|
Speaking of guns and horses
I was just reading that a selectman in a town here in MA (Shrewsbury) has raised an issue regarding gun ownership. He feels that local police departments should have the authority to visit registered gun owners' homes and inspect for required safe storage of the guns. His point is that laws exist that require locks and/or safes for guns but there are no means of enforcing these laws. Hmmmmm.... I pondered that one for a little bit then, because of the discussions here about horses, I realized something. A permit is required to have horses permanently on your property ... at least in our town and many others. The permit is issued yearly based on an inspection of the stables, barn, and grounds by the animal control inspector. She checks to ensure sanitary and safe conditions for both the horse(s) and that may visit in the barn area. Is that any different than home inspections for the safe storage of firearms? I don't know. |
Speaking of guns and horses
On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:21:20 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
I was just reading that a selectman in a town here in MA (Shrewsbury) has raised an issue regarding gun ownership. He feels that local police departments should have the authority to visit registered gun owners' homes and inspect for required safe storage of the guns. His point is that laws exist that require locks and/or safes for guns but there are no means of enforcing these laws. Hmmmmm.... I pondered that one for a little bit then, because of the discussions here about horses, I realized something. A permit is required to have horses permanently on your property ... at least in our town and many others. The permit is issued yearly based on an inspection of the stables, barn, and grounds by the animal control inspector. She checks to ensure sanitary and safe conditions for both the horse(s) and that may visit in the barn area. Is that any different than home inspections for the safe storage of firearms? I don't know. The big difference is in the 'confiscation' arena, which seems to be the next step up the anti-gun ladder. It sounds as though protection of the horse is the name of their 'inspection' game. You reckon they're trying to protect guns with their safety inspections. Suppose you like to sleep with a loaded pistol under your pillow? Does Joe Cop get to confiscate it if he finds it? Sounds like about ten too many liberals on the town council. You'd probably love it if they confiscated the horse! John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! |
Speaking of guns and horses
On 11/12/2013 3:21 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
I was just reading that a selectman in a town here in MA (Shrewsbury) has raised an issue regarding gun ownership. He feels that local police departments should have the authority to visit registered gun owners' homes and inspect for required safe storage of the guns. His point is that laws exist that require locks and/or safes for guns but there are no means of enforcing these laws. Hmmmmm.... I pondered that one for a little bit then, because of the discussions here about horses, I realized something. A permit is required to have horses permanently on your property ... at least in our town and many others. The permit is issued yearly based on an inspection of the stables, barn, and grounds by the animal control inspector. She checks to ensure sanitary and safe conditions for both the horse(s) and that may visit in the barn area. Is that any different than home inspections for the safe storage of firearms? I don't know. Meant to say, "sanitary and safe conditions for both the horse(s) and *people* who may visit in the barn area". |
Speaking of guns and horses
On 11/12/2013 3:32 PM, John H wrote:
On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:21:20 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: I was just reading that a selectman in a town here in MA (Shrewsbury) has raised an issue regarding gun ownership. He feels that local police departments should have the authority to visit registered gun owners' homes and inspect for required safe storage of the guns. His point is that laws exist that require locks and/or safes for guns but there are no means of enforcing these laws. Hmmmmm.... I pondered that one for a little bit then, because of the discussions here about horses, I realized something. A permit is required to have horses permanently on your property ... at least in our town and many others. The permit is issued yearly based on an inspection of the stables, barn, and grounds by the animal control inspector. She checks to ensure sanitary and safe conditions for both the horse(s) (*and people*) who may visit in the barn area. Is that any different than home inspections for the safe storage of firearms? I don't know. Suppose you like to sleep with a loaded pistol under your pillow? Doesn't everybody? |
Speaking of guns and horses
