Massachusetts Firearm Storage Initiative

Rating - 100%
11   0   0
Joined
Apr 12, 2007
Messages
21,243
Likes
9,961
In that MA likes to think of itself as California East, here is the CA DOJ requirement (note at the end that a UL RSC-rated safe is acceptable):

An acceptable gun safe is either one the following:
  1. A gun safe that meets all of the following standards:
    1. Shall be able to fully contain firearms and provide for their secure storage.
    2. Shall have a locking system consisting of at minimum a mechanical or electronic combination lock. The mechanical or electronic combination lock utilized by the safe shall have at least 10,000 possible combinations consisting of a minimum three numbers, letters, or symbols. The lock shall be protected by a case hardened (Rc 60+) drill resistant steel plate, or drill resistant material of equivalent strength.
    3. Boltwork shall consist of a minimum of three steel locking bolts of at least 1/2-inch thickness that intrude from the door of the safe into the body of the safe or from the body of the safe into the door of the safe, which are operated by a separate handle and secured by the lock.
    4. A gun safe shall be capable of repeated use. The exterior walls shall be constructed of a minimum 12-gauge thick steel for a single walled safe, or the sum of the steel walls shall add up to at least 0.100 inches for safes with two walls. Doors shall be constructed of a minimum one layer of 7-gauge steel plate reinforced construction or at least two layers of a minimum 12-gauge steel compound construction.
    5. Door hinges shall be protected to prevent the removal of the door. Protective features include, but are not limited to: hinges not exposed to the outside, interlocking door designs, dead bars, jeweler's lugs and active or inactive locking bolts.
  2. A gun safe that is able to fully contain firearms and provide for their secure storage, and is certified to/listed as meeting Underwriters Laboratories Residential Security Container rating standards by a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL).

Well I would have to toss my 4 gun safes in that case. Combinations require letters, not just numbers? Absurd.
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Mar 18, 2012
Messages
8,405
Likes
3,749
Location
A Fair Haven in an unfair state.
Well I would have to toss my 4 gun safes in that case. Combinations require letters, not just numbers? Absurd.
it's numbers, letters OR symbols... This means it can be any combination of the three. It can be numbers, or numbers and letters, or just letters, etc....

Not numbers, letters AND symbols. This would be it would require all 3...

..not to nit pick, but just wanted to make sure we're clear on the language.
 

Waher

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 2, 2014
Messages
12,706
Likes
17,837
Location
Boston Gun & Rifle and Braintree Rifle & Pistol
I guess Healey certified the question to go on the ballot:
MA Gun Storage & Transportation Laws Show Ballot Q = Harassment - GOAL.ORG

Final text:
https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2019/09/04/FINAL SUMMARY 19-02_1.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2BNu95eM58lTck1uc0L90YjNFY4GTowRfrfhGfdMmh7uvai_-t5NuxmP0

I don't get how it is even Constitutional (ex post facto prohibition correct?) to hold someone responsible for their being a party to a crime they had nothing to do with because they've already been a victim of a crime by having their property stolen. This is no different than charging someone whose car was stolen because the car thief used it to commit a crime spree.

Also violates the text in Heller about D.C.'s safe storage requirements being non-kosher
 
Last edited:

NewGuyRay

NES Member
Rating - 100%
11   0   0
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
1,083
Likes
705
Location
Just North of Boston
The text reads like it was written by one of the Parkland kids. Are there plans in the works for GOAL or Comm2A to go to court and challenge the AG's certification of this child's school project of a ballot question? How is this nonsense not unconstitutionally vague at the State or Federal level?

How exactly are gun owners to be held accountable? Is this strictly creating civil liability for the consequence of improper storage or is it rewriting storage and transportation statutes to create new criminal liability? What does, "Any expenses incurred in complying with the law could be deducted from the gun owner’s Massachusetts income taxes." mean? Are we talking a deduction against income or an actual tax credit deducted from my tax liability? Can I spend up to my expected tax liability and get an awesome safe and owe the state nothing in taxes that year? hell, I'll support the industry by purchasing a new safe every year and never pay state income taxes again!
 

