Yet another school question

[durask]

Here is yet another variation of school question.
Dropping off kids at school.
Also need work done on my rifle - new stock does not fit. As such what will be in the car is the stock that does not fit and barrrel/bolt assembly.
My reasoning is that since the stock does not fit, the rifle cannot be assembled and as such is non functioning.

To me it would be very easy to drop the rifile off at the gunsmith after I drop the kids off on my way to work and a big PITA to go to the gunsmith any other time of day.

What says the forum?

 

[Goliathan]

(j) For the purposes of this paragraph, ''firearm'' shall mean any pistol, revolver, rifle or smoothbore arm from which a shot, bullet or pellet can be discharged.
Whoever, not being a law enforcement officer and notwithstanding any license obtained by the person pursuant to chapter 140, carries on the person a firearm, loaded or unloaded, or other dangerous weapon in any building or on the grounds of any elementary or secondary school, college or university without the written authorization of the board or officer in charge of the elementary or secondary school, college or university shall be punished by a fine of not more than $1,000 or by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or both. A law enforcement officer may arrest without a warrant and detain a person found carrying a firearm in violation of this paragraph.

Any officer in charge of an elementary or secondary school, college or university or any faculty member or administrative officer of an elementary or secondary school, college or university that fails to report a violation of this paragraph shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and punished by a fine of not more than $500.

There it is in plain, clear, unambiguous English!

 

[chrbla2000]

I drop my kids off at school daily and have never been subjected to a vehicle search. YMMV.

-chris

*edit grammar!*

 

[Retired-LEO]

Here is yet another variation of school question.
Dropping off kids at school.
Also need work done on my rifle - new stock does not fit. As such what will be in the car is the stock that does not fit and barrrel/bolt assembly.
My reasoning is that since the stock does not fit, the rifle cannot be assembled and as such is non functioning.

To me it would be very easy to drop the rifile off at the gunsmith after I drop the kids off on my way to work and a big PITA to go to the gunsmith any other time of day.

What says the forum?

Go Green

 

[MisterHappy]

OP.

the law proscribes "carry", not transport (which is what you are doing). That said, people have been jammed up while not carrying.

I'd say it was a gray area, but that is too mellow.

As for reasoning, don't count on that. Under the definition of firearm WRT schools, a straw with a spitball is a gun.

 

[Goliathan]

As for reasoning, don't count on that. Under the definition of firearm WRT schools, a straw with a spitball is a gun.

So is a finger and thumb, apparently: http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/04/us/ohio-boy-suspended-finger-gun/

 

[Rob Boudrie]

the law proscribes "carry", not transport (which is what you are doing). That said, people have been jammed up while not carrying.

Under MGL anything involving movement from point A to Point B is "carrying". The qualifier in 269-10j is " carries on the person....".

There is ample precedent that a qualifier in one subsection of the law, not present in other subsections, shall be construed to have meaning.

Police are NOT trained on this nuance, though I have heard of such a charge (gun in car, not on person) being dropped once defense counsel points this out. I recommend Attorney Brennan in Wellesley for this - he is very familiar with this nuance of MGL. The courts can get it wrong without counsel to point it out - I saw a search warrant issued because the police had evidence of legal activity (suspicion an LTC holder had a gun not on his person stored in a car on school property). The MA SJC once had some dicta mentioning possession of ammo on school grounds was illegal without including the qualification.

In the case where the warrant was issued and a gun found, the 269-10j was dropped for this aforementioned reason. Unfortunately, the subject had his gun not in the trunk or a locked case and was bagged when they refiled as a storage violation (he got a lengthy CWOF).

So, if you keep a gun in your car on school property try to get lost in a crowd of one rather than stand out like a turd in a punchbowl, and expect significant legal fees if it is discovered. It is very important to understand the details of this section, so you don't say something stupid like "I locked the gun in the trunk once I parked the car" (thus admitting you briefly carried it on your person).

So is a finger and thumb, apparently: http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/04/us/ohi...ed-finger-gun/

No. The item must be able to fire a projectile by any means to meet the 269-10j definition of firearm. This means that a BB gun, Airsoft gun or even a nerf gun counts. Finger guns do not unless you are flicking a booger.

 

[Goliathan]

This is one of the main reasons I'm leery about daily carry. I drive straight from work to pick up the kid most days and while I agree with the carry vs. transport distinction I'm not, shall we say, in a sufficiently robust financial position to put it to the test!

 

[Len-2A Training]

No. The item must be able to fire a projectile by any means to meet the 269-10j definition of firearm. This means that a BB gun, Airsoft gun or even a nerf gun counts.

As does a hollow piece of tubing (think Chemistry class in HS) or straw and a spitball!

 

[AHM]

Here is yet another variation of school question.
Dropping off kids at school.
... it would be very easy to drop the rifile off at the gunsmith after I drop the kids off on my way to work and a big PITA to go to the gunsmith any other time of day. ...

