Dracut PD "Shoots Down" Nosy Moonbat Neighbor

That may have changed with that last round. Brass no longer considered a component or something. Len would know better. (I remember getting the jist that I no longer had to lockup empty brass a while back after the new shit went through) Not being snippy, just fyi

Not quite right.

527 CMR 1.00 - Fire Marshal regs on ammo/components does NOT count brass as a controlled component (primers, powder and ammo must be locked up and in "original containers" per CMR).

C. 140 - never required ammo to be locked up. HOWEVER the part of C. 140 that prohibits possession of ammo or ANY components without an FID/LTC requires that no unauthorized (unlicensed) person have access to it. Thus, without actually saying so, it really does mean that it all has to be locked up unless everyone present has a LTC/FID. Sorry, it is rather convoluted.
 
From "Dracut Incidents" Facebook page:

DPD just responded to a caller who reported seeing a person with "guns" through an apartment window. Location withheld. Officers talked to the gun owner, and "advised the caller of the 2nd Amendment and the right to bear arms."

Link to FB Posting (some good comments): www.facebook.com/DracutIncidents/posts/1121419014541171
Neighbor could continue to make a fuss, get support, and get traction. I would need to know more about the neighbor who made the call.
 
Not quite right.

527 CMR 1.00 - Fire Marshal regs on ammo/components does NOT count brass as a controlled component (primers, powder and ammo must be locked up and in "original containers" per CMR).

C. 140 - never required ammo to be locked up. HOWEVER the part of C. 140 that prohibits possession of ammo or ANY components without an FID/LTC requires that no unauthorized (unlicensed) person have access to it. Thus, without actually saying so, it really does mean that it all has to be locked up unless everyone present has a LTC/FID. Sorry, it is rather convoluted.



I stand corrected.
 
You thought wrong you poor brainwashed serf.

It's OK I didn't really read the whole Facebook thing either they did check in with the home owner. It's not being brainwashed it's preventing a lawsuit in case the homeowner was actually in danger and they ignored a tip off. But to each their own
 
See the way I always understood it was you have a reasonable expectation to privacy. Kinda like if your nailing your wife in the living room don't be surprised when the neighbor knows what her tots look like. Now if he was using them and she's peeking in the basement window that's so dirty she had to rub off a spot that's invasive. But I'd he's holding it up in a street facing window then it's not considered invasion because a reasonable person would know they might get seen there
 
See the way I always understood it was you have a reasonable expectation to privacy. Kinda like if your nailing your wife in the living room don't be surprised when the neighbor knows what her tots look like. Now if he was using them and she's peeking in the basement window that's so dirty she had to rub off a spot that's invasive. But I'd he's holding it up in a street facing window then it's not considered invasion because a reasonable person would know they might get seen there

I disagree, mainly because I don't spend my time looking in my neighbor's windows.

Even if I had, somehow, seen them going at it, I wouldn't stop and get an eye full of the old lady's fun bags. It's their home, they want to go at it in the livingroom? Good for them, I'm jealous.

I feel like you're starting to cross into blame the victim territory here.
 
The peeper is a nosey ahole. Are you upposed to hide when handling your firearms? How about when your loading up the truck to go hunting? Should you have to cover your Bow or your Camo? Cops did right in this case although it would have been interesting if it was lowell. I would turn the tables and spend some time staring at the ladies windows, and just explain I want to be sure she isnt do anything illegal :)
 
See the way I always understood it was you have a reasonable expectation to privacy. Kinda like if your nailing your wife in the living room don't be surprised when the neighbor knows what her tots look like. Now if he was using them and she's peeking in the basement window that's so dirty she had to rub off a spot that's invasive. But I'd he's holding it up in a street facing window then it's not considered invasion because a reasonable person would know they might get seen there
This.
 
I'm confused. So you guys are saying that it's totally cool that the cops were called on this guy because of the window he was standing by?
Not at all. It was moonbatty as all hell and the neighbor is a turd for doing it. All I'm saying is that there is likely no privacy issue here if the neighbor saw the guns through a window. Anything that can be seen from a public space is fair game.
 
Such a stark contrast to where I live. Around here, it's not a normal Saturday if I don't hear machine gun fire from up the road (a few houses past the State Trooper's house), and miscallaneous gunfire combined with the occasional tannerite explosion coming from the other direction. Usually if one of us hears gunfire, rather than call the PD, we facebook-message each other to see what firearm(s) we're using.

I love Vermont.
 
With a neighbor like that, It would be game on. Starting with telling the other neighbors (if they were not already aware of it) That she is a peeping Tom. That would be just for starters, I would think more up stuff as time goes on.

well I am not saying that she IS a peodophile... but... well... you know... she was looking into my house...
 
Back
Top Bottom