Law Enforcement Advisory Group Encourages Illegal Searches

GOALJim

NES Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2022
Messages
51
Likes
436
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Law Enforcement Advisory Group Encourages Illegal Searches

GOAL has been made aware of an “advisory” bulletin produced by Law Enforcement Dimensions, LLC released on December 17, 2024. The bulletin, written by Attorney John Sofis Scheft, is supposed to be a 27-page guide to Massachusetts law enforcement outlining the new laws created by the infamous Chapter 135. The bulletin is very lengthy and contains some of the normal interpretations we see from various sources. One piece jumped right off the page though.

Sheft’s discussion concerning suspended or revoked firearm licenses encourages law enforcement to unlawfully enter homes for search and seizure without proper authority.

“Best practice. Inform the suspect that: (1) the continued possession of firearms violates his duty to surrender them immediately; (2) the possession of firearms without the now suspended license is a crime; and (3) if police have to get a warrant to enter to seize the firearms, he will be charged with 269, § 10(i), and the firearms will be seized as evidence of that crime. After receiving this information, the suspect will be more inclined to consent to police entry and the seizure of guns, licenses, and ammunition. If not, secure the scene and obtain a warrant.”

The new surrender law under Chapter 135 is abundantly clear that law enforcement has no authority to enter a citizen’s home and conduct a search of the premises.

Chapter 140, Section 129D(a) “… the person whose application was so revoked, suspended or denied shall, without delay, deliver or surrender to the licensing authority where the person resides all firearms or ammunition which are registered to the person or that the person then possesses…”

There is nothing in Section 129D that even suggests that law enforcement has any authority to conduct a search without a warrant. However, Scheft is encouraging police to threaten the citizen with a trumped-up charge of felony possession of firearms if they are not allowed to conduct the unlawful search. It also states that police should “secure the scene” while obtaining a warrant. Likely, this means the citizen will be removed from the premises and held until the warrant is obtained and the search of the premises is conducted.

These types of tactics are completely Jim Crow-esque. Do what we say, or we will load you up with whatever criminal charges we can think of. One obvious result, other than the destruction of a potentially innocent citizen, is the permanent denial of Second Amendment rights.

GOAL is calling on all local and state law enforcement to publicly denounce these types of tactics and to permanently revoke any relationship with Law Enforcement Dimensions and, subsequently, Attorney Scheft.


Document: https://store.ledimensions.com/static/companypages/123/2005/07A UPDATE FIREARMS REVISED.pdf

New Chapter 135 Revised Chapter 140, Section 129D.

