Hells Angels member arrested carrying loaded gun without a license

Status
Not open for further replies.
and go figure, if he was riding in VT and got pulled over he would have done nothing wrong because VT does not have a handgun restriction at all.

I have always wondered how states can be so far off from each other. MA is just plain stupid. I was reading an artice yesterday that stated that MA has the highest crime in the northeast. Why is this? I think we all could take a few stabs at that answer and be pretty darn close and accurate.
I am not defending the Hells Angle rider at all I am just saying that MA's stupid laws dont solve anything. Especially crime.

again not news to any of us.


Rob
 
Last edited:
ateamrob, carrying concealed is illegal in most states. There are ony 3 or 4 which allow it. He is a resident of Mass so he should know mass law.
Click to expand...
I am aware of this dhuze. And you right he should know the law. I am just amazed at how some states (the 3 or 4 you mention) can be so far off in their veiws of what is right and wrong.

But I will tell you as a pro gun cop myself..... carrying concealed should be legal in all 50 states and no permit should be required. That is how our 2nd Ammendment (Civil Rights) were supposed to be. If it was that way crime would not be as prominent as it is today. Again this is not news to any of us.

that is one reason why going to San Fran back in Sept to the 2nd Ammendment foundation conference was a benificial trip. They show you exactly how the Government looks at things and plots to disarm us and keep us under finger with foolish, over the top licensing requirements. They show you their techniques and why they are effective. The good news is they also show you how to fight back using their logic. Case in point, when you say, "your infringing on civil rights" they dont know how to respond to that because they have for so many years not thought of the 2nd ammendment as a civil right. Again, I like the 2nd Ammendment foundation because they practice effective, nerve pinching techniques that just may work moving forward.

anyways back to the Hells Angles rider. Yes he should have known the law and had a license but still amazed at how VT feels nothing is required. They must be doing something right. VT crime is nowhere near where MA is. No there is no Boston in VT but there is Montpeillier and Burlington.

Rob
 
Last edited:
dhuze said:
ateamrob, carrying concealed[edit]WITHOUT A PERMIT[/edit] is illegal in most states. There are ony 3 or 4 which allow it. He is a resident of Mass so he should know mass law.
Click to expand...

FIFY - Only VT, AK, and AZ allow concealed carry without a license (I believe)

And you are correct. He should have known MA law, regardless of how stupid the laws are here.
 
Emoto said:
I don't follow your argument. What would his defense be, and why?
Click to expand...

In MA, he'll lose, but he can appeal to the higher courts at the federal level. If he was denied on suitability alone (ie: he is not a federally prohibited person), then we might have a chance to show that the whole "suitability" issue is unconstitutional, and he might walk. Might.
 
MARLBOROUGH —
Police said a Marlborough man identified in court records as a member of the Hells Angels was wearing an unlicensed, loaded .40-caliber handgun in a shoulder holster when an officer patted him down after a traffic stop Thursday night.
Click to expand...

What is it that EC says about the .40 ?

Headscratch.gif
 
william_munny said:
In MA, he'll lose, but he can appeal to the higher courts at the federal level. If he was denied on suitability alone (ie: he is not a federally prohibited person), then we might have a chance to show that the whole "suitability" issue is unconstitutional, and he might walk. Might.
Click to expand...

I seriously doubt he could fight the suitability issue anyway, since he is a member of a known criminal organization. If he was just an average citizen who was denied because he happened to live in a red town, that would be one thing, but I think it would be HIGHLY unlikely that any member of the Angels would not have at least one felony conviction on their record. In fact, from my understanding it is a pre-requisite for belonging to that club.
 
In north shore mass where I am and other northern parts of mass that I have been too they are around... I went to a black label society concert 6 years ago or so on Landsdown St in Boston and the HA's were working security for the event. But that was 6 long years ago.

They are actually the only "outlaws" I believe that are actually legally trademarked and incorporated. That being said outlaws don't care about laws....hence "out"laws...which really makes the whole Hells Angels INC [devil2] really strange. Legal "outlaws" ??? [banghead]

What is a "unlicensed firearm" I always see this term and "unregistered gun" used in the media all the time. Do they mean he was unlicensed there for so is the gun? It creates this misconception that there is this huge DMV like Dept of Firearms like they do vehicles.

Either way, don't these guys usually carry ball peen hammers cause its legal to be in possession of them?
 
Terminator03 said:
I seriously doubt he could fight the suitability issue anyway, since he is a member of a known criminal organization. If he was just an average citizen who was denied because he happened to live in a red town, that would be one thing, but I think it would be HIGHLY unlikely that any member of the Angels would not have at least one felony conviction on their record. In fact, from my understanding it is a pre-requisite for belonging to that club.
Click to expand...

MANY newer Hells Angels have no criminal records or are successful self employed tradesmen and small business owners. These members typically employ other members in their businesses. Check out the number of crew cut "clean" newer members during a run. The club is trying to go "legit" somewhat as the trademarked name and the sales of merchandise actually net them millions throughout the country at this point. I have no love for the HA but I agree that the simple act of carrying a gun should not be a crime. He uses it in the commission of a crime plug in an additional 20 years.
 
01SVTvert said:
Check out the number of crew cut "clean" newer members during a run. The club is trying to go "legit" somewhat as the trademarked name and the sales of merchandise actually net them millions throughout the country at this point.
Click to expand...