On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:36:46 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 11/12/2013 3:32 PM, John H wrote: On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:21:20 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: I was just reading that a selectman in a town here in MA (Shrewsbury) has raised an issue regarding gun ownership. He feels that local police departments should have the authority to visit registered gun owners' homes and inspect for required safe storage of the guns. His point is that laws exist that require locks and/or safes for guns but there are no means of enforcing these laws. Hmmmmm.... I pondered that one for a little bit then, because of the discussions here about horses, I realized something. A permit is required to have horses permanently on your property ... at least in our town and many others. The permit is issued yearly based on an inspection of the stables, barn, and grounds by the animal control inspector. She checks to ensure sanitary and safe conditions for both the horse(s) (*and people*) who may visit in the barn area. Is that any different than home inspections for the safe storage of firearms? I don't know. Suppose you like to sleep with a loaded pistol under your pillow? Doesn't everybody? Yeah, but it's uncomfortable as hell - having that loaded pistol in a big bulky safe. John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! |
Speaking of guns and horses
On 11/12/13, 3:21 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
I was just reading that a selectman in a town here in MA (Shrewsbury) has raised an issue regarding gun ownership. He feels that local police departments should have the authority to visit registered gun owners' homes and inspect for required safe storage of the guns. His point is that laws exist that require locks and/or safes for guns but there are no means of enforcing these laws. Hmmmmm.... I pondered that one for a little bit then, because of the discussions here about horses, I realized something. A permit is required to have horses permanently on your property ... at least in our town and many others. The permit is issued yearly based on an inspection of the stables, barn, and grounds by the animal control inspector. She checks to ensure sanitary and safe conditions for both the horse(s) and that may visit in the barn area. Is that any different than home inspections for the safe storage of firearms? I don't know. The fact that there are going to be inspections should be widely announced, but the inspections themselves should be unannounced...just a ring of the doorbell. But my guess is that the NRA would seek and get a TRO. -- Religion: together we can find the cure. |
Speaking of guns and horses
On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:21:20 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: The permit is issued yearly based on an inspection of the stables, barn, and grounds by the animal control inspector. She checks to ensure sanitary and safe conditions for both the horse(s) and that may visit in the barn area. Is that any different than home inspections for the safe storage of firearms? === Yes, big difference, unless your stable is also your dwelling. Inspecting the interior of a home except at the time of construction or renovation generally requires a search warrant and probable cause, and that's the way it should stay unless you want to roll the clock back to colonial times and British rule. It's another example of northeastern nanny state mentality run amok. |
Speaking of guns and horses
|
Speaking of guns and horses
On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 16:11:25 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:21:20 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: The permit is issued yearly based on an inspection of the stables, barn, and grounds by the animal control inspector. She checks to ensure sanitary and safe conditions for both the horse(s) and that may visit in the barn area. Is that any different than home inspections for the safe storage of firearms? === Yes, big difference, unless your stable is also your dwelling. Inspecting the interior of a home except at the time of construction or renovation generally requires a search warrant and probable cause, and that's the way it should stay unless you want to roll the clock back to colonial times and British rule. It's another example of northeastern nanny state mentality run amok. Yeah, what he said. John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! |
Speaking of guns and horses
"F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 11/12/13, 3:21 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: I was just reading that a selectman in a town here in MA (Shrewsbury) has raised an issue regarding gun ownership. He feels that local police departments should have the authority to visit registered gun owners' homes and inspect for required safe storage of the guns. His point is that laws exist that require locks and/or safes for guns but there are no means of enforcing these laws. Hmmmmm.... I pondered that one for a little bit then, because of the discussions here about horses, I realized something. A permit is required to have horses permanently on your property ... at least in our town and many others. The permit is issued yearly based on an inspection of the stables, barn, and grounds by the animal control inspector. She checks to ensure sanitary and safe conditions for both the horse(s) and that may visit in the barn area. Is that any different than home inspections for the safe storage of firearms? I don't know. The fact that there are going to be inspections should be widely announced, but the inspections themselves should be unannounced...just a ring of the doorbell. But my guess is that the NRA would seek and get a TRO. Sounds like with that reasoning, the state can come in and inspect any dwelling or land. Might be a building without the proper permit. Maybe you have a leaking toilet, and wasting water. Something that was addressed in the Constitution. DC court tossed the permit to own a gun in DC, did in they? |
