A word of advice...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Feb 22, 2010
Messages
707
Likes
236
Feedback: 12 / 0 / 0
Yesterday, I had an applicant for an LTC-A, who thought it would be in his best interest to misrepresent his criminal history. I always make it a point to explain beforehand, that you must disclose ANY incident in which you appeared in court as a defendant. I also explain that failure to disclose this information can result in civil fines, criminal charges, AND a license denial. After hearing all of this, the individual, who had a couple of very minor charges ( guilty findings) that would not have disqualified him at all, decided to lie to me, explaining very explicitly that he has NEVER set foot in a courtroom. It took about 10 seconds for me to find these charges, as well as his juvenile record. Why would you do this?? Be honest people. Tell your licensing official the truth. If you're not sure of exact dates, hey....that's ok. But please, don't put me in a position where I must consider denying someone an LTC. I don't like it. I'm a strong supporter of 2A, and contrary to common belief, some of us WANT you to own guns.
 
Some people can't fight their way out of a wet paper bag and set themselves up for failure.

On the other hand, while the guy is an idiot for lying to you, he shouldn't have to beg to you for a permit to begin with. Course, it does not help that the law in MA sets up this trap
on purpose.

-Mike
 
Last edited:
But please, don't put me in a position where I must consider denying someone an LTC. I don't like it. I'm a strong supporter of 2A, and contrary to common belief, some of us WANT you to own guns.

I don't see how you can be a licensing officer and a 2A supporter at the same time. Sorry you couldn't give him permission to exercise basic rights.
 
So, let me make sure I understand this correctly. Someone is sufficiently afraid of being denied the "privledge" of exercising their basic rights that they conceal trivial facts from you; ones that you admit have no bearing on his suitability. That is a potential cause for denial? Maybe he yelled "fire!" in theatre once, too. Should he disclose that when asking your permission to exercise his 1st amendment rights?
 
Last edited:
I don't see how you can be a licensing officer and a 2A supporter at the same time. Sorry you couldn't give him permission to exercise basic rights.

Part of the problem is the licensing law in MA intentionally sets up a perjury trap. A person who lies on the app is committing perjury. So basically in order to give the guy a license he has to allow him to break the law, which if he is a LEO, doesn't work out so hot. I can think of other ways to solve the problem without denying him, though. eg, "I just did you a big favor. Read this packet again and again, and come back when you can't **** up this section. If you leave this blank I can't give you a license, because you and I both know it's not supposed to be blank. "

-Mike
 
So, let me make sure I understand this correctly. Someone is sufficiently afraid of being denied the "privledge" of exercising their basic rights that they conceal trivial facts from you; ones that you admit have no bearing on his suitability. That is a potential cause for denial? Maybe he yelled "fire!" in theatre once, too. Should he disclose that when asking your permission to exercise his 1st amendment rights?

The problem is lying on the app is an offense that is codified into the law.

-Mike
 
Guys, Glasgow doesn't make the rules and seems like he is being a good licensing officer in a green town. As much as I hate the fact that we need an application at all. Committing perjury on the damn thing puts these guys in a sticky spot.
 
He didn't pass the laws, cut him some slack.

He deserves as much slack as a cop who proctors a literacy test at a polling place. His advice to accurately fill out the LTC application was correct.
 
So, let me make sure I understand this correctly. Someone is sufficiently afraid of being denied the "privledge" of exercising their basic rights that they conceal trivial facts from you; ones that you admit have no bearing on his suitability. That is a potential cause for denial? Maybe he yelled "fire!" in theatre once, too. Should he disclose that when asking your permission to exercise his 1st amendment rights?

I don't make the laws, I simply act as the laws dictate that I must. Nobody forced him to lie, which is what he did. I also never said that I denied him. I do find it rather sad that those of you who supposedly are pro 2A, would seize any opportunity to attack a licensing official that is on your side. Perhaps if you would try to educate people, and present yourselves as decent, law abiding citizens, rather than anti-police, angry, middle aged punks, then maybe your 2A fight wouldn't be such an uphill battle. Perhaps if you could learn to work together, meaning WITH law enforcement, you may just find that you have many strong allies that could help.
 
Guys, Glasgow doesn't make the rules and seems like he is being a good licensing officer in a green town. As much as I hate the fact that we need an application at all. Committing perjury on the damn thing puts these guys in a sticky spot.

Exactly. Thanks for pointing that out.
 
Some people can't fight their way out of a wet paper bag and set themselves up for failure.

On the other hand, while the guy is an idiot for lying to you, he shouldn't have to beg to you for a permit to begin with. Course, it does not help that the law in MA sets up this trap
on purpose.

