| Author | Post |
|---|
Gunslinger
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Mar 13th, 2009 09:07 pm |
|
Decoligny wrote: Assuming that he was legally able to possess the firearms in Connecticut, and he was also legally able to possess the firearms in Maine, and of course depending on if they were locked up or not, he should be covered under the following:
U.S. CODE Title 18, Part 1, Chap 44
§ 926A. Interstate transportation of firearms.
Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof, any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle: Provided, that in the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver’s compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console.
Exactly right. Peaceful transport of firearms you are lawfully seized of in your departure and destination state are exempt from state laws. The brass knuckles are illegal in the PDR of MA, I have no doubt, but the seach and seizure smells to me. Sounds like fruit of the poisoned tree. The weapons were being lawfully transported, however. He had a pistol grip for the shotgun! Oh heavens!!!This bimbo Block who wrote the story is a moron. Federal law doesn't require a license and will be an affirmative defense for this kid. Typical @#$%ing M@#$%.
|
Mathias9987
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Mar 14th, 2009 02:37 am |
|
thanx Decoligny that makes more sense, now if only we could get that in the heads of the MA legislature to fix their idiotic ways, unfortunately I was born in MA but moved to NH when I was 13 and have lived here ever since
|
Mathias9987
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Mar 14th, 2009 02:42 am |
|
Gunslinger wrote: Decoligny wrote: Assuming that he was legally able to possess the firearms in Connecticut, and he was also legally able to possess the firearms in Maine, and of course depending on if they were locked up or not, he should be covered under the following:
U.S. CODE Title 18, Part 1, Chap 44
§ 926A. Interstate transportation of firearms.
Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof, any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle: Provided, that in the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver’s compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console.
Exactly right. Peaceful transport of firearms you are lawfully seized of in your departure and destination state are exempt from state laws. The brass knuckles are illegal in the PDR of MA, I have no doubt, but the seach and seizure smells to me. Sounds like fruit of the poisoned tree. The weapons were being lawfully transported, however. He had a pistol grip for the shotgun! Oh heavens!!!This bimbo Block who wrote the story is a moron. Federal law doesn't require a license and will be an affirmative defense for this kid. Typical @#$%ing M@#$%.
but what about the ammunition they found in his pockets?
|
Mike
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Sat Mar 14th, 2009 05:55 am |
|
Mathias9987 wrote: but what about the ammunition they found in his pockets?
It's illegal to have ammo in Mass.?
|
timf343
Campaign Veteran
|
Posted: Sat Mar 14th, 2009 05:59 am |
|
I wish I hadn't just read this story. It's 12:46 AM and I don't think I'll be able to sleep.
This is SCARY.
It just as easily could have been me. I moved to New Hampshire by traveling through Massachusetts (and Illinois, New Jersey, and New York as well) thinking I was safe under the cited Federal law.
I had a few thousand rounds of ammo, a couple of "assault" rifles, a few shotguns, and a dozen handguns. Even an airgun now that I think about it. All locked, all encased, but fortunately, all in the bed of my truck (an Avalanche with locked bed cover). At least my gun cases wouldn't have been noticed as they were covered in the bed...........
But what a nightmare. That could be my ugly mug up there with all my gear seized and displayed all over the TV.
This reminds of another nightmare story I heard a few months ago about a guy traveling through New York airport (on a layover). He was arrested and had his gun seized because his layover resulted in an overnight stay due to weather. His bags were given to him and had to be rechecked (and thus the firearm re-declared).
WTF do you do? Congress ignores the constitution. The states ignore Federal law. And YOU get sent to jail for running the maze blindfolded like you thought you were supposed to.
I have been enjoying NH and VT. Unfortunately, we're surrounded. You have to go through Canada or Maine or New York or Massachusetts unless you fly. Just try not to get a flight with a layover and check the weather before you get on the flight.
|
timf343
Campaign Veteran
|
Posted: Sat Mar 14th, 2009 06:09 am |
|
Mike wrote: It's illegal to have ammo in Mass.?
It's even illegal to say words containing the letters GUN....
Begun
Burgundy
Gunk
Laguna
It hasn't yet been tested in the state courts whether the letters have to appear in that exact order, but I personally wouldn't risk ordering chicken NUGgets in a restaurant or evenly openly discussing my yoUNGer brother in open company.
