MSP Colonel's Son in Hot Water - Drunk with Guns

ccm75

NES Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2007
Messages
6,528
Likes
4,258
Location
Worcester County
Feedback: 7 / 0 / 0
Anyone following this story?
Kid got a little sleepy on the Cape with his heaters in the car....



(Hopefully this is not a dupe...I did search it)
 
Seems like a lot of speculation on the side of the article writer. We hate this kind of ahit with any other story, so we shouldn't be cheering it when it aligns with our perception.

The big unanswered question here is how we're the guns stored? Locked containers in the trunk of a sedan? Non story.

On the dash or passenger seat? OK, there's more to it.
 
Anyone following this story?
I thought Howie spent 2 (two) full hours
covering this since the news broke -
including Turtle Boy phoning in to the show.
Maybe it was only this hour:

State Police Colonel Cover Up Son’s DUI – Turtleboy – 5.04.22 – Hour 4


The press bitched so hard that the upcoming hearing
has been opened to the public.

... police discovered 4 firearms in the vehicle– 2 handguns and 2 rifles.​
It is a crime to be in possession of a firearm while intoxicated,​
but the police are claiming that the guns were unloaded.​

Even Turtle Boy prints the same crap information as the MSM about gun laws.

It's illegal to carry or have under your control in a vehicle
a loaded handgun when under the influence.

So it's obvious why the cops are saying the guns were unloaded.
 
This was a few days ago, right? I'm surprised NES was late reporting this!

Like others said, the MSP and their friends/family are all protected class. Let this state eventually burn itself into the ground. The fact that the police are covering his tracks tells you everything you need to know about the situation.
 
I thought Howie spent 2 (two) full hours
covering this since the news broke -
including Turtle Boy phoning in to the show.
Maybe it was only this hour:

State Police Colonel Cover Up Son’s DUI – Turtleboy – 5.04.22 – Hour 4


The press bitched so hard that the upcoming hearing
has been opened to the public.

... police discovered 4 firearms in the vehicle– 2 handguns and 2 rifles.​
It is a crime to be in possession of a firearm while intoxicated,​
but the police are claiming that the guns were unloaded.​

Even Turtle Boy prints the same crap information as the MSM about gun laws.

It's illegal to carry or have under your control in a vehicle
a loaded handgun when under the influence.

So it's obvious why the cops are saying the guns were unloaded.
Barnstable police filed 2 different reports on this incident. According to sources Howie spoke with, the 1st one just mentions guns. The only difference between that one and the 2nd one was that the 2nd one specifically called out that the weapons were unloaded. As of this time, neither report has been released to the public and BPD has not even publicly acknowledged this incident has happened, despite the fact that they routinely release info on these things, including when one of their own was arrested right outside the station. I'll let you all draw your own conclusions
 
Last edited:
It is a crime to be in possession of a firearm while intoxicated, but the cops are claiming that the guns were unloaded, so it’s not a crime. Would he really have 4 guns in the car, unloaded, after closing time? How believable is that?

Really?
 
Am I missing something or did this guy do nothing wrong? The amount of impossible to be true statements from the media regarding this is astounding. " It’s illegal in Massachusetts to have firearms in cars when they are not under control of the person owning the guns." is one of them.
 
Am I missing something or did this guy do nothing wrong? The amount of impossible to be true statements from the media regarding this is astounding. " It’s illegal in Massachusetts to have firearms in cars when they are not under control of the person owning the guns." is one of them.
Seems like all the dude did (that they can prove) is be drunk in possession of firearms. Is it smart? Not really, but seems like much ado about nothing. No harm, no foul. Don’t give a shit who his dad is.
 
Seems like all the dude did (that they can prove) is be drunk in possession of firearms. Is it smart? Not really, but seems like much ado about nothing. No harm, no foul. Don’t give a shit who his dad is.

Do we know if the keys were in the ignition or not? I seem to remember the lore being that if you are in the car, are intoxicated, and the keys were in the ignition, that you could be arrested and charged with a DUI, even if the car was not running
 
Do we know if the keys were in the ignition or not? I seem to remember the lore being that if you are in the car, are intoxicated, and the keys were in the ignition, that you could be arrested and charged with a DUI, even if the car was not running
That is true but you can also be charged if you are simply in possession of the keys. May not stick, but I know a dude who got charged for OUI because he was inside his car cleaning it while drunk and had keys in his pocket.

No, the local cops didn’t like him.
 
