• 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.

Police be wilding out here (improper storage)

nstassel

NES Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
6,105
Likes
21,536
Location
Middlesex County
Feedback: 28 / 0 / 0
In the perennial discussion of what amounts to proper storage comes another example.

The client get's suspended for an alleged assault and battery on his ex. OK. The police tell him that his LTC is suspended and he can go to his house and give them consent or they will get a warrant to search his house for all the guns on his FRB list. He agrees to let them into the house and seize the guns. Fine. He goes to the house with them following and has girlfriend or his in-laws that live there unlock the chained and deadbolted bulkhead doors. He walks in with the police down the bulkhead and opens the interior door by turning the simple privacy type lock. They go into the basement and he retrieves a hidden key from a shelf under the stairs leading up to the kitchen. He then uses the key to unlock an -exterior type- locking knob on a solid core door which secures an office. Two rifles are unsecured in the room. The other entry to the basement from the kitchen is also locked with a exterior type door and lock. All the other guns are properly secured in safes or locking containers.

They summons him in for a clerk's hearing for the two rifles. They claim that the key was hidden too close to the door for it to satisfy the requirement that the firearms be secured from all but the most persistent unauthorized access. He is charged for having guns behind two serious locked or chained access points.

Point being, make your storage decisions wisely as you never know when the police will be second guessing them.
 
So what would they have done if he didn't produce one of the guns on his list? I went through that excel sheet that they illegally posted on the .gov website and was very surprised to see that I apparently own a Mossberg shotgun. Would have a hell of a time producing it for the police as I have literally never even held one.
 
So what would they have done if he didn't produce one of the guns on his list? I went through that excel sheet that they illegally posted on the .gov website and was very surprised to see that I apparently own a Mossberg shotgun. Would have a hell of a time producing it for the police as I have literally never even held one.
Shoot your dog for starters… Escalate from there.

I wonder also as I have sold stuff to people out of state (via FFL) and a long long time ago.
 
In the perennial discussion of what amounts to proper storage comes another example.

The client get's suspended for an alleged assault and battery on his ex. OK. The police tell him that his LTC is suspended and he can go to his house and give them consent or they will get a warrant to search his house for all the guns on his FRB list. He agrees to let them into the house and seize the guns. Fine. He goes to the house with them following and has girlfriend or his in-laws that live there unlock the chained and deadbolted bulkhead doors. He walks in with the police down the bulkhead and opens the interior door by turning the simple privacy type lock. They go into the basement and he retrieves a hidden key from a shelf under the stairs leading up to the kitchen. He then uses the key to unlock an -exterior type- locking knob on a solid core door which secures an office. Two rifles are unsecured in the room. The other entry to the basement from the kitchen is also locked with a exterior type door and lock. All the other guns are properly secured in safes or locking containers.

They summons him in for a clerk's hearing for the two rifles. They claim that the key was hidden too close to the door for it to satisfy the requirement that the firearms be secured from all but the most persistent unauthorized access. He is charged for having guns behind two serious locked or chained access points.

Point being, make your storage decisions wisely as you never know when the police will be second guessing them.
No cap?
 
In the perennial discussion of what amounts to proper storage comes another example.

The client get's suspended for an alleged assault and battery on his ex. OK. The police tell him that his LTC is suspended and he can go to his house and give them consent or they will get a warrant to search his house for all the guns on his FRB list. He agrees to let them into the house and seize the guns. Fine. He goes to the house with them following and has girlfriend or his in-laws that live there unlock the chained and deadbolted bulkhead doors. He walks in with the police down the bulkhead and opens the interior door by turning the simple privacy type lock. They go into the basement and he retrieves a hidden key from a shelf under the stairs leading up to the kitchen. He then uses the key to unlock an -exterior type- locking knob on a solid core door which secures an office. Two rifles are unsecured in the room. The other entry to the basement from the kitchen is also locked with a exterior type door and lock. All the other guns are properly secured in safes or locking containers.

They summons him in for a clerk's hearing for the two rifles. They claim that the key was hidden too close to the door for it to satisfy the requirement that the firearms be secured from all but the most persistent unauthorized access. He is charged for having guns behind two serious locked or chained access points.

Point being, make your storage decisions wisely as you never know when the police will be second guessing them.

So what’s next, a key storage rule? Distance to safe, etc?

I’ll need gun locks on guns IN my safe? Safe for a key that is a combo lock safe?

f*** this state.
 
I once threw out my “issued” Glock in a recycle bin. Anyone remember that story. Or the state cop who had his P226 in the sock drawer down at the cape and his son took it.

I still lock up my guns I don’t use down here but I have certain hidden guns ready. As I don’t plan on calling the police… especially “today’s Uvalde style police”.
 
In the perennial discussion of what amounts to proper storage comes another example.