<end sarcasm>
Best to just avoid Massachusetts at all costs.
|
buketdude
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sat Sep 22nd, 2007 |
| Location: | Connecticut USA |
| Posts: | 184 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 14th, 2009 02:21 pm |
|
From what i see..all those firearms could be legally owned in CT...
|
CaptSkip
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 14th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 14th, 2009 04:25 pm |
|
Is anyone getting this kid the info he needs/or his lawyer--- How can we help? Updates? -- Skip
|
CJ
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sat Oct 20th, 2007 |
| Location: | VT, AK |
| Posts: | 59 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 14th, 2009 06:57 pm |
|
CaptSkip wrote: Is anyone getting this kid the info he needs/or his lawyer--- How can we help? Updates? -- Skip
I don't know. Does anyone have any contact info. on him?
|
KBCraig
Regular Member
| Joined: | Tue Aug 7th, 2007 |
| Location: | Northeast Texas |
| Posts: | 1497 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 16th, 2009 01:04 am |
|
Ohio Patriot wrote: http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/030509_Police_find_weapons_during_traffic_stop
Mr. Huizinga may face federal charges, including transporting guns across state lanes and not having a license to carry firearms.
Good lord, do they just make this crap up out of thin air? Or does someone believe there are any such federal laws?
|
BobbyGun71
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Mar 16th, 2009 01:31 am |
|
If he had any Mags that were LEO/GOV only or double edge knives & brass knuckles that would make your legally owned firearms in illegally for that reason, because Mass issues Non-Residents Firearms Licenses and he didn't have one that will be in favor for the prosecution, Mass has regulations on body armor, I would think if it was only the firearms and not the other things he had he would have a chance, just the brass knuckles alone would screw your life up in this state that is controlled by the Taliban. I live only 5 minutes from NH and even though I hold a unrestricted Class A LTC I still feel free when I visit NH. I hope this kid walks with just a warning.
|
timf343
Campaign Veteran
|
Posted: Mon Mar 16th, 2009 01:42 am |
|
You mentioned a law on body armor. The only one I could find is:
http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/269-10d.htm
It only applies in the event you're wearing it and are in the process of committing a felony. Since this kid wasn't wearing it, I don't think he broke any Mass laws on that particular item. I think it was mentioned more as propaganda.
Does anyone have a different take?
|
CJ
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sat Oct 20th, 2007 |
| Location: | VT, AK |
| Posts: | 59 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 16th, 2009 02:04 am |
|
BobbyGun71 wrote: If he had any Mags that were LEO/GOV only or double edge knives & brass knuckles that would make your legally owned firearms in illegally for that reason, because Mass issues Non-Residents Firearms Licenses and he didn't have one that will be in favor for the prosecution, Mass has regulations on body armor, I would think if it was only the firearms and not the other things he had he would have a chance, just the brass knuckles alone would screw your life up in this state that is controlled by the Taliban. I live only 5 minutes from NH and even though I hold a unrestricted Class A LTC I still feel free when I visit NH. I hope this kid walks with just a warning.
My hope is that since the firearms were perfectly legally being transported, and that was the basis for the search, that the rest of what was found is excluded. He really needs a good lawyer and I really hope his lawyer is well versed on the laws.
Only problem with NH, ME and VT are that you're surrounded by those "other" states if you want to go anywhere...
Last edited on Mon Mar 16th, 2009 02:05 am by CJ
|
Mathias9987
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Mar 16th, 2009 02:17 am |
|
Mike wrote: Mathias9987 wrote: but what about the ammunition they found in his pockets?
It's illegal to have ammo in Mass.?
one of the conditions of FOPA is that ammunition can not be readily accessible from the passenger compartment
|
BobbyGun71
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Mar 16th, 2009 09:34 pm |
|
You cannot even have an empty projectile from a shooting range in Mass with out some sort of License, You cannot even have a key chain bullet with out a license.
|
Decoligny
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Mar 16th, 2009 09:54 pm |
|
BobbyGun71 wrote: If he had any Mags that were LEO/GOV only or double edge knives & brass knuckles that would make your legally owned firearms in illegally for that reason, because Mass issues Non-Residents Firearms Licenses and he didn't have one that will be in favor for the prosecution, Mass has regulations on body armor, I would think if it was only the firearms and not the other things he had he would have a chance, just the brass knuckles alone would screw your life up in this state that is controlled by the Taliban. I live only 5 minutes from NH and even though I hold a unrestricted Class A LTC I still feel free when I visit NH. I hope this kid walks with just a warning.
As far as Non-Resident Firearms Licenses, he was driving through Massachusetts on his way to Maine. A person traveling through the state doesn't require a non-resident license.
If it were the case that he needed a non-resident license, then someone traveling from California to Maine would need a non-resident license from Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire.
Assuming about $100.00 for a non-resident permit, thats $1,400 just to drive across country with your guns.
Second point, even if he had mags marked "LEO/GOV ONLY" that is only a Massachusetts requirement, the magazines could be perfectly legal to own in Connecticut, and thus would be covered under FOPA.
