We are prima facie criminals

[garandman]

Having used MARTA a lot in my visits to the ATL, their transit police are pretty gastapo-ish. They love themselves some powa!

I spent 15 months at Fort Benning and tried to avoid all interaction with local police, who were not well disposed to soldiers in general and Yankee soldiers in particular.

You had to sign for ammo purchases but they didn't check your id. Strange.

 

[Jose]

But this whole ruling shifts the burden from the prosecutor to the defense as a matter of law. This one will never hold up on appeal. You can't be prima facie presumed guilty for following the law and then be forced to raise a defense to get the charges dismissed.

People in GA love their guns. Look for political backlash from this one.

+1

If GeorgiaCarry is smart, they will sink this one in to the hilt and get some serious mileage.

It may very well be an excellent case that destroys or severely weakens the "affirmative defense" bullshit.

 

[Talon3]

Is that like here? You know, where they are pissed because they couldn't make the real police force??

There is one civil service test for MBTA, MSP, EPO (grades a and b entry level, grades c = sgt and d= lt., captains and above are red book, directly appointable) and cities and towns that use the civil service process. Some towns have removed themselves from MGL Ch 31 regulations and can hire off the street.

link below to the past 2009 test with delayed scoring info.

http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=aftermi...nt&f=hrd_cs_posters_2009_po_trooper&csid=Eoaf

No idea on how MARTA hires.

 

[Half Cocked]

But this whole ruling shifts the burden from the prosecutor to the defense as a matter of law. This one will never hold up on appeal. You can't be prima facie presumed guilty for following the law and then be forced to raise a defense to get the charges dismissed.

Re read the ruling. It is no different than the law here in ma... It has to do with the elements of the crime in question.

 

[GSG]

Judge Thrash held for trial Raissi's Privacy Act claim, based on the demand for Raissi's social security number. He refused to rule on the request that MARTA be enjoined from requesting social security numbers because MARTA stated that it no longer demands social security numbers of those who provide firearms licenses. "It seems very unlikely that members of GeorgiaCarry.Org would carry a Georgia firearms license but then refuse to provide it to MARTA police officers."

This part bugs me. He won't rule on it's validity because they said they won't do it anymore...riiiight.

Apparently Georgia is shall-issue, but essentially forbids carry in any location where people might be present.

You're not kidding. As Rob said they took a few places off their "no carry here" list, but it's still huge.

Do you find it coincidental that the "test case" was a member of GeorgiaCarry.Org?

Maybe he had a "little Doobie in him".

Exactly.

Indeed, with or without license you can not show your weapon, period (obviously unless you are defending yourself). That’s why it is called concealed.

Ish.

In Georgia open carry or concealed carry is legal with a Georgia Firearms License, so it doesn't have to be concealed.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

The sticker that "counts" is the Mass Police Assn sticker - serial numbered, tracked, and the MPA agressively promotes a "do not tolerate these on unauthorized vehicles campaign", to quote from http://www.masspolice.com/secretary.htm

roster updates
It is also vitally important that you update your rosters each year before you return them to the Secretary. You wouldn't believe how many calls we get during the year from members who did not get their Sentinel because their addresses were not updated. It is also important to record the sticker numbers you assign to each member. This is so that we can track abuses in the distribution of these stickers to persons not authorized to display them.

The MPA takes the position that the display of the window decal is a "fradulent display of a trade or professional association emblem"; encourages their officers to never let a civilian vehicle continue after a stop with the sticker intact; and (as of the last time I checked) went to the length of printing this reminder on the back of their membership cards. Naturally, the decal (round MPA emblem, tracking inspection sticker color, on white square with serial number below) is to be displayed in a position to be seen in traffic stops (top center rear window or left side window).

 

[Jaxon]

So what law is broken to display their sticker, if you're not a member?

 

[terraformer]

So what law is broken to display their sticker, if you're not a member?

More interestingly, if no law has been broken, how do they expect "their officers to never let a civilian vehicle continue after a stop with the sticker intact"... Under what authority will they force the non authorized user to remove or otherwise modify the sticker.

 

[Half Cocked]

This has to do with MARTA how?

 

[MXD]

I have 2 comments. The first is that he was observed concealing a weapon in his vehicle before entering the station. That's enough reason to at least be questioned and possibly charged because technically I believe that is illegal, correct? If the officer bumped into him and felt his weapon then he has a case. The second, as mentioned above, this will never stand up (never say never but I would be surprised) because the burden of proof is ALWAYS on the prosecution. The way the judge worded his ruling reverses that and that's clearly unconstitutional.

 

[IPSC_DRL]

MPA stickers.

More interestingly, if no law has been broken, how do they expect "their officers to never let a civilian vehicle continue after a stop with the sticker intact"... Under what authority will they force the non authorized user to remove or otherwise modify the sticker.

A MA COP told me his officers have razor-scrapers in the cruisers and are instructed to remove the stickers from vehicles not driven by LEO's.

 

[Jose]

I have 2 comments. The first is that he was observed concealing a weapon in his vehicle before entering the station. That's enough reason to at least be questioned and possibly charged because technically I believe that is illegal, correct?

