So I submitted a letter to the licensing Lieutenant in Boston in an attempt to have my restrictions removed from my LTC. Reason being I have become disabled do to a work injury, and I need to walk for my rehab from neck surgery. And wanted to be able to protect myself when out walking. Obviously I was denied cuz Boston is ridiculous, although the Lieutenant was very nice and talk to me for 15min on the phone telling me why he thinks I don’t need conceal carry LOL. So my question is has anyone appealed and won there right to conceal carry in the city of Boston.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Denied request to have restrictions removed in Boston
- Thread starter Jimdev45
- Start date
Shire Guy
NES Member
"although the Lieutenant was very nice and talk to me for 15min on the phone telling me why he thinks I don’t need conceal carry"
Sounds more like 15 minutes of patronizing BS to me.
Sounds more like 15 minutes of patronizing BS to me.
greencobra
NES Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2011
- Messages
- 27,220
- Likes
- 26,716
i surprised he didn't tell you to get a treadmill so you wouldn't have to go out.
greencobra
NES Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2011
- Messages
- 27,220
- Likes
- 26,716
i'm a gimp and i'll tell you what...when you can't run, move or outmaneuver people well, having a firearm on you can be that piece of mind game changer that will turn the tide back when you're out and about. even in the house, also. i don't want any of these low life punks who know i don't move well to surprise me with a home invasion. they's gonna get a surprise of their own.
one-eyed Jack
Manufacturer
They always sound nice because they get pleasure by sticking it up your ass. Boston is just a lost cause. Jack.
one-eyed Jack
Manufacturer
Right on. My back is so bad now that I have to use a stick on steps or uneven ground. I go nowhere without my heater. Jack.
FrugalFannie
NES Member
Maybe consult with Comm2A and consider:
Send him a letter stating why and request the removal.
If he denies you again, get it in writing with his "reasons" why. <<< hold his feet to the fire if you can, this is now part of MGL - reasons for restrictions need to be in writing and "individual" vs blanket policy of restriction
Hire lawyer
Send him a letter stating why and request the removal.
If he denies you again, get it in writing with his "reasons" why. <<< hold his feet to the fire if you can, this is now part of MGL - reasons for restrictions need to be in writing and "individual" vs blanket policy of restriction
Hire lawyer
one-eyed Jack
Manufacturer
Letters from doctors, lawyers and money. To try to protect yourself. The system sucks. Jack.
I'm not sure about this. I know they have to give the reason for a denial but restrictions I don't think need a reason. Personally I would see an issue with restrictions, when the application was for unrestricted, as a denial of the original application, but I don't think there is any citable case to back this up.
I hope the OP challenges this and we get some clarification on when and how they can issue restricted. Good luck OP and keep us informed.
I’ve messaged comm2a an GOAL, and have got no responose. Might consult with a lawyer, but being out on comp and a pile of medical bills over the past two years can’t really afford to hire an attorney these days. Just was curious if anyone has had success fighting a restrictions denied in district court.
I doubt that this would work, but I throw it out there . . .
Talk with ACLU (yes, I know they hate guns) and see if this might be an ADA issue and if so, would they be interested in pursuing it?
Good luck.
In general, suing in court wrt restrictions is a waste of time/money as judges will almost always defer to the PD over the unwashed masses.
In God We Trust
NES Member
Walk to the range every day. That is the wall hack for restricted LTCs, no?
crispnipz
NES Member
No, for 2 reasons:
1. Cops are wise to that "loophole"
2. The town that issued the restricted LTC decides the terms of the restriction. In other words, the town may say that you can't be concealed carrying it even to/from a range, i.e. they want you to have it in a locked container, even to/from the range
HorizontalHunter
NES Member
Same here. I have lost most of the feeling in my lower left leg. I have to be careful, even with a stick, or I will end up on my ass.
This is the real answer.
Bob
Last edited:
VetteGirlMA
NES Member
Maybe you should call back and waste 15 minutes of his time explaining why Boston does not need him as a LT. Record it all and play it out loud for the city council at their next session. Then tell them you're taking the city to federal court and do a mic drop and walk out.
One party consent recording is a no-no in MA. Also, this would take a cunning linguist to last 15 minutes.
greencobra
NES Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2011
- Messages
- 27,220
- Likes
- 26,716
starting a go fund me for Jimdev45's prison commissary fund.
Funny that you write this. Waltham was always RED town and about 3-4 years ago they turned GREEN. I discussed it with the LO at time of renewal and he told me that CoP realized that the 'laws' around restrictions are so vague, that no one really knows what it means, so he decided to go GREEN and not to put restrictions on first license any more.
D
Deleted member 67409
There are free legal services options for people who qualify and generally speaking, the lawyers working at legal aid organizations are just as competent if not more competent than the average attorney. Some very pro-gun attorneys volunteer at legal aid organizations such as the ACLU. I'm not too familiar with the pro-gun legal aid lawyers in Mass, so I suggest privately messaging @nstassel and or @swatgig and asking if they know anyone.
@Jimdev45 should also talk to @JayR about engaging legal services. @JayR won a judgment against his town in RI using the services of the RI ACLU. Perhaps the RI ACLU lawyers know people in Mass, or could even represent him if they're licensed in Mass?
ACLU Wins Gun Lawsuit In R.I.
Last edited by a moderator:
concealed means concealed. Unless you actually need the gun nobody should ever know you have one. And in the event that you might actually need it wouldn't it be better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6?
Truthfully, if you had an unrestricted license and needed to use the gun you are going to jail anyway. I think carrying on a restricted LTC would be the least of your worries at that point.
Truthfully, if you had an unrestricted license and needed to use the gun you are going to jail anyway. I think carrying on a restricted LTC would be the least of your worries at that point.
A friend of mine was an ADA in Suffolk County. He said they only ever charged anyone under the Boston AWB to hold them until other charges could be developed, and never prosecuted.
They felt the law was so vague that almost any legal challenge would see it thrown out.
CT used to do the same thing with radar detectors. If you appealed, they'd drop the charges, so there could not be a legal challenge.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,526
- Likes
- 33,542
The Boston PD used to stamp "no concealed carry" on the paper licenses issued with a target "reason for issuance" (what it was called in those days until it was change to "restriction" after GOAL raised the issue of "is is just a reason or a restriction?". Chances are excellent that "you know what we meant and word games won't convince us otherwise" is going to the be the police reaction, and is very very unlikely to fly in court, especially on the civil end. Nobody really worries about the possible civil fine ... the issue is losing an LTC over restrictions.
