J
Jose
OH +1
-
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.
If you shot a home invader, would the police confiscate the gun used in the shooting?
- Thread starter italianppf2
- Start date
OH +1
I'd like (maybe a poor choice of words) to see a test case where a husband has an LTC, is away on business and the wife shoots a home invader while defending a child.
The liberal government and media will have quite the conundrum between the use of a gun and women's rights.
Paul. the guns would be long gone, held for ransom by the bonded warehouse with a take it or leave it policy.
The PD just washes their hands. No "I'm sorry" and no Vaseline either.
The PD just washes their hands. No "I'm sorry" and no Vaseline either.
There was the woman in Arlington who shot the home intruder in the neck. She was arrested. She wasn't charged. At one point, the police chief was going to revoke her LTC.
No they won't... the liberal DA will quietly ignore the violations and make the case disappear, or the grand jury will refuse to indict, and that'll be the end of it. There will be no test case because it'll never make it to trial.
Like I mentioned in the other thread, a handicapped woman with a target only permit in NYC shot a mugger. It's impossible for her to have been storing her handgun legally at the time locked in a case as required by NYC law for people with target permits..... she was obviously carrying in an illegal mode, but the DA basically ignored it and didn't attempt prosecuting her for the violation because of the obvious political overtones of doing so.
Women (especially ones protecting children) elderly, infirm, etc, often get a "political free lunch" even in the worst anti gun locales in the country. Plain old males on the other hand... forget it, they get out the rotisserie and basically try to jam it straight up our backsides, so they can roast us on a spit.
It would have to be a really bad shoot before a woman in that circumstance (protecting a child) would get prosecuted.
-Mike
Last edited:
It wouldn't mean !@$!. The law wouldn't be changed as a result.
![[horse]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/026.gif "Beat a dead horse [horse]")
This whole thread.
Seriously.
![[thinking]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/010.gif "Thinking [thinking]")
No kidding... what a CF. Do some of you actually believe the drivel you're posting? I see some bits of decent info hidden in the mess at least...
This past election shows how much NH is just like MA.
![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
I can't stand when people call NH 'North Mass'. Our election went all R across the board (with the exception of Governor). How did you guys make out? Oh and our Governor would be considered a conservative in MA.
The the OP, self defense isn't codified into law in Mass., so everything is handled on a case by case basis.
As of 2009 this info is still current. Some chiefs will also ignore court orders; instead of apealing it themselves, the gun owner has to pay out to push things forward, which is exhausting and painfully expensive.
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vb...00-for-the-good-guy-***UPDATE***-Wilbraham-MA
A castle law isn't enough, although it's a good start. Use of force needs to be clearly laid out by the legislature so that there is one uniform standard.
As of 2009 this info is still current. Some chiefs will also ignore court orders; instead of apealing it themselves, the gun owner has to pay out to push things forward, which is exhausting and painfully expensive.
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vb...00-for-the-good-guy-***UPDATE***-Wilbraham-MA
A castle law isn't enough, although it's a good start. Use of force needs to be clearly laid out by the legislature so that there is one uniform standard.
Last edited:
seriously, why not?
why would they take all of your guns? a man breaks into your home, you are forced to use deadly force to protect you and your family. you have a class a, b or fid card. what right does the police have to take them all?????????? makes no sense...
Now you are beginning to understand MA gun laws.
Hey TomH I have questions. there are decent people on this forum who have good answers. "drivel" screw u pal.
The answers to these questions and the entire conversation (minus the pissing match) has already been hashed out ad nauseum on the forum. The state of affairs in MA is quite simple, you can have your license suspended at any time for any reason, which necessitates immediately delivering your firearms to your local COP. Most likely your suspension/revocation will be delivered by a large number of officers at your home, requesting to search your home for firearms. You say no... bye bye license for good, and they will come back with a warrant. Then you may get charged on a storage violation, when they find your nightstand pistol unsecured. Then you may get charged on an AWB or highcap violation, when they find your AK/AR/etc. collection. In the near future though, you're a newbie dude, "screw you" is definitely not the way to make friends and influence people.
