About to apply for my LTC-A-ALP in Arlington -- suggestions?

[lagrangian]

Some time ago I posted about wanting any tips on making application, and it was suggested that I come back and ask again when I was actually ready to apply.

Well, I've finished my LTC-0002 safety class (with Mass Rifle Ass'n), have picked up the application packet from the police station, and am ready to apply. I do know that Arlington is rated "green" by packing.org.

Arlington doesn't require any "extra" stuff beyond the standard form aside from requiring you to acknowledge (with your signature) that you read their handout on MA's use of deadly force laws. No letters of reference are required, no explicit "reason I'm applying" letter required, etc. The process is to hand in just the application, then come back in a week for an interview and to hand in the $100 check, the safety class certificate, the deadly force handout, and to be photographed and fingerprinted

Everything I've read here and elsewhere says that on the form itself, simply say "for all lawful purposes" as the reason for applying, so I plan to do that. But I'm wondering (especially after reading the "MA LTC Question" thread in this forum) whether I should go beyond this and write up a "reason" letter anyways. In all honesty, I don't have any reason beyond "because it's my right to" (not that that's a bad reason ). I don't run a business, or carry cash and valuables, or live in a sketchy neighborhood. I'm also wondering if I should write an "about me" cover letter (i.e. "I've lived in Arlington for 12 years, have been steadily employed, have been a town meeting member for 10 years, etc...") or just look for a way to bring it up in the interview (or not bring it up? don't want to look desperate?) I'm planning to join MRA once licensed (I have a few friends who are members, and I've shot there with friends outside of the class and it seems nice enough, and it is very convenient to where I live). Should I join before applying so I can say I'm a member of a club? Good enough to say I intend to join? Don't bring it up? Similarly, good or bad idea to mention I've done some shooting (not much, only about 400 rounds including the 100 rounds shot as part of the class, but I have done some gun handling outside of the class)?

Related to this, I was wondering if anyone had general or specific (if you've been through the Arlington LTC application interview) tips on the interview portion. Obviously, I plan to dress well (is a suit and tie overkill?) and be clean-shaven. But I'm wondering what to expect -- is the interview a 3rd-degree thing, or is it more of a just-weed-out-the-obvious-crazies thing (and I realize that's very town-dependent). And how best to truthfully answer "why do you want an ALP license" if it is asked?

I realize I'm probably overthinking stuff, but I am interested in what you all have to say and in how to make this all go as smoothly and successfully as possible.

 

[Republic of Mass]

I say no. All Lawful Purposes on the last line of the app clearly and unmistakenly describes why you have submitted for an LTC.

Dont fix a problem that doesnt exist. Make it sweet and simple. Dont forget, the issuing authority has to enter it all into MIRCS when they photograph you, so writing a novel will only be more troublesom..

 

[Scrivener]

While brevity has its merits

DOCUMENTING is the name of the game w/firearms apps. I also find the apparent bifurcation of the process unwarranted and bizarre. Why hand in PART of the application only to come back and hand in the rest?

Note also that state law REQUIRES the PD to SUBMIT prints to AFIS w/i 7 days of receiving the app. How does THAT happen when the PD waits a week or more to even TAKE them?

The "deadly force acknowledgment" is pure BS and not part of the state application. That said, it's pretty harmless.

The real issue is documenting the reason for issuance, especially now that it is a formal restriction (Gee, thanks GOAL!). I would very carefully document that you WANT All Lawful Purposes and WHY you should get it.

 

[Republic of Mass]

Re: While brevity has its merits

The real issue is documenting the reason for issuance, especially now that it is a formal restriction (Gee, thanks GOAL!). I would very carefully document that you WANT All Lawful Purposes and WHY you should get it.

Please provide a MGL or CMR that seperates different restrictions within Class-A Firearm Licenses....

 

[Paulm]

While it isn't required in Arlington, I would certainly put the effort into a well written letter. For 3 renewals in Somerville, I listened to those who said it's not neccessary or required. Each of those renwals saw me walking away from my interview with "hunting and target shooting" as reasons for issuance.

