Comm2A Wins in Federal Court - Mass Alienage Ban Overturned

[Rob Boudrie]

Maybe you should call this Glidden fellow, explain the situation, and see if you can come in as a guest speaker. A little goes a long way.

I am confident that Chief Glidden is fully up to date on Fletcher v. Haas, and the FRB policy of assisting police departments in processing such applications.

Chief Glidden does an excellent job of presenting the law, and words from the mouth of a retired police chief who is recognized as "THE" gun law authority in MA LE circles will be far more effective than anything we could bring to the table.

 

[terraformer]

Some of these departments just need someone they recognize as an authority figure to tell them what they should be doing.

Well, that means even if FRB/CJIS actually did their jobs and told the PDs, it wouldn't have made a difference...

 

[Len-2A Training]

I'm not sure if the FRB didn't bother to get the word out or if the licensing officers just don't read their messages. Either way awareness of the change is pretty low. One licensing officer even told an applicant that even though there's a federal court ruling [that the law is unconstitutional], the legislature hasn't changed the law so he has to continuing enforcing the [unconstitutional] law.

I suspect that FRB has sent out word, but these days most things go via Email or Fax and probably a good percentage of PDs pay no attention to the incoming memos/Emails.

You really should do this. I bet a little goes a long way. Put it on some sort of letterhead with a fancy seal on it just for good measure, then mail, email, and FAX it to them. The fax often comes into dispatch, who will post it right there, which is where people who come in for applications go.

Although this is a good idea, don't expect any PD to abide by what "some organization" tells them to do. They will likely only abide by what some agency with authority tells them to do.

Chief Glidden's training organization is giving a seminar the 21st, primarily targets at police departments. Quite a few departments send their licensing officer, and I expect that the current information will be presented (Attorney Guida often attends to answer any FRB related questions).

I live in a fairly green town, but their position is "Until we get notice, we tell aliens to go to the state", followed by "that will change if we learn anything new at Glidden's class on the 21st". Some of these departments just need someone they recognize as an authority figure to tell them what they should be doing.

I expect the scope of the problem will decrease as information diffuses, but it may indeed take some corrective action to make sure that the PDs that are slow to get the message understand what the word "order" in "court order" means.

Perhaps an introduction to 42 USC 1983 will be in order .

Glidden does an excellent job and has already sent out an Email to those on his private training list, as I got a copy a week or so ago.

Problem is that only ~200 people attend each of his seminars (run 2x/year) and there are 352 entities issuing LTCs. Many never attend anything and are blissfully ignorant.

Guida usually doesn't show up until almost lunch time and may not be there when the issue gets raised.

I have zero tolerance for blissful ignorance. A couple slam-dunk lawsuits against arrogant PDs would please me no end.

I am confident that Chief Glidden is fully up to date on Fletcher v. Haas, and the FRB policy of assisting police departments in processing such applications.

Chief Glidden does an excellent job of presenting the law, and words from the mouth of a retired police chief who is recognized as "THE" gun law authority in MA LE circles will be far more effective than anything we could bring to the table.

Yes, see above.

Well, that means even if FRB/CJIS actually did their jobs and told the PDs, it wouldn't have made a difference...

Touché! Some don't like to be "told what to do" by anyone.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Although this is a good idea, don't expect any PD to abide by what "some organization" tells them to do. They will likely only abide by what some agency with authority tells them to do.

Correct, but the key is bringing to their attention that (a) the FRB is eager to provide all assistance to PDs in dealing with the issue, and (b) a motivated and funded organization is ready to litigate to assure that the terms of the court order are adhered to.

 

[RichM]

Somewhat off topic here, but...

If any of you can put a bug in either Mr. Guida's ear or in Chief Glidden's ear to tell the police departments to order a bunch of FA-10s, we-all would surely appreciate it!

 

[Len-2A Training]

Somewhat off topic here, but...

If any of you can put a bug in either Mr. Guida's ear or in Chief Glidden's ear to tell the police departments to order a bunch of FA-10s, we-all would surely appreciate it!

It doesn't work that way. The PDs (each of them) MUST order the forms for themselves.

Alternate method is each of us call FRB and request forms sent to ABC PD and they will do so.

PDs aren't motivated to request/stock/give out the forms, so they tend NOT to request them.

 

[wormsoldier]

Great win!

Is there anyone could share their experience on the application? Anyone knows how PD of Braintree does?

Thanks.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

The fallout from this case is proving to be very interesting. Both of our green card plaintiffs have applied for LTCs through their local police departments and one received his LTC over a week ago. (Restrictions: None in case anyone is interested.) A couple other green card holders have also been able to submit their applications. Wellesley was actually delighted to accept an application from an alien in mid-April long before the Commonwealth’s appeal window closed. The Wellesley chief ‘gets it’.