(a) Upon revocation, suspension or denial of an application for any license or card issued pursuant to sections 129B, 131 or 131F the person whose application was so revoked, suspended or denied shall, without delay, deliver or surrender to the licensing authority where the person resides all firearms or ammunition which are registered to the person or that the person then possesses and shall report such delivery or surrender to the electronic firearms registration system pursuant to section 121B. The person or the person’s legal representative shall have the right, at any time up to 1 year after the delivery or surrender, to transfer the firearms and ammunition, notwithstanding the limits on private firearm transfers in section 128A, to a licensed dealer or to a person legally permitted to purchase or take possession of the firearms and ammunition and, upon notification in writing by the purchaser or transferee and the former owner, the licensing authority shall within 10 days deliver the firearms and ammunition to the transferee or purchaser and the licensing authority shall observe due care in the receipt and holding of any such firearm or ammunition; provided, however, that the purchaser or transferee shall affirm in writing that the purchaser or transferee shall not transfer the firearms or ammunition to the former owner; provided, however, that such transfer shall not be permitted if the firearm may be evidence in any pending criminal investigation. The licensing authority shall at the time of delivery or surrender inform the person in writing of their right to request a transfer in accordance with this paragraph.
(b) The licensing authority, after taking possession of any firearm or ammunition by any means, may transfer possession for storage purposes to a federally licensed firearms dealer who operates a bonded warehouse on the licensed premises that is equipped with a safe for the secure storage of firearms and a weapon box or similar container for the secure storage of ammunition; provided, however, that the licensing authority shall not transfer to such dealer possession of any firearm or ammunition that may be evidence in any pending criminal investigation. Any such dealer that takes possession of a firearm or ammunition pursuant to this section shall: (i) inspect the firearm or ammunition; (ii) issue to the owner a receipt indicating the make, model, caliber, serial number and condition of each firearm or ammunition so received; and (iii) store and maintain all firearms and ammunition so received in accordance with such regulations, rules or guidelines as the secretary of the executive office of public safety and security may establish under this section. The owner shall be liable to such dealer for reasonable storage charges.
(c) Firearms and ammunition not disposed of within 1 year of delivery or surrender pursuant to this section shall be sold at public auction by the colonel of the state police to the highest bidding person legally permitted to purchase and possess said firearms and ammunition and the proceeds shall be remitted to the General Fund.
(d) Any such firearm or ammunition that is stored and maintained by a licensed dealer may be so auctioned pursuant to subsection (c) at the direction of: (i) the licensing authority at the expiration of 1 year following initial surrender or delivery to such licensing authority; or (ii) the dealer then in possession, if the storage charges for such firearm or ammunition have been in arrears for 90 days; provided, however, that in either case, title shall pass to the licensed dealer for the purpose of transferring ownership to the auctioneer; provided further, that in either case, after deduction and payment for storage charges and all necessary costs associated with such surrender and transfer, all surplus proceeds, if any, shall be immediately returned to the owner of such firearm or ammunition; provided, however, that any firearm or ammunition identified pursuant to section 131Q as having been used to carry out a criminal act and any firearm or ammunition prohibited by law from being owned or possessed within the commonwealth shall not be sold at public auction pursuant to this section and shall instead be destroyed by the colonel of the state police.
(e) Unless otherwise required in this chapter, if the licensing authority cannot reasonably ascertain a lawful owner within 180 days of acquisition by the licensing authority, the licensing authority may, in its discretion, trade or dispose of surplus, donated, abandoned or junk firearms or ammunition to properly licensed distributors or firearms dealers. The proceeds of the sale or transfer shall be remitted or credited to the municipality in which the licensing authority presides to purchase firearms, equipment or supplies or for violence reduction or suicide prevention; provided, however, that no firearm or ammunition identified pursuant to section 131Q as having been used to carry out a criminal act shall be considered surplus, donated, abandoned or junk for the purposes of this section.
(f) The licensing authority shall report the delivery or surrender or seizure of firearms and ammunition pursuant to sections 131R to 131Y, inclusive, to the department of criminal justice information services via the electronic firearms registration system. The report shall include the following information: (i) date of delivery, surrender or seizure; (ii) make, model, serial number and caliber of the firearm delivered, surrendered or seized and any identifying information for ammunition delivered, surrendered or seized; (iii) grounds for surrender or seizure; (iv) whether the firearm or ammunition is prohibited by law from being owned or possessed in the commonwealth; (v) whether the firearm or ammunition was classified as having been used to carry out a criminal act; (vi) information on the possession, storage, transfer, sale and any income derived therefrom; and (vii) the destruction or other disposition of the firearm or ammunition. Upon submission of this information, the system shall automatically report back to the licensing authority whether the firearm is registered, serialized, reported lost or stolen or potential evidence in a pending criminal investigation.
(g) The secretary of the executive office of public safety and security may promulgate rules and regulations as necessary to carry out this section.
 
Excessive "encourangement" by police to obtain consent can invalidate the voluntary nature of the consent.

People can be stupid if they do not think things out in advance. The proper response when faced with a seizure order is not "you can't come in and take my guns" but "I will bring them to the doorstep unloaded and cased and present myself in an unarmed and non-threatening manner at all times." VIctims of this tactic need to clearly establish that they not consenting to police entry, but to offer to surrender the guns, ammo and high cap magazines. That attorney's advice hinges on the police being able to successfully claim the refusal was to the seizure, not just to entry to the premises.

