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.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Would a zip tie be OK for securing a firearm in it's case when transporting? Silly question, I know, but I misplaced some of my smaller locks and don't have enough to go around.
Be careful of the distinction here too. Your title says storage, your post discusses transport. The requirements are not the same.
I'll clarify. What I meant was putting a firearm in a case, 'locking it' and driving back and forth to the range.
I've wondered the same. Both a zip tie and a lock cannot be opened with bare hands; both require tools (a key is a tool, as are bolt cutters) to remove, so who is going to be the first to make a legal argument for the precise difficult of locking device removal that would meet MA storage requirements?
I'd say that's absurd (I don't doubt that it's a true story in this state) because any safe can be broken into. Are we legislating the difficulty of doing so now?
If I remember the details correctly, someone was convicted based on another person unscrewing the hinges on a gun cabinet, stealing a gun and then screwing the hinges back on. Of course the person convicted tried to claim that his bedroom was a "locked container" when he had a "push-pin" bathroom type privacy lock on the bedroom door . . . the judge didn't buy his argument. [Rob Boudrie will be along shortly to correct me if I mis-remembered any of this.]
Wow, scary. Seems to say that the level of security which constitutes "locked" basically changes based on the whim of the cop and judge. If one could use a screwdriver to unscrew exposed screws on a cabinet, then how far a stretch is it for someone to use that same screwdriver to, say, pry open a security cabinet? Jimmy open a locked door? How much security is enough when it comes to a stolen gun? To a certain mindset, one might say that if the gun is stolen, then the security was obviously not adequate, no matter how strong it was.
Here's the case.
Comm. v. Parzick (2005) 835 N.E.2d 1171, 64 Mass.App.Ct. 846, review denied 848 N.E.2d 1212
"and possession of a firearm without a valid firearm identification (FID) card, in violation of G. L. c. 269, § 10(h). In his appeal, the defendant contends that guns stored in an unlocked bedroom closet within a locked bedroom are "secured 847*847 in a locked container,"
Yeah, I'm not using that yardstick.
========
ETA. For routine travel, I'm using a lock. For a one-off instance of travel (new purchase), if the included lock cannot be utilized, a beefy cable tie suffices for my needs.
I'll clarify. What I meant was putting a firearm in a case, 'locking it' and driving back and forth to the range.
I've wondered the same. Both a zip tie and a lock cannot be opened with bare hands; both require tools (a key is a tool, as are bolt cutters) to remove, so who is going to be the first to make a legal argument for the precise difficult of locking device removal that would meet MA storage requirements?
My opinion (which in no way is backed by understanding of the laws) is that any lock that can be defeated nearly instantly by almost any readily available tool is not a lock. Zip ties can be cut with scissors, a pocket knife, or even melted off with a lighter.
My opinion (which in no way is backed by understanding of the laws) is that any lock that can be defeated nearly instantly by almost any readily available tool is not a lock. Zip ties can be cut with scissors, a pocket knife, or even melted off with a lighter.
My opinion (which in no way is backed by understanding of the laws) is that any lock that can be defeated nearly instantly by almost any readily available tool is not a lock. Zip ties can be cut with scissors, a pocket knife, or even melted off with a lighter.
The locks that they give away at the PDs are easily cut with lineman's pliers. That does not make them "not locks".
As I stated above, the fact that the PD gives you a gun lock to lock your gun makes it more "official" than other things that are just as easily defeated. Because PRM.
I'm not saying that it's logical, just that in the PRM form often takes precedence over function. There was a case (sorry, no cite, but it's been referenced on NES before) where a handgun in a plastic cooler was held to have been lawfully stored. I'm sure that most people would not consider that overly secure.
Of course Maura could issue a STORAGE ROSTER that lists acceptable Locks and Containers.
(groan)
There was a case (sorry, no cite, but it's been referenced on NES before) where a handgun in a plastic cooler was held to have been lawfully stored.
Meanwhile, another officer found a "little Igloo cooler" in the backyard. … Upon opening the cooler, the officer found a locked box in which there was a firearm. The box, which appears to be made for the firearm by the manufacturer, is composed of a plastic-type material and measures approximately ten-by-six inches. … The words "Glock 'safe action' pistol" are written in raised letters across the front of the box. The box is designed with a small hole, which lines up with the firearm's trigger guard. Here, the box was found with a cable lock ("a lock mechanism with a cable" attached) threaded through the hole, thereby securing the firearm in the box as well as locking the box itself. There was no direct testimony as to how the police opened the box. The trial judge, however, found that the box and the lock were adequate.
… The Commonwealth's theory of culpability was that, even though the handgun was stored in a locked box, the box and the lock were inadequate, and, further, that the gun was not "secure[]" because anyone could walk away with the cooler in which the gun was hidden or with the locked box itself. The judge adopted the Commonwealth's latter theory, framing the issue as "whether the gun was maintained in a locked and secured location." The judge found the defendant guilty on the ground that, "although . . . the gun was locked," it was not in a "secured location."
The defendant contends that he was not in violation of the statute because the statute permits the storage of a firearm in "any place" as long as it is "secured in a locked container" (emphasis added). G. L. c. 140, § 131L(a). We agree. In a prior case concerning the improper storage of firearms, we interpreted the word "secured" as indicating 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." Commonwealth v. Parzick, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 846 , 850 (2005). [Note 6] Here, the judge's guilty finding was not based on any deficiency in the lock or the box. Rather, as we have noted, the finding was based on a failure to keep the box in a "secured location." However, the fact that the defendant placed the securely locked box in a cooler is of no consequence. The judge's implicit determination that the lock box adequately secured the firearm should have ended her inquiry; no more was required to determine that the defendant had satisfied the requirements of the statute. Although we acknowledge the safety concerns expressed by the Commonwealth, nonetheless, neither the statute nor our case law requires a gun owner who keeps a firearm "secured in a locked container" to also store that container in a secure location. The Commonwealth's interpretation of the statute is simply too expansive. … Should the Legislature choose to consider imposing stricter storage requirements, it is free to do so.
Judgment reversed.
Finding set aside.
Judgment for defendant.
....incidentally MGL c. 140 s. 131K does require a state approved trigger lock (not provided by the buyer) to accompany ALL firearms (handguns) and large capacity weapons that are sold by Mass licensed dealers. [For storage purposes, the locking device does not need to be state approved]
Where did you see the "Mass licensed dealers" part? My understanding is that the requirement applies to everyone, including manufacturers, wholesalers, and private sellers.
The current list of approved safety devices is here. Not all of them are trigger locks.