For the most part, however, things have not gone smoothly. The state has not been very proactive in getting the word out and appears to have limited their communication to updating the instructions for applying for an Alien Permit.

Several green card holders have actually been turned away by their local police departments! Either the PDs won’t change what they do until someone explicitly instructs them to do so or they don’t want to ‘bother’ with accommodating a fundamental right by issuing a paper license. People are essentially getting the “we’ll call you when something changes routine”. My favorites: “just because the law changed doesn’t mean you can have it now” and “how do you know I won’t just give you an FID?” In a couple of instances treatment by the local licensing officer has been downright shabby.

Obviously this is not acceptable as complying with the federal courts in matters of fundamental rights is not generally viewed as something that’s discretionary based upon the convenience of the government. Yesterday our attorney sent what I expect will be the first of many Cease and Desist letters that will go out to local police chiefs. I anticipate that most, if not all, PDs will quickly come to understand their obligations. But if they don’t, we’re prepared for that as well.

The implementation of this change in the law is proving to be very illuminating with respect to how the state and police departments continue to view the Second Amendment. Of course this is nothing new, but it does underscore the degree to which intransigence, stubbornness, and inertia are all forces that must be overcome.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Several green card holders have actually been turned away by their local police departments! Either the PDs won’t change what they do until someone explicitly instructs them to do so or they don’t want to ‘bother’ with accommodating a fundamental right by issuing a paper license. People are essentially getting the “we’ll call you when something changes routine”. My favorites: “just because the law changed doesn’t mean you can have it now” and “how do you know I won’t just give you an FID?” In a couple of instances treatment by the local licensing officer has been downright shabby.

The implementation of this change in the law is proving to be very illuminating with respect to how the state and police departments continue to view the Second Amendment. Of course this is nothing new, but it does underscore the degree to which intransigence, stubbornness, and inertia are all forces that must be overcome.

Sadly this is just what I had predicted to happen. Chiefs (and the State) do NOT like to be told what to do and will oftentimes do whatever they can to circumvent what they are supposed to do!

 

[soam]

Sadly this is just what I had predicted to happen. Chiefs (and the State) do NOT like to be told what to do and will oftentimes do whatever they can to circumvent what they are supposed to do!

Too bad for them (and good for us) that we have an organization like Comm2A that will keep on fighting until they are forced to do what they are required to do. I am happy to see our donation dollars being put to good use.

 

[M1911]

As much as I despise macops, is there any chance that a letter from the Comm2A attorneys to macops might encourage them to explain the reality of the laws to the police chiefs? That might be faster than playing wack-a-mole with each podunk PD in this state.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Too bad for them (and good for us) that we have an organization like Comm2A that will keep on fighting until they are forced to do what they are required to do. I am happy to see our donation dollars being put to good use.

I agree and they are!

 

[Len-2A Training]

As much as I despise macops, is there any chance that a letter from the Comm2A attorneys to macops might encourage them to explain the reality of the laws to the police chiefs? That might be faster than playing wack-a-mole with each podunk PD in this state.

I doubt that there are more than 1 or 2 chiefs on Masscops. There are more than that reading what we post here!

And one thing you learn in a PD is that the "boots on the ground" do NOT give advice to their superiors. It is more than frowned upon. I got yelled at by my late chief (friend) when I suggested cages in the cruisers after a discussion with a full-time officer about it and he said "no, not me, I'm not going to tell him we need them!" It was nice being a part-timer, I could say what I wanted and fear no repercussions. [NOTE: He claimed we didn't need them. Six months later "HE came up with an idea" and ordered/installed cages in the cruisers. ]

 

[atmay]

I doubt that there are more than 1 or 2 chiefs on Masscops. There are more than that reading what we post here!

And one thing you learn in a PD is that the "boots on the ground" do NOT give advice to their superiors. It is more than frowned upon. I got yelled at by my late chief (friend) when I suggested cages in the cruisers after a discussion with a full-time officer about it and he said "no, not me, I'm not going to tell him we need them!" It was nice being a part-timer, I could say what I wanted and fear no repercussions. [NOTE: He claimed we didn't need them. Six months later "HE came up with an idea" and ordered/installed cages in the cruisers. ]

I tell my boss when she's doing something wrong.

Any public servant that does otherwise is a ****ing scumbag.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

Based on past results Guido will do nothing to enforce the law as required on the police agencies. He will let Comm2a carry the water. Guido should be charged with some kind of dereliction of duty charge. He is a total a**h***.

