MA Law location...

Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
134
Likes
11
Location
Massachusetts
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Can anybody tell me where I can find SPECIFIC answers to MA CCW and gun laws in general? I currently use mass.gov but the laws are vague at best IMO and I hate to rely on forum replies. For example, I'd like a black and white answer as to where I can or cannot carry. I inquired about carrying in a hospital and got differing answers albeit only one person said I could not BUT I'd hate to find out HE was right and the rest were wrong.

OR, if I am using the proper site, if someone could tell me how to search certain questions within that site.

Thanks.
 
You ask a question to which there is no answer.

Not even our cops or the legislature can tell you what the gun laws mean.
 
There aren't that many places where you can't legally carry in MA.

-Courthouses (not by law but by courthouse fiat/security)

-SOME police stations (same as above, not by law but by policy - eg, Boston, because they have metal detectors)

-Schools (basically anything that is a school, public or private, to include colleges and universities)

-Federal Buildings, to include post offices (this is via federal law, not MA)

-Other Federal property (for example, you can't carry a gun on the USS Constitution).

There aren't many others. There is no one "catch all" law for all of these, they are sprinkled about in MGL and Federal Law.

Schools are pretty much the largest prohibited location class in the state. That's covered under MGL 269-10(j) IIRC. For most purposes that's pretty much the only thing you have to worry about.

-Mike
 
What drgrant said. The good news is that in Mass the list is short of places off limits.
 
I had a fun time considering this question yesterday... My daughter had a basketball game in a central Mass town. Now, often these are at schools so I know I might need to unholster and store in my vehicle's lock box, but in this case it was a "municipal gym".

Looking it up on the map, the building was noted as a high school, but when I arrived, all signage referred to it as the town's municipal building, with the PD around back even. I checked with the coach and he confirmed that it is used to be a high school but is no longer.

So I ccw'd my way towards the entrance without concern until I saw a sign for their "Early Childhood Center"... Thinking "wtf is that? A pre-school? A daycare??" I won't write here what my final decision was, but this just serves as an example of how our complicated and poorly-defined laws result in a "chilling effect" on the free and fair exercise of our 2nd Amendment rights.
 
So I ccw'd my way towards the entrance without concern until I saw a sign for their "Early Childhood Center"... Thinking "wtf is that? A pre-school? A daycare??" I won't write here what my final decision was, but this just serves as an example of how our complicated and poorly-defined laws result in a "chilling effect" on the free and fair exercise of our 2nd Amendment rights.

I was at a meeting not too long ago that was held in a building that is part of a church. But the sign on the door says Montessori School. I'm treating it as a school, with all of the implications of MGL 269 S10j...
 
I was at a meeting not too long ago that was held in a building that is part of a church. But the sign on the door says Montessori School. I'm treating it as a school, with all of the implications of MGL 269 S10j...
Hmmm... So here's the law...
... loaded or unloaded or other dangerous weapon in any building or on the grounds of any elementary or secondary school, college or university...

Is a pre-school, not otherwise on the grounds of a k-6 facility, considered an "elementary school" under MA law? Seems an especially relevant question because elementary school attendance is mandated by law, whereas pre-school is not (and I presume does not fall under the same regulatory control??)
 
Is a pre-school, not otherwise on the grounds of a k-6 facility, considered an "elementary school" under MA law? Seems an especially relevant question because elementary school attendance is mandated by law, whereas pre-school is not (and I presume does not fall under the same regulatory control??)

I would suspect that it is not an elementary school for this law, but that section of the law does not have any definitions. So who wants to be the test case?
 
this just serves as an example of how our complicated and poorly-defined laws result in a "chilling effect" on the free and fair exercise of our 2nd Amendment rights.

In principle, you have 2nd Amendment rights. The chilling reality is that they're gun rights priveledges that can be taken away, even in the free-est of free states.

Is a pre-school, not otherwise on the grounds of a k-6 facility, considered an "elementary school" under MA law?

No.

