Can't they streamline licensing?

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Messages
17
Likes
2
Location
Cape Cod
Being new to this forum, I am quite suprised and horrified, frankly, at some of the problems people have with acquiring a LTC-A ALP. Why is there such a problem and discrepency with some of the PD's licensing guidelines?

I was first licensed in 1991 (on my 18th birthday). I let me license lapse after 1998. When I went to get my new license, I walked into the local PD with the LTC-A application filled out and check in hand. The officer at the desk informed me that since the license lapsed and the laws had changed, I had to take the gun safety course. I took it at Bass River, went back to the PD and gave them the application and check. I was never asked for a reason or letter of why I wanted my LTC. I put on the application "For All Lawful Purposes". I was finger printed and sent on my way. 4 weeks later, I got a call that my LTC-A ALP was in and picked it up...easy! [smile]

Under what authority can a chief "restrict" a license? [frown]
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Aug 18, 2005
Messages
727
Likes
12
Location
Attleboro, MA
Chiefs have absolute discretion. Which means if his wife is PMS'n and giving him shit, then he can deny you. Obviously not all CLEO are complete a**h***s, but there are plenty to go around.

4 weeks is like finding gold lying in the street, mine took 8 weeks, and that’s fast in some cities.

Why hasn't any of this crap been fixed? Because only a few people in charge want people to have guns. This state likes to shit on the people because they can. Because the retarded liberal base keeps on voting like they are getting paid to do it.

If you ever wanted and example of what a bunch of stupid people in one place looks like, well, this is it.
 

drgrant

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
59   0   0
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
70,143
Likes
30,261
The process itself -is- pretty streamlined. The core problem lies in
the fact that MA is a "may" issue state; which means that a chief
in a given locality has ultimate authority. It's not like NH, ME,
etc, where the law says "SHALL" issue; shall issue; for most
intents and purposes, means the person MUST be issued a permit
unless they're statutorily disqualified by law (eg, criminal offense
record, etc. ).

Another problem is that the courts in MA have routinely backed up
the chief's right to be discretionary. Some people fight and win,
but most of the time nothing is ever done about the policy or to
the chief directly. About the only flack the chief gets is if the
applicant has political throw in town (unlikely for most) it might (at
least partially) result in them getting tossed... but in most cities
and towns in MA, this isn't likely.

IMO part of the reason discretionary issue stays in MA is because
the antis and the sheeple like it, and there are a lot of anti police
chiefs that do, too. Reforming the system to be less
discretionary would be great but I'm not holding my breath, given
the current political situation. Gun owners in MA don't really
have enough votes/throw to ram the issue home.

-Mike
 

Len-2A Training

Instructor
Instructor
NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 98.3%
59   1   0
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
51,944
Likes
9,922
Location
Escaping to NH
You have a LOT of reading to do here!

It's all been answered many times before, with cites from MGLs that give chiefs FULL DISCRETION on who is "suitable" and what restrictions get placed on LTCs.

Try reading the Stickies in the Gun Laws forum for a starter.

BTW: MGL says that if you had ANY LTC/FID in effect on June (don't recall day) 1998, you do NOT have to take any courses whatsoever! This is true even if you let it lapse/move out of MA in late 1998 and want it re-issued 10 years later . . . it is still a "renewal" per MGLs. However, as you found . . . chiefs can impose damn near anything they like . . . unless you are willing to spend Thousands in court costs to avoid paying $100-200 for the added BS!
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Messages
17
Likes
2
Location
Cape Cod
I know that the chiefs have full discretion. However, there has to be some kind of consistency town to town, no?

You're right...I have to read up on all the stickies! [grin]

Like I said, I'm new, but reading some of the recent threads concerning all the problems with licensing, I didn't realize what a huge problem some towns have.

I, personally, don't understand how ANYONE can limit, restrict or otherwise infringe upon our 2nd ammendment right. However, I realize that we live in a state where we should be used to bending over and taking it in the a$$.
 

Len-2A Training

Instructor
Instructor
NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 98.3%
59   1   0
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
51,944
Likes
9,922
Location
Escaping to NH
I say this in all seriousness . . .

- We have NO rights in MA . . . only what "they" let us do.

- The courts have agreed. The 2nd Amendment does NOT apply in MA!

- There is more consistency to licensing than many would believe . . . MCOPA does what it can to indoctrinate chiefs to be as big a PITA as possible and get away with it.
 
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
2,532
Likes
87
Location
North Reading, MA
The only way that consistency can happen is if the power was removed from the chief, and MA was made into a "Shall Issue" state. The only consistent thing about applying anywhere is the application itself. Is the chief infringing on your rights by restrictions....ABSOLUTELY...Is there much you can do about it? - Refer to the Chuck Norris thread to cheer yourself up because the answer is no.
 
