When was the last time, or ever, has a LO or CLEO been held responsible for a shooter in Massachusetts after they issued that person a LTC ?
-
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 May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Guide to gun rights in your Massachusetts town
- Thread starter Moderator
- Start date
- Status
When was the last time, or ever, has a LO or CLEO been held responsible for a shooter in Massachusetts after they issued that person a LTC ?
- Joined
- May 17, 2008
- Messages
- 16,975
- Likes
- 2,824
I am not making myself clear. This is not about what has happened, it is about what they think can happen.
Is anyone over there telling them they are not responsible? Is someone telling them they are? Have they been threatened that massive press attention will be visited upon them in the case of someone screwing up or going postal? If I was the Brady campaign I would be telling any and every CLEO that I would make their lives miserable if someone they vet as "suitable" turns out not to be.
In the absence of any sort of clear statewide structure to this, whatever they or anyone else believes can guide their policy. I just went through the process with Watertown 6 months ago and I assure you, the armorer there believes he is personally responsible for my behavior. Is that the CLEO's policy? Do they believe that the press will excoriate them if somehow I am implicated in some big shootout? Who knows. But this state does not indemnify anyone except for a small subset of people (in very limited circumstances) on anything to do with firearms. This lack of liability protection has shown itself in recent cases where owners of firearms have been held liable for their misuse by people who stole them. In one, the guy had it locked up but the lock (wooden tool box like setup) was not considered secure enough. Mind you, he was not prosecuted criminally, he is being held civilly liable because the definitions in the criminal code are vague to say the least.
Is anyone over there telling them they are not responsible? Is someone telling them they are? Have they been threatened that massive press attention will be visited upon them in the case of someone screwing up or going postal? If I was the Brady campaign I would be telling any and every CLEO that I would make their lives miserable if someone they vet as "suitable" turns out not to be.
In the absence of any sort of clear statewide structure to this, whatever they or anyone else believes can guide their policy. I just went through the process with Watertown 6 months ago and I assure you, the armorer there believes he is personally responsible for my behavior. Is that the CLEO's policy? Do they believe that the press will excoriate them if somehow I am implicated in some big shootout? Who knows. But this state does not indemnify anyone except for a small subset of people (in very limited circumstances) on anything to do with firearms. This lack of liability protection has shown itself in recent cases where owners of firearms have been held liable for their misuse by people who stole them. In one, the guy had it locked up but the lock (wooden tool box like setup) was not considered secure enough. Mind you, he was not prosecuted criminally, he is being held civilly liable because the definitions in the criminal code are vague to say the least.
Lucas
NES Member
Fairhaven = Green
Thanks for the input, and welcome aboard.
Salem Ma. (Detailed)
Business Owner – Green
Must prove you own the business (Legal Letter - Tax ID - Etc.) / Do not have to prove you carry large amounts of cash.
Non-Business Owner – Black
The first thing that's asked is "Do you own a business"?
Business Owner – Green
Must prove you own the business (Legal Letter - Tax ID - Etc.) / Do not have to prove you carry large amounts of cash.
Non-Business Owner – Black
The first thing that's asked is "Do you own a business"?
Last edited:
Salem can bite me. I've said for years that every worker is in the business of selling himself. We market and sell our personalities, ideas, and labor. You don't need a storefront to run a business.
So if I own a business in Salem but never show, I can get an LTC-A, but my employee who works there 40 hours a week or more at a cash register gets an FID or LTC-B.
So if I own a business in Salem but never show, I can get an LTC-A, but my employee who works there 40 hours a week or more at a cash register gets an FID or LTC-B.
45collector
NES Member
Falmouth just recently got a new Chief. I don't know what his policies are on gun permits though. change to BLUE?
For those looking for the "discretionary issue" thread drift, I moved it HERE:
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=37513
-Mike
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=37513
-Mike
I never said it was right,,, I was only detailing Salem for everyone. The Process was very simple and quick. I only wonder what it would be like if I didn't own a business - Thus the reasoning for BLACK.
