Posted on 03/30/2009 4:43:20 AM PDT by marktwain
After a police officer's 12-year-old son got access to the officer's handgun, the officer was prosecuted for violating Mass. Gen. Laws. ch. 140, § 131L:
It shall be unlawful to store or keep any firearm, rifle or shotgun ... in any place unless such weapon is secured in a locked container or equipped with a tamper-resistant mechanical lock or other safety device, properly engaged so as to render such weapon inoperable by any person other than the owner or other lawfully authorized user. For purposes of this section, such weapon shall not be deemed stored or kept if carried by or under the control of the owner or other lawfully authorized user.
Last month, the court held the statute was unconstitutional (Commonwealth v. Bolduc), and dismissed the prosecution. I only just now managed to get a copy of the opinion, and here's the relevant discussion:
The locking mechanisms [required by the statute] are the functional equivalent of those enumerated in the D.C. statute struck down in Heller.
In Heller, the Court held that the Second Amendment not only protects an individual's right to possess firearms but that the right requires that the firearms be available for "the purpose of immediate self-defense." The Massachusetts statute mandating lock boxes or similar devices would frustrate an owner's ability to immediately access an operable weapon.
Although the statute exempts firearms that are "carried" or "under the control of the owner" from the requirement that they be locked, the statute applies to the lawful owner of a firearm even when he is at home. People can be subject to prosecution whether they are home or not. The term "under the control of the owner" is a question of fact and subject to interpretation. Any ambiguity in the statute as applied to a person lawfully keeping a firearm in the home must be resolved in favor of the holder of the right. Legislation requiring an owner to store firearms in a place inaccessible to children or unauthorized persons would satisfy the Supreme Court's holding in Heller and protect the safety of others.
In light of the foregoing, the Court finds that, based on the Supreme Court's decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, G.L.c. 140, sec. 131L is unconstitutional.
According to a Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly article notes that Massachusetts courts seem split on this. It also reports that the prosecutor "agreed with [Judge] Lynch's analysis and decided not to appeal. 'I've read the Heller case,' he says. 'Judge Lynch read the Heller case, and the Heller case seems to say very clearly that these kinds of blanket restrictions are unconstitutional.'"
Interestingly, the court seemed to assume that the Second Amendment applies to state laws -- what lawyers call the "incorporation" issue -- which is something Heller pointedly declined to resolve.
Wood grain is like soda straws. As you know if you have an old piece of any wood and cut it, it’s pretty ‘clean’ inside. So called penetration of wood by stains, and such is very shallow.
Another old trick is to seal it with a different solvent product, like shellac. Another is get a couple of those two tubes injectors of epoxy at the hardware store, cut it with acetone, bush on a coat with a disposable brush, let dry and repeat again. You can top coat(s) with poly to make it look nice. I’ve done this with teak and mahogany on boats. Both can be or have had oils on them that just using poly causes either the finish to lift off in a film or not dry.
Not to butt in but what was on the sheet? Had it recently ben in the wash with some type of fabric softener. The wet sheet may have trapped moisture against the stock and caused some type of reaction with the grease or whatever is used to treat or seal the grain. Most likely, however, the moisture trapped under the sheet may have simply caused the wood to swell and squeeze the grease out of the now smaller pours (sp?) in the obviously unsealed wood.
Gunstocks. Yeah, that's it. I'm going to bleach a lot of gunstocks. Wait until the guys at the hardware store hear that one.
Teak decks on boats need it routinely. I believe the product is called "TeakBrite."
Hmmm...
Have never much dealt with outside brightwork such as teak. Much less a deck-load of it, though I've seen it on a few yachty sailing rigs.
More used to heavier boats with raised, slated wood over-decks configured in such a way that the water will drain. Treated with with sea water and fish oil only. 'Cept for the older wooden boats in which we'd use linseed oil, turpentine and pine tar to coat the deck itself. Messy bizness. Takes a while to fully cure.
I'd be more hesitant to use vaporized teakbright than straight oaxalic. The real deal can be had much cheaper.
I restored antique boats for nigh on a decade.
More used to heavier boats with raised, slated wood over-decks configured in such a way that the water will drain.
Heavier? I've worked on a 90' yacht with teak bright work, and yes, full teak decks.
'Cept for the older wooden boats in which we'd use linseed oil, turpentine and pine tar to coat the deck itself. Messy bizness. Takes a while to fully cure.
Yep, except most of those decks are fir.
I'd be more hesitant to use vaporized teakbright than straight oaxalic. The real deal can be had much cheaper.
The product is crystalline oxalic acid. I offered it as a way to buy it without getting any questions that you had indicated were a problem for you.
Native bees don't have problems with varroa mites. All it takes is making sure there are flowers around all year and giving them a place to maintain their burrows. They don't make honey though.
When I was talking heavier boat, I was talking fishing trawlers. I could pretty much guarantee that '80 of trawler gross displacement is about 2X the '90 yacht. The raised decks are exactly that. A grating. We used to build them with 2x4's layed flat on top of 2X4'set on edge, with the on-edge boards configured with cut outs, or staggered to act as limber holes. These are not there for looks. They are there for function.
I wasn't comparing fir decks to teak. Sorry to distract you.
Was this special treatment for a COP? Suppose it had been YOU. Would the “Judge” have gone the same way?
By the way, the Full Auto Ban Amendment to the 1986 “Firearms Owners Protection Act” never REALLY passed! And the BATF knows it. It was just on a voice vote, and the Nays WAY outweighed the Yeas on the Amendment’s adoption ballot! I heard it! Tip O’Neal just PROCLAIMED that it passed, to the GASPS of many in attendence, and the minority Repubs could not challenge him because of the parlimentary rules in effect at the time! HONEST! History!
Be careful how you handle that stuff...there’s no OSHA or FDA over there. That stuff could have all kinds of lead and other toxins in it.
The “stuff” on your stocks is called cosmoline and was used for long term storage. The Russians used to just dunk the rifles in barrels of boiling water until they were clean when pulling them out for re-issue. As mentioned, oven cleaner works. So does wrapping the stocks in black plastic and leaving it on the dash of a car in the hot sun.
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.