Rating - 100%
22   0   0
Joined
Jan 24, 2007
Messages
916
Likes
68
Location
MA
The only way that consistency can happen is if the power was removed from the chief
Can this be done?
Can this be put on a ballot with enough signatures?
If so,just the attempt alone might send a message.
Maybe just some foolish thoughts.[thinking]
 

pdm

NES Member
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Messages
9,823
Likes
893
Location
Taxachusetts
Be careful what you ask for. In Mass, you'd just as likely end up with a big red rubber stamp that says "DENIED".
 

dwarven1

Appleseed Instructor
Dealer
NES Member
Rating - 100%
33   0   0
Joined
Mar 13, 2005
Messages
27,698
Likes
1,988
Location
Starksboro, VT
I know that the chiefs have full discretion. However, there has to be some kind of consistency town to town, no?
No. Marlboro would issue Sport and Target for a first permit, and then ALPs from then on - automatically. Now, they do no restrictions automatically. The next town over, Hudson, used to ONLY give out Sport & Target - NO exceptions. Now? All are issued no restrictions, I'm told.

BTW... welcome to the forum, and glad to see you in Green! Check out the threads in the Member's forum about the two shoots coming up and the two luncheon meet & greets. One is in Quincy - not too far for you, I hope!
 

KMaurer

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Mar 9, 2005
Messages
8,654
Likes
340
Location
Litchfield, NH
Can this be done?
Can this be put on a ballot with enough signatures?
Do you mean like the ballot initiative where the people voted overwhelmingly to repeal the seatbelt law or the one where they voted to lower the state income tax back to its previous 5%?

Ken
 

Cross-X

Shooting at the big range in heaven
Dealer
NES Member
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
8,528
Likes
249
Location
Metrowest, MA & Points South and West
Boys, boys, boys, a police chief _does not_ have "full discretion" as to whether to issue an LTC.

He, at a minimum, must avoid being arbitrary and capricious. In other words, he must be able to articulate some rational basis for denying an applicant an LTC.

For example, a court reviewing a petition for judicial review would not permit a denial based on a policy of only issuing unrestricted Class A LTCs to police officers and retired officers.

Don't make the state of the law in Massachusetts any worse than it actually is. If you do, you risk scaring away some good people who, after reading some of the advice in this thread, will decide not even bothering to apply for a license. That would be a real shame.
 

Admin

Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
18   0   0
Joined
Feb 25, 2005
Messages
39,469
Likes
14,838
Location
Monadnock area, NH
Cross-X,

What about the 70 year old man who was denied because he stole a chicken in 1946 when he was 9?
 

drgrant

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
59   0   0
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
70,143
Likes
30,261
Boys, boys, boys, a police chief _does not_ have "full discretion" as to whether to issue an LTC.

He, at a minimum, must avoid being arbitrary and capricious. In other words, he must be able to articulate some rational basis for denying an applicant an LTC.
Even then though, he could still just issue an H+T Class A, and tell
someone to begone..... IIRC, someone can challenge an outright
denial a lot easier than they could a restriction.

-Mike
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
835
Likes
9
Location
North of Woosta, 16 mi. south of Freedom
He, at a minimum, must avoid being arbitrary and capricious. In other words, he must be able to articulate some rational basis for denying an applicant an LTC.
I believe that only applies if the applicant has a good lawyer... If only you could recover you legal costs from the PD after winning the case... then more CLEO's might follow the rules.
 
Rating - 100%
22   0   0
Joined
Jan 24, 2007
Messages
916
Likes
68
Location
MA
Do you mean like the ballot initiative where the people voted overwhelmingly to repeal the seatbelt law or the one where they voted to lower the state income tax back to its previous 5%?

Ken
Ken,
I was thinking the same thing,
thats why I put in the disclaimer "Maybe just some foolish thoughts". [smile]
 
F

Finalygotabeltfed

Rating - 100%
33   0   0
I say this in all seriousness . . .

- We have NO rights in MA . . . only what "they" let us do.

- The courts have agreed. The 2nd Amendment does NOT apply in MA!

- There is more consistency to licensing than many would believe . . . MCOPA does what it can to indoctrinate chiefs to be as big a PITA as possible and get away with it.
And this matter alone should be challenged in court for the intentional conspiracy that it is, to willfully deny the citizens of this state of their rights under the law.

Note: I know of no single person who has sued a chief of police for an LTC and lost in court. Myself included. f*** You John Jackson.....former chief, Watertown PD!!!
 