To be fair the FRB’s responsibility isn’t to enforce the court’s ruling, it’s to comply. And while I wished they’d be more proactive, they’ve essentially met their obligation. They’re not dummies. They didn’t cry to the court that MIRCS made it impossible for them to comply, they created a work around. Any police department has the ability to follow the law, the FRB has seen to that. It’s enormously important that we be accurate and focus our attention on the specific source of a given problem. In this instance at least it’s not the FRB.

Sadly this is just what I had predicted to happen. Chiefs (and the State) do NOT like to be told what to do and will oftentimes do whatever they can to circumvent what they are supposed to do!

Correct! But it's actually not all that sad.

As much as I despise macops, is there any chance that a letter from the Comm2A attorneys to macops might encourage them to explain the reality of the laws to the police chiefs? That might be faster than playing wack-a-mole with each podunk PD in this state.

Notice has been given and ignorance is no excuse for violating fundamental rights. Chief Glidden is well aware of the ruling and discusses it during his seminars. The Executive Director of MCOPA is aware and has commented publicly on the ruling.

“This is a very narrow decision that is well-reasoned and limited to a number of people.”

They all know or should know.

This isn't really the game of wack-a-mole you might think that is. By now the potential strategic value to everyone of this case should be clear. The laws, customs and practices in Massachusetts are far removed from the base line established by Heller/McDonald. Anytime that a federal court has the opportunity to look at how the Second Amendment is applied in Massachusetts there is the potential to create positive change. Moreover those laws and practices will be subject to heightened scrutiny by the courts when they are applied to members of a suspect class - like aliens.

 

[M1911]

I doubt that there are more than 1 or 2 chiefs on Masscops. There are more than that reading what we post here! . ]

, I meant the MA chiefs of police association - whatever it is called - NOT masscops.com

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

, I meant the MA chiefs of police association - whatever it is called - NOT masscops.com

They know.

 

[Len-2A Training]

, I meant the MA chiefs of police association - whatever it is called - NOT masscops.com

I don't know the numbers but many chiefs are NOT members of MCOPA, I know that mine isn't (he told me so some years ago). I also know that the one officer from my PD that was on Ron Glidden's private Email list asked to be removed from said list a number of years ago (Ron told me this).

There are many chiefs who are proud to have their heads buried in the sand, know that they are king of their fiefdom and don't want anyone telling them what to do (or trying to educate them about change)!

I'm just hoping and praying that a few 1983 cases where chiefs are made to pay up huge legal fees (all the better if the court rules that the chief is personally liable, not the city/town) will shock them into reality.

 

[M1911]

They know.

Oh well.

I'm just hoping and praying that a few 1983 cases where chiefs are made to pay up huge legal fees (all the better if the court rules that the chief is personally liable, not the city/town) will shock them into reality.

To quote a certain ex EPA burearat, we need to put a couple chiefs' heads on a legal spike, to serve as a warning to the others.

 

[Len-2A Training]

To quote a certain ex EPA burearat, we need to put a couple chiefs' heads on a legal spike, to serve as a warning to the others.

Like the squirrels hung on the fence in NJ?

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

Like the squirrels hung on the fence in NJ?

And lest anyone think otherwise, we all know you're speaking figuratively.

 

[Len-2A Training]

And lest anyone things otherwise, we all know you're speaking figuratively.

I was merely asking M1911 if his analogy was similar!

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

You can add Winchester to the list of PDs who 'get it' and issue LTCs to qualified green card holders. (yes, restrictions: none).

Even today Boston is telling people that haven't heard anything from the state......

 

[JuergenG]

Even today Boston is telling people that haven't heard anything from the state......

Bastards! Any chance to light a fire under Mr. Mumbles' rear?

 

[jar]

Bastards! Any chance to light a fire under Mr. Mumbles' rear?

http://www.northeastshooters.com/vb...here-to-Federal-Court-Ruling?highlight=comm2A

 

[JuergenG]

Thanks, I've read that. I was thinking of a possible next step, once the City of Boston decides not
to give a damn.
Keep up the good work, Comm2A!

 

[jar]

Thanks, I've read that. I was thinking of a possible next step, once the City of Boston decides not
to give a damn.
Keep up the good work, Comm2A!

I'm sure they're ready to file a lawsuit if Boston continues it's non-compliance. Enforcement of Fletcher may lead to all sorts of good things for us.

 

[JuergenG]

Yep, that's what I was hoping for.

 

[massamerican]

does this mean they will be removing restrictions for citizens too? or does this only apply to green card people.

 

[soam]

does this mean they will be removing restrictions for citizens too? or does this only apply to green card people.

This doesn't mean that green card holders automatically get unrestricted licenses. It means they get to go through the same process as citizens, with the same possibility of restrictions. Before, they couldn't get an LTC at all.