Seems an especially relevant question because elementary school attendance is mandated by law, whereas pre-school is not (and I presume does not fall under the same regulatory control??)

For the purposes of 269-10(j), whether or not your child is required to attend by law is an interesting side note, but is not the deciding factor. As M1911 correctly pointed out, the key here is the definition. I'm feeling too lazy to string together the legal argument explaining how the below definition can be applied to the "school grounds" law, but this is the key.

The case Comm. vs. Burke, 44 Mass. App. Ct. 76 (1997) says in part:

The Commonwealth argues, on the basis of the age of the children, three to five and one-half years, that the jury could infer that the school included a kindergarten, and that a school which contains a kindergarten is properly considered an elementary school for purposes of the statute. There was, however, no evidence that the school contained a kindergarten. The officer's estimate as to the ages of the children is insufficient to create the inference the Commonwealth seeks.

Moreover, even if the inference were warranted, a kindergarten, together with a preschool, is not an elementary school. See State v. Roland, 577 So. 2d 680, 681 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991). In that case the court construed a similar statute (Fla. Stat. s. 893.13[e] [1991]) which provided enhanced penalties for drug violations occurring "within 1,000 feet of the real property comprising a public or private elementary, middle, or secondary school." The court held that a school offering a "kindergarten/ preschool program that . . . enrolls students from the ages of two to six" was not the type of school enumerated in the Florida statute. State v. Roland, supra at 681. The construction by the Florida court accords with the normal dictionary definition of "elementary school" which is a school for the first six or eight grades. See the definition in Webster's Third New Intl.
Dictionary (1971 ed.), [Note 3] cited in Alford v. Southern Berkshire Regional Sch. Dist., 2 Mass. App. Ct. 98 , 100 n.1 (1974), and the definition in The American Heritage Dictionary 595 (3d ed. 1992). [Note 4]


then

[Note 4] The Heritage definition is: "l. A school usually for the first six or eight grades. 2. The first six to eight years of a child's formal education. Also called grade school, grammar school, primary school." (Emphasis original.)

That's from an Appeals case so it's not strictly binding and the opinion could be overturned by the SJC, but given the history of this case (it's already been cited in others, which is very typical of a ruling the SJC will uphold) I'd be willing to bet this is correct. With that said, I wouldn't expect the average street cop to know that.
 
Can't carry in the gift shop at Minuteman Park.

Anybody know about Nickerson State Park and/or the National Seashore?
 
In principle, you have 2nd Amendment rights. The chilling reality is that they're gun rights priveledges that can be taken away, even in the free-est of free states.
Terrific cites all around, thank you! As noted, I certainly don't want to risk my daughter needing to get a ride home from her game while the local constables and I debate MGL, but at the same time "concealed means concealed" [wink]

The "chilling effect" to which I refer is an attempt to reference a constitutional legal precept I believe should be applied to 2nd Amendment law in the same way it is applied to 1st Amendment law... but that's my own windmill...
 
The "chilling effect" to which I refer is an attempt to reference a constitutional legal precept I believe should be applied to 2nd Amendment law in the same way it is applied to 1st Amendment law... but that's my own windmill...

Like not needing to wait 60 days & take a state approved course before getting the permit required to excercise your 4th Amendment rights? I totally agree.
 
I'm sure I'm missing something here, but is there a waiting period, training and a permit required to avoid unreasonable search and seizure?

No but that's my point, "reasonable restrictions" are applied to the 2A that no one would ever consider allowing to be applied to the 3A, 4A, 5A, etc.
 
No but that's my point, "reasonable restrictions" are applied to the 2A that no one would ever consider allowing to be applied to the 3A, 4A, 5A, etc.
Aha! I knew it was something clever like that. [grin] YES, this is exactly the point I'm trying to make wrt the chilling effect... laws that intimidate and discourage people from exercising free speech, even when not outright forbidding it, are struck down by SCOTUS on a regular basis... same rules should apply to 2A!

[cheers]
 
Anybody have the answer to the National Seashore? Would probably have to leave it in the car.

Thanks.
 
Back
Top Bottom