-
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.
hi capacity magazines
- Thread starter chindogg
- Start date
MisterHappy
NES Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,411
- Likes
- 17,599
if you were innocent, you would not have been charged.
![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
dcmdon
NES Member
Its actually worse. If someone gets a restraining order against you, you lose your 2a rights. The threshold of evidence necessary to get a restraining order is very low. Because in most cases, granting it imposes no real hardship on the subject of the order. The attitude is typically "why not? Whats the harm? If he's a good guy, its minimally invasive, and if he's a bad guy it will give us legal leverage."
I remember in a couple of cases in CT, a cop's estranged wife got a restrainig order against him while in the process of divorcing him. He was harassing her and her new boyfriend. The PD made the case that the restraining order should not be granted because it would prohibit him from carrying off duty.
It didn't fly with the judge. The cop could work, but had to leave his firearm at the station. ugh.
In CT at least, you can have a friend or relative come over and do a massive transfer all in one day. In MA, you're limited to 4 f2f transfers per year.
This is another area where a revocable trust set up for the ownership of firearms is useful. If the firearms are owned by a trust, you simply add a person as a trustee to the trust and bring the guns to their house. Very simple and the firearms ownership never transfers.
I remember in a couple of cases in CT, a cop's estranged wife got a restrainig order against him while in the process of divorcing him. He was harassing her and her new boyfriend. The PD made the case that the restraining order should not be granted because it would prohibit him from carrying off duty.
It didn't fly with the judge. The cop could work, but had to leave his firearm at the station. ugh.
In CT at least, you can have a friend or relative come over and do a massive transfer all in one day. In MA, you're limited to 4 f2f transfers per year.
This is another area where a revocable trust set up for the ownership of firearms is useful. If the firearms are owned by a trust, you simply add a person as a trustee to the trust and bring the guns to their house. Very simple and the firearms ownership never transfers.
Oftentimes you have no warning . . . and that is intentional for many reasons.
dcmdon
NES Member
So here is an interesting hedge. I was just reading that there is no reason you can't have a FID and a LTC. Since the FID is shall-issue, as long as you are not prohibited, it could provide you with a legal hedge if you were ever charged with anything that would allow your CLEO to pull your LTC, but would not make you prohibited.
Does that make any sense?
Does that make any sense?
Some PDs will not issue both if you have the other, but there is nothing stopping you in the law from having both.
That said, an FID is pretty much worthless (it only covers fudd guns, basically, low capacity rifles, shotguns, ammunition, and mace) and it won't stop you from getting cleaned out, either, if the PD is thuggish. Better than nothing though. At least if they cleaned you out and you still had an FID, you could at least go out and get a shotgun and some shells for HD.
ETA: Also, in that thread that Eisenhow just posted, there are ruminations that some PDs unlawfully axe both, either. I have also heard indirectly of a case where some kid had extortion committed against him. He left a pump shotgun on his car after hunting, and forgot about it. He drove down the road and the gun fell off the car and he didn't know about it. They never found it. He reported it to the PD and basically the chief said "Surrender your FID or I will charge you with unsafe storage".
-Mike
Last edited:
MisterHappy
NES Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,411
- Likes
- 17,599
But if the shottie had a trigger lock when it was lost, that would meet the letter of the law, right?
[sarcastic laugh smiley]
Yeah, I know it wouldn't work out that way.
[sarcastic laugh smiley]
Yeah, I know it wouldn't work out that way.
A few questions on new Hicaps in MA (instead of starting a new thread)
1. Are LEOs allowed to purchase new Hicaps for any and all guns they own, even if not used for duty?
2. If the answer to #1 is yes, are they required to turn them in when they retire or change professions?
1. Are LEOs allowed to purchase new Hicaps for any and all guns they own, even if not used for duty?
2. If the answer to #1 is yes, are they required to turn them in when they retire or change professions?
1. No
2. Yes
2. Yes
Thank you.
yanici
NES Member
I would bet that a lot of them are unintentionally violating this law, just as many "good for life" FID holders don't know that their FIDs have expired.
FIFY in accordance to many discussions that I've had with officers/chiefs.
Per EOPS, they aren't supposed to arrive to their shift/detail or leave the station with the hi-caps! To a man, every officer I've asked about this has some very choice words for those in higher power (state) about what they can do with their "interpretation" of MGL.
dcmdon
NES Member
And if they are ever caught with one, whether currently employed or retired, they will of course be given a professional courtesy and left alone.
Don
Maybe, maybe not. Didn't LenS say that EOPS was looking for some scalps?
EOPS is but most line officers are not looking to jack a fellow officer/retiree up unless the person acts like an a-hole.
dcmdon
NES Member
Exactly. Its part of the subtle culture of corruption among most LEOs. Even good ones. Even friends of ours.
Nearly all expect a little extra "professional courtesy" when it comes to essentially victim-less crimes. These include
1) speeding when no accident is involved
2) DUI within reason, when there isn't an accident
2.5) General disregard for most traffic and parking laws.
3) possession of standard capacity mags.
4) a little extra resistance if an estranged wife/gf is pushing for a restraining order. (In CT, if the officer has a restraining order against him, he must stow his sidearm at the PD at the end of his shift) or if the officer is involved in a domestic dispute without injury.
The list goes on. Its subtle. Most of us would probably fall into it if given the opportunity. But make no mistake, it is a form of corruption.
Don
Nearly all expect a little extra "professional courtesy" when it comes to essentially victim-less crimes. These include
1) speeding when no accident is involved
2) DUI within reason, when there isn't an accident
2.5) General disregard for most traffic and parking laws.
3) possession of standard capacity mags.
4) a little extra resistance if an estranged wife/gf is pushing for a restraining order. (In CT, if the officer has a restraining order against him, he must stow his sidearm at the PD at the end of his shift) or if the officer is involved in a domestic dispute without injury.
The list goes on. Its subtle. Most of us would probably fall into it if given the opportunity. But make no mistake, it is a form of corruption.
Don
