Appeals Court License Decision Against Boston

[Knuckle Dragger]

Hot off the appeals court docket. A good decision against Boston. It's worth the read if only to see the sleazy lengths that Lt Det. McDonough will go to in order to screw people.

Comm2A had no role in this appeal.

Phipps's history of dismissed charges -- which only months earlier did not render him unsuitable -- cannot fairly be recast by the department based on Phipps's personal opinions about that history. Neither Phipps's "inaccurate" account of his conversation with Officer Coleman about the process for removing the target and hunting license restriction, nor his failure to accurately recite to McDonough the number of charges and arraignments from his court history, created an increased risk to public safety.

Here, even under Detective McDonough's stated criteria for evaluating an applicant's "proper purpose" in seeking an unrestricted license, Phipps demonstrated a "proper purpose."

The judgment is reversed, and a new judgment shall enter in the Superior Court reinstating Phipps's license to carry a firearm, without restriction, for any lawful purpose. So ordered.

 

[ScottS]

At the BMC evidentiary hearing, Lieutenant Detective John McDonough confirmed that this was department policy, except for applicants who were either police officers or attorneys, who, once approved as suitable, were issued unrestricted licenses.

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

ETA: The Court agrees: "We find no language in the licensing statute that supports the department's apparent practice of denying unrestricted licenses to carry firearms to first-time applicants who, like Phipps, are neither police officers nor attorneys."

 

[Bonesinium]

A perfect example illustrating exactly why licensing schemes are bogus and ought to be eliminated in entirety.

It’s like when a kid asks their parents for something, and gets something else they didn’t want, and then the parent says that’s what you get because you don’t like it now you get nothing.

That’s what happened.

Don’t like your restricted LTC that your holiness granted you? Now you get nothing, peon! Revoked!

 

[Rob Boudrie]

either police officers or attorneys

The attorney part is for one of 3 possible reasons:

1. Attorneys have more of a "need" that normal people
2. Attorneys are considered more responsible
3. The Boston PD knows that legal fees for a license appeal are not of concern to an attorney

My vote is #3.

 

[Beretta92FS]

It could also be that attorneys are given unrestricted licenses because, as attorneys, they know the law and their rights, and will not tolerate any crap and will sue right away if being messed with.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

It could also be that attorneys are given unrestricted licenses because, as attorneys, they know the law and their rights, and will not tolerate any crap and will sue right away if being messed with.

Sort of like #3. Rights are of little you if you cannot afford to enforce them.

 

[Darksideblues42]

Dupe

Interesting Mass Appeals Court Decision - Boston LTC

 

[duffyd]

#3

 

[Len-2A Training]

It could also be that attorneys are given unrestricted licenses because, as attorneys, they know the law and their rights, and will not tolerate any crap and will sue right away if being messed with.

In my experience as a Constable over the past 20 yrs dealing with attorneys on a professional level, in general I will dispute the above bolded statement. Some but very few understand gun laws, most have specialized knowledge in some areas but not necessarily gun licensing laws unless that is their specialty. For the record, I have been asked by attorneys to write legal documents to serve since they acknowledged lack of knowledge in certain areas of law . . . in all cases I refused (I do not practice law without a license and I'm not paid like an attorney when I serve papers!).

 

[fstkmaro]

It is amazing the lengths to which the city of Boston will go to get their way. What a sloppy process and lack of policy these public servants have. They completely disregard the law.

 

[Steelslave3]

I am glad this guy stood up for himself. There are many people denied licensing because of things that could be disputed in court if they have the money. I feel very strongly that we as a nation are having our constitutional right stomped on by uptight politicians and licensing authorities.

Anything short of Constitutional carry in all states is a fail . I feel the generations before us either didn't fight hard enough for this amendment or they were asleep at the wheel. The amendment is right there in front of us yet they ignore it and stuff regulations down our throats.

If you really look at the political climate right now we still have some states who recently went to constitutional carry and I truly applaud them to do this despite the liberals screaming bloody murder . Something drastic needs to happen before it's to late . These are spooky times and we are at the tipping point .

Cheers

 

[xero2099]

yup # 3 if you have money to fight you can

 

[VetteGirlMA]

I think the thing I want to see is how long the Boston PD will be allowed to drag their feet while reissuing his LTC.

 

[firestorm]

I think the thing I want to see is how long the Boston PD will be allowed to drag their feet while reissuing his LTC.

I would guess they will pump it right out and pretend it didn't happen. Maybe a downgrade on renewal, or just let this guy have it and not give out unrestricted to anyone else.

 

[beach]

The week after next I will be back in Boston and am going to stop by his establishment and introduce myself and thank him for fighting the fight. And ask him if he is a nember of NES. If he is not I will pay for his membership.