-Mike

I agree with you. But without changing the laws, AND the names of the people in power, we are bound by the laws.
 
I don't see how you can be a licensing officer and a 2A supporter at the same time. Sorry you couldn't give him permission to exercise basic rights.

I don't give permission. I simply process the application, which he lied on. Should I lie for him? That wouldn't say much for MY integrity, now would it?
 
Part of the problem is the licensing law in MA intentionally sets up a perjury trap. A person who lies on the app is committing perjury. So basically in order to give the guy a license he has to allow him to break the law, which if he is a LEO, doesn't work out so hot. I can think of other ways to solve the problem without denying him, though. eg, "I just did you a big favor. Read this packet again and again, and come back when you can't **** up this section. If you leave this blank I can't give you a license, because you and I both know it's not supposed to be blank. "

-Mike

That's basically what I do BEFORE the application process.
 
I don't make the laws, I simply act as the laws dictate that I must. Nobody forced him to lie, which is what he did. I also never said that I denied him. I do find it rather sad that those of you who supposedly are pro 2A, would seize any opportunity to attack a licensing official that is on your side. Perhaps if you would try to educate people, and present yourselves as decent, law abiding citizens, rather than anti-police, angry, middle aged punks, then maybe your 2A fight wouldn't be such an uphill battle. Perhaps if you could learn to work together, meaning WITH law enforcement, you may just find that you have many strong allies that could help.
I'm going to pile on with something I've recently realized.

We (Comm2A) field a large number of inquiries from folks that are denied for stupid statutory reasons. One of the most common profiles is someone in their 60s or 70s who smoked a little pot 'back in the day' or did something else foolish when they were young and stupid and got caught once. For years these folks were either not prohibited or flew under the radar. But now they go to renew and guess what pops up? Some of these people actually forgot they plead guilty to possession! These are folks that in many cases have had their LTCs for 20-30 years and now their local PD CANNOT issue them a renewal.

Far more often than not, the PDs are bending over backwards trying to find a way for these folks to keep their licenses AND their guns. The cops know these are folks that have lived in their community for years or decades, have raised families, paid taxes, owned and carried guns and have generally been your run-of-the-mill upstanding citizen. Yet they end up in a position they don't want to be in: telling these folks that they're now a prohibited person.

Bad cop stories rightly get a lot of attention here on NES especially when they involve Massachusetts gun owners. But a lot of these folks are good public servants who actually end up being in our corner.

As to the comment:
I don't see how you can be a licensing officer and a 2A supporter at the same time.
I'd rather have Glasgow Grin inside of the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in.
 
Too many here are "shoot the messenger" types and you may wonder why very few LEOs still participate on NES!

The laws are what they are, none of us here chose them to be what they are. We must live with them until/unless we are able to change them.

And bitching about someone doing his job, while still trying to help us by giving us advice to be honest and fill out the app correctly should not be happening . . . we make enemies of our friends that way.

My advice is to take that energy to your legislators and explain to them the need for changes in the law, do something positive with your anger about the system . . . rather than attacking the LEOs that are trying to help us within the parameters of a terrible system.
 
Honesty is the best policy! The guy should've just accepted his past mistakes and show confidence that he's now ready to take the responsibility of owning a firearm.
I don't blame Glasgow, it's his job and it's not personal ...
 
The guy shouldn't have lied. Glasgow is doing his job. Nothing else matters. Next time don't lie. That's the applicants fault for lying about nothing. [rolleyes] Nervous or not, tell the truth. Honesty is best, especially when it comes to ridiculous MA laws.
 
I don't give permission. I simply process the application, which he lied on. Should I lie for him? That wouldn't say much for MY integrity, now would it?

I think you're understating your authoritay as the licensing officer. And you should absolutely not lie for someone who willfully misrepresented his criminal history. In my first post I said sorry you couldn't grant him permission, not that you chose not to grant him permission.
 
I don't see how you can be a licensing officer and a 2A supporter at the same time. Sorry you couldn't give him permission to exercise basic rights.

If he quits, the chief will just put someone else in his place. Blame the politicians, the chiefs and the idiots in this state who keep voting in the same politicians.

Yes, there are times when saying "I was just doing my job" is a complete cop out (pardon the pun) but this isn't one of them.

EDIT: I should add that the licensing officer in my town saved me from making a major mistake. I went to get the LTC application and talked to the officer when I picked it up. I was completely naive and told her I probably just needed an LTC-B. She said no, we'll just give you an LTC-A unrestricted since it's the same fee. IMO, that's being very pro-2A.
 