My friend, I never meant to sound personal in the least. I was only pointing out the twisted logic of some of these so called chiefs who cater to business owners instead of the residents and working stiffs.
Congrats on your success in Salem, I would have done the same in my town if I could have.
Reapplication Procedures
So is it possible for someone issued a "B" to reapply, say on a yearly basis, even before expiration with the hope of having their license changed to an "A"?
Well, I just got my LTC-A no restrict. in Bridgewater, but it took some doing, or "explanation(s)" as the other poster said...
They wanted to give me a B first, and then reapply four years later for the A.
I had to talk to the police chief and really plead my case, then a followup email, and I also, on my own accord, gave him an additional character reference, from shall we say, another person-of-importance.
The chief in B'water said thats the way he usually does it...'B' first, then 'A'.
So I REALLY don't know about Bridgewater being truly "green" as-it-were, maybe it was just me and my personal profile.
ace57
![[wink]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/002.gif "Wink [wink]")
So is it possible for someone issued a "B" to reapply, say on a yearly basis, even before expiration with the hope of having their license changed to an "A"?
Yes..........
Carver=Green
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2007
- Messages
- 1,864
- Likes
- 69
.
Last edited:
Eastham = Green
I've been reading on this forum for about a month now & decided to register today.
I submitted the application for my Class A ALP in Hudson this morning. I hope everything turns out well. A lot of post's i've read on here about Hudson licensing have been negative, and although I just submitted my application, I have to say that both officers I interacted with were VERY pleasant & there has been no indication that a Class A ALP is out of the question.
I would think that if it's normal practice for them to issue Class A Restricted or less they would have said so right up front. Am I correct in this assumption?
I would say Hudson can stay black for the time being. To be continued...
I submitted the application for my Class A ALP in Hudson this morning. I hope everything turns out well. A lot of post's i've read on here about Hudson licensing have been negative, and although I just submitted my application, I have to say that both officers I interacted with were VERY pleasant & there has been no indication that a Class A ALP is out of the question.
I would think that if it's normal practice for them to issue Class A Restricted or less they would have said so right up front. Am I correct in this assumption?
I would say Hudson can stay black for the time being. To be continued...
No. A friend just got one in Hudson. They gave him a restricted class A And told him when he renewed he could get unrestricted. I hope you did your homework and included enough backup info to make this practice very difficult for them.
Good luck.
That isn't black, that's more like "red", or "red with a dollop of mustard".
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
Black is reserved for the towns where the chief is such a miserable POS that getting ANY ltc at all is difficult or impossible. There aren't that manyfull out black towns in MA. I think a few years ago there was a
city/town down on the cape that was black because some PD didn't have an officer assigned to process
licenses.
-Mike
I feel so sorry for you people in mass..what a hassle..i hope CT never gets like that......one more thing..i have a friend who just moved to Hadley from CT and got his Class A-ALP...no issues at all...
Reading:
Should probably go from BLUE to GREEN.
Is this where where one is to make this statement?
Should probably go from BLUE to GREEN.
Is this where where one is to make this statement?
Tell of your experience
then others will agree or disagree of change
did you have to provide 3 letters ?
a damn "GOOD REASON" why you should receive a LTC/ALP ?
letter from doctor ? etc.....
It took my father 7 weeks to get his LTC A (no restrictions). He lives in Taunton.
Abington should be red
Reading:
My first LTC was in '93/'94. I have no connections. I did have to provide reference letters back then. Take a written test, and a range test. These were not hard, just hurdles.
Since then the '98 Chap 180 changed things. I've renewed twice since oriiginal, and have LTC-A no restrictions.
Renew earlier this year was with the new chief, but seems same policy as last renewal. Names of reference on the form, I don't think they were called.
There was a thread somewhere back in jan/feb with another from Reading who was a first timer. I believe he eventually posted that he got LTC-A also.
- Status
