Driving record impact on LTC application

[Saint194]

I'm preparing to apply for a Class A LTC and have no dsqualifying history but am wondering about the impact that some recent speeding tickets may have on my application.

I've recieved 2 speeding tickets in MA and 1 in New York over the past 18 months. All we're for "reasonable" speeding such as +10 miles over the posted limit.

Should I be concerned?

 

[Cross-X]

No.

 

[Chris]

Should I be concerned?

Only about your driving...

 

[LoginName]

Posted only for the purpose of comment and discussion...

Article is a long but interesting read (relevent section cut and pasted, link posted below).

"You won't get an argument from Chris Janus. What you will get is a tirade against what he believes is an unfair system.

After jumping through each and every hoop required by Massachusetts law, Chris' application for an LTC was denied-not because his background check triggered one of the prohibitions. His local police chief denied it because Chris had one too many local speeding tickets on his record, which, according to Chris, the police chief claimed "showed a willful disrespect of the law."

Chris-a business analyst and commissioned officer and helicopter pilot in the United States Army Reserve-was devastated by the decision. "The Federal government and the United States Army thinks so highly of my integrity and character that they trust me to command a multi-million dollar helicopter capable of being armed with 2.75 inch rockets and 2 miniguns capable of firing 6,000 rounds of .30 caliber ammunition per minute . . . but the Commonwealth of Massachusetts won't trust me carrying my unloaded side arm in my car from my house to my base."

By law Chris could appeal the decision, but since he's moving to another town in Massachusetts, an appeal would be a moot point. Hoping for a more favorable outcome, he plans on starting the application process anew once he settles into his new town-like reshuffling a deck of cards".

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a387e1e2f0d8e.htm

 

[Pilgrim]

Loginname, I've heard of similar situations. Too many speeding tickets means 'unsuitable character' to some CLEO's.

 

[Chris]

Well, for one Carver chief, breathing was enough to be unsuitable.

Ignoring abuse, driving record does not apply.

Even the official 4-page application states on Question 10:

Have you ever appeared in any court as a defendant for any criminal offense (excluding non-criminal traffic offenses)?

Obviously the agency tasked with designing the application does not think that traffic offenses are worth dealing with.

 

[Len-2A Training]

The local PDs have an enormous amount of info on each of us.

On one of my renewals, the chief asked the usual: any domestic issues, anything changed, etc. Then he reads off to me that I had called in a complaint about a loose and barking dog some 8-10 years earlier! Yup, I did complain, but what relevance is it or why even retain that info 8-10 years later is rather questionable. Said neighbor doesn't even have the same dog any more.

So if you've ever been accused of "jay walking" watch out, some towns may think that it makes you "unsuitable".

"Chief's discretion" means exactly that! So I wouldn't be paranoid, as only a very few chiefs are that abusive, but I'd just be aware that ANY contact with the PD is tracked and can be used for whatever purposes they like.

 

[MarkM]

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, what part of shall not be infringed do many of the lawmakers and police chiefs of Massachusetts not understand?

 

[tele_mark]

The Constitution concerns the United States. We're talking Massachusetts here.

 

[Nickle]

The Constitution concerns the United States. We're talking Massachusetts here.

Theoretically speaking, it's suppossed to apply in Mass. Problem is, the states ignore their own Constitutions, not to mention the US Constitution.

 

[Twigg]

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, what part of shall not be infringed do many of the lawmakers and police chiefs of Massachusetts not understand?

All of it.

 

[rscalzo]

Most departments today use Computer Aided Dispatch systems linked to a Records Management System. As computer storage is cheap and hard drives keep getting bigger, these records will be retained almost forever. In our system, when a call comes in, the info is entered into the system which is nothing more than a large database. At any time, quaeries can be run using names, addresses, etc. So finding if you had any contact with a department can be found in seconds.

Now the bigger question is what bearing on your application is the fact you were the complaintant in a call for service. Sometimes too much data is counter productive. You could have just as well called in a MVA and so what? That's just being a good citizen willing to help.

 

[Lynne]

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, what part of shall not be infringed do many of the lawmakers and police chiefs of Massachusetts not understand?

What...THAT little nuisance? Nah...they just ignore it.

 

[drgrant]

Theoretically speaking, it's suppossed to apply in Mass. Problem is, the states ignore their own Constitutions, not to mention the US Constitution.

Not to mention the federal government pretty much openly ignores
it. Most federal gun laws themselves are even unconstitutional. So
the states probably figure "hey, if the feds piss on the 2nd amendment,
we can -easily- get away with doing the same!)

Sure theres this notion of "reasonable regulation" but frankly most
federal gun laws don't follow in that concept.


-Mike

 

[Nickle]

I don't trust the Federal Government. And I work for them.........

 

[drgrant]

I don't trust the Federal Government. And I work for them.........

Neither do I, and same here, FWIW. What I was driving at though, is if
the feds do it, then the states will do it too, because there is a dearth of
supreme court cases pretaining to the 2nd amendment... And of the few
that ever made it to the supremes, most/all of them ended up in nothing
happening or the government winning. We -might- see a nice paradigm
shift an important case comes along now, and with Alito on board, things
could be good. I'm not holding my breath though... I'll probably be dead
before a 2nd amendment case reaches SCOTUS again. (they seem to avoid
the issue whenever possible, I think it is out of a fear of creating a roe v
wade for gun owners, or gun banners!)

-Mike