Posted on 12/24/2004 11:19:51 PM PST by neverdem
WOBURN, Mass., Dec. 24 - When Massachusetts this month became the first state to install an electronic instant-check system complete with a fingerprint scanner for gun licenses and gun purchases, the impact was quickly apparent.
On Wednesday, for example, moments after a court placed a woman's husband under a restraining order, a notice about the order popped up on a new computer terminal at the police station here. Given that information, the Woburn police went to the man's house and confiscated his guns, all 13 of them.
The computer is part of the record-check system and allows the police and gun stores to learn right away if a person can legally own or buy a firearm. The system provides instant updates on arrest warrants, restraining orders and convictions, and it links fingerprint scanners and computers at gun stores and police departments with a central database.
Under Massachusetts law, anyone wanting to buy a gun must first obtain a license from the local police department. Now, when a person applies for the license or goes to buy a gun, his fingerprints can be checked electronically to verify his identity.
"This is a quantum leap in improving public safety and also making it quicker for people to buy a firearm," said Edward A. Flynn, the Massachusetts secretary of public safety. The new computer system was developed by the state's Criminal History Systems Board, part of Mr. Flynn's office.
Philip Mahoney, the police chief in Woburn, a city of 38,000 people just north of Boston, said the new system was particularly valuable because "we get notified in real time about any new restraining orders, warrants and arrests."
Under the old system, based on paper records maintained at individual police stations and gun shops, Mr. Mahoney said, "we might not be notified at all if someone was put under a restraining order."
In the case this week, Mr. Mahoney said: "We were able to go to the individual's house immediately after the restraining order was issued, which is the most dangerous time for a batterer. It's a time when the victim is probably moving out, and the risk of violence is highest."
The new Massachusetts electronic system is in addition to the federal requirement that a gun buyer undergo an instant background check. That check is completed by telephone before the gun is sold, with a clerk in the gun store calling the F.B.I. or a state police agency.
Many of the same records are searched in both checks, but the national instant background check is not as up to date as the new Massachusetts system, particularly for restraining orders, and does not require fingerprint verification.
Mr. Flynn said his office was working with the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to try to consolidate the two checks in Massachusetts.
So far there has been no outcry against the new system from gun owners or the state's gun stores.
"Basically, it's all the same information we had to submit before, so this is not more intrusive," said Carl Ingrao, the owner of Four Seasons Firearms in Woburn. His business is the largest gun store in Massachusetts and was used in a pilot project testing the system beginning last June.
"I haven't had any negative comments from customers whatsoever, and I've sold over 2,000 firearms since the system went into effect," Mr. Ingrao said.
"The computer is actually quicker, more efficient and less expensive for the dealer," he said, because under the old paper system each form cost 50 cents, not including the postage for mailing a copy to the Criminal History Systems Board. Mr. Ingrao says he believes the new system will save him about $2,000 a year.
The electronic system is also faster because once a purchaser's identity is confirmed by the fingerprint scan, the computer automatically fills in the buyer's address, date of birth, height, weight and hair and eye color. That data comes from the gun license application.
"A few months ago, they had to take the system down for a day for a software upgrade, and we had to go back to filling out all the old paperwork," Mr. Ingrao said. "My clerks were saying, 'Hey, the computer is better.' "
Gun owners and the gun industry have often complained that background checks are onerous because they take too much time and prevent people from just walking in and buying a gun when they want to. Mr. Flynn said the new system was an effort to answer that criticism by speeding the process.
By law, police departments in Massachusetts have had 45 days to issue a firearms license. But with the instant check system, the police should be able to issue the license in 24 to 48 hours, Mr. Flynn said, and then a customer with a license will be able to buy a gun in a few minutes.
So far, computer terminals linked to the system have been installed in 159 of the state's 351 police departments and at the four largest gun dealers. The goal is to have them installed in all departments and gun stores by next June, Mr. Flynn said.
A customer at Four Seasons Firearms who collects handguns said he had no objection to the electronic system "because I have nothing to hide."
The customer, who declined to be identified, echoing the concerns of many gun owners about their privacy, added: "The law-abiding gun owners are always put on the defensive when some nut shoots someone. The media makes us out to be the bad guys, but we are just following the law."
woman's husband under a restraining order
Quite a bit of tin foil there!
Under most circumstances a person has to to have reasonable cause for a restraining order. If this dumb shmuk had been threatening this woman in some manor as to cause her to file for the writ in the first place, then maybe he was a menace to society. If he was inocent he should have had a lawyer. If he was an NRA member he could have gotten support.
Just because he owned guns doesn't mean he was of sound mind!
(understandable where women are concerned.)
There was no mention of her side of the story.
For her sake I hope she keeps a handgun under the pillow!