Last edited:
To those that posted the positive comments, thank you. You are a credit to gun owners. Being a " gun guy" and pro 2 A, I do get comments on occasion from LTC applicants. Apparently, my predecessor wasn't as easy going. He would look for reasons to disqualify. I try to issue them whenever I can. Trust me. I'm on your side, but as some have said here, don't shoot the messenger. Stick together, and make changes. This past year has been a very good one for 2A rights. Let's keep the momentum up.
 
I don't know what kind of a dumbass thinks it is a good idea to lie on their application. Whether the officer you're dealing with is with for or against us, what kind of moron thinks that their criminal record isn't going to show up? If I were the officer (I am not a cop, BTW) I would be leaning toward calling such a person "unsuitable". I may get flamed for that, but too bad.
 
I don't make the laws, I simply act as the laws dictate that I must. Nobody forced him to lie, which is what he did. I also never said that I denied him. I do find it rather sad that those of you who supposedly are pro 2A, would seize any opportunity to attack a licensing official that is on your side. Perhaps if you would try to educate people, and present yourselves as decent, law abiding citizens, rather than anti-police, angry, middle aged punks, then maybe your 2A fight wouldn't be such an uphill battle. Perhaps if you could learn to work together, meaning WITH law enforcement, you may just find that you have many strong allies that could help.

Maybe I'm just lucky but every LEO I've ever met is pro 2a. Since I joined NES I read story after story about people being denied and I see thread after thread advising people that 'you'll never get unrestricted in that town'. Meanwhile I've convinced at least 8 friends to apply for their LTC. In several of those cases my freinds lived in RED towns. They all got LTC A with no restrictions. The most recent case was the most interesting. My friend took a class, had her interview and discussed all the options with the LO. The idea of an employment restriction came up in their discussions but it was dismissed. About 4 weeks later the LTC arrived. When my friend got home with her license she realized it had an employemt restriction. Guess what my friend did. She went in and told the LO there had been a mistake. The LO agreed and reissued the permit. LOs are people too.
I realize there are black towns but there's a defeatist attitude that seems to invade far too many threads.
To the OP. Thanks for the post and thanks for trying to stay pro 2a.
 
I don't know what kind of a dumbass thinks it is a good idea to lie on their application. Whether the officer you're dealing with is with for or against us, what kind of moron thinks that their criminal record isn't going to show up? If I were the officer (I am not a cop, BTW) I would be leaning toward calling such a person "unsuitable". I may get flamed for that, but too bad.

I agree with you.

There is ONE possible reason where mis-information may lead to someone lying unintentionally.

We've all read (here) reports of people who were TOLD by a judge/their lawyer that "the charge will go away" when they turn 18/21 (Juvie issue), they stay out of trouble for x-time or is "sealed" and thus they need not disclose it. BAD INFO! That info "may be" (I have no idea) valid when applying for a job/mortgage/etc. BUT we (those of us smart enough to read what's posted on NES) KNOW that everything since your birth will show up on a LTC records check! The PD WILL KNOW that some court action occurred and when.

I still have no sympathy with lying. And this is where (if you have ANY RECORD AT ALL) someone needs a short consult with a "firearms attorney" (not a run of the mill attorney) who will advise them as I stated above (tell all).
 
I don't make the laws, I simply act as the laws dictate that I must. Nobody forced him to lie, which is what he did. I also never said that I denied him. I do find it rather sad that those of you who supposedly are pro 2A, would seize any opportunity to attack a licensing official that is on your side. Perhaps if you would try to educate people, and present yourselves as decent, law abiding citizens, rather than anti-police, angry, middle aged punks, then maybe your 2A fight wouldn't be such an uphill battle. Perhaps if you could learn to work together, meaning WITH law enforcement, you may just find that you have many strong allies that could help.


Your a licensed DCJIS user and you used his juvenile record against him as well????? Have you read the new CORI law???? A word of advise, if he reads this forum and sees you read his juvy record YOU could be in a bit of a jam. IMO .....and yes I am a DCJIS certified user and trainer.

Sharing one persons mistake or lack of good judgment serves what? That people are afraid if they admit in their younger days they may have F'd up. Were these felony's???I can see your point , in a way, but folks in this state have to jump thru hoops to get a license and with all the so called experts on the law out there telling horror stories to folks people get nervous.
I in NO way condone lying.
 
I don't make the laws, I simply act as the laws dictate that I must. Nobody forced him to lie, which is what he did. I also never said that I denied him.

Perhaps if you would try to educate people, and present yourselves as decent, law abiding citizens, rather than anti-police, angry, middle aged punks, then maybe your 2A fight wouldn't be such an uphill battle.

To the former; fair point. My comments were misdirected and you have my apologies.

To the later, if civil rights aren't something that require a vigorous and aggressive defense, I don't know what is. How has polite discourse worked so far where 2A rights are concerned?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom