and forty, unless an appeal is pending, shall be punished by imprisonment in a jail or house of correction for not more than two and one-half years or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars.


Section 129D. Upon revocation, suspension or denial of an application for a firearm identification card pursuant to section 129B or for any firearms license if the firearm identification card is not then in force or for any machine gun license, the person whose application was so revoked, suspended or denied shall without delay deliver or surrender to the licensing authority where the person resides all firearms, rifles, shotguns and machine guns and ammunition which the person then possesses unless an appeal of the revocation or suspension is pending. The person or the person's legal representative shall have the right, at any time up to 1 year after the delivery or surrender, to transfer the firearms, rifles, shotguns and machine guns and ammunition to any licensed dealer or any other person legally permitted to purchase or take possession of the firearms, rifles, shotguns and machine guns and ammunition and,
...

Without parsing 129B, then this only applies to FIDs, not LTCs.

If that's not correct after all, it all hangs on the meaning of the word "possesses". Where's Bill Clinton's lawyer?

Legal Definition of Possession

The Legal Term * Possession * Defined & Explained

www.lectlaw.com

POSSESSION

I can't make sense of that. It looks like it is saying you have to surrender the FID or LTC itself, not the actual firearms. But that is such a huge run on sentence with endless commas and prepositions that my 5th grade teacher would have dropped dead on the spot had she seen it.

 

[Deleted member 12999]

I don’t think I’ve heard someone throw that insult out there since maybe third grade. Just like the typical little baby bully on the playground. I am a huge pile of sticks? Pretty funny how these brave heroes such as yourself are triggered by mere words. What hurts you the most is the words are the truth and you know it.

Lol... no... not even close. Maybe some day I'll meet you at an NES event. I won't have any badge or gun, and you can say whatever words you want.

You run your mouth here like the most cliche keyboard warrior. It's laughable.

 

[AntiHippie]

Lol... no... not even close. Maybe some day I'll meet you at an NES event. I won't have any badge or gun, and you can say whatever words you want.

You run your mouth here like the most cliche keyboard warrior. It's laughable.

It’s usually the same people that whine about all gun owners being painted with the same broad brush that don’t hesitate to swipe that same broad brush from behind their keyboard...yet if you hear of a bank teller getting DUI’d, you won’t see the rants about all bankers being alcoholics. Guy that runs the asphalt machine fixing my street shoplifts a pair of jeans, you won’t see anyone wailing and gnashing over heavy equipment operators all being thieves.

Hypocrites gonna hypocrite. Is what it is on the internet.

 

[namedpipes]

I can't make sense of that. It looks like it is saying you have to surrender the FID or LTC itself, not the actual firearms. But that is such a huge run on sentence with endless commas and prepositions that my 5th grade teacher would have dropped dead on the spot had she seen it.

If you stick to bold words you can "sorta" see what they're getting at. Basically, if they revoke you, you must turn in your ltc/fid and any firearms THAT YOU "THEN" POSSESS.

To me, that means "actual" possession. As in, on your person or maybe even in your home or the state. You aren't in actual possession of firearms stored in another state and if you maintain legality THERE, there is no reason for those to be subject to MA seizure.

To your point, law makers are blithering idiots, yes.

 

[namedpipes]

In my case, my license was not suspended or revoked. I was not handed a C. 209A/ERPO or any other paperwork. So I don't think I was required by law to tell them anything. Also, I think laws requiring to tell authorities anything could be challenged in court as a violation of your 5th amendment rights.

It sounds like they hassled you prior to revoking the ltc but they must have eventually revoke it. Once they DID, then yeah, as the law is written, you'd have to turn over the ltc/fid and any guns (at least any in the state). You definitely had the right to require them to be turned over to someone for safekeeping.

You probably have a case against them for harassment but seizing the guns was "probably" legal. Not moral, ethical or just, but legal. (I'm not a lawyer, just spouting my opinion like everyone else)

 

[Boston4567]

MGL C. 269 S. 10(i)

ONLY requires you to tell where they are (if not in your possession at the time) if LTC/FID suspended/revoked or C. 209A/ERPO is handed to you. LE (DAs and judges) interpret this to mean that if you don't tell them where the items can be found is the same as refusing to hand them over and a separate felony.

My plan if I get the feeling something might go wrong with my MA license is pretty simple. I'll drive 30 minutes up to Nashua with all my guns, rent a storage unit, and leave them there. If the cops come I'll tell them exactly where they are and they won't be able to do anything about it.

Any flaws in that plan?

 

[CCW]

Lol... no... not even close. Maybe some day I'll meet you at an NES event. I won't have any badge or gun, and you can say whatever words you want.

You run your mouth here like the most cliche keyboard warrior. It's laughable.

I look forward to it. Would you "handle things like a man" or would you get my plate number from the parking lot and handle things like a butt hurt bully? That's rhetorical BTW....

 

[Len-2A Training]

My plan if I get the feeling something might go wrong with my MA license is pretty simple. I'll drive 30 minutes up to Nashua with all my guns, rent a storage unit, and leave them there. If the cops come I'll tell them exactly where they are and they won't be able to do anything about it.

Any flaws in that plan?

As I teach in my "Mass Gun Law Seminar by and for Non-Lawyers", a guy knew that his wife was about to pull a 209A in their divorce action, so he put all his guns in storage in Manchester, NH. When they served him with the 209A, he told the police where the guns were and they contacted Manchester PD who retrieved the guns from the storage unit.

Keep in mind that the MA 209A is the Mass version of the US law called the Frank Lautenberg Act which REQUIRES PD confiscation of guns when a domestic violence order is issued. So that is true in all 50 states and possessions.

Major differences however:
- No bonded warehouses in NH, so guns are stored by PD.
- When RO expires (or judge rules it void), NH PDs will return your guns. In MA it is "discretionary" for the LTC/FID to be returned and if not, they won't give you your guns (assuming they already haven't been shipped to a bonded warehouse).

If the LTC/FID is taken for any other reason other than the DV RO or being charged with a felony (that makes you a PP), the NH PDs likely would not confiscate the guns stored there, unlike MA!

 

[Valkyrie 3]

I’ve never bought in NH. It’s only a matter of time before I get a place in NH. All my stuff is from mass on fa10

Once you get A NH property, you’ll be all set. Some NH FFLs like maybe Shooters Outpost** tend to actually understand the law and qualifications for residency as defined by the ATF. Be prepared to produce your property tax statement and two utility bills for your NH property.

 

[SgtHal75]

Once you get A NH property, you’ll be all set. Some NH FFLs like maybe Shooters Outpost** tend to actually understand the law and qualifications for residency as defined by the ATF. Be prepared to produce your property tax statement and two utility bills for your NH property.

Thank u brother! What if it’s just land with a cabin on it and no utilities?????

 

[clampett]

Thank u brother! What if it’s just land with a cabin on it and no utilities?????

Maybe you could purchase a 100lb propane cylinder,have it filled and save the receipt. Also if you showed them a receipt for a couple of solar panels, charge controller and battery it might meet the ATF requirement.

 

[SgtHal75]

Maybe you could purchase a 100lb propane cylinder,have it filled and save the receipt. Also if you showed them a receipt for a couple of solar panels, charge controller and battery it might meet the ATF requirement.

I am putting in a well and septic in the future, I think that meets there requirement.

 

[Chevy 2 65]

Regardless of whether initially this guy was being a clown, I hope he is lawyering up, it would be nice if he really is squeaky clean.

That squeaky clean record BS needs to be tossed