EJFudd

NES Member
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
4,101
Likes
1,895
Location
Behind Enemy Lines
Are we talking a deduction against income or an actual tax credit deducted from my tax liability?
If it's against the taxes I owe the state I'll be upgrading this and every year thereafter.
A deduction (from taxed income) vs. a tax credit (toward taxes due)? Huge difference.

There's a reason Maura left it ambiguous. [thinking] It's called wiggle room for our corrupt pols. [frown]
 

swatgig

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
May 26, 2011
Messages
5,730
Likes
6,064
Location
In the shallow end of the gene pool
Are there plans in the works for GOAL or Comm2A to go to court and challenge the AG's certification of this child's school project of a ballot question?
I don't think anyone will do anything unless the proponents first come up with their 80,000 signatures, with no more than 25% coming from a single county. That's a pretty onerous task.
 

milktree

NES Member
Rating - 100%
28   0   0
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
5,023
Likes
2,952
In that MA likes to think of itself as California East, here is the CA DOJ requirement (note at the end that a UL RSC-rated safe is acceptable):

An acceptable gun safe is either one the following:
  1. A gun safe that meets all of the following standards:
    1. Shall be able to fully contain firearms and provide for their secure storage.
    2. Shall have a locking system consisting of at minimum a mechanical or electronic combination lock. The mechanical or electronic combination lock utilized by the safe shall have at least 10,000 possible combinations consisting of a minimum three numbers, letters, or symbols. The lock shall be protected by a case hardened (Rc 60+) drill resistant steel plate, or drill resistant material of equivalent strength.
    3. Boltwork shall consist of a minimum of three steel locking bolts of at least 1/2-inch thickness that intrude from the door of the safe into the body of the safe or from the body of the safe into the door of the safe, which are operated by a separate handle and secured by the lock.
    4. A gun safe shall be capable of repeated use. The exterior walls shall be constructed of a minimum 12-gauge thick steel for a single walled safe, or the sum of the steel walls shall add up to at least 0.100 inches for safes with two walls. Doors shall be constructed of a minimum one layer of 7-gauge steel plate reinforced construction or at least two layers of a minimum 12-gauge steel compound construction.
    5. Door hinges shall be protected to prevent the removal of the door. Protective features include, but are not limited to: hinges not exposed to the outside, interlocking door designs, dead bars, jeweler's lugs and active or inactive locking bolts.
  2. A gun safe that is able to fully contain firearms and provide for their secure storage, and is certified to/listed as meeting Underwriters Laboratories Residential Security Container rating standards by a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL).
So... My understanding of CA law (based on a conversation with someone who lives there and keeps track of such things 'cuz he owns guns)

- There is no absolute storage requirement
- There is liability if children get access to the guns *and* do something bad with them (take them into school, shoot them in a bad place, get injured, etc)
- If a company wants to sell a safe labeled as a "gun safe", it has to meed the above specifications. If you don't care about the specs, you can sell anything you want.
 

EJFudd

NES Member
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
4,101
Likes
1,895
Location
Behind Enemy Lines
So... My understanding of CA law (based on a conversation with someone who lives there and keeps track of such things 'cuz he owns guns)

- There is no absolute storage requirement
- There is liability if children get access to the guns *and* do something bad with them (take them into school, shoot them in a bad place, get injured, etc)
- If a company wants to sell a safe labeled as a "gun safe", it has to meed the above specifications. If you don't care about the specs, you can sell anything you want.
Correct. Like MA, the professed intent of the current CA law is to limit access to children, not necessarily to prevent theft or to limit owner access to the guns. The proposed MA law would be aimed at preventing child access and theft as well as further limiting owner access.

I should also point out that there is a CA standard for certified gun safes and a separate approved list of CA certified firearm safety devices, which includes a lot of single or double handgun safes. The technical/legal standard for certified safes is not the same as the standard for certified firearm safety devices.

The only good thing I see in Maura's grade school re-write is the dropping of the term "certified"... so, presumably, those of us who already own gun safes not meeting the UL RSC standard (or whatever) will not have to run out immediately and buy a new safe (or safes) unless we want to. [thinking]
 
Top Bottom