The client get's suspended for an alleged assault and battery on his ex. OK. The police tell him that his LTC is suspended and he can go to his house and give them consent or they will get a warrant to search his house for all the guns on his FRB list. He agrees to let them into the house and seize the guns. Fine. He goes to the house with them following and has girlfriend or his in-laws that live there unlock the chained and deadbolted bulkhead doors. He walks in with the police down the bulkhead and opens the interior door by turning the simple privacy type lock. They go into the basement and he retrieves a hidden key from a shelf under the stairs leading up to the kitchen. He then uses the key to unlock an -exterior type- locking knob on a solid core door which secures an office. Two rifles are unsecured in the room. The other entry to the basement from the kitchen is also locked with a exterior type door and lock. All the other guns are properly secured in safes or locking containers.

They summons him in for a clerk's hearing for the two rifles. They claim that the key was hidden too close to the door for it to satisfy the requirement that the firearms be secured from all but the most persistent unauthorized access. He is charged for having guns behind two serious locked or chained access points.

Point being, make your storage decisions wisely as you never know when the police will be second guessing them.
Where in MGL does it say “most persistent unauthorized access”? I just reread 140 131L because I thought I was losing my mind. So now we make up requirements and then charge people for violating these new made up requirements.

I love MA
 
In the perennial discussion of what amounts to proper storage comes another example.

The client get's suspended for an alleged assault and battery on his ex. OK. The police tell him that his LTC is suspended and he can go to his house and give them consent or they will get a warrant to search his house for all the guns on his FRB list. He agrees to let them into the house and seize the guns. Fine. He goes to the house with them following and has girlfriend or his in-laws that live there unlock the chained and deadbolted bulkhead doors. He walks in with the police down the bulkhead and opens the interior door by turning the simple privacy type lock. They go into the basement and he retrieves a hidden key from a shelf under the stairs leading up to the kitchen. He then uses the key to unlock an -exterior type- locking knob on a solid core door which secures an office. Two rifles are unsecured in the room. The other entry to the basement from the kitchen is also locked with a exterior type door and lock. All the other guns are properly secured in safes or locking containers.

They summons him in for a clerk's hearing for the two rifles. They claim that the key was hidden too close to the door for it to satisfy the requirement that the firearms be secured from all but the most persistent unauthorized access. He is charged for having guns behind two serious locked or chained access points.

Point being, make your storage decisions wisely as you never know when the police will be second guessing them.
What about?


In the Heller case, the Supreme Court found gun-storage laws in Washington, D.C., unconstitutional and for the first time ruled the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own a firearm for self-defense


The court defined handguns as arms within the meaning of the Second Amendment and held that the Amendment extends to rights beyond participating in the militia. Keeping guns unloaded and disassembled also was impermissible because it hindered individuals in exercising the right of self-defense.
 
What about?

In the Heller case, the Supreme Court found gun-storage laws in Washington, D.C., unconstitutional and for the first time ruled the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own a firearm for self-defense


The court defined handguns as arms within the meaning of the Second Amendment and held that the Amendment extends to rights beyond participating in the militia. Keeping guns unloaded and disassembled also was impermissible because it hindered individuals in exercising the right of self-defense.
Hahahahha

This is ma. We don’t care about these things.
 
Where in MGL does it say “most persistent unauthorized access”? I just reread 140 131L because I thought I was losing my mind. So now we make up requirements and then charge people for violating these new made up requirements.

I love MA
I think that wording is from some case law. It's still ambiguous garbage, much like the cmr940 "average 8 year old" or whatever it is. 🤣
 
◦Com. v. Parzick, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 846, 850 (2005)
◦"secured" means that "the container must not merely be locked, but securely locked ... [i.e.,] maintained in [a] locked container[] in a way that will deter all but the most persistent from gaining access.“
Define persistent?

(Yes I’m playing, so much ambiguity)
 
What about?


In the Heller case, the Supreme Court found gun-storage laws in Washington, D.C., unconstitutional and for the first time ruled the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own a firearm for self-defense


The court defined handguns as arms within the meaning of the Second Amendment and held that the Amendment extends to rights beyond participating in the militia. Keeping guns unloaded and disassembled also was impermissible because it hindered individuals in exercising the right of self-defense.
MA does not require that the guns be unloaded and disassembled.
 


3. The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment . The District’s total ban on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense. Under any of the standards of scrutiny the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this prohibition—in the place where the importance of the lawful defense of self, family, and property is most acute—would fail constitutional muster. Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional. Because Heller conceded at oral argument that the D. C. licensing law is permissible if it is not enforced arbitrarily and capriciously, the Court assumes that a license will satisfy his prayer for relief and does not address the licensing requirement. Assuming he is not disqualified from exercising Second Amendment rights, the District must permit Heller to register his handgun and must issue him a license to carry it in the home. Pp. 56–64.
 
◦Com. v. McGowan, 464 Mass. 232 (2013) and Com. v. Runyan, 456 Mass. 230 (2010)
◦Upholds constitutionality of safe storage law
◦Opines that any safe storage restriction would be constitutional if an owner could access the firearm for self-defense in the time it took a colonial soldier to load and fire a musket or flintlock pistol (15 to 20 seconds to 1 minute), referring to See Heller at 2849-2850 (Breyer, J., dissenting)
 
Back
Top Bottom