Min license for wife to use my gun in home self defense

[Palladin]

Can you cite any cases of someone being charged under a situation like this in MA.

If you are married to a woman (or a man) and you are properly licensed for whatever is in the house. If she (he) used it in lawful self defense within the house while not having any license, I doubt anyone would be prosecuted.

Prove me wrong.

think about this:

Donate to Stan Sokolowski defense fund | MAgunowner

Robbery Victim May Go to Prison

Self-Defense Tip: Don't Let the Cops into Your House Without A Warrant | The Truth About Guns

I, for one, am not giving the LEO's in this state the opportunity to use the bride or I as their next gun news clip

 

[dcmdon]

think about this:

Donate to Stan Sokolowski defense fund | MAgunowner

Robbery Victim May Go to Prison

Self-Defense Tip: Don't Let the Cops into Your House Without A Warrant | The Truth About Guns

I, for one, am not giving the LEO's in this state the opportunity to use the bride or I as their next gun news clip

That has nothing to do with the defensive use of a firearm. Its terrible and tragic. But its got nothing to do with what we're discussing. It goes to a tangential issue, which is the presence of cops in your house after the defensive use of a firearm. But thats not what we're discussing.

 

[dcmdon]

think about this:

Donate to Stan Sokolowski defense fund | MAgunowner

Robbery Victim May Go to Prison

Self-Defense Tip: Don't Let the Cops into Your House Without A Warrant | The Truth About Guns

I, for one, am not giving the LEO's in this state the opportunity to use the bride or I as their next gun news clip

I, for one, am not giving the LEO's in this state the opportunity to use the bride or I as their next gun news clip

I agree with this statement as it suggests that all adults in a household should be properly licensed to use any firearm in thhe household. However, if one isn't properly licensed, only a fool would hesitate to use a (otherwise lawfully possessed) firearm thats in the house to prevent harm from coming to themselves or their children.

Botom line, get a permit. But if evil visits your home while you are waiting for the LTC, then don't heistate in defending yourself.

One other scenario. I moved to MA last year with guns. They moved with me and I got my LTC in a timely manner. If durring the time I did not have a LTC someone had come into my home uninvited, my lack of a LTC would never have even entered into my response to this threat in my home. As it should be.

 

[MisterHappy]

The subtlety that I see, and did not see addressed, is this:

Justifiable shoot - that's one thing.

Access to a firearm (in the broad term, not Mass-specific) by an unlicensed and therefore "unauthorized" person - that's another. Safe storage law is designed to prevent that.



This is why all persons in the household should have the "best" license possible.

 

[Tyke]

What it really boils down to is this. What would you rather have? A dead wife? Or a court date?

 

[montemuscle1970]

I think we all agree(?) that we'd rather risk prosecution in some form than the alternative. I think in our scenarios, if they were that clear cut, they may waive their case to prosecute, but I think it is written in such a way it would allow them to make a case if they so desired. That's the part about MA law I don't like, is that they seem to write it out so they always reserve the right to prosecute you somehow.

And they talk about gun loopholes.....pffft

 

[dcmdon]

The subtlety that I see, and did not see addressed, is this:

Justifiable shoot - that's one thing.

Access to a firearm (in the broad term, not Mass-specific) by an unlicensed and therefore "unauthorized" person - that's another. Safe storage law is designed to prevent that.



This is why all persons in the household should have the "best" license possible.

Is there anything in the law or any case law that says that a properly stored firearm must be inaccessible to any other unlicensed person in the household. Assuming none are PPs.

This is not a challenge. I'm seriously curious. My wife will always have access to whatever firearms are in the house. She's not licensed but she shoots well enough to hold her own.

Don

 

[KenK]

One more advantage of her getting the "A" is if you should die, she won't loose the guns!!!!!
Hey.... Biden recommends women get a shotgun!!!!!!!

So in summary. Ill have her apply for A and see what she gets. AND, maybe I get an excuse to buy a shotgun.

 

[dcmdon]

One more advantage of her getting the "A" is if you should die, she won't loose the guns!!!!!
Hey.... Biden recommends women get a shotgun!!!!!!!

Right. I'll get the wife out there with the Converted Tromix Saiga 12 tomorrow practicing. Somehow, I don't think thats what he meant. (The guns in CT not MA. Don't get all worried)

 

[Len-2A Training]

Is there anything in the law or any case law that says that a properly stored firearm must be inaccessible to any other unlicensed person in the household. Assuming none are PPs.

This is not a challenge. I'm seriously curious. My wife will always have access to whatever firearms are in the house. She's not licensed but she shoots well enough to hold her own.

Don

I guess you never bothered to read S. 131L?

