Friend didn't renew his LTC

[42!]

That is the best option.

Wasn't there a case like this...?

Guy tried to make an appointment to get his LTC renewed because it was due to expire soon. He was given an appointment AFTER the LTC expired. Upon entering the police station he was promptly arrested for possessing guns without a valid LTC.

In your example, I'm sure it will be pointed out that he would be ok as long as he "applied" before the old LTC expired regardless of the appointment. BUT, I don't have the confidence others do in all LE (some yes, but not all) doing the right thing and I can see them charging someone like this. Of course they (the state) will lose in court, as long as the accused can afford a good attorney. And and this is the basis of my "paranoid" over protection attitude. When the accusation can destroy your life financially, are you better off being careful and right, or just being right.

 

[Glockster30]

As others stated, a friend with a LTC-A can hold on (borrow) it with no issues unless there are high cap restrictions in play. It's in MGL c. 140, s. 131(a):

Section 131: Licenses to carry firearms; conditions and restrictions


[Introductory paragraph effective until January 1, 2021. For text effective January 1, 2021, see below.]

Section 131. All licenses to carry firearms shall be designated Class A or Class B, and the issuance and possession of any such license shall be subject to the following conditions and restrictions:

[Introductory paragraph as amended by 2014, 284, Sec. 46 effective January 1, 2021. See 2014, 284, Sec. 112. For text effective until January 1, 2021, see above.]

The issuance and possession of a license to carry firearms shall be subject to the following conditions and restrictions:

[Paragraphs (a) to (c) effective until January 1, 2021. For text effective January 1, 2021, see below.]

(a) A Class A license shall entitle a holder thereof to purchase, rent, lease, borrow, possess and carry: (i) firearms, including large capacity firearms, and feeding devices and ammunition therefor, for all lawful purposes, subject to such restrictions relative to the possession, use or carrying of firearms as the licensing authority deems proper; and (ii) rifles and shotguns, including large capacity weapons, and feeding devices and ammunition therefor, for all lawful purposes; provided, however, that the licensing authority may impose such restrictions relative to the possession,

 

[Reptile]

In your example, I'm sure it will be pointed out that he would be ok as long as he "applied" before the old LTC expired regardless of the appointment. BUT, I don't have the confidence others do in all LE (some yes, but not all) doing the right thing and I can see them charging someone like this. Of course they (the state) will lose in court, as long as the accused can afford a good attorney. And and this is the basis of my "paranoid" over protection attitude. When the accusation can destroy your life financially, are you better off being careful and right, or just being right.

I think it happened in Gardner...

He got in trouble because his LTC expired before his renewal interview was done. The cops didn't let him come in to renew until his LTC expired. IF he did renew on time, his LTC would still suffice for possession of his guns.

It may be wise to inquire about licensing delays 6 months ahead of time just to make that you'll be able to make your appointment. Of course if you live in a "green" town - I doubt any such antics would transpire.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

An FFL has to put it on his books and in that case the FFL is now the "owner" and transfer back to the <prior> owner requires all the regular BS . . . EOPS List and AG Regs compliant. Absolutely the stupidest thing that I could think of doing.

The actual laws and regulations refer to sale .... the interpretation of "transfer" of something one already holds title to is a stretch by scared dealers.

If what you said was true, it would be impossible to have gunsmithing or repair (except of the no-overnight, while you wait, variety) on a gun not on the EOPS list and AG tolerated. Also, bonded warehouses would not be able to return confiscated guns not on the list even if the ransom were paid.

The real question is what the FFL is willing to do. You could also transfer the lowers/frames to the FFL, so there would be no state action in the transfer back.

 

[browncoat]

Relax...

I'm just curious as to what the situation should end up being.. he isn't concerned really, I'm just wondering since he mentioned it to me. IANAL, but my interpretation is you can "borrow" a firearm for any length of time, per fed law. So it shouldn't be wrong for a valid LTC holder to "borrow" it til he gets his back..

Federal law has nothing to do with borrowing firearms within a state. Massachusetts law doesn't restrict borrowing firearms (supposing the borrower is properly licensed). Ergo, borrowing firearms in Massachusetts is a OK, easier than going through an FFL. It only gets sticky if your friend never renews / gets denied on renewal / dies or otherwise never takes possession of the gun again

 

[Racenet]

Federal law has nothing to do with borrowing firearms within a state. Massachusetts law doesn't restrict borrowing firearms (supposing the borrower is properly licensed). Ergo, borrowing firearms in Massachusetts is a OK, easier than going through an FFL. It only gets sticky if your friend never renews / gets denied on renewal / dies or otherwise never takes possession of the gun again

Guns? What guns?