Quick question for MA LEOs...

[merc lover]

I know that at some point it was not legal in MA for an LEO to pull somebody over unless the parking lights were on in the pursuit vehicle.
In NH at the time this was not the case and NH State Troopers could lie low in the weeds and just pull over violators.
Is this still the case in MA or did the law change so that any LEO can pull over violators without any lights on at all?
This is just a curiosity question, has nothing to do with me, I just know that the law in this state was as such years ago, just wondering about the current state of affairs. Thank you very much and have a great weekend.

 

[FordSVTFan]

I dont know how you know this, as it is an urban legend. Sort of like the L.E.O. must be wearing his hat when he writes the ticket or he is out of uniform and the summons is bad.

Bottom line is it is not true.

 

[merc lover]

Thank you Sir, for your response.
Are you familiar with the MA laws, or did this change with the times, AKA all of the interstate/national stuff? Keep in mind that when I got my license, one could lose their license in one state, but be perfectly legal to drive the next state over. All of that changed years later and now many states are in contact, so that losing your right to drive in one state also will mean loss of driving privileges in neighboring states.
Again Sir I am not doubting your information, more like MA laws change often and without warning.
I know of people who have told me that they had not been charged with speeding tickets because of the "no lights" issue, but they could have been totally bullshitting me.
Thanks.:beer:

edited to add:
I had never heard of the "hat" story. That's a new one on me.

 

[FordSVTFan]

Thank you Sir, for your response.
Are you familiar with the MA laws, or did this change with the times, AKA all of the interstate/national stuff? Keep in mind that when I got my license, one could lose their license in one state, but be perfectly legal to drive the next state over. All of that changed years later and now many states are in contact, so that losing your right to drive in one state also will mean loss of driving privileges in neighboring states.
Again Sir I am not doubting your information, more like MA laws change often and without warning.
I know of people who have told me that they had not been charged with speeding tickets because of the "no lights" issue, but they could have been totally bullshitting me.
Thanks.:beer:

edited to add:
I had never heard of the "hat" story. That's a new one on me.

I can say with confidence that has not been the case in the last twenty years. I have done a cursory check of Mass. Statutes.

Let me pose this question: If a police officer was sitting without lights and pulled someone over, would they then tell the driver "oh, I cant write you because I didnt have my lights on?" They wouldnt waste their time pulling the driver over.

 

[merc lover]

OK Thanks Adam.
It was probably more than twenty years ago that I had heard of this. Thanks for straightening this out, it has been a topic of great debate amongst friends. It seems MA lawmakers love to create useless and ineffective laws at the drop of a hat, then quickly change the law back when they don't work. Usually said laws are of the knee-jerk reaction variety in response to some hyped-up nonsense.:shrug:
Thanks again.

 

[FordSVTFan]

OK Thanks Adam.
It was probably more than twenty years ago that I had heard of this. Thanks for straightening this out, it has been a topic of great debate amongst friends. It seems MA lawmakers love to create useless and ineffective laws at the drop of a hat, then quickly change the law back when they don't work. Usually said laws are of the knee-jerk reaction variety in response to some hyped-up nonsense.:shrug:
Thanks again.

Typically "bills" tend to serve a useful purpose at the start, but what eventually makes it into law they are far from that. Reading the "legislative history" of a law oftens lends to that understanding.

Also, I would suggest that laws that create an unreasonable burden on L.E. from completing their duties would not be upheld. Generally speaking there is no reason to enact a law to give a loophole to another law. If that is the intent, the first law will usually be revised.