-
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.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS June Giveaway ***Keltec SUB2000***
Guide to gun rights in your Massachusetts town
- Thread starter Moderator
- Start date
- Status
[INVOKING GOOGLE-FU]
Yuh, they did:
http://www.capecodtoday.com/blogs/i...y_in_cape_history_tony_costa_arraign?blog=161
And THEN there was this gruesome crime:
http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/classics/christa_worthington/index.html
I was a little kid eating linguica pizza at the Cape Cod Cafe in Brockton when the earlier Truro crimes were being discussed. It wasn't very long after the Boston Strangler murders, also in the local area. No wonder I always wanted a gun ....
As the twig is bent, so grows the tree.
![[shocked]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/007.gif "Shocked [shocked]")
Thanks for the links. Looks like I have some more latereading to do.
West Roxbury is part of Boston I read
I guess I won't be missing much then. I'd be going from RED to RED. My present LTC-A won't expire until 2013 and I've had an ALP for 5+ years now (since my 2nd renewal). Would it be safe to say I stand a good chance of getting "downgraded" the next time around since West Roxbury is under the umbrella of Boston?
Last edited:
Acton = Green
Just to put a different spin on your question, my friend, I wouldn't worry about it. You're good to 2013. Live for today. When 2013 come around, the scenery may change quite a bit and then you'll have your information needed to make the correct decision for that point in time.
Gardner is not on the list.
Update on Fitchburg- I just renewed and had no trouble doing so. (got A/None, had A/ALP before on the old style licenses.) Any "policy" doesn't appear to have changed at all, at least not yet. It's very possible the new chief doesn't want to stir up crap, he probably has enough of it to deal with now, being unpopular to begin with. Or it could just be that the guy isn't an anti despite having worked for one. Who knows. IMO we're safe, "so far". I'm sure I'll hear about it if anything changes. It might simply be too early to tell... I'd still rate it as provisionally GREEN.
FWIW Officer Richards is still there doing the licensing and is still a pleasure to deal with. My renewal was done in just about a month's time, which I was informed of out of the
gate. I was able to pick up my LTC when it came in on a Saturday, which made it convenient.
-Mike
FWIW Officer Richards is still there doing the licensing and is still a pleasure to deal with. My renewal was done in just about a month's time, which I was informed of out of the
gate. I was able to pick up my LTC when it came in on a Saturday, which made it convenient.
-Mike
Methuen chief Solomon fired - heard on WBZ radio this morning - due to alleged inappropriate language to officers and possibly due to federal investigation over spending of grant money. Methuen is currently RED, if anybody from the area has more info about what happened or who is succeeding him, let us know. Lets get some positive changes in Quincy and Methuen!
http://www.eagletribune.com/punews/local_story_129005350.html
Solomon fired: Report slams chief for failing to take responsibility for his actions and 'ethical lapses' of judgment
By J.J. Huggins
Staff writer
To read the report that led to Mayor William Manzi's decision to fire Police Chief Joseph Solomon, click here.
For a summary of the Solomon report, click here.
For a timeline of the Solomon situation, click here.
METHUEN — Mayor William Manzi fired police Chief Joseph Solomon yesterday, basing his decision on a report chastising the chief for casting himself as the victim and trying to save himself by "impugning the reputation of others."
"Solomon failed to accept responsibility for any errors, mistakes, ethical lapses or errors in judgement," wrote lawyer Michael Marks, hired to oversee the civil service disciplinary hearing against Solomon.
"He made unsubstantiated claims of alleged political corruption ... In my opinion, the claims by Solomon are repugnant and he has sought refuge by impugning the reputation of others."
Marks' report followed 45 hours of testimony on 11 pages of charges filed by Manzi against Solomon in January.
Marks recommended Manzi fire Solomon "forthwith" for verbally abusing officers, allowing grant money to be misspent on superior officers, as well as paying his sister and brother-in-law taxpayer money to take care of the department's marine equipment.
Other issues Marks pointed to were Solomon ordering officers to install a surveillance camera outside his sister's home and having officers make more than 300 police checks of her Baremeadow Street home.