Do you really believe that drivel that you posted? They are simply trying to look more "mainstream" so as to infiltrate more businesses/targets of opportunities and draw less attention to themselves when not on "runs".
 
Terminator03 said:
I seriously doubt he could fight the suitability issue anyway, since he is a member of a known criminal organization. If he was just an average citizen who was denied because he happened to live in a red town, that would be one thing, but I think it would be HIGHLY unlikely that any member of the Angels would not have at least one felony conviction on their record. In fact, from my understanding it is a pre-requisite for belonging to that club.
Click to expand...

I've tried that argument before, but it doesn't hold much water if you stop and actually think about it. What is a "known criminal"? If he's a dangerous person unworthy of self defense, then why is he free to roam the general public? TomH will be along shortly to hand you your ass. [laugh] [wink] As far as the club prerequisite, I would think that it's a crime that most gangs are looking for to determine membership, not a felony conviction. And as someone else has already pointed out, a lot of them are actually clean now. It's possible that the Hell's Angels are more of a brand name at this point than the are an actual "gang". If the guy in this case actually is a federally prohibited person, then that's the end of the story - he has no hope here. That's probably also the case if he was never arbitrarily denied (ie: never applied for an LTC).
 
Emoto said:
I don't follow your argument. What would his defense be, and why?
Click to expand...

If suitability is ruled unconstitutional (and a right to carry case were to be affirmed), he could argue that the states prohibition on him was therefore unconstitutional. So then the state would lose the option to punish him for simple possession. That said, he would have had to have actually been denied on suitability as unlike in DC, the vast majority of permits here are actually granted. You have to show that you at least tried here. I would really hate for this guy to be a right to carry case though.

Half Cocked said:
Ummm......... maybe he is a prohibited person and it is a moot point......[rolleyes]
Click to expand...

May very well be the case.
 
Is being nervous probable cause?
I always consider all "outlaw" bikers armed when they are wearing their colors. This summer I saw Angels, Outlaws, Exiles, and Iron Horseman in Maine.
 
pc.geek said:
Is being nervous probable cause?
I always consider all "outlaw" bikers armed when they are wearing their colors. This summer I saw Angels, Outlaws, Exiles, and Iron Horseman in Maine.
Click to expand...

Terry doesn't require PC for arrest. The cop mentioned the nervousness to justify the terry stop if anyone questioned it. But that gets me thinking... Interesting thing about this is carrying a firearm is presumptively legal (providing a right to carry which has not been recognized yet). Technically, forcing someone to provide a license (and their subsequent failure to do so) is forcing them to provide evidence against themselves... I don't know what the rules are for using evidence gained via terry stops is but I do know that they can only inspect pocket contents if the contents clearly feel to the officer to be of a shape indicative of a weapon or other known contraband (crack pipe). Once carrying of arms is presumptively legal, there is an opening here to say that forcing one to provide a license is a 5th amendment violation.

This fits with the stated purpose of a terry stop. It was solely for officer safety. All that is justified for that end is seizing of the firearm and handing it back at the end of the stop. The presence or absence of a license is not indicative of dangerousness (so says our very own SJC... [grin]). Since it was decided, Terry has otherwise been abused as a means of gaining PC and evidence where none was available without it. Anything to pull that back would be a positive step.
 
william_munny said:
I've tried that argument before, but it doesn't hold much water if you stop and actually think about it. What is a "known criminal"? If he's a dangerous person unworthy of self defense, then why is he free to roam the general public? TomH will be along shortly to hand you your ass. [laugh] [wink] As far as the club prerequisite, I would think that it's a crime that most gangs are looking for to determine membership, not a felony conviction. And as someone else has already pointed out, a lot of them are actually clean now. It's possible that the Hell's Angels are more of a brand name at this point than the are an actual "gang". If the guy in this case actually is a federally prohibited person, then that's the end of the story - he has no hope here. That's probably also the case if he was never arbitrarily denied (ie: never applied for an LTC).
Click to expand...

974094790_Pw6TK-L.jpg
 
Half Cocked said:
Do you really believe that drivel that you posted? They are simply trying to look more "mainstream" so as to infiltrate more businesses/targets of opportunities and draw less attention to themselves when not on "runs".
Click to expand...

Drivel? Read again and look at the the quotes around legit. Read some of the books on them. One even mentions the inordinate amount of time the club meetings discussed merchandising and fighting over the profits from such. This was from a wiretap IIRC and occurred during a undercover operation on them.

What I am saying is that the actual old school dirtbag skinny biker with long hair and a beard is going away. Considering how mainstream tattoos are now they are becoming a moot point. Multi million dollar law firm on retainer for trademark issues and other club "business" is now the norm for some of the biggest chapters. HA will always be a criminal enterprise to me. Again, having "clean" members as part of the club is an attempt in my mind to lay it out as "legit" so they can beat RICO statues.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

MA Law: carrying a gun where animals may be present
2
Replies
56
Views
2K
MisterHappy
MisterHappy
New member
2 3
Replies
64
Views
910
Canndo
Canndo
Arrested for having a Starter set
2
Replies
34
Views
1K
Thirwell1216
Thirwell1216
  • Locked
Massachusetts man arrested for possessing firearms, std-cap mags without an LTC
Replies
5
Views
449
jkelly1229
J
Hell's Angels raided in California
3 4 5
Replies
144
Views
5K
cams
cams
Back
Top Bottom