There is another reason one must establish that you are "not resisting" rather than "consenting". If the police can establish consent, anything else they see when looking in an area where a gun could be found can be used as a basis for a charge (perhaps presence of a 3D printer they allege was intended to make ghost guns) will be accepted as evidence. Without consent, the entry can be challenged.

In fact, it may be strategically wise to resist only to the extent that you establish non-consent thatnlet it proceed to the step of a warrant, that can be hard to challenge ... especially if the judge starts the hearing with "Counsel, I don't want to hear anything about the warrant" (yes, this has happened).

COMM2A and GOAL should be contacted by anyone to is victim of the "coerced consent" games.
 
Last edited:
There's a commonly held understanding that when an enslaved people are freed from their enslavement, they don't typically lobby for freedom. They instead strive mightily to garner power and authority to control and enslave others.

This might explain why Mr. Scheft, a Jewish person who is entirely familiar with the dangers of giving unconstitutional power to authority figures, has embraced empowering the boot on the neck of people like us.

The fact that you can't even have guns in your private residence without asking "mother may I" from the guards is scary indeed.
 
Scheft has his tentacles in all facets of Massachusetts policing. I don't know if he still does, but he used to write the civil service promotional exams, sell the books he authored as required reading material for the exams, and hold classes to prep officers for passing his exams. I sat next to him one time on a flight to Myrtle Beach. We were going to the same golf tournament. Not exceedingly personable.
 
Scheft has his tentacles in all facets of Massachusetts policing. I don't know if he still does, but he used to write the civil service promotional exams, sell the books he authored as required reading material for the exams, and hold classes to prep officers for passing his exams. I sat next to him one time on a flight to Myrtle Beach. We were going to the same golf tournament. Not exceedingly personable.
it is always quite peculiar how a singular vision of a sole particular individual with time may shape the habits of the whole society.
fascinating stuff.

we should get more lawyers from india making policies here, and in some decades we will have a fully functional 4 casts system just like up there.
 
Excessive "encourangement" by police to obtain consent can invalidate the voluntary nature of the consent.
I'd be interested in hearing more about this.

As an example (as I've talked about this before), I had an interaction where I purchased firearms from a FFL after the prior owner had lost his LTC in a non-violent incident. PD demanded my firearms, and threatened obstruction charges unless I turned them in.

It cost me a few grand to get the firearms back, when investigating if I could sue, I was told from several lawyers (including Comm2) that I'd voluntarily turned them in and that no such follow up was possible.
 
I'd be interested in hearing more about this.

As an example (as I've talked about this before), I had an interaction where I purchased firearms from a FFL after the prior owner had lost his LTC in a non-violent incident. PD demanded my firearms, and threatened obstruction charges unless I turned them in.

It cost me a few grand to get the firearms back, when investigating if I could sue, I was told from several lawyers (including Comm2) that I'd voluntarily turned them in and that no such follow up was possible.
They made you an offer you couldn't refuse, then called your actions "voluntary"
 
then called your actions "voluntary"
A German, an American, and a Russian are arguing who can feed a spoonful of mustard to a cat.
The German just grabs the cat and forces the spoon with mustard into its mouth. The Russian protests: "This is violence!"
The American hides the mustard between two slices of sausage. The Russian protests: "This is deception!"
Then Russian spreads the mustard under the cat's tail. The cat starts furiously licking it off, screaming with pain.
A happy Russian proclaims: "See - it does it 100% voluntarily and with a motivational song!"
 
Ahh jeez,don't act surprised by Healy's henchmen and their behavior.
roflmao, this shouldn't surprise anyone. Talk to your neighbors, talk to your friends,
try to convince them to actually vote and do something to help the sheeples....
 
This is nothing at all new.....

How is this different than suspending or revoking someone's license while the police are driving on the way over to the residence for a domestic call or some suspected criminal activity. Then charging the person with possession of a firearm without an LTC because they suspended or revoked the license on the way over. Essentially charging them with a crime before the fact.......

