This is what's wrong with MA gun laws

[right_to_bear_arms]

This is what's wrong with the laws in Massachusetts. Why, in God's name, if they won't enforce the laws on the books do they feel the need to pass MORE restrictive laws that will only serve to punish law-abiding citizens!

From the Worcester T&G Court Records in today's paper:

Romeo Walker, 38, of Miami, charged with possession of a firearm without a firearm ID card, fined $250, $50 victim witness fee; marked lanes violation and license plate violation, found responsible, filed; possession of a large capacity firearm and carrying a loaded firearm without a license, dismissed.

 

[Baldkat82]

wtf??? Dismissed?

 

[Admin]

Maybe he was able to produce a non-res license after the arrest?

 

[drgrant]

Another possibility is the LEO committed an illegal search or some other breach of protocol and his lawyer got the gun charges tossed as a result of that.

-Mike

 

[M1911]

Maybe he was able to produce a non-res license after the arrest?

I'd bet you a beer the he didn't have a non-res license.

Another possibility is the LEO committed an illegal search or some other breach of protocol and his lawyer got the gun charges tossed as a result of that.

He still got convicted of possession of a firearm without an FID, so the fact that he had a gun on him didn't get tossed. If the search had been tossed, I suspect he wouldn't have been convicted of this.

 

[Admin]

I'd bet you a beer the he didn't have a non-res license.


He still got convicted of possession of a firearm without an FID, so the fact that he had a gun on him didn't get tossed. If the search had been tossed, I suspect he wouldn't have been convicted of this.

You drop him off at the airport?

 

[AppleSeeds]

Anyone else curious what "$50 victim witness fee" is?

 

[pdm]

You know what's really wrong with MA gun laws? That they exist at all.

 

[Cato]

Ok, I'll be the contrarian. I'm happy for the guy.

 

[M1911]

Ok, I'll be the contrarian. I'm happy for the guy.

If I was on a jury, I'd have a real hard time convicting someone of possessing or carrying a gun without a license. I realize such charges would likely never go to a jury. But I'd have a hard time convicting someone of exercising their 2nd Amendment rights.

 

[wahsben]

In my opinion in America the bearing of arms should never be a crime. To make it one is unconstitutional. Only the actions that one takes with the gun or with anything should be the determining factor in whether a crime was commited or not.

 

[MisterHappy]

The reason that we need more laws is because the one cited above would not apply to a law-abiding gun owner, and is therefore, useless.

/sarcasm

When you're on a jury (at least in my experience) you think a bit differently....we (as a jury) let a dirtbag walk on several counts (even though we "knew" he was guilty_ because the state's case was so poor....

 

[Cato]

If I was on a jury, I'd have a real hard time convicting someone of possessing or carrying a gun without a license. I realize such charges would likely never go to a jury. But I'd have a hard time convicting someone of exercising their 2nd Amendment rights.

Yeah, same here.

I'm surprised that MA was so easy on him. They just stole $300 from him and sent him on his way. Probably stole his gun too.

The poor guy is from Miami and probably had no idea that he could get in trouble for simple possession. I would imagine that he hauled butt south to the state line right after the theft was finalized.

 

[M1911]

When you're on a jury (at least in my experience) you think a bit differently....we (as a jury) let a dirtbag walk on several counts (even though we "knew" he was guilty_ because the state's case was so poor....

I haven't been on a jury, so perhaps my view will change if I am ever called.

But if the only charges are gun possession or carrying a concealed firearm, it's likely going to be a hung jury because I'll have a hard time convicting. If he's really a dirt bag, then the DA will have to point me towards something that he actually did wrong.

 

[kevin9]

Can you say "plea bargain"

 

[Garys]

Can you say "plea bargain"

This. I doubt that this went to trial. The ADA and his lawyer (maybe a public defender) struck a deal so that this guy plead out to one of the charges, paid a fine, and avoided jail time. Stuff like this happens all the time. Very few minor cases actually go to trial. Most are plead away by mutual agreement.

Which is why Howie Carr says, "In the Halls of Justice, the only justice is in the halls."

 

[economist]

Ok, I'll be the contrarian. I'm happy for the guy.

+1, except for him having to pay a fine at all.

 

[Zappa]

I'd bet you a beer the he didn't have a non-res license.


He still got convicted of possession of a firearm without an FID, so the fact that he had a gun on him didn't get tossed.

What ever happened to the Bartley-Fox Law?

In 1974, Massachusetts legislators approved one of the toughest gun control measures in the country. The Bartley-Fox law, enacted with great fanfare and coupled with an unusual three-month publicity campaign, set a mandatory one-year jail term for anyone in the state convicted of carrying a firearm without a permit.

Does anyone ever get charged under that statute?

Anyone else remember the signs that were once posted along the highway at the state line touting the "Year in Jail" Gun Law?

 

[Len-2A Training]

This is SOP in MA.

I've posted on this before a number of times, including the reasoning why (from a chief justice in a district court).

 

[cekim]

This is SOP in MA.

I've posted on this before a number of times, including the reasoning why (from a chief justice in a district court).

Clearly we try to reserve the best oppression for residents...

