Now they're shooting at Firefighters!

[Swimmer]

I agree mental health is the primary issue here, that and not keeping the guy locked up because he hammered his grandmother to death, BUT how about all these people who have all these weapons laying around there house so that every occupant has access to them. Granted, many locks don't provide much in the way of denying access, then again some locks keep a nut busy for hours trying to get the locks off the trigger housing.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Swimmer

I agree mental health is the primary issue here, that and not keeping the guy locked up because he hammered his mother to death, BUT how about all these people who have all these weapons laying around there house so that every occupant has access to them. Granted, many locks don't provide much in the way of denying access, then again some locks keep a nut busy for hours trying to get the locks off the trigger housing.

There's a reason why safes and locks are frequently rated on "how long it takes to crack". Given 15 minutes, a drill and some titanium drill bits, most locks and safes can be broken into - even those fancy $1000 safes.

Trigger locks? A thief could just steal the gun and cut the lock off when they get home (rather, get back to their government subsidized crack house).

In MA, it is state law that all stored firearms are required to be locked in a safe or with a tamper-resistant lock that disables the weapon.
General Laws: CHAPTER 140, Section 131L

[Swimmer]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

In MA, it is state law that all stored firearms are required to be locked in a safe or with a tamper-resistant lock that disables the weapon.
General Laws: CHAPTER 140, Section 131L

The above information was correct until a cape judge decided on behalf of a defendent, who just happened to be a state trooper, that thier is no requirement to keep guns locked in Massachusetts. The defendent was found not guilty based on the judges finding. Remember in Mass. go jury waived.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Swimmer

The above information was correct until a cape judge decided on behalf of a defendent, who just happened to be a state trooper, that thier is no requirement to keep guns locked in Massachusetts. he defendent was found no guilty based on the judges finding. Remember in Mass. go jury waived.

Thank you. I was unaware that there was any case law to the contrary. You don't happen to have any other information?

Frankly, if my spouse and I are both legally licensed, I see no reason why the state can tell me how I'm allowed to store firearms in my own house, especially my home protection weapon. "Excuse home invader, could you please wait a moment while I get my keys, unlock my safe and get my shotgun. Thanks!"

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Thank you. I was unaware that there was any case law to the contrary. You don't happen to have any other information?

Frankly, if my spouse and I are both legally licensed, I see no reason why the state can tell me how I'm allowed to store firearms in my own house, especially my home protection weapon. "Excuse home invader, could you please wait a moment while I get my keys, unlock my safe and get my shotgun. Thanks!"

Don't take it as any kind of precedent. The law is on the books, and being enforced everywhere in the Commonwealth. You have one ruling in a jury-waived trial, by a lower court judge, who didn't want to see a Statie lose his job. Since the judge found the Statie not guilty after a trial, the DA couldn't appeal. The judge didn't throw the law out. He found that the DA didn't prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That's all. And if the defendant wasn't a Statie, you can bet your bottom dollar that the verdict wouldn't have gone that way.