Speaking of guns and horses
On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 21:35:05 -0600, Califbill wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote: On 11/12/13, 3:21 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: I was just reading that a selectman in a town here in MA (Shrewsbury) has raised an issue regarding gun ownership. He feels that local police departments should have the authority to visit registered gun owners' homes and inspect for required safe storage of the guns. His point is that laws exist that require locks and/or safes for guns but there are no means of enforcing these laws. Hmmmmm.... I pondered that one for a little bit then, because of the discussions here about horses, I realized something. A permit is required to have horses permanently on your property ... at least in our town and many others. The permit is issued yearly based on an inspection of the stables, barn, and grounds by the animal control inspector. She checks to ensure sanitary and safe conditions for both the horse(s) and that may visit in the barn area. Is that any different than home inspections for the safe storage of firearms? I don't know. The fact that there are going to be inspections should be widely announced, but the inspections themselves should be unannounced...just a ring of the doorbell. But my guess is that the NRA would seek and get a TRO. Sounds like with that reasoning, the state can come in and inspect any dwelling or land. Might be a building without the proper permit. Maybe you have a leaking toilet, and wasting water. Something that was addressed in the Constitution. DC court tossed the permit to own a gun in DC, did in they? I mentioned the next step to 'safety inspections' would be confiscation, but Luddite deleted that in his response. "The big difference is in the 'confiscation' arena, which seems to be the next step up the anti-gun ladder. It sounds as though protection of the horse is the name of their 'inspection' game. You reckon they're trying to protect guns with their safety inspections. Suppose you like to sleep with a loaded pistol under your pillow? Does Joe Cop get to confiscate it if he finds it? Sounds like about ten too many liberals on the town council. " The idea that a cop could search, warrantless, your home and this would be acceptable is unfathomable. John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! |
Speaking of guns and horses
|
Speaking of guns and horses
|
Speaking of guns and horses
On 11/13/2013 7:18 AM, John H wrote:
The idea that a cop could search, warrantless, your home and this would be acceptable is unfathomable. John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! I agree that a search of your home without a warrant showing probable cause is unfathomable. The sneaky thing about this selectman's proposal is that the authorization for the cops to search is tied to your permit to own firearms. In other words, you don't agree .. you can't legally own a firearm. To me, his idea is that in order to qualify for a gun permit you must give the police permission to enter and search your home ahead of time. Years ago when we were wintering in Florida and Mrs.E's. horses had been transported down there, we received a letter from our home town indicating that a barn inspection had been conducted and her permit to have horses was renewed for another year. Mrs.E. was happy. I was ****ed. The barn had been secured for the winter. No horses. It's located on our property. It also contains a lot of fairly expensive equipment and gear. What right did a town official have to enter the barn without our knowledge or permission? I know it was harmless and for a specific purpose but still the idea that anyone ... town official or private citizen could enter whenever they felt like it got under my skin. To me, it's trespassing. I called the town hall and explained my concern. I wasn't an ass about it or anything but made the point that if it were anyone else, it would be considered a break-in, in my opinion. I asked them what would happen if we reported some equipment as being missing when we returned in the spring? I guess the town had never considered anything like that. Since then they always call the day before they would like to visit for an inspection. |
Speaking of guns and horses