No one has given you the most crucial piece of advice:

Under no circumstances ever allow your kids to know that the rifle components have ever been in the car on school property.
​

It doesn't matter if they are pre-schoolers who don't know you own a gun,
or a high school senior who is looking forward to going shooting with you this weekend.


Just STFU.

• Don't discuss it with anyone else within earshot of the kids.
• Brief anyone else not to discuss it within earshot of the kids - that includes loud phone conversations.
• Don't let them see you have the parts out in the house for transport.
• Don't let them see you put it in the vehicle.
• Don't let them see the container in the vehicle.
• Don't discuss it after the fact.

Count on it - they will tell someone,
and you (and they) will get jacked up for it.

P. S. Don't tell the gunsmith you just dropped your kids off at school, either.

 

[AHM]

... The item must be able to fire a projectile by any means to meet the 269-10j definition of firearm. This means that a BB gun, Airsoft gun or even a nerf gun counts. Finger guns do not unless you are flicking a booger.

I just realized the deep irony here:
If you keep your booger hook...

...on the bang switch,
then you can't flick that booger.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

This is one of the main reasons I'm leery about daily carry. I drive straight from work to pick up the kid most days and while I agree with the carry vs. transport distinction I'm not, shall we say, in a sufficiently robust financial position to put it to the test!

Close. The distinction is "One one's person" or not. Keeping mind how this interacts with the direct control requirement. What is transport in plain English is often carry MGL.

 

[one-eyed Jack]

Every day 15,635 parents drop off their kids at schools while packing. Don't worry about it. Jack.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

To summarize what has been said many times before:

1. MGL 269-10(j) bans carry on ones person of a firearm of dangerous weapon without unobtainable permission from the administrator of the school.

2. It does not ban possession not one one's person, but PDs consistently (and quite possibly intentionally) fail to train their officers of this distinction. I had a talk with a very pro-gun officer who treats applicants almost free-state friendly, but told me "it's in there somewhere" when I pointed out the distinction. He just plain refused to believe it because he had been taught otherwise.

3. The last time I took the Glidden gun law class, he mentioned the ban "on one's person" but did not elaborate that "not on ones person" was legal.

4. The police DO charge people with 269-10(j) even for guns secured in a car not on ones person. Defense counsel can generally get these charges dropped, then the scavenger hunt for alternate charges starts (in once case, it was re-filed as a storage violation because the gun was in the center console). They train to what they want the law to be, not what it is.

5. There is no formal determination that ammo alone is a dangerous weapon, but even some courts (absent argument) assume so and there is dicta to this effect. Even so, "on one's person" would apply.

6. The big issue to off one's person is that to many issuing authorities it will be "obvious" that possession in the trunk of you car on school property is "bad judgment and unsafe" and chances are no MA court would disagree.

7. The last slicing of the salami by the Great and General Court upgraded violation of 269-10(j) from citable to arrestable. Also, keep in mine a conviction bestows state level, but not federal, PP status.

8. Visible ammo cases not on ones person has been the basis for a MA search warrant for a parked vehicle, and the court did not question the applying PD's claim in the warrant application that "possession of ammo on school grounds is a crime". That resulted in charges for 269-10(j) and, when defense pointed out it was a non-crime, charges were dropped and the LTC returned, after which the charges were re-filed as a storage violation and a CWOF entered with a period of time during which the owner/driver could not have his LTC. Oh, and the judge started the hearing with "I don't want to hear any arguments about the warrant".

9. STFU, but if you do talk, don't say anything stupid like "I locked my gun in the trunk after parking my car in the school lot".

10. Len - did I miss anything?

 

[LuvDog]

Is the work that is being done - fitting the stock? If so, and they don't need to test fire, then leave the bolt at home?

 

[Picton]

So, here's the best part of this thread.

Posts 10 and 11 were put up over four years apart by the same poster. Post 11 has a gif.

My honest response when I first saw that was amazement that it took @AHM four years to find that Black Hawk Down screenshot.

 

[Len-2A Training]

10. Len - did I miss anything?

Only that I recall you saying that you were aware of someone being convicted of possession (locked in car) on school property under 269-10(j)

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Only that I recall you saying that you were aware of someone being convicted of possession (locked in car) on school property under 269-10(j)

Not quite. That charge was dropped after defense counsel discussed the law with the ADA; it was refiled as a storage violation and a CWOF issued as the gun was within the passenger compartment, not in a locked case or trunk. Might have been loaded as well. #8 in my list in my earlier post.

 

[AHM]

So, here's the best part of this thread.

Posts 10 and 11 were put up over four years apart by the same poster. Post 11 has a gif.

My honest response when I first saw that was amazement that it took @AHM four years to find that Black Hawk Down screenshot.

I have the Black Hawk Down screenshot on speed dial.
It took me four years to find the Deep Irony...