INCORRECT

 

[drumenigma]

I have 2 comments. The first is that he was observed concealing a weapon in his vehicle before entering the station. That's enough reason to at least be questioned and possibly charged because technically I believe that is illegal, correct? If the officer bumped into him and felt his weapon then he has a case. The second, as mentioned above, this will never stand up (never say never but I would be surprised) because the burden of proof is ALWAYS on the prosecution. The way the judge worded his ruling reverses that and that's clearly unconstitutional.

The cop probably jumped to conclusions kind of like if a person reports a "person with a gun". They have no idea whether or not you are a criminal or not BUT you are not necessarily breaking the law. Maybe everyone should just start open carrying, problem solved. Those that you do not see a gun strapped to their side must be up to something...

 

[Garys]

So what law is broken to display their sticker, if you're not a member?

There's a section of the MGLs, which I can't find right now, that deals with wearing or displaying the trademark or symbol of an organization of which you are not a member. I think it's printed on the MPA membership card.

Then again, I'm not sure how this got into this thread.

 

[Titan]

The defendant's attorney did a great job of pointing out the insanity of the judge's 'logic', with his suggestion that even cops can be stopped by citizens, since being a cop is just an 'affirmative defense', and not an 'element of the crime'.

What a total BS ruling.

.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

There's a section of the MGLs, which I can't find right now, that deals with wearing or displaying the trademark or symbol of an organization of which you are not a member. I think it's printed on the MPA membership card.

Covered in post #36 and, last I checked it was on the back of the MPA card and frequently mentioned in The Sentinal (the MPA magazine)

 

[cekim]

The defendant's attorney did a great job of pointing out the insanity of the judge's 'logic', with his suggestion that even cops can be stopped by citizens, since being a cop is just an 'affirmative defense', and not an 'element of the crime'.

What a total BS ruling.

That would be an entertaining afternoon

 

[SecondAmdFirst]

The cop probably jumped to conclusions kind of like if a person reports a "person with a gun". They have no idea whether or not you are a criminal or not BUT you are not necessarily breaking the law. Maybe everyone should just start open carrying, problem solved. Those that you do not see a gun strapped to their side must be up to something...

The problem we have in the North East is that many people are shocked and affraid at the mere sight of a gun. A comedian once described it as the p*ssification of America.....I think it fits

 

[GSG]

The problem we have in the North East is that many people are shocked and affraid at the mere sight of a gun. A comedian once described it as the p*ssification of America.....I think it fits

It's not just in the Northeast. The Carry Issues section of Glocktalk has a megathread for "Tales of Open Carry" or something similar, and there's people in it from all over the US who talk about someone who was scared of their gun, or how no one noticed, etc. etc.

People are just people IMO.

 

[cekim]

It's not just in the Northeast.
...
People are just people IMO.

It's certainly true that there is a broad cultural problem in the US with irrational fear of guns (which is not new - the present level of gun phobia has been with us for decades).

However, it is not the case that the level of fear/misunderstanding is the same everywhere. It is definitely a cultural phenomenon. Those places where people grow up with them routinely, there is less "mystique" to them.

Much like virtually anywhere in this nation - the sight of a uniformed police officer with a sidearm does not raise an eyebrow. The object is now in a context they understand and believe they do not need to fear.

 

[GSG]

My point is that open carry draws crowds, draws police attention, draws no attention, gets people kicked out of stores, gets people second glances, and doesn't even get noticed in free states and restricted states.

I agree with you that it's a cultural phenomenon, but I definitely believe it's more individual than regional.

 

[Coyote33]

I will refer you to this post, which I don't want to retype.

 

[GSG]

I will refer you to this post, which I don't want to retype.

Just keep in mind that someone with a Class B can open carry in public, but not in a car, and if they're caught doing it they lose their LTC for a year.

MGL 140-131c:

Chapter 140: Section 131C. Carrying of firearms in a vehicle


Section 131C. (a) No person carrying a loaded firearm under a Class A license issued under section 131 or 131F shall carry the same in a vehicle unless such firearm while carried therein is under the direct control of such person. Whoever violates the provisions of this subsection shall be punished by a fine of $500.

(b) No person carrying a firearm under a Class B license issued under section 131 or 131F shall possess the same in a vehicle unless such weapon is unloaded and contained within the locked trunk of such vehicle or in a locked case or other secure container. Whoever violates the provisions of this subsection shall be punished by a fine of $500.

(c) No person possessing a large capacity rifle or shotgun under a Class A or Class B license issued under section 131 or 131F shall possess the same in a vehicle unless such weapon is unloaded and contained within the locked trunk of such vehicle or in a locked case or other secure container. Whoever violates the provisions of this subsection shall be punished by a fine of not less than $500 nor more than $5,000.

(d) The provisions of this section shall not apply to (i) any officer, agent or employee of the commonwealth or any state or the United States; (ii) any member of the military or other service of any state or of the United States; (iii) any duly authorized law enforcement officer, agent or employee of any municipality of the commonwealth; provided, however, that any such person described in clauses (i) to (iii), inclusive, is authorized by a competent authority to carry or possess the weapon so carried or possessed and is acting within the scope of his duties.

(e) A conviction of a violation of this section shall be reported forthwith by the court or magistrate to the licensing authority who shall immediately revoke the card or license of the person so convicted. No new such card or license may be issued to any such person until one year after the date of revocation.

 

[Coyote33]

Good clarification, GSG.