Manzi placed Solomon on paid leave from his $132,000-a-year job Sept. 28 and called for a civil service disciplinary hearing against him in January. Solomon, a 22-year-veteran of the force, will keep his pension, as well as get a good-bye check containing vacation and sick pay, Manzi said.
City Auditor Thomas Kelley did not provide the exact figure of how much Solomon has collected while on leave or how much he will receive for his vacation and sick pay.
Nobody answered the door at Solomon's home yesterday. Solomon's lawyer Andrew Gambaccini said it was unlikely Solomon will comment.
Gambaccini did say Solomon will appeal the mayor's decision to the state's Civil Service Commission, which could overrule the firing.
"It is what it is. You deal with the hand that you're dealt at the local level and you have your day in court down the road," he said. He also said, "I could have told you in October that this was going to be the result."
Manzi, who has known Solomon since they were children, said the decision was personally difficult but believes it was the right one.
"I think the community can now step forward," Manzi said. "The Police Department can step forward, and I think it's a good day to have finality."
Manzi said if Solomon appeals, he feels confident the state will uphold his decision.
"I think our case is solid," he said.
The Marks' report
Marks' 17-page report summarizes testimony provided by officers, Solomon and others over a period of seven days of hearings held in February, March and April.
He based his recommendation to fire Solomon on several issues, including Solomon's behavior following an August 2007 incident where the chief walked into the station to find several officers in a squad room watching a preseason Patriots football game on TV.
Officers testified that Solomon swore at them and appeared red faced, "gesturing wildly" and "out of control" after catching five officers watching a Patriots preseason football game at the station on Aug. 24. Marks determined Solomon exhibited "conduct unbecoming of an officer" for his "wild, overreaction to a relatively minor incident."
As a result of that incident, Solomon placed Sgt. Larry Phillips on leave and ordered him to undergo a "fitness for duty evaluation," including an interview with a social worker.
In his testimony, Solomon asserted that placing an employee on administrative leave was not a form of punishment. Marks' report casts Solomon's assertion as hypocritical, stating "However, when (Solomon) was placed on administrative leave (by Manzi) in September of 2007, in his view this represented a form of punishment."
Marks goes on to hit Solomon for a "serious lapse in judgement" for releasing his report into the football viewing incident to three private attorneys which included "personal, medical and psychological history of Sgt. Phillips."
Marks also calls Solomon's decision to discipline Phillips retaliatory. Phillips reported a stolen property case involving Solomon's former brother-in-law James Caron to the FBI when he was ordered by Lt. Michael Wnek not to charge Caron criminally.
Phillips said he believed the order came down from Solomon, who claims he never intervened. Phillips learned from the FBI that Caron had been called to testify before a grand jury shortly before the Patriots incident. Solomon said he learned of his ex-brother-in-law being called to testify after he disciplined Phillips.
While Marks wrote he could find no proof that Solomon intervened in the investigation, he also stated, "It is also my opinion that the most reasonable conclusion to be drawn from Solomon's behavior toward Sgt. Phillips directly relates to the grand jury criminal investigation in which Phillips was involved."
The Police Department has been under federal scrutiny for its spending of grant money since 2006. In December 2007, the U.S. Department of Justice demanded repayment of $170,000 in grants, saying it was misspent on overtime for supervising officers, including Solomon.
One issue auditors hired by the city testified to during the hearing was supervisors were putting in less-than-detailed time sheets showing how the overtime was earned. Also, several superior officers were putting in their own time sheets, despite it being a violation of department policy.
"Additional investigation revealed that certain individuals were paid overtime when on vacation, sick or personal leave," the report states.
Solomon asserted the lack of detail on the sheets by "drawing a distinction between management functions and tasks required by patrol officers." He also said the officers "not only worked the number of hours for which they were paid, but in many instances worked many hours without any compensation," the report says.
Marks wrote Solomon "was not persuasive" and ruled in favor to the city, saying specifically that the chief and other superior officers got paid for overtime that they cannot prove they worked.
Marks also slammed Solomon for two instances involving a sister or sisters unnamed in the report. The first involves police installing a surveillance system at Solomon's sister's house at 38 Baremeadow St., and that the city alleged Solomon ordered officers to drive past the home some 300 times. Solomon's lawyer claimed there was no evidence Solomon made the orders or knew of the property checks or the camera installation, but Marks didn't buy it.
"The notion that a chief, universally described as a 24-hour-seven-day-a-week employee, would not know of police activity at 38 Baremeadow St., the home of his sister, in my view is not credible," Marks said.
Marks also found Solomon violated state law by failing to tell Manzi about a contract the department had with his sister's business to maintain police marine equipment. Marks said Solomon's "use of subordinates within the police department to approve marine related expenditures does not cure these violations."
Solomon's side of things
Marks did rule in favor of Solomon on charges brought against him by Manzi, including the payment of overtime to his secretary Patricia Giarrusso.
Manzi alleged Giarrusso was allowed to "triple dip" into overtime without working some of the hours. Marks called the allegation "less clear" and said "an apparent misreading of payroll records may also have led to an incorrect conclusion on the part of officials."
Marks also found no evidence to support an allegation that Solomon used threatening and profane speech toward officers "purportedly to diffuse rumors concerning the chief" at a roll call meeting at the station. The report does not indicate when Solomon's meeting with these officers reportedly occurred.
Gambaccini said the chief knew this decision was coming and even predicted the outcome during his rally with supporters in November. At this event, Solomon proclaimed he wanted the public to know his side of the story.
However, when the hearing began, Solomon requested the hearing be closed to the public.
Gambaccini said when the chief learned this week there was an issue over releasing the Marks' report to the public, Solomon "short-circuited" the squabble between the mayor and city solicitor by telling them to "release everything."
Gambaccini said he did not have the power to subpoena people and force them to testify at the discipline hearing. He wanted Manzi to testify, but Manzi wanted to be the last person to testify and to know the questions beforehand, Gambaccini said.
Gambaccini could not agree to those terms, and therefore, the mayor did not testify, Gambaccini said.
But things will be different the next time around, the attorney said.
"He can't dodge a subpoena before Civil Service Commission," Gambaccini said.
Manzi: It's time to move on
Manzi said he hopes to announce the appointment of a new chief "very shortly." He would not say who that person will be, but he had nice things to say about Acting Chief Katherine Lavigne.
"The truth of the matter is, I think she has done a wonderful job for this city," he said.
Manzi said he told Lavigne about Solomon's termination yesterday.
Lavigne said she asked Capt. Thomas Fram to pass the word onto the officers.
"My only hope is that things at the station can now settle down and we can move forward with the mission of the police department," Lavigne said.
Asked what he would say to Solomon if he ran into him in the grocery store, Manzi said," Maybe 'hello.' Maybe not."
"I wouldn't expect that we'd be exchanging Christmas cards."
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 11,135
- Likes
- 1,600
even if Methuen's Chief is gone, what would help just even more would be to get rid of the mayor IMHO
First of all, thanks for this resource, without it I wouldn't have had a clue about how really f'ed up things are in MA. I've been a member of the NRA for a long time and I am now a member of GOAL.
I just picked up my neutered (hunting/target) LTC-A from the Dracut PD with a date of issuance 4/28/2008. I signed up for an appointment 11/27/2007. The appointment happened 2/13/2008. Before I'd taken off my coat I was told that 1st time applicants do not receive ALP and that when I felt more comfortable with firearms I could get an ALP. I kept my mouth shut. I was also told that I could carry to and from a shooting range - I won't.
As I was leaving I was handed a sheet that said my license would not be granted without a letter to the chief and 3 letters of reference from non-family members that I had known for more than 5 years. Why they couldn't have given me that when I signed up for the appointment I don't know.
After 80+ days and not hearing anything I called the PD and left a message. The next day I had a message that my license was ready.
When I picked up the license I was given a letter from the CHSB with a PIN and contained the following: "When purchasing a firearm, please be sure to either have your PIN memorized or bring this form with you as you may be required to present it."
Now I'm off to get "comfortable".
Thanks again for this resource.
