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.

  2. Dismiss Notice

Massachusetts Firearm Storage Initiative

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Bakin, Aug 8, 2019.

  1. 308rifleman

    308rifleman

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2015
    Messages:
    820
    Likes Received:
    537
    Location:
    Down the rabbit hole, somewhere in Paradise.
    Many people carried pepper spray without a permit. Purchased it out of state and carried it concealed. Maybe a handful got caught and prosecuted. It was usually an "add-on" charge after they were arrested for another offense. When I purchased two rifles and a shotgun in NH, I was told that I would have to supply a "Massachusetts State Police approved gun lock". I purchased a three-pack of inexpensive trigger locks, the dealer installed them on the firearms, we did the federal form and background check. Then I was on my way home. Where those locks really approved by MSP? Probably not.
     
  2. 308rifleman

    308rifleman

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2015
    Messages:
    820
    Likes Received:
    537
    Location:
    Down the rabbit hole, somewhere in Paradise.
    Ok, those would be the 3 inactive bolts on the right side of our BassPro Redhead safe. The three active locking bolts are on the left side. Thanks for the explanation.
     
  3. Prepper

    Prepper NES Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Messages:
    18,020
    Likes Received:
    5,996
    Location:
    NH

    Well I would have to toss my 4 gun safes in that case. Combinations require letters, not just numbers? Absurd.
     
  4. ThePreBanMan

    ThePreBanMan

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    7,415
    Likes Received:
    2,636
    Location:
    A Fair Haven in an unfair state.
    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.
     
  5. Waher

    Waher NES Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2014
    Messages:
    7,743
    Likes Received:
    5,939
    Location:
    BG&RA, BR&PC
    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: Sep 11, 2019
    andrew1220, Coyote33 and EJFudd like this.
  6. NewGuyRay

    NewGuyRay NES Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    827
    Likes Received:
    267
    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!
     
    pinefd and andrew1220 like this.
  7. EC1

    EC1 NES Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2007
    Messages:
    6,738
    Likes Received:
    1,071
    Location:
    Somewhere
    If it's against the taxes I owe the state I'll be upgrading this and every year thereafter.
     
    andrew1220 and PeterC like this.
  8. EJFudd

    EJFudd NES Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2013
    Messages:
    3,469
    Likes Received:
    987
    Location:
    Behind Enemy Lines
    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]
     
    andrew1220 likes this.
  9. swatgig

    swatgig NES Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Messages:
    4,936
    Likes Received:
    4,095
    Location:
    Chained together with 999 of my associates at the
    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.
     
  10. milktree

    milktree NES Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2008
    Messages:
    4,228
    Likes Received:
    1,601
    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.
     
  11. EJFudd

    EJFudd NES Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2013
    Messages:
    3,469
    Likes Received:
    987
    Location:
    Behind Enemy Lines
    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]
     
  12. SteelShooter

    SteelShooter NES Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Messages:
    8,789
    Likes Received:
    1,770
    Location:
    MA
    This freaking state......
     

Share This Page