C. 140 § 131L Weapons Stored or Kept by Owner

(a)
[FONT=LKAOBC+TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman][FONT=LKAOBC+TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman]It shall be unlawful to store or keep any firearm, rifle or shotgun including, but not limited to, large capacity weapons, or machine gun in any place unless such weapon is secured in a locked container or equipped with a tamper-resistant mechanical lock or other safety device, properly engaged so as to render such weapon inoperable by any person other than the owner or other lawfully authorized user. [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=LKAOBC+TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman][FONT=LKAOBC+TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman][/FONT][/FONT]

Therefore, if anyone UNLICENSED gets access to it, the owner of the gun is criminally liable for that act. The subsequent paragraphs lay out the penalties (M or F, with 1 year for low-cap long guns to 10 years for evil guns).

I do suggest that you read that entire section of law.

 

[MisterHappy]

Len posted the black letter law that I was alluding to.

What many forget is that the stated intent of the Safe Storage Laws is to prevent "unauthorized use". Not inappropriate, or poorly aimed, but unauthorized. And only the PRM can authorize such use (outside of the "training exemption", etc.) via LTC/FID.

This is why the Lowell case is such a travesty - the guy exceeded all of the requirements and still got jammed up.

 

[montemuscle1970]

I guess you never bothered to read S. 131L?



Therefore, if anyone UNLICENSED gets access to it, the owner of the gun is criminally liable for that act. The subsequent paragraphs lay out the penalties (M or F, with 1 year for low-cap long guns to 10 years for evil guns).

I do suggest that you read that entire section of law.

And I'm assuming that "other lawfully authorized user" means authorized by the state with a valid firearms license, further, to the class to which the firearm in question falls under? That's my immediate interpretation of it. But for the sake of clarification, if you're spouse called and said there was an intruder in the house, could you grant her a temporary lawful authorization and tell her how to access it(combo lock or something) if she needed it? Would the state allow that interpretation? I'm assuming probably not, but how might that play out in court?

 

[dcmdon]

Thank you.

I guess this is what happens when you try to get a handle on MA gun law in less than a year. Big holes. Thank you also for the reminder that in the areas where I've found and read the laws I may be fine, but there are areas where I don't know what I don't know.

So, with that in mind. An unlicensed person would, in the eyes of the law, be legal if they assisted a licensed person. Right.

Don

- - - Updated - - -

And I'm assuming that "other lawfully authorized user" means authorized by the state with a valid firearms license, further, to the class to which the firearm in question falls under? That's my immediate interpretation of it. But for the sake of clarification, if you're spouse called and said there was an intruder in the house, could you grant her a temporary lawful authorization and tell her how to access it(combo lock or something) if she needed it? Would the state allow that interpretation? I'm assuming probably not, but how might that play out in court?

Your interpretation makde total sense.
I'm guessing your case is only as a legal thought exercise. In real life, lets hope that any of our wives would simply retrieve a firearm and do what needs to be done. In our house, thats to grab a gun, gather the children, go to a safe place dial 911 and wait.

Thank you both again. I've been pushing my wife to get licensed. She's never been very motivated because she goes to the range with me, and she could lawfully posses firearms without a permit in CT. This is great justification for her to get her license.

She already shoots well enough to be dangerous:

[video=youtube_share;pOrYjBq5V4Y]http://youtu.be/pOrYjBq5V4Y[/video]

 

[montemuscle1970]

I'll be pushing my girlfriend to set up the application and interview. She's not a proponent of guns. Or she wasn't. But she likes to do things I like to do, and I paid for her to take the MA certification course with me. She's slowly getting into it. But then all this crazy stuff started happening. So that's sort of put a damper on the process. But she also see's how seriously I take all of this pro 2A fight, and that its not just a 'guns are kewl!~' thing. And as anxious as she is about all of it, she is still determined to at least get her license. She thinks that would be cool to say she's done that. Which in turn means she can't be all that opposed to it.

And for the situations we're describing, I'd feel much better about her having her Class A unrestricted. Its something I want her to have anyways. I think the experience would be good for her, and it will allow her to continue taking other courses that require a license to participate in.

This is my opinion for everyone, actually. It would help a lot of that negative information out there start to disappear. Fat chance, I suppose. But its more personal and important that she does it. She's gettin' there! I've been pretty happy and proud that she's gone from "Ahh, guns!" to being certified to apply for her license. It just shows that if you take a chance with an open mind you can see the truth, and form a better opinion, and its your own. Not some twisted crap you see out there everyday.

 

[MisterHappy]

And I'm assuming that "other lawfully authorized user" means authorized by the state with a valid firearms license, further, to the class to which the firearm in question falls under? That's my immediate interpretation of it. But for the sake of clarification, if you're spouse called and said there was an intruder in the house, could you grant her a temporary lawful authorization and tell her how to access it(combo lock or something) if she needed it? Would the state allow that interpretation? I'm assuming probably not, but how might that play out in court?

No.

The law is clear - a person must have a LTC/FID or be under the supervision or control of a person that does. While telling the spouse how to access the firearm may be morally right, it's legally wrong.

As for how the situation might play out? It's Mass......think about it.


Now, if you were there, and handed a gun to your spouse for the firefight, that would be different

 

[Len-2A Training]

And I'm assuming that "other lawfully authorized user" means authorized by the state with a valid firearms license, further, to the class to which the firearm in question falls under? That's my immediate interpretation of it. But for the sake of clarification, if you're spouse called and said there was an intruder in the house, could you grant her a temporary lawful authorization and tell her how to access it(combo lock or something) if she needed it? Would the state allow that interpretation? I'm assuming probably not, but how might that play out in court?

We (mere citizens) can not "authorize", only the "state" can do that and they do that by issuing a license. So, no this wouldn't work legally and again both would be charged criminally. Likely conviction/plea bargain at best.

So, with that in mind. An unlicensed person would, in the eyes of the law, be legal if they assisted a licensed person. Right.

Don

Under "direct supervision" of a licensed person is OK, but phone call won't do here. Not even sure if the two of you were in two different rooms would qualify as "direct supervision" (untested waters)!

The law isn't logical or forgiving. And yes, they'd prefer dead bodies to breaking these over-restrictive laws. This is MA, not TX (or "Free America")!

 

[montemuscle1970]

No.

The law is clear - a person must have a LTC/FID or be under the supervision or control of a person that does. While telling the spouse how to access the firearm may be morally right, it's legally wrong.

As for how the situation might play out? It's Mass......think about it.


Now, if you were there, and handed a gun to your spouse for the firefight, that would be different

If I was there, it'd probably be more like "Close your eyes and plug your ears, sweety!"

But, even if I was there, and let her use my firearm to dispatch an aggressor, would that even be legal?

 

[MisterHappy]

everything is illegal in Massachusetts.

The guy that shot the psycho that was stabbing the psychiatrist in Boston a couple of years ago was cleared, after six moths.

The law states that a non-licensed individual must be under the "control" of the licensed individual. At Hunter Ed, this comes up - dad or gramps, out hunting with junior, who's 14. No FID for junior (too young), one gun between them. What constitutes "control"? There is no positive answer. On opposite sides of a field, NO. In two different blinds, NO.


Now...to take the scenario out a bit: You live in East Treestump, police response time is 15+ minutes (distance, one officer on duty, you get the idea). Meth-heads show up, looking for Dave (Dave's not here, man....) because, being meth-heads, they got the address wrong. They think that Dave IS here, and want in. You open you properly secured storage, and remove your legall owned handgun, and also pass a shottie to the spouse. As far as this point, you have not broken any laws. However, once you point a gun at a meth-head, you have opened yourself up to an assault with a dangerous weapon charge; pulling the trigger ups the ante. Corpses move it further along.

Now...I'd say that the East Treestump PD should be understanding in the above scenario, and agree that you did what you had to do. The DA should also be understanding.

Let us know how it works out for you.

If the SHTF, you do what you have to do.

 

[CLW42]

Kind of related but maybe not really. My wife and daughter both want to apply for their LTC-A. My daughter doesn't turn 21 until February 2014. Can she take the Training Course now with my wife and just hold off on the application until she's 21?

 

[mctrinket]

I don't think we'll ever know what the final outcome would be, in this state, unless a situation like this actually happens and then works its way through the guts of our wackadoo legal system.

Some good points raised here: If someone was in the house and the spouse used, say, a knife or a bat to defend themselves...that would be okay? But using the firearms in the house, even if you don't have an LTC, is somehow not okay. That doesn't really make much sense.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Kind of related but maybe not really. My wife and daughter both want to apply for their LTC-A. My daughter doesn't turn 21 until February 2014. Can she take the Training Course now with my wife and just hold off on the application until she's 21?

Yes, and she should then approach the chief and ask for an appointment in Feb 2014 so she stands a chance of getting her LTC before she turns 22.

 

[CLW42]

Yes, and she should then approach the chief and ask for an appointment in Feb 2014 so she stands a chance of getting her LTC before she turns 22.

Touche! And thanks!!

 

[Len-2A Training]

Touche! And thanks!!

Please understand that I am 100% serious in that reply. Not kidding at all. Let her setup the appointment to minimize her wait time. I expect that it will continue to get worse/longer and longer over the next few years until the O either gets crowned King or leaves (and may not end depending on who he passes the baton to if he does leave).

 

[CLW42]

Please understand that I am 100% serious in that reply. Not kidding at all. Let her setup the appointment to minimize her wait time. I expect that it will continue to get worse/longer and longer over the next few years until the O either gets crowned King or leaves (and may not end depending on who he passes the baton to if he does leave).

I took it as completely serious. I'm just waiting for her to get home from work to tell her and my wife to kick it into gear.

And thanks again!!