On my most recent renewal, I wrote the letter and also had several letters of reference. I am confident that without them I would not have received ALP.

They only input the application info into MIRCS, but the other documents gave the issuing LEO a sense of who I am, not from me but from others who were willing to put their reputation on the line for me. It allowed for a better interview because the LEO already had a sense of who I was. (It was obvious that he had looked at the info prior to my arrival)

While it's true thats its outside the "rules", it's important to realize that we don't write the rules. However, even the rules that are written are often disregarded. If it's worth it to get an ALP and not something with a restriction, then put in the extra effort. The LEO's have the power and you have to use whatever resources are at your disposal to work within a biased system to get what you want.

Bugie

 

[Scrivener]

RTFD

"Please provide a MGL or CMR that seperates [sic] different restrictions within Class-A Firearm Licenses...."

Try the licensing statute itself, c. 140, s. 131(d):

"... the applicant has good reason to fear injury to his person or, property, or for any other reason, including the carrying of firearms for use in sport or, target practice only, subject to such restrictions expressed or authorized under this section,"

This applies to both A and B licenses; however, it is more an issue with Class As as it is the only class allowing concealed carry. I'd have thought pretty much everyone on this board knew that.

Now that GOAL has made "Reason For Issuance" into a "Restriction," it will be even more important. Want more law? Here you go:

" A violation of a restriction imposed by the licensing authority under the provisions of this paragraph shall be cause for suspension or revocation and shall, unless otherwise provided, be punished by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000. "

Satisfied?

 

[Republic of Mass]

You didnt include the whole that the punishments you quotes is regarding, why?
That "a violation" quote is from a paragraph regarding "for all lawful purposes; provided, however, that the licensing authority may impose such restrictions relative to the possession, use or carrying of large capacity rifles and shotguns as it deems proper"
the only city that exercises this mgl is Boston, if a resident, you are not *supposed* to possess any large-capacity feeding deevices for long guns

Caselaw TIME AND AGAIN has ruled that, becasue MGL NO WHERE specifies ANY restrictions that can STOP a CLASS-A holder from CARRYING CONCEALED, that said "restrictions" are absolutetly frivolous...


Why would you come here and piece-together lines from laws to make them seem like one thing, when they are far from that?

 

[lagrangian]

It's good to hear the give and take over what the wording on the back of the new-style licenses mean, but there's still the step of getting one in the first place , so I'm still interested in any application/interview tips people have.

 

[Lynne]

Scrivener, your post appeared 3 times. I deleted 2 of them.

 

[Len-2A Training]

OK, I tried a new (none of us had ever used it before) tool for Moderators that allows us to "split a topic". Regrettably, it moves the selected posts to a new thread and DOES NOT leave a link to it in the original thread. [I was hoping that it would duplicate the selected post in the newly created thread, but leave the original where it was.]

Live and learn!

Therefore, I lifted two of Scrivener's responses to this thread and created a new thread (made it a "sticky") called "Tips on Applying for LTC - Important Info" with these replies.

Here's where that info can be found. I'm sorry, but there is no "undo" feature . . . but the good news is that this valuable info will be more readily available for others to find in the future.

http://northeastshooters.com/viewtopic.php?p=24553

 

[Scrivener]

"Scrivener, your post appeared 3 times. I deleted 2 of them."

Thanks, Lynne. I sent a PM to one of the Moderators (Ken?), asking him to do just that.

LOVE your avatar! Are you really bad, or were you just DRAWN that way?

 

[Lynne]

LOVE your avatar! Are you really bad, or were you just DRAWN that way?

hehehe...I'll nevah tell. [lol]

 

[cromagnum]

MGL and CLASS-A Restriction

I was reading the MGL to understand how MGL cannot restrict a class A LTC. This is the first part from Ch. 140 Sec. 131...

Unless I am missing something, the "authority" does have the ability to restrict a class A according to this. (a)(i) specifically. Please help me if I am misreading this.