FoxHill
I just picked up my neutered (hunting/target) LTC-A from the Dracut PD with a date of issuance 4/28/2008. I signed up for an appointment 11/27/2007. The appointment happened 2/13/2008. Before I'd taken off my coat I was told that 1st time applicants do not receive ALP and that when I felt more comfortable with firearms I could get an ALP. I kept my mouth shut. I was also told that I could carry to and from a shooting range - I won't.
As I was leaving I was handed a sheet that said my license would not be granted without a letter to the chief and 3 letters of reference from non-family members that I had known for more than 5 years. Why they couldn't have given me that when I signed up for the appointment I don't know.
After 80+ days and not hearing anything I called the PD and left a message. The next day I had a message that my license was ready.
When I picked up the license I was given a letter from the CHSB with a PIN and contained the following: "When purchasing a firearm, please be sure to either have your PIN memorized or bring this form with you as you may be required to present it."
Now I'm off to get "comfortable".
Thanks again for this resource.
FoxHill
amb
NES Member
So just how bad is Newton, really?
I've always heard that Newton is bad, but how bad? A friend of mine who lives there is interested in getting licensed hasn't been able to get a straight answer from the PD (though he hasn't spoken directly to the licensing officer yet, so it's mostly hearsay), and I haven't seen any detailed experiences earlier in this thread. Anyone know what they're likely to give a first-time applicant?
I've always heard that Newton is bad, but how bad? A friend of mine who lives there is interested in getting licensed hasn't been able to get a straight answer from the PD (though he hasn't spoken directly to the licensing officer yet, so it's mostly hearsay), and I haven't seen any detailed experiences earlier in this thread. Anyone know what they're likely to give a first-time applicant?
new member, with question about my town
I live in Norton, and taking my firearm class tomorrow, and wondering what are the chances of getting a concealed, if its as tough as some ppl have told me, I will just opt for FID? so I can get range time in and go hunting during season, and still be able to aquire guns to start a collection.
Its a great hobby and something I enjoy, Im 27 never been arrested completely clean record, have called the Norton PD but they arent alot of help other than come get the app and submit and it can take 6 months??? or more, dont quote me on that, but I believe thats what I was told, because it goes through the state.
Also is FID different than class A and B?
and as far as stating a reason why I want a concealed if I do submit a App for that purpose, what are good reasons to list other than Protection, or I carry large sums of money.(In my case I usually do carry a couple hundred dollars occasionally, no more than $300, for a part time side business with computers and sometimes computer equipment in my vehicle, so Id rather not look stupid etc...) Im just a law abiding citizen that realizes not everyone is, and I believe I should be able to exercise the right to carry given I have no record etc...but I know if I wrote that down I would be laughed at/denied.
also anyone mind explaining the different class licenses and each ones purpose.
I apologize for some many questions, but Im new to things here, I moved up here from Tampa,Florida 2 years ago and that place is crime ridden like you wouldnt believe, but I suppose its expected from a fairly large city, sad to see though.
In my short time living here I only know of one town bordering me that is considered dangerous brockton, so If anyone would like to chime in with others, Ill take note.
I live in Norton, and taking my firearm class tomorrow, and wondering what are the chances of getting a concealed, if its as tough as some ppl have told me, I will just opt for FID? so I can get range time in and go hunting during season, and still be able to aquire guns to start a collection.
Its a great hobby and something I enjoy, Im 27 never been arrested completely clean record, have called the Norton PD but they arent alot of help other than come get the app and submit and it can take 6 months??? or more, dont quote me on that, but I believe thats what I was told, because it goes through the state.
Also is FID different than class A and B?
and as far as stating a reason why I want a concealed if I do submit a App for that purpose, what are good reasons to list other than Protection, or I carry large sums of money.(In my case I usually do carry a couple hundred dollars occasionally, no more than $300, for a part time side business with computers and sometimes computer equipment in my vehicle, so Id rather not look stupid etc...) Im just a law abiding citizen that realizes not everyone is, and I believe I should be able to exercise the right to carry given I have no record etc...but I know if I wrote that down I would be laughed at/denied.
also anyone mind explaining the different class licenses and each ones purpose.
I apologize for some many questions, but Im new to things here, I moved up here from Tampa,Florida 2 years ago and that place is crime ridden like you wouldnt believe, but I suppose its expected from a fairly large city, sad to see though.
