DPR
NES Member
This will get interesting quick with the judge ordering them to produce an explanation of how they were destroyed. I'm guessing the threat of losing a pension will thin out that blue line a whole lot.
-
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.
MA SP in trouble (again) - this time guns at Logan
- Thread starter John2006
- Start date
The other problem is its a matter of conflicting evils. If every mom and pop muni PD is given a de-facto pass (and budget) to go full retard on the interstates, the number of citations and other motorist harrasment garbage is easily going to triple, and they're not going to be following what I call the "MSP playbook". Every serious motorist in MA knows what I'm talking about.... Several of the pisspot revenue rhetoric town munis in this state make MSP look "friendly and professional" in comparison. This is one rare case where if I know I'm not going to be realistically free of all the evils, I'd rather have the far lesser one.
-Mike
inkdesigner
NES Member
And even if they are led by an outsider, that reform will never happen. The union is to strong and they will actively resist any and all attempts at significant reform.
Boston fire tried that experiment and it failed.
A leader from outside has a chance to reform the SP. An insider has no chance.
FFY
jaypap
NES Member
From the article:
"Although firearms aren’t permitted in carry-on luggage, and violators face fines of up to $13,333 per violation, last year a record-setting 4,239 firearms were discovered in carry-ons at checkpoints nationwide, according to the TSA."
Who comes up with this shit $13,333.00 dollars?
I'm sure the State Police could have just lost them in a boating accident. But I like the idea that they destroyed them without any proof.
Yeah I cut them up with a band saw and threw them away.
"Although firearms aren’t permitted in carry-on luggage, and violators face fines of up to $13,333 per violation, last year a record-setting 4,239 firearms were discovered in carry-ons at checkpoints nationwide, according to the TSA."
Who comes up with this shit $13,333.00 dollars?
I'm sure the State Police could have just lost them in a boating accident. But I like the idea that they destroyed them without any proof.
Yeah I cut them up with a band saw and threw them away.
Alex9661
NES Member
I have a strong feeling that the guy with the pending court appearance for gun charges wasn't particularly unhappy to find out that confiscated from him firearm disappeared.
What gun Your Honor? I have no idea what this officer is talking about.
What gun Your Honor? I have no idea what this officer is talking about.
I think you need to check your laws my friend:
For purposes of § 922 and § 924 violations 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3) defines a "firearm" as: A. any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; B. the frame or receiver of any such weapon; C. any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; or D. any destructive device. Such term does not include an antique firearm.
Quoting federal law on the definition of a "firearm" is irrelevant (and silly). We're talking about TSA regs here (read my post you quoted); the TSA bans many, many things from carry-on baggage that are not legally defined as firearms. My friend.
Last edited:
silversquirrel
NES Member
Lol back my yoot, my buddy and I would go bar hopping in Salem. He coined the phrase "generic M and M blonde" for the local talent.
The judge presiding over the case seems to disagree with your assessment. All charges were dismissed with the reasoning that the charged broke no law because the firearm was a black powder / antique.
He still tried to take a prohibited item through TSA in his carry-on baggage; do you think somehow he now gets to take his blackpowder pistol onto the airplane in his carry-on? "No, no. The judge said it was ok..."
![[hmmm]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/009.gif "Hmm [hmmm]")
MisterHappy
NES Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,388
- Likes
- 17,552
Well, the TSA website on Prohibited items says "No Firearms in carry on luggage," and references
18 U.S. Code § 921 - Definitions
Which specifically states that an Antique is NOT a firearm.
Though, to be more confusing the TSA page states that replica firearms, including toys, are for checked luggage only.
Transporting Firearms and Ammunition
At least the Judge was able to read the definitions in the law.
The BP gun is NOT a firearm
The BP gun is NOT a replica
Since the item in question is not a firearm, the powder, etc. is not.
18 U.S. Code § 921 - Definitions
Which specifically states that an Antique is NOT a firearm.
Though, to be more confusing the TSA page states that replica firearms, including toys, are for checked luggage only.
Transporting Firearms and Ammunition
At least the Judge was able to read the definitions in the law.
The BP gun is NOT a firearm
The BP gun is NOT a replica
Since the item in question is not a firearm, the powder, etc. is not.