On 11/13/13, 7:38 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/13/2013 7:18 AM, John H wrote: The idea that a cop could search, warrantless, your home and this would be acceptable is unfathomable. John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! I agree that a search of your home without a warrant showing probable cause is unfathomable. The sneaky thing about this selectman's proposal is that the authorization for the cops to search is tied to your permit to own firearms. In other words, you don't agree .. you can't legally own a firearm. To me, his idea is that in order to qualify for a gun permit you must give the police permission to enter and search your home ahead of time. If there is a local law requiring guns to be locked up safely, how is that law to be enforced? Here's an idea: If you have a gun and it is supposed to be locked and a kid gets his hands on it and shoots himself or someone else, *you* go to prison. Or, if someone steals a firearm and you don't report it right away, you go to prison. -- Religion: together we can find the cure. |
Speaking of guns and horses
On 11/13/2013 7:44 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 11/13/13, 7:38 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 11/13/2013 7:18 AM, John H wrote: The idea that a cop could search, warrantless, your home and this would be acceptable is unfathomable. John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! I agree that a search of your home without a warrant showing probable cause is unfathomable. The sneaky thing about this selectman's proposal is that the authorization for the cops to search is tied to your permit to own firearms. In other words, you don't agree .. you can't legally own a firearm. To me, his idea is that in order to qualify for a gun permit you must give the police permission to enter and search your home ahead of time. If there is a local law requiring guns to be locked up safely, how is that law to be enforced? Here's an idea: If you have a gun and it is supposed to be locked and a kid gets his hands on it and shoots himself or someone else, *you* go to prison. Or, if someone steals a firearm and you don't report it right away, you go to prison. Those are already distinct possibilities. You can be charged for negligence and for not storing the firearms in the prescribed manner by law. This will **** off the Tea Party types here, but I would not object to an inspection of my firearm storage. If a cop knocked on the door right now and asked if I voluntarily agreed to him coming in and checking how my guns are stored, I'd say, "Come on in". |
Speaking of guns and horses
On 11/13/13, 7:57 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/13/2013 7:44 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 11/13/13, 7:38 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 11/13/2013 7:18 AM, John H wrote: The idea that a cop could search, warrantless, your home and this would be acceptable is unfathomable. John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! I agree that a search of your home without a warrant showing probable cause is unfathomable. The sneaky thing about this selectman's proposal is that the authorization for the cops to search is tied to your permit to own firearms. In other words, you don't agree .. you can't legally own a firearm. To me, his idea is that in order to qualify for a gun permit you must give the police permission to enter and search your home ahead of time. If there is a local law requiring guns to be locked up safely, how is that law to be enforced? Here's an idea: If you have a gun and it is supposed to be locked and a kid gets his hands on it and shoots himself or someone else, *you* go to prison. Or, if someone steals a firearm and you don't report it right away, you go to prison. Those are already distinct possibilities. You can be charged for negligence and for not storing the firearms in the prescribed manner by law. This will **** off the Tea Party types here, but I would not object to an inspection of my firearm storage. If a cop knocked on the door right now and asked if I voluntarily agreed to him coming in and checking how my guns are stored, I'd say, "Come on in". I don't have any problem with such an inspection, either. There are no kids running around here, and all but one home defense weapon are locked up in a safe. We don't get many doorbell ringers around here, other than UPS/FEDEX and the Sunday church ladies, and I always peek on the video monitor before I open the door anyway. Anyone breaking in at night meets Mr. 12 Gauge. -- Religion: together we can find the cure. |
Speaking of guns and horses
|
Speaking of guns and horses
"F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 11/13/13, 7:38 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 11/13/2013 7:18 AM, John H wrote: The idea that a cop could search, warrantless, your home and this would be acceptable is unfathomable. John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! I agree that a search of your home without a warrant showing probable cause is unfathomable. The sneaky thing about this selectman's proposal is that the authorization for the cops to search is tied to your permit to own firearms. In other words, you don't agree .. you can't legally own a firearm. To me, his idea is that in order to qualify for a gun permit you must give the police permission to enter and search your home ahead of time. If there is a local law requiring guns to be locked up safely, how is that law to be enforced? Here's an idea: If you have a gun and it is supposed to be locked and a kid gets his hands on it and shoots himself or someone else, *you* go to prison. Or, if someone steals a firearm and you don't report it right away, you go to prison. In California, your guns not secured and a kid gets them, you can go to prison. What happens if you do not realize a weapon has been stolen? Still go to prison? What if you car is stolen, and is in an accident, and you have not reported it stolen? |