In my short time living here I only know of one town bordering me that is considered dangerous brockton, so If anyone would like to chime in with others, Ill take note.
Dunno about the PD in Newton, but what I can tell is that I drive thru it everyday to work. Next to the People's Republic of Cambridge, it's one of the biggest havens for liberal moonbats in the state. Good luck to your friend.
Groveland Chief Retiring
Police Chief R. Weeks in Groveland is retiring and The Sgt. in charge of licensing will be the acting Chief and is also in the running for the permanent job.
Police Chief R. Weeks in Groveland is retiring and The Sgt. in charge of licensing will be the acting Chief and is also in the running for the permanent job.
Do some reading at http://goal.org/misc/faq/faq.html. If you have questions after that, come back and ask them.
How Bad is Newton?
I grew up in Newton and lived there 44 years until I moved 3 years ago.
I got my first FID there in 1982. Then got my first LTC there in 1984 (T&H).
I renewed in 1989 and upgraded to ALP under Chief Quinn. Renewed again for ALP in 1994 and 1999 with no hassles. However, when 2004 rolled around there was a new Chief (Cordero) in charge who had a standing order to his licensing officer to DENY EVERYONE. After 20 years of carrying without any problems, I was downgraded back to T&H. I moved out of newton in 05' and now live in a nearby town that isn't really any better, but I did manage to get my rights partially restored. My current LTC is for "Employment", not ALP, but still better than T&H. That licensing officer is still there in Newton, but now's he's a Lieutenant. He was only a seargent when I had to deal with him. I've heard of dozens of others that got downgraded and outright denied on renewals in Newton since then, so the chances of getting one now is looking pretty grim for anyone. It dosen't matter to them if you've been licensed before, or for how long, your life is worth nothing to them. What ever happened to honorable men in the CLEO position like Chief Quinn?
I grew up in Newton and lived there 44 years until I moved 3 years ago.
I got my first FID there in 1982. Then got my first LTC there in 1984 (T&H).
I renewed in 1989 and upgraded to ALP under Chief Quinn. Renewed again for ALP in 1994 and 1999 with no hassles. However, when 2004 rolled around there was a new Chief (Cordero) in charge who had a standing order to his licensing officer to DENY EVERYONE. After 20 years of carrying without any problems, I was downgraded back to T&H. I moved out of newton in 05' and now live in a nearby town that isn't really any better, but I did manage to get my rights partially restored. My current LTC is for "Employment", not ALP, but still better than T&H. That licensing officer is still there in Newton, but now's he's a Lieutenant. He was only a seargent when I had to deal with him. I've heard of dozens of others that got downgraded and outright denied on renewals in Newton since then, so the chances of getting one now is looking pretty grim for anyone. It dosen't matter to them if you've been licensed before, or for how long, your life is worth nothing to them. What ever happened to honorable men in the CLEO position like Chief Quinn?
Acushnet and New Bedford are both reasonable for getting class a's and FID's hardly anyone bothers with the class B.
They're of a bygone era. All politician's now.
Or they are no longer with us.[sad2]
the_shootist
Banned
Tewksbury still green
Applied for my renewal LTC Class A in the Town of Tewksbury...Painless (expect for the Benjamin I said goodbye to)
Applied for my renewal LTC Class A in the Town of Tewksbury...Painless (expect for the Benjamin I said goodbye to)
- Joined
- May 17, 2008
- Messages
- 16,975
- Likes
- 2,824
Lynnfield
Does anyone have ANY information about Lynnfield? I am looking to put down an offer on a house there and the CLEO/armorer refuses to return my messages, GOAL has not returned my emails, there is not a shred of anything online. I have an A and I would go ballistic if I had to get rid of most my guns if they are a black town and nobody has posted that here yet.
<RANT>
How in gods name can any government claiming to represent the people create a system where there is no possibility of knowing just by reading the law whether someone is qualified for anything. This is not about guns, it is about equality under the law. The idea of States Rights has been abused in order to affect discriminatory and unfair governmental policies onto the citizenry and the Democrats have stood against States Rights with a passion. Yet, when given the chance, the hypocrites claim that local governments (note, this means towns to them, not even states) should have the right to set gun policy. This makes no sense. I could live in Marblehead with an unrestricted LTC and work in Salem. Most of my waking time will be in Salem. What has this accomplished????