KMaurer

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Mar 9, 2005
Messages
8,654
Likes
340
Location
Litchfield, NH
And this matter alone should be challenged in court for the intentional conspiracy that it is, to willfully deny the citizens of this state of their rights under the law.
What rights might those be? Keep in mind that the Mass SJC has ruled that neither the 2nd Amendment (which in any case hasn't yet been accepted as applying against states) nor the Massachusetts Constitution guarantee any individual rights with regard to firearms.

Ken
 

GSG

Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Joined
Jun 18, 2007
Messages
5,825
Likes
554
IIRC, when Kerry Healey ran for governor, she said that her goal was to do just that. Basically, have one authority that control it statewide, and a review board for special cases. That way every citizen would know their chances of getting a license, and wouldn't have to worry about losing rights when moving to another town or city. Another argument she made is that if you're not legally disqualified, how else could you be disqualified?

Some police chiefs organization opposed it, saying that the local chief knows better than anyone else who should be licensed. Scary to think that so many find it more than reasonable to disqualify someone based on a chief's/licensing officer's impression of a person. Isn't that profiling or something similar?

In some places, you'll be lucky to get an FID restricted. Other places they put ALP on anything you ask them to.

When I applied for mine, I wanted it to be ALP, and I was told "Whatever you write on the application is what we put on the license. If you want it to say All Lawful Purposes, write that." They only wanted a completed application, $100 and your picture. However, I know people from the same town who've gotten an LTC that says "Hunting/Sporting," but from that town, it's not a restriction, it's just what the person wrote down. Other towns, if it says the same thing, it's illegal to carry with it. So the LEO that runs the LTC on the side of the raod then has to figure out what each town meant when it put what it wrote on the license.

It's nuts, but they've made it so complex that many people just don't bother. It's a total mess, and I personally think it'll take a federal case to clear it up.
 

drgrant

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
59   0   0
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
70,143
Likes
30,261
... but from that town, it's not a restriction, it's just what the person wrote down.
Well, the way the law is now, restrictions are (more) binding...
so if someone wrote "hunting and target" then they functionally just
gave themselves a restricted license. Under the old system
where "reason for issuance" was the terminology, it was a lot more
ambiguous in meaning. GOAL made some noise about getting
it changed so certain IA's couldn't waffle around the fact that they
were restricting licenses... problem is in doing so, they removed
a possible greyhole/wallhack that existed in the law.

-Mike
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
835
Likes
9
Location
North of Woosta, 16 mi. south of Freedom
The whole restriction is pointless... (even more pointless than needing the LTC) I can't imagine the following ever happens...

Law abiding citizen decides to make a career change and turn thug.
Hmm I need a gun. Oh I need to take this BFSC... ok and fill out an application w/ background check... ok no problem...Oh yeah here have my fingerprints... Oh crap I got a restricted LTC now I can't carry my gun when I knock off that liquor store...

Do these CLEO's think that if a criminal that happens to have a clean record is given an LTC that the "restriction" will stop them from carrying?
 

drgrant

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
59   0   0
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
70,143
Likes
30,261
Do these CLEO's think that if a criminal that happens to have a clean record is given an LTC that the "restriction" will stop them from carrying?
No, they don't... it's quite a bit worse than that.... these CLEOs
don't want anyone but the police carrying guns. Some of these
CLEOS have even given restricted permits to ex law enforcement!

-Mike
 

JonJ

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
11   0   0
Joined
Feb 27, 2005
Messages
13,068
Likes
339
Location
Plymouth, MA
Do these CLEO's think that if a criminal that happens to have a clean record is given an LTC that the "restriction" will stop them from carrying?
No. They just don't want you to carry a firearm. They don't think you need to carry or have a right to.
 

GSG

Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Joined
Jun 18, 2007
Messages
5,825
Likes
554
4-5 years ago, a Leominster police officer lived in Worcester and worked in Leominster. He renewed his LTC-A ALP when it was up, and the chief issued him a target/hunting restricted LTC-A. He was told that he carries a gun at work, but has no need to carry off duty. Now with HR 218 that doesn't matter, but right before it passed I know of yet another officer who had the same thing happen.
 

Len-2A Training

Instructor
Instructor
NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 98.3%
59   1   0
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
51,944
Likes
9,922
Location
Escaping to NH
My chief has been sued by a number of people (2 women and 2 men) for refusal to issue a LTC. Only one person won against him and later that jerk blew it by leaving his gun in a belly-bag on the top of his shopping cart in a mall in another town. GG finds the purse-belt, brings it into the store where the manager opens it to find some ID, sees the gun and calls the PD.

Story was confirmed to me by the chief in the town it happened in and my chief was crowing that "the judge was wrong and he was right all along!" The guy's LTC was pulled for unsuitability and that was the end of him.
 
Top Bottom