Last edited:
Jesus, we're beating a dead horse here, but the judge never said it was OK to bring the BP pistol onto the airplane as carry-on baggage. He only ruled on the "illegal posession of a firearm" charge.
"The passenger was summoned to East Boston Municipal Court to face a charge of illegal possession of a firearm, but the charge was dismissed when Judge Richard Sinnott noted that the law doesn’t apply to firearms, like the black powder pistol, manufactured before 1900."
The guy still violated TSA regulations by trying to bring a BP pistol onto the airplane, and he was/is a f***ing moron for not knowing that wouldn't be "OK with TSA."
MisterHappy
NES Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,388
- Likes
- 17,552
Which TSA regulation?
I'm not saying that it's not a common sense thing, but the way the USC and the TSA info that I posted read,
he did not break any regs or laws.
Per federal and state law a BP gun is not a "firearm."
I'm not saying that it's not a common sense thing, but the way the USC and the TSA info that I posted read,
he did not break any regs or laws.
Per federal and state law a BP gun is not a "firearm."
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2014
- Messages
- 23,808
- Likes
- 29,903
I'll double disagree. You should be able to hire more officers to patrol areas including the highways with their salaries.
Regarding murders you should be able to either hire an older detective or figure it out by borrowing a detective from a big city. It averages out to something too small to justify the entire msp when they start at 125k
You’ve completely missed the point. Having 5 different departments patrol the same controlled-access highway within a 10 mile stretch is stupid. Someone calls in a drunk driver to 911 on the Pike in Framingham, but before the call is over the car is in Natick. Before the Natick police can get there the car is already through Weston and into Newton, in the meantime, the dispatchers are still transferring the call from agency to agency.
There is a reason that states have highway patrol agencies — to patrol the highway.
The big cities don’t have detectives sitting around that they can loan out. Boston’s murder squad is swamped. Even if they weren’t swamped, the Boston PD’s budget is there to serve Boston, not the suburbs.
The whole point of the state police investigation bureau is to cover crimes which local agencies don’t have the expertise to cover. The state police covers enough ground that they can afford to support those experts.
In addition, there are crimes that are multi jurisdictional, that cross multiple towns. A state force can follow that investigation across town lines.
State agencies make sense, which is why every state except Hawaii has one.
There's a few separate issues here. First off, the TSA is not a law enforcement agency. They don't even have the right to act on the laws you're citing. No one at the TSA has arrest powers or the power to criminally charge anyone. So generally speaking, you're not going to get federally charged for attempting to bring something onto an airplane that they don't want you to, unless there are other factors at play (e.g., suspected terrorism).
Second, regardless of laws, the TSA can and will physically stop you from bringing anything on a plane they're able to detect that they don't want you to. This isn't something that gets adjudicated in a courtroom according to strict rules; they have the administrative flexibility to say "you're not taking that on the plane" regardless of laws and regulations. So no one's ever taking an antique firearm onto a plane in their carry-on based on some technicality or loophole in the rules. And they might give you a civil ticket in the same way the meter maid gives you a parking ticket, although it's not clear how often they actually bother doing that in ordinary cases.
Finally, what the TSA does if they catch someone with something illegal is hand them off to local law enforcement to be charged at the state level with whatever crimes are applicable. In this case the staties charged first and asked questions later, 'cuz guns. If this guy had been treated according to the law, they would have confiscated the gun (or just made him check the bag) and sent him on his way with no charges. Same as if he had a pocket knife in his bag.
They start at 75k or so, if I recall correctly. They just work a lot of OT and details, which jacks up total pay. Regardless, if pay is the issue then you have a case for lowering the pay, not for eliminating the force. There are, after all, issues of statewide concern that you need law enforcement for.
MisterHappy
NES Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,388
- Likes
- 17,552
That's why I put the "common sense" line in there
Here's reality:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82ogQXmLTeI
Here's reality:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82ogQXmLTeI
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2019
- Messages
- 28
- Likes
- 14
Probably used as throwdowns. Let's see. OK felon boy, look what we found here after our "search". Hi cap firearm, check (felony). Hi cap magazine, check (felony). Loaded mag possession of ammo without FID (check) felony. One loaded gun and three felonies! Officer is well on his way to promotions. Worse yet, these guns could be used in murders and planted on some one during a search. I have zero faith in cops.
