• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

MA Compliant Storage?

What is your question?

Is it Mass Compliant? Who knows? There was recently a case, where a guy was jammed up because the locked containers were "flimsy," and could be pried open.

PRM FTW!!!!

Do you have more info about the flimsy case conviction? That is news to me.
 
You wouldn't happen to know where in that 296 post thread the "flimsy" reference occurs, would you? The linked news story in the first post talks about unlocked cases, an unlocked safe, and leaving the key in a trigger lock.
I'm not digging through it either, but I can confirm that the court accepted the argument that because something could be pried open by the cops it wasn't securely locked. That certainly seems to conflict with case law that says a locked cooler is acceptable
 
Since I am not 100% sure of the details and disposition (that was a long thread), I used "Jammed up" as opposed to a more precise legal term. There were a lot of charges piled on, like stones on Giles Corey.

The point I was trying to make was: If you have to ask, you already know the answer (or at least, have strong doubts).
 
What is a locked case in Massachusetts ? Who the hell knows ? I'm not even sure the state knows. But I think it safe to assume that the state would like you to have a lock that can't be picked by a two year old with a toothpick. Another words if you have kids buy a safe or container with a real lock on it.
 
I have a box full of cable type gun locks that were provided by the West Palm Beach Fl. P.D. through some kind of program. They can be cut with an ordinary pair of lineman's pliers with out much difficulty by a 10 yr old . I don't use them unless I'm buying a used firearm someplace , I'll take 1 along with me so I don't have to buy 1 to do the transfer.
 
I bet you some whacked out PD in this state has a board in the station with pictures of all the gun cabinets/containers they deem not suitable, just so if the day comes they can jam someone up.
 
Last edited:
But I think it safe to assume that the state would like you to have a lock that can't be picked by a two year old with a toothpick. Another words if you have kids buy a safe or container with a real lock on it.

A safe assumption I guess. (pun intended)

But it does not take much further assumption to say that the state does not give a fat rat's ass that I have no children in my house. The law linked below by @northframingham is a big FU to people like me as the state tries to control what occurs on my private property (because guns) and in so doing dictates how my wife and I may defend ourselves.

I urge folks to contact the members of the Joint Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security and ask that they support H.1247 which is currently before the committee.

That bill, H.1247, would add a new paragraph (g) to the current language.

The text of the new paragraph (g) would be very simple...
(g) This section shall not apply to premises where no minors reside.

http://malegislature.gov/Bills/190/H1247/BillHistory
 
Last edited:
What is your question?

Is it Mass Compliant? Who knows? There was recently a case, where a guy was jammed up because the locked containers were "flimsy," and could be pried open.

PRM FTW!!!!

I was wondering if a custom built box, made of plywood and 2x4's, with hinged lid, hasps, and padlocks would be OK.

How does one find this out, other than "the bad way"?




What is a locked case in Massachusetts ? Who the hell knows ? I'm not even sure the state knows. But I think it safe to assume that the state would like you to have a lock that can't be picked by a two year old with a toothpick. Another words if you have kids buy a safe or container with a real lock on it.

The configuration I'd like is not vertical, but horizontal.
 
I was wondering if a custom built box, made of plywood and 2x4's, with hinged lid, hasps, and padlocks would be OK.

How does one find this out, other than "the bad way"?







The configuration I'd like is not vertical, but horizontal.

By letting someone else find out, and watching from a distance.

It's the ol' "I know pornography, when I see it," theory.
 
You wouldn't happen to know where in that 296 post thread the "flimsy" reference occurs, would you? The linked news story in the first post talks about unlocked cases, an unlocked safe, and leaving the key in a trigger lock.

Use the search features, perhaps? Or maybe google Edward Fleury, firearms storage violation? Don't be lazy; you had the tools to find the answer to your question as soon as I gave you the link to the thread.
 
I would be leery of a gun cabinet that could be thwarted by this.

stock-photo-retro-rusty-crosscut-hand-saw-hand-saw-tool-isolated-on-white-background-384949945.jpg


I could make an amazing argument that hidden is just as good as, if not better than, "locked." But will it hold up in court? Not sure. Sorta afraid to try it out despite the odds of having it be a problem approaching those of me winning the lottery WITHOUT buying a ticket.
 
I vaguely remember hearing somewhere that even one of those locking guns cabinets with glass fronts were considered to be MA complient storage. Of course, I'm older now and I may have heard wrong
 
I vaguely remember hearing somewhere that even one of those locking guns cabinets with glass fronts were considered to be MA complient storage. Of course, I'm older now and I may have heard wrong
Yes, that was stated when the law was passed in 1998, BUT judges have ruled differently over the years to fit their agenda that makes it risky business, as are doors where hinges can be removed, "flimsy locks", etc.
 
Yes, that was stated when the law was passed in 1998, BUT judges have ruled differently over the years to fit their agenda that makes it risky business, as are doors where hinges can be removed, "flimsy locks", etc.

Yeah, after the Fluery case I'd be real hesitant to use a standard display gun cabinet. Maybe if you put trigger locks on them, but even then you've got questionably "flimsy" locks. Sometimes I feel like I need another, larger safe to put my safe into. o_O
 
Yes, that was stated when the law was passed in 1998, BUT judges have ruled differently over the years to fit their agenda that makes it risky business, as are doors where hinges can be removed, "flimsy locks", etc.

Unless there is an Engineering-quality mechanical standard printed somewhere, these 'judicial rulings' are a tennis-ball that a good lawyer would return-serve on. I'm rather surprised that there isn't better legal representation available that tear this 'vague language' to shreds. Nobody should have to guess what the 'acceptable standard' is on such matters, but I'm also guessing that the authority on this topic, for the State's satisfaction, isn't an entity who is very popular on this board - the Consumer Protection weenies. As a result, there is zero dialog with them on the subject (probably because they have no clue, and thus would benchmark something really stupid and unreasonable).
 
Well, we all know that the cable locks that are occasionally handed out by the local PDs are less than impenetrable.....and they MUST be ok, as the cops gave them to you.....

Right? Right?

You mean the ones you can open by smashing them off of a hard enough surface? Oh yeah. Totally acceptable and not "flimsy" at all.
 
Well, we all know that the cable locks that are occasionally handed out by the local PDs are less than impenetrable.....and they MUST be ok, as the cops gave them to you.....

Right? Right?

Well there would be an entrapment defense. But a MA judge after a swig of Koolaid and a mouth full of paste is likely to pull out a crayon and draw an x through that.
 
Perhaps a better question, why did you let cops in your house and why are they fuc#ing with your flag? LOL
 
Well, we all know that the cable locks that are occasionally handed out by the local PDs are less than impenetrable.....and they MUST be ok, as the cops gave them to you.....

Right? Right?

If you can provide evidence, in a Court of Law, that this actually occurred then you may have met the legal standard of 'Due Diligence' on the matter, having demonstrated ceding judgment to a Law Enforcement entity. What MA Judge is going to hammer a defendant for doing that? Not one who wants to keep their job...
 
Back
Top Bottom