This is a huge investment on my part and I should be able to reasonably find out if I have an issue moving into the town.
</End Rant>
--------------------------------------
From the NES Forum EULA: By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws unless aforementioned speech regards liberals, the Commonwealth of MA, Democrats or other groups, entities and individuals who are generally considered hostile to the 2nd Amendment.
Ooops...![[wink]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/002.gif "Wink [wink]")
Does anyone have ANY information about Lynnfield? I am looking to put down an offer on a house there and the CLEO/armorer refuses to return my messages, GOAL has not returned my emails, there is not a shred of anything online. I have an A and I would go ballistic if I had to get rid of most my guns if they are a black town and nobody has posted that here yet.
<RANT>
How in gods name can any government claiming to represent the people create a system where there is no possibility of knowing just by reading the law whether someone is qualified for anything. This is not about guns, it is about equality under the law. The idea of States Rights has been abused in order to affect discriminatory and unfair governmental policies onto the citizenry and the Democrats have stood against States Rights with a passion. Yet, when given the chance, the hypocrites claim that local governments (note, this means towns to them, not even states) should have the right to set gun policy. This makes no sense. I could live in Marblehead with an unrestricted LTC and work in Salem. Most of my waking time will be in Salem. What has this accomplished????
This is a huge investment on my part and I should be able to reasonably find out if I have an issue moving into the town.
</End Rant>
--------------------------------------
From the NES Forum EULA: By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws unless aforementioned speech regards liberals, the Commonwealth of MA, Democrats or other groups, entities and individuals who are generally considered hostile to the 2nd Amendment.
Ooops...
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2005
- Messages
- 443
- Likes
- 49
As stated in the Boston Sunday Globe on 5/18/08, Globe South page 3, under Community Briefing, Plympton Chief Matthew Clancy now requires 3 personal references when applying for an LTC.
Didn't the chief get the memo?
OK, then, let's see. Three references. I'll choose my last boss who fired me, my neighbor with whom I have a property line dispute, and....hmmmm....oh yeah...the manager at the Bung Hole Bar where I worked up a $250 tab.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2007
- Messages
- 1,864
- Likes
- 69
acushnet - green
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 11,135
- Likes
- 1,600
this is NOT true.
I can think of a great way to solve this problem. 38 states have figured it out.
- Joined
- May 17, 2008
- Messages
- 16,975
- Likes
- 2,824
At least plympton is putting their policy out there for everyone to see. See my post above about trying to move within the state.
And unfortunately the way the state has structured the laws re: firearms, this is actually very true. Maybe they are not legally liable, or there may not be any sort of punishment if someone goes postal but the fact of the matter is the Globe, Herald and all of the talking heads would pounce hard if someone was given one and screwed up or worse. And that CLEO would likely lose his/her job.
Don't you all get it? That is why these laws are as screwed up as they are. The point was to make this as gangly and unwieldy as possible. And the use of municipalities and local governments was very intentional.
A) The state agency gets to punt and not have to deal with the fall out and B) no one pays attention to what happens in town x if they don't live there (and frankly even if they do they don't pay attention). Additionally, states have much greater protection from liability than towns.
So yes, they very much feel they are putting their reputations on the line.
And unfortunately the way the state has structured the laws re: firearms, this is actually very true. Maybe they are not legally liable, or there may not be any sort of punishment if someone goes postal but the fact of the matter is the Globe, Herald and all of the talking heads would pounce hard if someone was given one and screwed up or worse. And that CLEO would likely lose his/her job.
Don't you all get it? That is why these laws are as screwed up as they are. The point was to make this as gangly and unwieldy as possible. And the use of municipalities and local governments was very intentional.
A) The state agency gets to punt and not have to deal with the fall out and B) no one pays attention to what happens in town x if they don't live there (and frankly even if they do they don't pay attention). Additionally, states have much greater protection from liability than towns.
So yes, they very much feel they are putting their reputations on the line.
- Status