[ http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/140-131.htm ]

Section 131. All licenses to carry firearms shall be designated Class A or Class B, and the issuance and possession of any such license shall be subject to the following conditions and restrictions:

(a) A Class A license shall entitle a holder thereof to purchase, rent, lease, borrow, possess and carry: (i) firearms, including large capacity firearms, and feeding devices and ammunition therefor, for all lawful purposes, subject to such restrictions relative to the possession, use or carrying of firearms as the licensing authority deems proper; and (ii) rifles and shotguns, including large capacity weapons, and feeding devices and ammunition therefor, for all lawful purposes; provided, however, that the licensing authority may impose such restrictions relative to the possession, use or carrying of large capacity rifles and shotguns as it deems proper. A violation of a restriction imposed by the licensing authority under the provisions of this paragraph shall be cause for suspension or revocation and shall, unless otherwise provided, be punished by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000; provided, however, that the provisions of section 10 of chapter 269 shall not apply to such violation.

You didnt include the whole that the punishments you quotes is regarding, why?
That "a violation" quote is from a paragraph regarding "for all lawful purposes; provided, however, that the licensing authority may impose such restrictions relative to the possession, use or carrying of large capacity rifles and shotguns as it deems proper"
the only city that exercises this mgl is Boston, if a resident, you are not *supposed* to possess any large-capacity feeding deevices for long guns

Caselaw TIME AND AGAIN has ruled that, becasue MGL NO WHERE specifies ANY restrictions that can STOP a CLASS-A holder from CARRYING CONCEALED, that said "restrictions" are absolutetly frivolous...


Why would you come here and piece-together lines from laws to make them seem like one thing, when they are far from that?

 

[Scrivener]

"Unless I am missing something, the "authority" does have the ability to restrict a class A according to this. (a)(i) specifically. Please help me if I am misreading this."

You - unlike certain others on this forum - are not missing or misreading anything. The licensing authority is expressly authorized by statute to impose restrictions on both Class A and B LTCs, should it so desire.

And no; it is NOT limited to Boston; neither is Boston's law part of the MGL.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

You didnt include the whole that the punishments you quotes is regarding, why?
That "a violation" quote is from a paragraph regarding "for all lawful purposes; provided, however, that the licensing authority may impose such restrictions relative to the possession, use or carrying of large capacity rifles and shotguns as it deems proper"
the only city that exercises this mgl is Boston, if a resident, you are not *supposed* to possess any large-capacity feeding deevices for long guns

Caselaw TIME AND AGAIN has ruled that, becasue MGL NO WHERE specifies ANY restrictions that can STOP a CLASS-A holder from CARRYING CONCEALED, that said "restrictions" are absolutetly frivolous...


Why would you come here and piece-together lines from laws to make them seem like one thing, when they are far from that?

Wow - three fundamental errors in a single post.

Error #1: The Boston law on large rifle mags is a local law, which was approved by the state under a "home rule" bill passed by the legistlature. As Scrivener notes, it has absolutely nothing to do with the restrictions on an LTC. Although this law is not part of MGL as Scirvener observes, it is worth noting that the passage of a local gun ban requires the passage of a home rule bill at the state level for such a law to be valid.

Error #2: Prior to the changes in 1998 when the law had the specific provision for restrictions added, the validity of a "restriction" was unclear with courts using terms like "may" (see Ruggerio v. Roache). The only case law on restrictions which would be relevant at this point is that which occurred after the statutes were updated to specifically grant restricting power to the issuing authority.

Error #3: It is factually inaccurate to claim that Boston is the only city exercising the right to restirct, as residents of Worcester can confirm. If you expand the scope to includes towns as well as cities, you will be able to find numerous additional examples.

I respectfully suggest that you research things a bit more carefully, and avoid discussion of gun laws in front of people who think you know what you are talking about as your advice could get someone into trouble.

I realize you mean well, but you conclusions are about as valid in the real world as an explanaination that a carry permit is not need to carry in NYC because the 2nd ammendment contains the words "shall not be infringed."

I invite corrections from any lawyers on this forum as the only bar I am a member of is the one upstairs in my gun club. (Although I do know that it is possible to try a case there).