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2008
- Messages
- 3,435
- Likes
- 401
Yes..... it would be evidence
The arrest would be dependent upon the circumstances and whether or not the homeowner gave a statement indicating self defense and whether the evidence supported such.
Surprisingly good news
Hingham District Court
The Patriot Ledger
Posted Oct 10, 2008 @ 12:01 PM
More to the story of his acquittal here:
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-19296498.html
![[bs2]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/047.gif "BS2 [bs2]")
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2009
- Messages
- 4,908
- Likes
- 2,902
Only surprising to the folks that read this forum! In this thread alone there were numerous posts about arrests and confiscation with no basis in fact. Halfcocked gave the best and most likely correct answer. "it depends". Ask anybody on the street. Even many of the moon bats understand that shooting a home invader is not a crime. They may not like it but they aren't going to try and jail you.
Of course if your walls are adorned with posters of guns and catchy quotes like 'kill em all. Let god sort them out" then All I can say is good luck.
Two things.
One, when you reply to someone, click the "reply with quote" option instead of "reply." It's very difficult to understand who you're responding to when you post the way that you do, since we don't know who you're talking to unless you mention usernames. You can also use the multi-quote feature to quote several posts at a time, that option is located to the right of "reply with quote."
Two, play nice. You've started a ton of threads that border on the nonsensical, similar to other threads that get posted every 3-4 weeks.
Here's a real life example from Boston where the guy wasn't arrested despite not having any license for the gun, although he didn't pull the trigger.
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vb...ed-Boston-apartment-dweller-confronts-burglar
I was stunned to read how that guy's situation turned out.
Good for him. I wonder if he'll still be "unsuitable" for an LTC, although FID seems to cover his gun of choice.
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
Bill Nance
Banned
Again, this is only true if you live in a commie state like Mass. It's wildly inaucurate if you live anywhere else. (Except maybe NY/NJ?) Most places will only take a gun if it's uncertain that the shoot was justifiable. And even in that eventuality it's only the GUN THAT WAS USED that would be taken (temporarily, and I'm talking days, not weeks) before being given back to the owner.
In Mass on the other hand, you can count on your LTC being suspended, all your guns being taken and maybe NEVER getting them back.
Bottom line? If you live in Mass. and value your human right of self defense, MOVE. Most of the rest of the country doesn't operate that way.
I don't really care what the law is, if someone is going to harm my family, they are going down. If someone breaks in (hopefully the alarm is blaring at that point) and want to make off with a flat screen, so be it. I'm not about to shoot someone for a TV. My family is a different story.
Jamie
NES Member
Anything posted by italianppf2.
Seriously.
Fixed that for ya, Kev.
Really, this has been rehashed over and over.
I will defend myself and my Loved Ones, I'll worry about it later.
Anyone that does less is a sheep.
![[hmmm]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/009.gif "Hmm [hmmm]")
Exactly, and he has been informed before to search. He simply chooses to pad his post count with drivel.
You actually live in Massachusetts and took the time to type this out? Wow.
That kind of response probably won't get you very far. You are a guest here, play nice.
Well said Joe. (This guy is a lawyer specializing in firearms law, pay attention to this free advice before you end up having to pay for it.)
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2009
- Messages
- 4,908
- Likes
- 2,902
So of all the cases in MA that you've researched what percentage of home invasion shootings have resulted in a suspended LTC, criminal charges against the homeowner and seized gun collections? Break them down for us if you would.
I wasn't refering to you or your questions. I was refering to the over the top, tinfoil responses.
+1 for the good guys.
The rest of this thread is
IBTL
My point exactly. Lots of fearmongering. Can lots of bad stuff happen to you? Maybe. Shut up, lawyer up, and you have the best chances. Also, you'll still be alive.
Last edited:
Similar threads
