Any license renewals since Maura's become Gov?

[MaxStravinsky]

Got this email from a friend today.
Here’s a scary story: a close friend in his late 70s who’s been shooting for years and has a nice collection sent in his renewal application and was refused because he had a traffic violation 54 years ago and paid a $25 fine! He’s reapplied but who knows. The Haverhill licensing officers said it’s not them, but Maura Healy trying to stop people from shooting. He called GOAL and they have lawyers who will fight this and he’ll hire one if he’s denied again.

 

[FancyGunz]

This sounds highly suspect.... likely there is way more to the story.

 

[FalArAk]

Is this a real friend or one of those Facebook fwd:fwd:fwd: friends?

 

[LTCRN]

 

[DW357]

Yep

 

[HARRYM]

Boy, IDK......I have mentioned this before.

1971, 16 yrs old, cops show up at a park and frisk everyone in the group, some had weed and a couple pills, not very much at all. Not me though. However I was arrested and cuffed for a "minor being present charge" Go to court, get a CWF and that was it. Maybe a couple of traffic tickets since then. Actually a short time after that the minor being present law was dropped except for things like Heroin. Few years back the state does a review going back decades and initially denies my FID card. One because I didn't disclose my arrest, which I said I never have because at that time my Lawyer said I did not have to disclose the arrest with a minor CWF so I have never thought about this since. Then they said we don't know what the drugs were as the microfilm is hard to read. I said geezzz....I was NOT in possession.....WTF...

I eventually got it but I remain convinced their full intent was to deny so I never initially dismiss these types of stories out of the gate as this state can't be trusted.

 

[HARRYM]

I actually have also come to believe that additional disqualifications have been added years after many cases have long be adjudicated. No grandfather clauses. The problem is years ago many would have likely handled their cases quite differently had they know that down the road Leftists would revise restrictions.

 

[namedpipes]

Boy, IDK......I have mentioned this before.

1971, 16 yrs old, cops show up at a park and frisk everyone in the group, some had weed and a couple pills, not very much at all. Not me though. However I was arrested and cuffed for a "minor being present charge" Go to court, get a CWF and that was it. Maybe a couple of traffic tickets since then. Actually a short time after that the minor being present law was dropped except for things like Heroin. Few years back the state does a review going back decades and initially denies my FID card. One because I didn't disclose my arrest, which I said I never have because at that time my Lawyer said I did not have to disclose the arrest with a minor CWF so I have never thought about this since. Then they said we don't know what the drugs were as the microfilm is hard to read. I said geezzz....I was NOT in possession.....WTF...

I eventually got it but I remain convinced their full intent was to deny so I never initially dismiss these types of stories out of the gate as this state can't be trusted.

My hometown Chief of Police busted me on a B&E, then signed off on my LTC maybe six years later. It varies.

There weren't any charges, just a "knock it off, idiot!"

My Gram would have pinned his ears back if he'd taken me in

Small Town grandmothers give no effs.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

There is an exception to the ex-post-facto ban for gun laws.

When the Lautenberg amendment (misdemeanor domestic violence conviction => federal lifetime prohibited person), deprivation of 2A rights was not viewed as punishment, and applied retroactively. I know of no other case in which a legally enshrined right was removed because it was added to the penalty for an old conviction prior to the law change.

On the administrative side, MA applied an ex-post-facto standard to drivers license penalty points when they went from a 3 to 6 year lookback - and resurrected tickets people had seen "age off" their driving record.

There are currently three situations in which CWOF may be overtly used against an in-duh-vidual:

• CWOF for OUI is counted as a predicate conviction
• CWOF for driving crimes are considered convictions for commercial drivers license issues. The feds prohibit any alternative adjudication other than not guilty/dismisses charges that avoids the conviction of a sanction), and the MA SJC held this applies to CWOF
• FIrearms licensing suitability

There is nothing to prevent MA from adding other ex-post-facto penalties for pre-existing CWOFs in the future.

 

[FalArAk]

Boy, IDK......I have mentioned this before.

1971, 16 yrs old, cops show up at a park and frisk everyone in the group, some had weed and a couple pills, not very much at all. Not me though. However I was arrested and cuffed for a "minor being present charge" Go to court, get a CWF and that was it. Maybe a couple of traffic tickets since then. Actually a short time after that the minor being present law was dropped except for things like Heroin. Few years back the state does a review going back decades and initially denies my FID card. One because I didn't disclose my arrest, which I said I never have because at that time my Lawyer said I did not have to disclose the arrest with a minor CWF so I have never thought about this since. Then they said we don't know what the drugs were as the microfilm is hard to read. I said geezzz....I was NOT in possession.....WTF...

I eventually got it but I remain convinced their full intent was to deny so I never initially dismiss these types of stories out of the gate as this state can't be trusted.

So there could be some validity to OP's story...

Although a PAID traffic ticket in the 70's is vastly diff then a CWF minor around drugs.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Although a PAID traffic ticket in the 70's is vastly diff then a CWF minor around drugs.

Correct. The former is the equivalent of a conviction (the term in the civil traffic proceedings is "responsible", not "guilty").

The later does not include any finding of guilt, and is technically a dismissed charge.

 

[cams]

Something off with this story. I agree with The Titanium Kid @FalArAk sounds like some FB f***ery people are spreading like stupid chain mail stuff.

 

[chrbla2000]

Sent in my renewal a couple weeks ago, got a letter pretty quick from my PD saying it's in process and expect to be notified within 2 months to come pick up the new LTC.

 

[AMV]

I am waiting on renewal for 2 licences applications submitted October 1st, called a few weeks ago, they have been approved but still don't have them yet

Update: just tried running a licence validation through the portal, came back unable to validate, that is a good indication my new licences have been issued and probably in the mail

 

[MAJoe]

What was the violation and did it show as unpaid? I thought you couldn’t even renew a DL with unpaid traffic and parking fines?

 

[n1heu]

Not an LTC but a notice to renew my BFS (instructor) from MA-SP. It asked for proof of current qualification, IOW my NRA certification being up to date. I always keep it valid so I had it but I don't ever remember being asked to provide that after the initial license. Either a new requirement or my memory is faulty.

 

[Coyote33]

Sent in my renewal a couple weeks ago, got a letter pretty quick from my PD saying it's in process and expect to be notified within 2 months to come pick up the new LTC.

Just a reminder, or just checking, but I'm pretty sure that BY LAW, it is 40 days. You should remind them of that, since they like to follow the law, right?

 

[whatluck]

this is bullshit but i believe it

 

[Joeldiaz]

Just a reminder, or just checking, but I'm pretty sure that BY LAW, it is 40 days. You should remind them of that, since they like to follow the law, right?

There’s also no penalty for going over the 40 day limit so PDs regularly ignore it and take their sweet time. Nothing you can really do about it except wait, unless you’ve got the money to hire a lawyer and sue the PD

 

[Broc]

OP forgot to add:

"If you don't forward this to at least 10 people in the next 20 minutes, you will have 7 years of bad luck, you will get AIDS, your d*ck will rot and fall off and a brain eating amoeba will kill you"

 

[jpm]

I'm thinking there was more to the story and the applicant didn't disclose it on his application and they found it. Remember, the coverup is worse than the crime. Don't lie on the application!

 

[drgrant]

This sounds highly suspect.... likely there is way more to the story.

This reeks suspiciously of "my sister-in-law got a $500 fine on the maine turnpike from ezpass for violating the covid lockdown"

 

[G4Y4HK]

Maura's as anti gun as the people running NYC. Only the rich, famous, and politically connected get to carry guns with a permit in NYC. Why should MA be any different?

 

[Broc]

This reeks suspiciously of "my sister-in-law got a $500 fine on the maine turnpike from ezpass for violating the covid lockdown"

OMG, DID SHE REALLY!?

 

[HARRYM]

I'm thinking there was more to the story and the applicant didn't disclose it on his application and they found it. Remember, the coverup is worse than the crime. Don't lie on the application!

For me, I was a minor being present and not in possession. And the law was changed a yr or two after. The rules in 1971 are not the rules today. At that time I was told that as a minor, a CWF, would mean after the set time it would be scrubbed from my record. I would not have to disclose. I thought I was on good ground. I was quite surprised some 30 plus years later to be questioned on it.

Now there are weed shops everywhere and people lined up to buy it and I am getting pushed over a nothing incident from 1971.

 

[HARRYM]

My recollection in 1971 was that the Juvenile record would be sealed, I guess it wasn't. Over the years some have said I should request that it be scrubbed as it was a law that threw a wide net which is why it was changed. I never bothered.

 

[drgrant]

Adding ... remember, this is the same Maur la that told CLEO to stop f*cking around with people after Bruen. Now she is making it harder?

Maura had nothing to do with that actually. That was more than likely some kind of edict from EOPS.

 

[CATI]

For me, I was a minor being present and not in possession. And the law was changed a yr or two after. The rules in 1971 are not the rules today. At that time I was told that as a minor, a CWF, would mean after the set time it would be scrubbed from my record. I would not have to disclose. I thought I was on good ground. I was quite surprised some 30 plus years later to be questioned on it.

Now there are weed shops everywhere and people lined up to buy it and I am getting pushed over a nothing incident from 1971.

Yeah. The question is pretty messed up
"Have you ever been arrested" is a messed up question
You either are convicted of a crime or not.....but not in MA

 

[HARRYM]

Yeah. The question is pretty messed up
"Have you ever been arrested" is a messed up question
You either are convicted of a crime or not.....but not in MA

I have no doubt in my mind that was was discussed between my Lawyer, myself, and the Judge in 1971 is not being followed these days.

Because of this I don't discount those that say they are being denied over old or old and stupid crap.

 

[drgrant]

I'm thinking there was more to the story and the applicant didn't disclose it on his application and they found it. Remember, the coverup is worse than the crime. Don't lie on the application!

If it's not an outright fabrication by the Op's friend it's often basically the LTC applicant version of "I was cleaning my gun and it went off". Like nobody wants to talk about how they got caught with a unit of heroin or something in 1971 because it makes them look bad or whatever.... so they make up some fake thing to gloss over it without understanding that it makes their entire story bizarre. If people are going to lie they should probably curate their stories a little bit better....