Speaking of guns and horses
"F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 11/13/13, 7:57 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 11/13/2013 7:44 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 11/13/13, 7:38 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 11/13/2013 7:18 AM, John H wrote: The idea that a cop could search, warrantless, your home and this would be acceptable is unfathomable. John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! I agree that a search of your home without a warrant showing probable cause is unfathomable. The sneaky thing about this selectman's proposal is that the authorization for the cops to search is tied to your permit to own firearms. In other words, you don't agree .. you can't legally own a firearm. To me, his idea is that in order to qualify for a gun permit you must give the police permission to enter and search your home ahead of time. If there is a local law requiring guns to be locked up safely, how is that law to be enforced? Here's an idea: If you have a gun and it is supposed to be locked and a kid gets his hands on it and shoots himself or someone else, *you* go to prison. Or, if someone steals a firearm and you don't report it right away, you go to prison. Those are already distinct possibilities. You can be charged for negligence and for not storing the firearms in the prescribed manner by law. This will **** off the Tea Party types here, but I would not object to an inspection of my firearm storage. If a cop knocked on the door right now and asked if I voluntarily agreed to him coming in and checking how my guns are stored, I'd say, "Come on in". I don't have any problem with such an inspection, either. There are no kids running around here, and all but one home defense weapon are locked up in a safe. We don't get many doorbell ringers around here, other than UPS/FEDEX and the Sunday church ladies, and I always peek on the video monitor before I open the door anyway. Anyone breaking in at night meets Mr. 12 Gauge. Paranoid, or you live in a high crime district. |
Speaking of guns and horses
On 11/13/13, 12:09 PM, Califbill wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote: On 11/13/13, 7:57 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 11/13/2013 7:44 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 11/13/13, 7:38 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 11/13/2013 7:18 AM, John H wrote: The idea that a cop could search, warrantless, your home and this would be acceptable is unfathomable. John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! I agree that a search of your home without a warrant showing probable cause is unfathomable. The sneaky thing about this selectman's proposal is that the authorization for the cops to search is tied to your permit to own firearms. In other words, you don't agree .. you can't legally own a firearm. To me, his idea is that in order to qualify for a gun permit you must give the police permission to enter and search your home ahead of time. If there is a local law requiring guns to be locked up safely, how is that law to be enforced? Here's an idea: If you have a gun and it is supposed to be locked and a kid gets his hands on it and shoots himself or someone else, *you* go to prison. Or, if someone steals a firearm and you don't report it right away, you go to prison. Those are already distinct possibilities. You can be charged for negligence and for not storing the firearms in the prescribed manner by law. This will **** off the Tea Party types here, but I would not object to an inspection of my firearm storage. If a cop knocked on the door right now and asked if I voluntarily agreed to him coming in and checking how my guns are stored, I'd say, "Come on in". I don't have any problem with such an inspection, either. There are no kids running around here, and all but one home defense weapon are locked up in a safe. We don't get many doorbell ringers around here, other than UPS/FEDEX and the Sunday church ladies, and I always peek on the video monitor before I open the door anyway. Anyone breaking in at night meets Mr. 12 Gauge. Paranoid, or you live in a high crime district. I have video cams around the exterior. Nothing paranoid about that. What's paranoid about greeting someone breaking in at night with a 12 gauge? -- Religion: together we can find the cure. |
Speaking of guns and horses
On 11/13/13, 1:22 PM, Charlemagne wrote:
