Class A LTC with restrictions

Joined
May 1, 2005
Messages
4,529
Likes
26
Location
Somerville, MA
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Hi all-


i was just wondering how many others out there have their Class A LTC's but with stupid restrictions? My LTC is "Sporting and Target" When the Chief gave it to me he said, "you can carry because no cops are going to look at the second line." Ofcourse- I don't carry. Not with the wacky Mass laws. I almost felt like the guy was trying to set me up...

Also wondering if anyone has experience with reapplying to get the restrictions lifted. Is it worth spending the $100 bucks since I'm still in the same town (somerville)?


-jen
 
He may have been, but he may also have been giving his honest opinion. In contrast, I would expect a lot of police to notice the "reason for issue" and interpret it as a restriction. (For these purposes, "a lot" is defined as more than I want to have to deal with.) However, the most recent court case I've seen ruled that the reason for issue was exactly that, not a restriction. Of course it was only at the district level, so it won't be precedent, but might carry a little weight. My firm and sound legal advice (as someone who took two law school courses once upon a time, but has never even played a lawyer on TV) is to avoid serving as a test case whenever possible.

Ken
 
There are some chiefs that will issue either a restricted A or a B for the first license (I don't understand that one, but that's their perogative) then issue a full A on the revewal if you ask for it. Some of our students have been told "keep your nose clean and you'll get an A when you renew". [roll] Seems to me their nose was clean to begin with if they got the A or B, BUT that's just little ol' me.
 
Lynne said:
There are some chiefs that will issue either a restricted A or a B for the first license (I don't understand that one, but that's their perogative) then issue a full A on the revewal if you ask for it. .

That wouldn't sound SO bad if the damn thing wasn't good until 2010...
 
SiameseRat said:
Hi all-


i was just wondering how many others out there have their Class A LTC's but with stupid restrictions? My LTC is "Sporting and Target" When the Chief gave it to me he said, "you can carry because no cops are going to look at the second line." Ofcourse- I don't carry. Not with the wacky Mass laws. I almost felt like the guy was trying to set me up...

Also wondering if anyone has experience with reapplying to get the restrictions lifted. Is it worth spending the $100 bucks since I'm still in the same town (somerville)?


-jen

I can't see how the restriction would affect anyone criminally. That being said, the cop on the street would notice the restriction but could not charge you with anything. Whatever the situation was to cause the contact with the police officer could require a report which could/would be forwarded to the licensing authority. Then he could use that as cause to pull your permit administratively.
The "Reason for Issuing License" part of the license makes no sense. A license to carry is just that, a license to carry. The restrictions on a license are set forth in the General Laws, by virtue of the Class of License.
Jon
 
My first permit from Somerville was for target only. Next two were renewed for target and employment. On the last renewal, I was finally able to convince them for an ALP. SPD is tough but fair. Before your next renewal, put time into preparing your case, including letters of reference and a good document stating why you want the ALP. Persistence can pay off :D

Bugie the Believer
 
JonJ said:
I can't see how the restriction would affect anyone criminally.

Really? From Chapter 140, Section 131(a): "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;" It isn't jail time, but it's more than enough to concern me.

Ken
 
KMaurer said:
JonJ said:
I can't see how the restriction would affect anyone criminally.

Really? From Chapter 140, Section 131(a): "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;" It isn't jail time, but it's more than enough to concern me.

Ken
I stand corrected.
 
KMaurer said:
JonJ said:
I can't see how the restriction would affect anyone criminally.

Really? From Chapter 140, Section 131(a): "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;" It isn't jail time, but it's more than enough to concern me.

Ken

See but what I hate about that is that on my license it doesn't "really" say RESTRICTION. It says "Reason for Issue" But I figure that that's just a loophole that wouldn't actually get me out of trouble if I concealed. Which is ridiculous. I can coach firearms safety but I can't be trusted to safely conceal and carry...

Was talking about this with my fiance who is NRA certified etc. He has Sporting and Target on class A although he had an All Lawful Purpose before he moved to this state. We're moving to Arlington when our lease is up as they have less stringent "restrictions."
 
As I noted, there's at least one Massachusetts judge who agrees with your interpretation. I have my doubts as to whether that would prove to be the majority view.

Ken
 
Jen, it might pay to talk with the chief in Arlington once you move and then if he assures you that you'll get LTC-A/ALP it would probably be worth spending the $100.

I have a theory (based on an unsolicited conversation with a chief and a few lawsuits, all of which he won), and it is pretty ugly in my eyes. I think that there are more than a few chiefs who have a real problem issuing LTCs to females, regardless if they have been threatened, raped or whatever. However unless one can absolutely prove that it is a clear case of sex discrimination, there really isn't much that one can do about it other than put some political pressure to the chief's bosses.
 
I wouldn't want to bet against that, Len. I recall back in the early 80's there was a case in one of the burbs. A woman who had lived in the town her entire life without so much as a parking ticket applied for a license after her husband died. The PD not only refused to issue it, but were dumb enough to do so in writing including a statement that it was against department policy to issue handgun licenses to women. When she protested, she was told that whatever security she felt she needed beyond the police, her sons could provide. Unfortunately for the Chief, she took him at his word. Two of her sons were practicing attorneys, who explained to the Chief that there two ways this could be handled but that they really hoped he would choose the expensive, embarassing and really painful route. The license was issued imediately.

Ken
 
Licensing and cities

According to a survey I'm doing for packing.org, Arlington is listed as a "green" city, which means you will be issued a Class A-ALP LTC without restrictions, if you meet the requirements for it and pass the required background check. Check www.packing.org and click on CCW info for Mass. Scroll down to Mass. cities and towns and licensing. All are designated green, red, or black. Though not complete, it lists over a hundred cities and towns in Mass. and their licensing practices. [wink]
 
Back
Top Bottom