 

[M1911]

What ever happened to the Bartley-Fox Law?

Does anyone ever get charged under that statute?

Anyone else remember the signs that were once posted along the highway at the state line touting the "Year in Jail" Gun Law?

Someone here explained why it is hardly ever used. I don't remember exactly why. Is it because B-F is only punishable by time in jail, rather than prison, and so it has to be tried in local district court, rather than superior court?

 

[Garys]

Someone here explained why it is hardly ever used. I don't remember exactly why. Is it because B-F is only punishable by time in jail, rather than prison, and so it has to be tried in local district court, rather than superior court?

I think it's because of the mandatory year in jail if convicted. Since often people get little or no jail time, I seem to remember reading that it's thrown in with the other charges so it can be plea bargained out later on. More leverage for prosecutors to use to get a deal.

 

[Half Cocked]

What ever happened to the Bartley-Fox Law?


Does anyone ever get charged under that statute?

There is not a statute for Bartley-Fox.... it is not a law in and of itself it is a sentencing requirement under C269-10. It does not appear in this case that the defendant was charged under 269-10 so therefore it is not applicable.

 

[Reptile]

Why, in God's name, if they won't enforce the laws on the books do they feel the need to pass MORE restrictive laws that will only serve to punish law-abiding citizens!

Because they want to disarm us so we will become dependent on the government.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Someone here explained why it is hardly ever used. I don't remember exactly why. Is it because B-F is only punishable by time in jail, rather than prison, and so it has to be tried in local district court, rather than superior court?

I had forgotten about that aspect. You are right and I think it was RKG that raised that issue.

I think it's because of the mandatory year in jail if convicted. Since often people get little or no jail time, I seem to remember reading that it's thrown in with the other charges so it can be plea bargained out later on. More leverage for prosecutors to use to get a deal.

This was the story I was given by the former chief justice. It also cuts down on number of jury trials demanded by perps, reducing judicial workload.

 

[George D]

What ever happened to the Bartley-Fox Law?



Does anyone ever get charged under that statute?

Anyone else remember the signs that were once posted along the highway at the state line touting the "Year in Jail" Gun Law?

Remember the big giant signs when you entered the state from NY or RI?

 

[Underwhere]

It says he's from Miami.
Maybe he didn't know about MA laws and they dismissed because it was an honest mistake.

I see it sort of like making a right on red in NYC. Sometimes you just don't know what's legal and what's not.

 

[GSG]

From the Worcester T&G Court Records in today's paper:

Keep reading them. There's piles of cases with dispositions like that listed in it every single day.

Anyone else curious what "$50 victim witness fee" is?

They pay witnesses to show up to court.

You know what's really wrong with MA gun laws? That they exist at all.

+1

The poor guy is from Miami and probably had no idea that he could get in trouble for simple possession.

It says he's from Miami.
Maybe he didn't know about MA laws

This is my guess. It's perfectly legal for a Florida resident 18 or older to buy a handgun on a driver's license and carry it loaded in their glove compartment (or otherwise "securely encased") in Florida without any kind of license. If he spent his life living somewhere free he may well not have known.

There is not a statute for Bartley-Fox.... it is not a law in and of itself it is a sentencing requirement under C269-10. It does not appear in this case that the defendant was charged under 269-10 so therefore it is not applicable.

Huh? Aside from the petty driving stuff, everything he was charged with was under subsections of MGL 269-10, including what he plead it down to.

ETA: Just realized you're talking about 269-10(a) which is where the Bartley-Fox penalty comes in. Still, he was charged there, just not convicted.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Originally Posted by AppleSeeds
Anyone else curious what "$50 victim witness fee" is?

They pay witnesses to show up to court.

MA courts only pay $6.00/day + $0.10/mile as a witness/travel fee to show up in court. It's an embarrassment as it won't cover the cost of parking alone, but no way does it approach $50.00!

The state just calls it that. It's really just an extortion fee that gets dumped into the general treasury to be wasted along with all the other fees/taxes.

Ref: MGL C. 262 S. 29 (last amended in 1998!)

 

[Mark from MA]

This is what's wrong with the laws in Massachusetts. Why, in God's name, if they won't enforce the laws on the books do they feel the need to pass MORE restrictive laws that will only serve to punish law-abiding citizens!

From the Worcester T&G Court Records in today's paper:

Romeo Walker, 38, of Miami, charged with possession of a firearm without a firearm ID card, fined $250, $50 victim witness fee; marked lanes violation and license plate violation, found responsible, filed; possession of a large capacity firearm and carrying a loaded firearm without a license, dismissed.

I read this every day in the T&G. Unlicensed persons having Firearms with serial numbers scratched off, firearms while in possession of drugs, carrying loaded hi cap firearms without a license. This is almost daily they get off dismissed with a 50 dollar fine.

Read the records under Judge Robert Harbour sometime it will make you puke.....he lets most everyone off dismissed with a 50 dollar fine..it's a joke. Doesn't matter if they are from MA, Miami, or Timbucktu.....majority of time it's dismissed.

In my reply to Bill Fine's editorial, I asked them......Why not an editorial on why there are all the dismissed firearms charges in this state?