You do know that there are 351 different towns and the majority of them issue unrestricted. There are also plenty of unrestricted non-resident licenses issued.
Everyone of those unrestricted licenses allows completely legal carry in Boston.
You started out good then went straight to the I'm going home deal so your rights don't apply when l say so.
Keep your hands visible is an implicit threat coming from law enforcement.
You next state that part of your routine is to disarm then check for LTC.
The tone and content of your statement shows that your default position is that a person doesn't have the inalienable right of self defense and the act of peacefully going about one's business while armed is cause for alarm and interrogation.
That attitude is incompatible with the words of the operative clause of the 2A.
One cannot both support the 2A and hold a basic operating assumption contrary to it.
There is a SJC case covering the subject of a legally armed person not commiting illegal act simply because the act of carry causef alarm in another person. Unfortunately I can't immediately remember the case and research on a phone is difficult at best.
There's obviously a disconnect here... and that's fine.
First, yes, I do know that there are multiple issuing agencies for LTCs in Massachusetts. An MA LTC is an MA LTC... Restrictions are restrictions. You either have them or you don't. If you don't then you're all good. If you have restrictions, then obviously you fall under certain parameters that you have to abide by based on the issuing agency. Don't know where you were going with that one.
Second, your responses to my responses are subjective. I'm giving experienced real-life and potential real-life scenarios that the OP (Keop) had asked in his original post:
"If a person is printing and law enforcement is called what can law enforcement legally do? I would assume that they would ask if you are armed and if you're licensed but would they disarm you first? Are they legally able to inspect your firearm, ammo, magazines, etc. if you provide a valid LTC?"
To answer what OP had asked, the answer is "yes," if a person is printing, and law enforcement is called, the responding officer(s) have the legal grounds to conduct a threshold inquiry on the person in question. The typical response varies from department to department based on training and experience, but the constitutional law remains the same. You are the subject of a 911 call in regards to possessing a firearm. I gave a few different scenarios and how responses vary:
I'll try to use two more "clearer" examples...
A) You, pastera, possess a valid, unrestricted MA LTC with no capacity restrictions. While at a supermarket in Downtown Crossing, some concerned citizen notices a "bulge" on your waist and it becomes more worrisome to them that you may be carrying a firearm. This concerned citizen decides to call 911 and states "... I'm at the supermarket and I think this person has a firearm on them. They have an object sitting on their waist that is poking through their shirt and it looks like it could be a firearm.... No, I haven't seen it and they haven't taken it out but I think it is a firearm can you send officers to make sure this is okay"
At that point, dispatch will put out the call. Depending on the interaction between the call taker and the caller, this information is relayed and it is what we have to go on.
We respond and locate you somewhere in the store matching the description given by the 911 caller. At this point, a threshold inquiry begins and casual conversation occurs. No firearm displayed. No problems.
Me: "Hello sir, we received a 911 call that someone was concerned you may have a firearm on you, specifically on your waist. You match the description given by the caller and I can see a bit of printing. Do you have a firearm on you?"
You: "Yes, I do."
Me: "Can you provide me your LTC and we can get this squared away?"
You: "Yes, I can, it is in my pocket."
Me: "You can remove that for me, but just for the duration of this interaction, please refrain from having your hands around that area where your firearm is until we can clarify validity of your license."
You: "Absolutely, not a problem at all."
Another officer speaks with the 911 caller to confirm the call and I'll conduct a check on the LTC. Once everything comes back as it should, I return your LTC and everyone goes on their way. The caller is informed privately of the information and if they have a problem with you legally carrying a firearm, they can choose to avoid you if they feel uncomfortable or take their business elsewhere.
B) You, pastera, possess a valid, unrestricted MA LTC with no capacity restrictions. While at a supermarket in Downtown Crossing, some concerned citizen notices a "bulge" on your waist and it becomes more worrisome to them that you may be carrying a firearm. This concerned citizen decides to call 911 and states "... I'm at the supermarket and this guy has a gun on his waist, I can see it poking through his shirt." (provides description and has a more rapid and stressed tone). No other information is given.
This is a bit more of a different call than Scenario A. Dispatch will obviously send this out in a more immediate stance than the other scenario.
This scenario plays out exactly the same as Scenario A. Period. Conversation is key.
However, if, by chance, you decide to become irate, unruly, and refuse to cooperate when officers have enough probable cause (911 call, exact description, visible "printing" on waist consistent with concealing an item) to conduct an inquiry, then based on the totality of the circumstances and the "nature of the call," we may conduct a pat frisk for safety. Then, the variables are multiple as to what can happen after that.
At the end of the day, safety is paramount. I know in my previous post I stated " "... This is the reason we are here and speaking with you. Do you have a firearm on you? If you do, do you mind keeping your hands where I can see them while I secure your firearm and check to make sure you can legally be carrying this..." By no means is this the absolute response. This is a potential response based on the current climate of the situation at hand.
If there was misunderstanding there, I hope that can clear some of it up.