Ping
Big deal. I bought a pistol the other day. No fuss, no muss. And I got to take it home with me right away. Not only that, but I can carry concealed without any type of permit. But then again, I don't live in Assachusetts, the Gay State.
And yes, the Red Dawn scenario immediately came to mind.
Bloat and Merry Christmas!
Great tagline.
Welcome to the unrestrained and absolute power of the Judiciary in America.
Clearly unreasonable search and seizure. But if they are going to openly break the second admendment to the Constitution, surely all the others will soon follow.
America has become so much like the Kingdom of Brittany that we all fled from so long ago. No longer a nation of free men, the King owns the land, the deer and the guns. Must by why the illegal taxation by the IRS is so cherished. Not fun to be a King unless you have serfs.
They can do it here in conservative Indiana too.
Preliminary restraininng orders can be frivolous and are often used by a spiteful spouse.
They are all too easy to get and don't really provide much protection for anyone unless a cop is on guard 24/7.
Read up on how many men are murdered by their wives.
This is by no means a one way street.
Preliminary (emergency) restraining orders are often granted without notification to the person being "restrained", and they have NO opportunity to contest it.
Later there will be a hearing on whether an actual restraining order will be granted.
Unless the person is actually convicted of domestic abuse, ( a felony in many if not all states) there is no legal grounds for denying the ownership of firearms.
I like the fact that if domestic abuse occurs, most cops take BOTH spouses to jail for the night.
huh....never would have guessed....
of course that depends on circumstances too I guess...
dont register your firearms, obviously....
That would sure tic me off. Would they leave me with my 3,000 lb. truck and its 350 hp motor?
In California, a restraining order is automatic upon request in a divorce. No proof needed. Their impact is not just on firearms ownership.
If your work in the defense industry, your security clearances are your lifeblood. A RO can have a very negative impact on getting or maintaining a clearance. More than one colleague has seen theirs lowered or suspended due to allgations in a divorce or child custody fight. Recovering them later (and keeping your job) can be a major issue afterwards, even if you are cleared.
It doesnt just happen in MA. With our litiguous society, if the govt does not take every possible step to prevent any incident from occuring, should someone actually hurt someone with a gun that could have been confiscated there will be a helluva lawsuit. same with medical malpractice. Not that I approve, but it isnt just about confiscating guns.
-- Amendment IV, United States Constitution
What causes the order to be issued is state law -- varies from state to state. In Mass, it's a routine tactic in divorce maneuvering. It is filed on an affidavit only, and there is no investigation. Technically, the judge has discretion, but he or she never uses it.
Financially, as a divorce maximization tactic, this can be dumb, because in the cited case, the 13 guns will probably be destroyed even if the order is lifted; the wife has forfeited perhaps half the value of those weapons.
Of course, in the case at hand, the wife could indeed have reasonable cause. But that is not likely based on statistics alone. Perhaps one in a thousand restraining orders involves abuse of the threat of abuse.
She probably cannot keep a handgun under her pillow, because a standard countertactic is for the husband to file a restraining order on her, which the judge again will treat as essentially nondiscretionary.
If he was inocent he should have had a lawyer.
Guilty or innocent, he certainly had a lawyer, but the lawyer can do nothing to prevent the restraining order from issuing. And once it is issued you are a felon forever and for all time, at least as far as gun rights are concerned.
If he was an NRA member he could have gotten support.
Hah. The NRA won't touch a guy like this with a 10-foot pole. What if he's really a wife-beater? They can't get involved in this kind of thing, and in this case, you can't really blame them. But they also have a record... they didn't sign on to Emerson until others had it won already. The NRA is about nice salaries for a bunch of insiders in Washington, DC, and nice commissions for the ad agencies, fund-raisers, direct-mail firms, etc., to which they're connected. The heavy lifting, if any, is done by independent groups and state affiliates. But the NRA will be careful to stage a press conference claiming credit, if the locals win success, and will send a blizzard of fund-raising letters (90% to 95% of the funds raised by those letters goes to the direct-mail fund-raising firm).
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
Wrong. Liberal judges give these out like candy to women in divorce or child custody proceedings in Massachusetts. It is standard practice for lawyers to ask for this in a contested matter.
In Mass, a person may transfer their firearms to a licensed friend or an FFL for safekeeping during the period of the restraining order.
This is much better than letting the cops get them. The cops will intentionally destroy guns by storing them improperly. Go into an evidence room and you'll find expensive over/under shotguns heaped in a pile with Jennings and Bryco handguns under a leaky roof.
After a time these guns go to bonded storage where fees can be as high as 1% of a gun's value PER DAY. When the owner stops making payment on their guns, the warehouse owner sells them at auction to recover their costs.
Thanks for the information!
Lessons learned: If you owm guns, don't live in Mass.
When dealing with a vindictive woman, hide your assets.
Don't count on the NRA for anything!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.