On 11/13/2013 12:09 PM, Califbill wrote: iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 16:11:25 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:21:20 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: The permit is issued yearly based on an inspection of the stables, barn, and grounds by the animal control inspector. She checks to ensure sanitary and safe conditions for both the horse(s) and that may visit in the barn area. Is that any different than home inspections for the safe storage of firearms? === Yes, big difference, unless your stable is also your dwelling. Inspecting the interior of a home except at the time of construction or renovation generally requires a search warrant and probable cause, and that's the way it should stay unless you want to roll the clock back to colonial times and British rule. It's another example of northeastern nanny state mentality run amok. Yeah, what he said. John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! It's the GOP that doesn't want progress..... Progress? Maybe all progress is not good. Illegal search was very important to the Founders of this country. Really, when did "progress" start to mean, go back 400 years??? Wow...you really did skip through a lot of school. 2013 - 1776 = 237 years. And, actually, "progress" goes back to the beginning, either 6,000 years ago if you are a stuporstitious bible-thumper, or much much farther if you are not. You know what progress is, right? It's the opposite of what you believe: regress. -- Religion: together we can find the cure. |
Speaking of guns and horses
|
Speaking of guns and horses
In article 14377863406053108.919177bmckeenospam-
, says... iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 16:11:25 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:21:20 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: The permit is issued yearly based on an inspection of the stables, barn, and grounds by the animal control inspector. She checks to ensure sanitary and safe conditions for both the horse(s) and that may visit in the barn area. Is that any different than home inspections for the safe storage of firearms? === Yes, big difference, unless your stable is also your dwelling. Inspecting the interior of a home except at the time of construction or renovation generally requires a search warrant and probable cause, and that's the way it should stay unless you want to roll the clock back to colonial times and British rule. It's another example of northeastern nanny state mentality run amok. Yeah, what he said. John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! It's the GOP that doesn't want progress..... Progress? Maybe all progress is not good. Illegal search was very important to the Founders of this country. So was witch hunting. |
Speaking of guns and horses
In article , says...
On 11/13/2013 12:09 PM, Califbill wrote: iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 16:11:25 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:21:20 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: The permit is issued yearly based on an inspection of the stables, barn, and grounds by the animal control inspector. She checks to ensure sanitary and safe conditions for both the horse(s) and that may visit in the barn area. Is that any different than home inspections for the safe storage of firearms? === Yes, big difference, unless your stable is also your dwelling. Inspecting the interior of a home except at the time of construction or renovation generally requires a search warrant and probable cause, and that's the way it should stay unless you want to roll the clock back to colonial times and British rule. It's another example of northeastern nanny state mentality run amok. Yeah, what he said. John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! It's the GOP that doesn't want progress..... Progress? Maybe all progress is not good. Illegal search was very important to the Founders of this country. Really, when did "progress" start to mean, go back 400 years??? WTF are you yammering about now, you insane little dolt? |
Speaking of guns and horses
|
Speaking of guns and horses
In article ,
says... On 11/13/2013 12:13 PM, wrote: On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 11:58:49 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote: There are several of those cases working their way through the court as we speak. Florida? $25 fine, right? 2d degree misdemeanor $500 and 60 days in jail for the first offense, if there are no other charges present. If you knowingly provided a weapon to a minor or anyone else who was prohibited from having one you can get up into felony territory. Here's the law in MA: Section 131L. (a) It shall be unlawful to store or keep any firearm, rifle or shotgun including, but not limited to, large capacity weapons, or machine gun in any place unless such weapon is secured in a locked container or equipped with a tamper-resistant mechanical lock or other safety device, properly engaged so as to render such weapon inoperable by any person other than the owner or other lawfully authorized user. For purposes of this section, such weapon shall not be deemed stored or kept if carried by or under the control of the owner or other lawfully authorized user. (b) A violation of this section shall be punished, in the case of a firearm, rifle or shotgun that is not a large capacity weapon, by a fine of not less than $500 nor more than $5,000 or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment, and in the case of a large capacity weapon or machine gun, by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000 or by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than ten years, or by both such fine and imprisonment. That's just for them finding out you didn't secure them as required. The last sentence in (a) gives you an easy out. |
Speaking of guns and horses
Man...you guys in Massachusetts are practically Canadians.