Howie Carr had something on it this morning but couldn't get by paywall.
Howie's columns show up on his own web site (howiecarrshow.com) usually later in the day after they are on the Herald's site. No paywall.
Example:


Read the whole article, folks.
 
Do we know if the keys were in the ignition or not? I seem to remember the lore being that if you are in the car, are intoxicated, and the keys were in the ignition, that you could be arrested and charged with a DUI, even if the car was not running
Most cars these days don’t require you to put a key into the ignition to start.

If the story is correct, then he may have been drunk but wasn’t driving. If the guns were locked up, then what crime was committed? Public drunkenness? Seems like a lot of pearl-clutching to me.
 
Most cars these days don’t require you to put a key into the ignition to start.

If the story is correct, then he may have been drunk but wasn’t driving. If the guns were locked up, then what crime was committed? Public drunkenness? Seems like a lot of pearl-clutching to me.
It’s because he is related to a trooper. Any punishment he received would just cause the cop badgers to cry “corruption!”

90% of people would be offered a CWOF and a fine, but if a troopers son gets that offer, it’s because his dad “pulled strings”
 
Maybe his dad did pull strings, maybe he didn’t. While I hate the “some animals are more equal than others“ cases, this seems to be a non crime. Who is the victim here? Where was the criminal intent? If I was serving on a grand jury and an ADA brought this crap before me I’d probably end up getting myself in trouble by mouthing off.
 
Last edited:
The 22-year-old son of Col. Mason has had his 5 firearms licenses suspended by the Barnstable PD.

Huh? Of course he could have five licenses but the Barnstable PD could only suspend one
 
The 22-year-old son of Col. Mason has had his 5 firearms licenses suspended by the Barnstable PD.

Huh? Of course he could have five licenses but the Barnstable PD could only suspend one

Journal conflated guns and license. Shocking.

Ignorant journalists are ignorant, water is wet and the sun rises in the east every day.
 
His dads an a**h*** for firing unvaxxed healthy MSP troopers but I don’t see a crime here.

I seem to remember a situation called 'operational -----' something or other ? being behind the wheel drunk/or being the sole occupant in a vehicle even not behind the wheel with the keys in the ignition/in your pocket and even near you meant you had a real big problem for the unconnected of course.

Being 'passed' out in a car with firearms should of itself be a very very serious crime.
 
The sleeping it off in your car instead of attempting to drive drunk could potentially be commendable if that's how he ended up that way. But where were the guns? If this was a jeep-like vehicle, it has no trunk, and that's kind of lame if the guns are unloaded and in the back and that's what this is all about. That's just a technically at that point. But if he was strapped and hot when they found him, I suppose there might be something there.
 
I believe that came from a SJC decision some years back. Maybe one of the lawyers here can confirm or debunk that.

During the debate/fight over the 2014 gun "reform" legislation there was a version of the bill that defined carrying a firearm under the influence the same way as OUI. That is, there were specific BAC levels just as with OUI. The existing law left that up to the police and prosecutor with no specific numbers. As I recall, that language was removed and that part of the law never changed.

This case from 2016 shows that one can be acquitted of OUI while being convicted on FUI on the same set of facts, https://www.springandspring.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/veronneau.pdf

Do we know if the keys were in the ignition or not? I seem to remember the lore being that if you are in the car, are intoxicated, and the keys were in the ignition, that you could be arrested and charged with a DUI, even if the car was not running
 
That is true but you can also be charged if you are simply in possession of the keys. May not stick, but I know a dude who got charged for OUI because he was inside his car cleaning it while drunk and had keys in his pocket.

No, the local cops didn’t like him.
So on this notion, if i were in my truck and had a few, and called for a ride home -ride has spare keys and my keys in my pocket. My driver had to stop for whatever reason. I in passanger seat didnt drive after a few too many bit have keya in pocketm


Then a cop shows up for some reason, and they talk to me, i coukd be charged with a dui all because ky damn keys are in my pocket because my driver is getting a snack?
 
I seem to remember a situation called 'operational -----' something or other ? being behind the wheel drunk/or being the sole occupant in a vehicle even not behind the wheel with the keys in the ignition/in your pocket and even near you meant you had a real big problem for the unconnected of course.

Being 'passed' out in a car with firearms should of itself be a very very serious crime.

Why? should it be a serious crime to be passed out with firearms in your house too?
 
Am I missing something or did this guy do nothing wrong? The amount of impossible to be true statements from the media regarding this is astounding. " It’s illegal in Massachusetts to have firearms in cars when they are not under control of the person owning the guns." is one of them.
 
Back
Top Bottom