License renewel questions

Ill work out of order.
1. Check into a PO box. That what I have, as I've moved a few times recenetly. Keeps everything in one place.
EDIT that wont work, thats only good for the mailings, not the actual LTC. How long ago did you move? Could you still use your old address?

2. No, you dont need to take the class, unless it's that chief's requirement. But why not freshenup?

3. Personaly, I'de word something like ... Applying to be able to continue carrying as responsibility for work, while extending this oppertunity to hours off-the-clock... (now cite a reason or two, the family is always a good one).

but thtas just me. I live in a "green town", my first firearm license is class-A ALP, and i havent yet needed to renew (5.5 yrs to go wooo)

Good luck

I haven't moved yet, but will be moving in late August (assuming the condo is ready by then as it's still being built). The post office is arguing with the condo about the address so we're still up in the air about that.

About the permit, it has a work restriction on it but when I finally got it, no one would hire a woman for armed work. First, they wouln't hire me with a Class B, then they just wouldn't hire me. So I got tired of waiting and became and an extremely under paid admin at the Federal level. My job doesn't require a firearm and unless I transfer to Homeland Security, I won't ever need a firearm at work so that arguement won't fly. Besides, I'm 37 now which prohibits me from any armed work in Homeland Defense or anywhere else for that matter.

I'd like to find a good statement for why I should be allowed an upgrade for all lawful purpose carry. BTW, I did find the extra copy of the paperwork in my files so no need to download that or pick it up at the PD.

When I recently obtained my Class A, I did not realize that there was a menu of restrictions. I thought the Class A allowed all purposes short of full auto. I was disappointed to find that this is not the case. How and when are these restrictions decided upon? There was certainly not a list of choices on the application. The word restriction appears no place on the license, so how does one know what the restrictions are, or even that there are any? There is a place that indicates the "Reason For Issuing License", but there is no indication whatsoever that I am in any way restricted in the carrying of a firearm under my direct control.

If this involved anything besides the ownership and transport of a firearm, I would say that the attempt at restricting my use according to the license would never hold up in court. I'm not so naive to believe that though.

In plain English, a reason for issuance is not a statement of restriction. I don't hunt and never claimed that as my intent, but that purpose is stated on my license. The license states "Issued for use of holder named hereon. Use or possession except as prescribed by law is unlawful. There is absolutely no statement anywhere on that license that speaks of a restriction unless that little quote refers to something somewhere else the defines the stated "reason for issuing license" as the only lawful use of the firearm. If that is the case, can someone direct me to it?

I can't claim to be fully knowledgeable concerning MA gun laws (who can?), but I have never come across anything that explained restrictions or even listed them. It's irritating to know that I did not get what I thought I was applying for. How would I know what to apply for and where to state that? Should I have written "All Lawful Purposes" on my Class A application where it asked for what purpose I wanted a license? I thought I was prepared for my application, but without a lawyer, perhaps I was not.

I should add that Nantucket has historically been cooperative with those applying for licenses. Both the former and present chiefs have been fair about issuance.

I knew that I could get a Class A or B, and obviously wanted the A. I was told it's never given unless for work so I tried to find something in armed security, did, and got upgraded with a restriction - but never got the position to carry. I became disgusted with the company and left. I was angry myself when I got my permit that there were so many complications and even my teacher (NRA) thought "for all lawful purposes" should have been enough. Not in my city... [evil]

Originally Posted by dvl

In plain English, a reason for issuance is not a statement of restriction. I don't hunt and never claimed that as my intent, but that purpose is stated on my license.

And the courts see it that way too. Caselaw after caselaw affirms that courts around the state aggree that, while they may have issued it to you for target, personal protection, work, etc and state it on the LTC, MGL no where scopes out the limits of ANY restrictions. As far as these courts are considered, a Class-A is a Class A until the cows come home, and even then, you still have a Class-A. Even Boston;s "restricted" red stamp hold about as much weight as a scratch-and-sniff stamp on your LTC as well.

Now, if this were to come to that, (court), while even the most horrible attorney could get anything criminal dropped, you can bet your lmonths slary that your town is going to pull your license as being "unfit" i.e. cant follow instructions.

How and when are these restrictions decided upon?

DVL, they are decided upon by the Chief or his appointed minion, arbitrarily, when they process your application. I suspect the officer you dealt with filled that block in while you were sitting there.

I also left mine blank, thinking that if I filled it in, it might trigger an interrogation as to why I "need" to carry. I would have a hard time justifying such a need, as the most dangerous thing I realistically face each day is having a computer fall on my foot. Fortunately, my town has an elightened policy and the officer filled in ALP while I was sitting there, no questions asked.

I have to say that my town and my chief are gun friendly in that there are no deceptions, no funny looks, none of that stuff because I was applying for the license. I filled in the purpose myself not having any idea that it would suggest that I be restricted in any way. I have friends on the force here including a guy I shoot with and I want to give credit where credit is due. This department has good people making good decisions. It's the convoluted laws that I find so annoying.

I have a good reason to carry for the protection of my fiancé and myself, documented within this very department, but I did not refer to it when I applied for my license. Frankly, I did not get the license because of the threat, but that threat is one reason why I wanted to legally carry a concealed weapon if I felt the need. I am not trained in self defense with a firearm and would use it only as a last resort. But I would like the option if I get a phone call from a stalker who traveled thousands of miles to "visit" me as has already happened once.

I really wish the Commonwealth would clean up the General Laws to reduce the chance of any of us going to prison simply because we could not decipher them.

If you own a gun, you should always train to use it, otherwise take karate and carry pepper spray. I've studied martial arts for years and was told to stick with that and carry pepper spray. Wish my PD were more open minded.