Meaning...Jackboots are gonna jackboot. They will use any and all tactics to get you to comply and trump up as many charges that will stick.

The law is clear, guns are to be surrendered immediately, not searched and taken. But anytime cops really want to enter a residence without a warrant they always try to threaten some bullshit charge for not allowing a search. This is pretty much standard procedure and has been for a long time.

However, like anything else, it depends whose chief in that town, do they give a rats ass about the constituition they swore to uphold, and do they trust that you gave them all your guns.....if they don't....they are gonna try and come in, search and take them. Legal or not they won't care and will leave it to the courts to throw it out. They will and have taken shit that doesn't even fall under scope..... like bows, and muzzleloaders in the past.

This is why states that have a permit to own a gun suck. They simply use these permits to violate your rights.....and try to write in laws relating that just the fact of having a permit you will consent to searches, or getting a permit revoked is reason enough for your consent for search and seizure. It can never say it as it won't pass muster...but they will always imply it and try to make their police act accordingly.
 
Last edited:
Excessive "encourangement" by police to obtain consent can invalidate the voluntary nature of the consent.

People can be stupid if they do not think things out in advance. The proper response when faced with a seizure order is not "you can't come in and take my guns" but "I will bring them to the doorstep unloaded and cased and present myself in an unarmed and non-threatening manner at all times."

I missed the part where you mention they can take them from your cold, dead hands
 
There is another interesting case where a bogus legal opinion was circulated as fact years ago.

One attorney (not a court) write an opinion to a PD stating thath a CWOF was a conviction for firearms licensing purposes if it was accompanied by an ASF, and that the licensing officer must refer to the court documents to find out if AS:F was part of the pleading. This had no basis in fact or law, but was repeated in numrous document, LTC instructions, etc. for years.
 
@GOALJim

This "interpretation" is nothing new.
Chief Glidden has stated this many, many times since 1998 in his classes for chiefs/LOs. Unsure if he also wrote it in his books, but he made it clear that if one didn't instantly turn everything over that they would be charged with C. 269 S. 10(i).

So coercion in order to search is nothing new in MA.
 
@GOALJim

This "interpretation" is nothing new.
Chief Glidden has stated this many, many times since 1998 in his classes for chiefs/LOs. Unsure if he also wrote it in his books, but he made it clear that if one didn't instantly turn everything over that they would be charged with C. 269 S. 10(i).

So coercion in order to search is nothing new in MA.
So, you are saying that if they don't have a warrant - you don't have to turn anything over to the police if your LTC is revoked???
 
@GOALJim

This "interpretation" is nothing new.
Chief Glidden has stated this many, many times since 1998 in his classes for chiefs/LOs. Unsure if he also wrote it in his books, but he made it clear that if one didn't instantly turn everything over that they would be charged with C. 269 S. 10(i).

So coercion in order to search is nothing new in MA.
In his recent class (Dec 2024) he was quite clear that a surrender order does not serve as a search warrant.
 
Ahh jeez,don't act surprised by Healy's henchmen and their behavior.
roflmao, this shouldn't surprise anyone. Talk to your neighbors, talk to your friends,
try to convince them to actually vote and do something to help the sheeples....
My father believed that the police, although necessary, were incredibly dangerous, and needed to be avoided at all costs. I'm now holding a similar opinion. They are not your friends, and allowing them into your life in any way is like choosing to spend time around a deadly snake, spider or crocodile.
 
Boots gonna jack.

Scheft has his testicles in all facets of Massachusetts policing. I don't know if he still does, but he used to write the civil service promotional exams, sell the books he authored as required reading material for the exams, and hold classes to prep officers for passing his exams. I sat next to him one time on a flight to Myrtle Beach. We were going to the same golf tournament. Not exceedingly personable.

Hmmm. That seems like a conflict of interest. I mean, something that corrupt could only happen in mASSachusetts.

Imagine being that surly going to a golf tournament. Talk about a crappy life. It's too bad his daddy didn't hug him enough.

And fixed it for you.
 
Back
Top Bottom