I've tried to stay out of this . . . to no avail I'm afraid. To put things in perspective, I try very hard never to go on the Cape, I've been in Powderhorn twice and bought a few small items there and have met Mark twice but wouldn't know him if I tripped over him. I've known Peter Dowd and have done business with him numerous times over 30+ years and although I like him as a person I have serious problems with his "business model". I testified against the law we know as GCA 1998 and I testified FOR regulation of the Bonded Warehouse business (Mark and Peter were both present) . . . it failed due to "pressure" allegedly attributed to both of them.
Free market? Only one of the parties is a willing participant in the transaction, all because he lives in a town where the PD allegedly has no room in evidence (a whole other pile of BS) . I urge you to read old posts on the subject, specifically by Lens and specifically about Dowd/Cohen taking steps to protect their racket.
A "technical error" that I must correct. Evidence is NEVER EVER given to civilian 3rd parties, that would break the chain of custody and it would never later be allowed to be introduced as "evidence". So anything deemed "evidence" (of a crime) MUST be kept secure by the PD themselves. PDs don't have lots of space for evidence, this is true . . . thus when they confiscate guns due to 209A or suspension/revocation, there is a strong urge to dispose of those items to a bonded warehouse.
https://malegislature.gov/Laws/Gener...40/Section129D maybe its late and i am just reading this wrong.
What I still do not get is why the police have a say in the return of the property ?
reading the link provided anyone who had their stuff taken has the right with in one year of surrender. To have those items transfered to a legal person. No mention of police permission?
Then those items must be returned with in 10 days to the legal person....im reading this correctly I think?
Now I am also confused about the items that go to auction. I read it that after 1 year if the owner does not come up with a plan to transfer the items they go to auction and the state gets the cash---minus any storage fees I would imagine. BUT I read the next section as if the owner does try to transfer the items but can not afford the fees the items go to auction fees are deducted and the owner gets any money above and beyound the storage fees. I think that what it says.......im tired the more I read the less sense I make of it.
You aren't reading this quite right. The 10 days to transfer POSSESSION (only, not ownership) in the law is ONLY for PDs to turn over items confiscated to a licensed party of the owner's choosing and is NOT TRUE for a 209A confiscation under MGL. Many PDs refuse to comply as you have no reasonable recourse other than to spend months/years in court with legal costs exceeding the value of the items. Once guns are shipped to a bonded warehouse, that 10 day law is totally irrelevant. At that point you are obligated by WHATEVER rates/rules the bonded warehouse has in place and it is strictly a civil matter. Bonded warehouses only have to hold goods for 90 days unless all fees are paid up, then the law allows them to go to auction. They typically hold them longer so that the fees will definitely exceed the monies received at auction (free guns). NO money goes to the town, it's all profit for the bonded warehouse.
You are right, once the guns are in the hands of an FFL or bonded warehouse, there is NO LAW that requires police permission to dispose of them according to the wishes of the owner. Failure of the bonded warehouse to act on the request is a civil action if one wants to take them to court.
Dgafton, I am sorry that I did not answer your question reguarding the storage of the black powder guns and accessories that come in with the firearms. I cannot tell you why they are taken but they usually are and then we also tell the police departments that we don't need to store them because permits are not required to own them. We usually get a I don't care or oh well keep them anyway. The Black powder guns however are a bit trickier because even though you don't need a permit to own one the materials needed to fire the gun do require a permit. And the ammunition is illegal to possess if the owners permit is suspended or revoked no matter how temporary. So the police keep everything together until they know what is going on and because they don't all know the laws as well as others. Now I am not trying to bad mouth the police because I do value their service and they have a million other laws and procedures to know and follow so we cant expect perfection.
Mac1911 all I can tell you at this time for needing the departments permission to release is that since ive been working here and before this is the procedure we follow. I will talk to the gentleman that runs our bonded warehouse and get you an answer to your question.
I wanted to thank everyone again for your posts and say that I truly don't mind answering your questions. the more the merrier.
Thanks again
Greg
Greg, I appreciate your attempt to understand the nuances of these laws. I teach this stuff (see link below). NOTHING tricky here, POSSESSION of black powder guns/ammo does NOT require any permit at all (I do believe that the 209 primers may need a permit to possess but nothing else does), period. MGL requires a permit ONLY to purchase ammo components IN MA. Even federally prohibited persons can own/possess/shoot/carry primitive weapons with no permit, it's in the law (recent case law).
PDs confiscate damn near everything and anything and could care less about the law because they are never held accountable for their improper actions (theft). On a 209A they could confiscate all the kitchen knives too and nobody is going to tell them "no, you can't do that"! Read Jarvis v. Village Vault on
www.comm2A.org to educate yourself in this matter . . . the PD did confiscate swords, etc. all illegally and VV sold those items at auction and whatever year the court rules, this is going to cost VV some serious coin!
There are more than a few vindictive PDs out there that if/when you request "permission" to give back something that doesn't require a permit or to transfer to a properly licensed 3rd party and refuse lacking "police permission" you could be looking at a serious lawsuit and perhaps even criminal charges of theft for refusing to return items.
Thank you for the answer. Unfortunately you haven't swayed my opinion to your side.
There is NOTHING tricky about dealing with those items. If you want to be fair and do the right thing, you should inform the rightful owner that they can come down to pick up any non-restricted items. If they do not show up within a certain timeframe, then charge them storage.
I have been through the 209a process twice with a vindictive ex. The first time, I was naive and got jerked around by the pd.
The second time, in a different town, they took everything again. I went into the pd the following morning with a letter addressed to the chief with a copy of the law attached. I said I would be back in one hour to pick up all my unrestricted items or I would be filing a complaint for theft with the state police. My items were waiting when I got back to the pd.
Kudos to Dan, sometimes this is what it takes. Most are afraid to face off their PD even when they are 100% right, so the abuses will continue. The PDs know that they can get away with this stuff, that is why they do it.