Congratulations. |
Speaking of guns and horses
On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 13:39:49 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:
Probable cause is a joke === When they can search you or your car because a dog barked, I tend to agree. I cringe when I see LEA K-9 dogs going up and down the waiting area in airports sniffing out carry on luggage. |
Speaking of guns and horses
On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 2:11:32 PM UTC-5, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On 11/13/2013 12:13 PM, wrote: On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 11:58:49 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote: There are several of those cases working their way through the court as we speak. Florida? $25 fine, right? 2d degree misdemeanor $500 and 60 days in jail for the first offense, if there are no other charges present. If you knowingly provided a weapon to a minor or anyone else who was prohibited from having one you can get up into felony territory. Here's the law in MA: Section 131L. (a) It shall be unlawful to store or keep any firearm, rifle or shotgun including, but not limited to, large capacity weapons, or machine gun in any place unless such weapon is secured in a locked container or equipped with a tamper-resistant mechanical lock or other safety device, properly engaged so as to render such weapon inoperable by any person other than the owner or other lawfully authorized user. For purposes of this section, such weapon shall not be deemed stored or kept if carried by or under the control of the owner or other lawfully authorized user. (b) A violation of this section shall be punished, in the case of a firearm, rifle or shotgun that is not a large capacity weapon, by a fine of not less than $500 nor more than $5,000 or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment, and in the case of a large capacity weapon or machine gun, by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000 or by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than ten years, or by both such fine and imprisonment.. That's just for them finding out you didn't secure them as required. The last sentence in (a) gives you an easy out. Except that if you want to have quick access to one at night while you sleep, it sounds like you must sleep with a holster. Having it under the bed (12 gauge) or in a night stand drawer (9mm) doesn't sound like it qualifies for that exemption. It has to either be locked up, or in your hands/on your belt. |
Speaking of guns and horses
On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 2:24:23 PM UTC-5, True North wrote:
Man...you guys in Massachusetts are practically Canadians. Congratulations. ~snerk~ There, I fixed it for you! |
Speaking of guns and horses
On 11/13/2013 2:11 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On 11/13/2013 12:13 PM, wrote: On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 11:58:49 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote: There are several of those cases working their way through the court as we speak. Florida? $25 fine, right? 2d degree misdemeanor $500 and 60 days in jail for the first offense, if there are no other charges present. If you knowingly provided a weapon to a minor or anyone else who was prohibited from having one you can get up into felony territory. Here's the law in MA: Section 131L. (a) It shall be unlawful to store or keep any firearm, rifle or shotgun including, but not limited to, large capacity weapons, or machine gun in any place unless such weapon is secured in a locked container or equipped with a tamper-resistant mechanical lock or other safety device, properly engaged so as to render such weapon inoperable by any person other than the owner or other lawfully authorized user. For purposes of this section, such weapon shall not be deemed stored or kept if carried by or under the control of the owner or other lawfully authorized user. (b) A violation of this section shall be punished, in the case of a firearm, rifle or shotgun that is not a large capacity weapon, by a fine of not less than $500 nor more than $5,000 or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment, and in the case of a large capacity weapon or machine gun, by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000 or by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than ten years, or by both such fine and imprisonment. That's just for them finding out you didn't secure them as required. The last sentence in (a) gives you an easy out. It means to make damn well sure you lock 'em up before leaving the house. |
Speaking of guns and horses
On 11/13/2013 3:24 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 13:39:49 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: Probable cause is a joke === When they can search you or your car because a dog barked, I tend to agree. I cringe when I see LEA K-9 dogs going up and down the waiting area in airports sniffing out carry on luggage. Everyone should pack a fresh Milkbone in their luggage. That could cause some excitement. |
Speaking of guns and horses