Third point, even if he had a double edged knife and brass knuckles, and they were illegal everywhere, if the only reason the police searched his vehicle was because he had LEGAL FIREARMS PROTECTED IN TRANSPORT BY FEDERAL LAW, then anything found because of the search, be it a set of brass knuckles or a kilo of pure cocaine, would have to be thrown out as the fruits of an illegal search.
|
BobbyGun71
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Mar 17th, 2009 07:45 pm |
|
I hear ya Decoligny, but I seen this happened to someone that had only (Handguns) and one of his handguns were a five&seven pistol that had 20 round mags marked with LEO/GOV on them, he didn't even have ammo in his car or on him, just a couple of Pistols with trigger locks and in a lock box, he was 22 years old and had his NH resident Pistol/Revolver License he just got and he was still found guilty and lost everything and got 5 years and probation, the federal law for passing threw was not allowed to be used in a Massachusetts court in his defense in this case, that really sucked, but anyway During a traffic stop if you have anything on you meaning in your pockets like ammunition in any district or state that you need to have a license/permit for then it is state law issue not Federal law issue, if he had it in his vehicle locked up and not had access or in a lock box then federal passer threw law would cover him but once you get stopped for a traffic violation they make their own judgments, being 18 and not 21 plus in age and having a firearm that you need to be 21 to have will not help out in court passer threw or not. This kid will have to prove he did't stop anywhere in Mass while passing threw the state but then again that is not the issue it's just that some Mass state police will be German Nazi troops and bothering folks passing threw. Government power will do it every time. If laws were inforced we would have Barack Hussein Obama in office and Acorn.com would have been shut down.
|
SlackwareRobert
Regular Member
| Joined: | Tue Jun 10th, 2008 |
| Location: | Alabama |
| Posts: | 943 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 17th, 2009 09:50 pm |
|
Did I miss where the ammo was in the cab? If they found it in the beds box then
it is clearly authorized for transport.
The video link said he had a spent 50 cal on a string around his neck, was this the
only "ammo" on him?
If he was not maintaining the marked lanes, lets see the dash cam footage.
Wouldn't be surprised that this also wasn't fabricated.
So close to freadom only 45 minutes away from the American border.
Probably less at that hour.
Brasss knuckles make a good heatsink when soldering copper pipes.
And since no one else has said it.....
"Shotgun Wedding" ring any bells. Gave my sister one on her wedding.
Last edited on Tue Mar 17th, 2009 09:57 pm by SlackwareRobert
|
CJ
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sat Oct 20th, 2007 |
| Location: | VT, AK |
| Posts: | 59 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 17th, 2009 10:26 pm |
|
BobbyGun71 wrote: I hear ya Decoligny, but I seen this happened to someone that had only (Handguns) and one of his handguns were a five&seven pistol that had 20 round mags marked with LEO/GOV on them, he didn't even have ammo in his car or on him, just a couple of Pistols with trigger locks and in a lock box, he was 22 years old and had his NH resident Pistol/Revolver License he just got and he was still found guilty and lost everything and got 5 years and probation, the federal law for passing threw was not allowed to be used in a Massachusetts court in his defense in this case, that really sucked, but anyway During a traffic stop if you have anything on you meaning in your pockets like ammunition in any district or state that you need to have a license/permit for then it is state law issue not Federal law issue, if he had it in his vehicle locked up and not had access or in a lock box then federal passer threw law would cover him but once you get stopped for a traffic violation they make their own judgments, being 18 and not 21 plus in age and having a firearm that you need to be 21 to have will not help out in court passer threw or not. This kid will have to prove he did't stop anywhere in Mass while passing threw the state but then again that is not the issue it's just that some Mass state police will be German Nazi troops and bothering folks passing threw. Government power will do it every time. If laws were inforced we would have Barack Hussein Obama in office and Acorn.com would have been shut down.
Didn't that guy appeal it? If he eventually took it up high enough the conviction would have been thrown out.
|
Rattrapper
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sat Jul 5th, 2008 |
| Location: | Swanzey,NH |
| Posts: | 100 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 18th, 2009 03:18 am |
|
SlackwareRobert wrote: Did I miss where the ammo was in the cab? If they found it in the beds box then
it is clearly authorized for transport.
The video link said he had a spent 50 cal on a string around his neck, was this the
only "ammo" on him?
If he was not maintaining the marked lanes, lets see the dash cam footage.
Wouldn't be surprised that this also wasn't fabricated.
So close to freadom only 45 minutes away from the American border.
Probably less at that hour.
Brasss knuckles make a good heatsink when soldering copper pipes.
And since no one else has said it.....
"Shotgun Wedding" ring any bells. Gave my sister one on her wedding.
Mass. State Police do not have dash cams
|
Current time is 07:15 am | Page:   1 2 3 4   |
|