"F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 11/13/13, 12:09 PM, Califbill wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 11/13/13, 7:57 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 11/13/2013 7:44 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 11/13/13, 7:38 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 11/13/2013 7:18 AM, John H wrote: The idea that a cop could search, warrantless, your home and this would be acceptable is unfathomable. John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! I agree that a search of your home without a warrant showing probable cause is unfathomable. The sneaky thing about this selectman's proposal is that the authorization for the cops to search is tied to your permit to own firearms. In other words, you don't agree .. you can't legally own a firearm. To me, his idea is that in order to qualify for a gun permit you must give the police permission to enter and search your home ahead of time. If there is a local law requiring guns to be locked up safely, how is that law to be enforced? Here's an idea: If you have a gun and it is supposed to be locked and a kid gets his hands on it and shoots himself or someone else, *you* go to prison. Or, if someone steals a firearm and you don't report it right away, you go to prison. Those are already distinct possibilities. You can be charged for negligence and for not storing the firearms in the prescribed manner by law. This will **** off the Tea Party types here, but I would not object to an inspection of my firearm storage. If a cop knocked on the door right now and asked if I voluntarily agreed to him coming in and checking how my guns are stored, I'd say, "Come on in". I don't have any problem with such an inspection, either. There are no kids running around here, and all but one home defense weapon are locked up in a safe. We don't get many doorbell ringers around here, other than UPS/FEDEX and the Sunday church ladies, and I always peek on the video monitor before I open the door anyway. Anyone breaking in at night meets Mr. 12 Gauge. Paranoid, or you live in a high crime district. I have video cams around the exterior. Nothing paranoid about that. What's paranoid about greeting someone breaking in at night with a 12 gauge? Breaking in at night? Where was that mentioned. You commented about answering the front door. |
Speaking of guns and horses
iBoaterer wrote:
In article 14377863406053108.919177bmckeenospam- , says... iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 16:11:25 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:21:20 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: The permit is issued yearly based on an inspection of the stables, barn, and grounds by the animal control inspector. She checks to ensure sanitary and safe conditions for both the horse(s) and that may visit in the barn area. Is that any different than home inspections for the safe storage of firearms? === Yes, big difference, unless your stable is also your dwelling. Inspecting the interior of a home except at the time of construction or renovation generally requires a search warrant and probable cause, and that's the way it should stay unless you want to roll the clock back to colonial times and British rule. It's another example of northeastern nanny state mentality run amok. Yeah, what he said. John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! It's the GOP that doesn't want progress..... Progress? Maybe all progress is not good. Illegal search was very important to the Founders of this country. So was witch hunting. I don not know of any of the founders that were involved in witch hunting. Maybe you can give a link. |
Speaking of guns and horses
In article ,
says... On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 2:11:32 PM UTC-5, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 11/13/2013 12:13 PM, wrote: On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 11:58:49 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote: There are several of those cases working their way through the court as we speak. Florida? $25 fine, right? 2d degree misdemeanor $500 and 60 days in jail for the first offense, if there are no other charges present. If you knowingly provided a weapon to a minor or anyone else who was prohibited from having one you can get up into felony territory. Here's the law in MA: Section 131L. (a) It shall be unlawful to store or keep any firearm, rifle or shotgun including, but not limited to, large capacity weapons, or machine gun in any place unless such weapon is secured in a locked container or equipped with a tamper-resistant mechanical lock or other safety device, properly engaged so as to render such weapon inoperable by any person other than the owner or other lawfully authorized user. For purposes of this section, such weapon shall not be deemed stored or kept if carried by or under the control of the owner or other lawfully authorized user. (b) A violation of this section shall be punished, in the case of a firearm, rifle or shotgun that is not a large capacity weapon, by a fine of not less than $500 nor more than $5,000 or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment, and in the case of a large capacity weapon or machine gun, by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000 or by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than ten years, or by both such fine and imprisonment. That's just for them finding out you didn't secure them as required. The last sentence in (a) gives you an easy out. Except that if you want to have quick access to one at night while you sleep, it sounds like you must sleep with a holster. Having it under the bed (12 gauge) or in a night stand drawer (9mm) doesn't sound like it qualifies for that exemption. It has to either be locked up, or in your hands/on your belt. "Under control" is vague at best. A decent lawyer would use that to his advantage. |
Speaking of guns and horses
|
Speaking of guns and horses
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 11/13/2013 3:24 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 13:39:49 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: Probable cause is a joke === When they can search you or your car because a dog barked, I tend to agree. I cringe when I see LEA K-9 dogs going up and down the waiting area in airports sniffing out carry on luggage. Everyone should pack a fresh Milkbone in their luggage. That could cause some excitement. Lol! |
Speaking of guns and horses
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:33 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com