In-state to out-of-state LTC

[BryMan92]

Howdy all,

I was wondering if anyone has had any experiences going from an in-state LTC to an out-of-state LTC. More specifically, I want to get my out-of-state LTC sooner, rather than later, and have already alerted my CLEO of my move. Essentially, I am wondering if it is worth starting the process early or simply waiting for my in-state to expire and starting over. Any comments would be great especially with what encompasses a resident in MA.

 

[glide]

I moved from MA to NH and got my non-res LTC.

I’m not sure you can begin the process before you move. At which time your MA resident LTC will no longer be valid.

Your CLEO doesn’t care about your move until it happens. He also cannot expedite your non-res permit as those are handled by the State Police.

Your first application will require a visit to Chelsea for an interview and fingerprinting. Your former MA status may help you get a non-restricted license but that’s about it. Expect a 3-4 month wait before your license is issued.

Good luck.

 

[greencobra]

money talks, shit walks. bribe the licensing officer.

 

[BryMan92]

My late uncle knew the CLEO, so unfortunately, I might not be in luck unless we have a seance or give to the Police Officers' Ball.

I reported my new residential address (out-of-state) and kept my mailing address (in-state, physical home) the same which kept my LTC valid. My LGS have no issues with this as "that's what the old guys who move to Florida do". My friend moved to NH and once he reported he left MA (forever, in his words) his license was invalidated (different CLEO). Per MA guidelines for taxes, my "legal residence" is defined:

Your legal residence is usually where you maintain your most important family, social, economic, political, and religious ties, and it depends on all the facts and circumstances per case, including good faith....You cannot change your domicile by taking a temporary or longer than expected absence from Massachusetts. You must not intend to return.

For me, where I am now, is only a largely short-term arrangement (money, money, money) which is why I've kept my MA bank accounts, all MA/NH-bought firearms, almost all my property in MA (in mom's home), my entire family are from MA (bar a few in ME), and I spend 1 - 2 months back in MA.

I suppose, when it comes to renewal, I could simply fill out the form with my mailing address as the same and my residency as where I am. How soon before should I renew, y'all reckon?

 

[42!]

Start a business at your mom's home, list that as you address for your MA in state LTC.

Many years ago I did this when I moved from MA to NH. I held an FFL and state licensing out of my mother's house in MA and another FFL at my house in NH. Held an instate NH P&R (required back then) and an in state MA LTC. The town, the state, and the fed were all ok with this.

Of course it doesn't have to be a gun business.

 

[AHM]

I ... have already alerted my CLEO of my move.

Oh, really?
Precisely how did you do that?

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I’m not sure you can begin the process before you move. At which time your MA resident LTC will no longer be valid.

Can you substantiate this declaration with anything other than "someone told me"? I am interested in a statute or case law. People keep spouting this but never seem to be able to cite an authoritative source other than "I've heard it", "Someone told me", or "I know I am right".

This "algorithmic revocation" is a myth made out of thin air. And, even if it is specifically revoked for failure to change address, that is the only revocation reason that does not deprive one of the lifetime protection against criminal charges afforded by an expired license (it becomes a civil failure to renew offense, non criminal).

 

[drgrant]

Can you substantiate this declaration with anything other than "someone told me"? I am interested in a statute or case law. People keep spouting this but never seem to be able to cite an authoritative source other than "I've heard it", "Someone told me", or "I know I am right".

This "algorithmic revocation" is a myth made out of thin air. And, even if it is specifically revoked for failure to change address, that is the only revocation reason that does not deprive one of the lifetime protection against criminal charges afforded by an expired license (it becomes a civil failure to renew offense, non criminal).

It's "some droid at EOPS wants it to be that way" whether or not it "actually is" is a whole other story. I've had a few people moved out of state who self ratted tell me they went on the validator like 3 months later and the state said their license was still valid...

-Mike

 

[42!]

Can you substantiate this declaration with anything other than "someone told me"? I am interested in a statute or case law. People keep spouting this but never seem to be able to cite an authoritative source other than "I've heard it", "Someone told me", or "I know I am right".

This "algorithmic revocation" is a myth made out of thin air. And, even if it is specifically revoked for failure to change address, that is the only revocation reason that does not deprive one of the lifetime protection against criminal charges afforded by an expired license (it becomes a civil failure to renew offense, non criminal).

Since you brought it up.
I think it's implicit in the laws that clearly define an in-state and out-of-state (I'm using these terms to avoid the resident, business, non-res confusion) license. Once you no longer qualify for one or the other, a license issued under those qualifying factors is no longer valid.

If I'm wrong, no great harm done to the individual, if you are and he gets caught, his life is ruined even if he eventually buys his way out of a conviction.

But you're free to be the test case, I'd like nothing better than to see proof I'm wrong on this one.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I think it's implicit in the laws that clearly define an in-state and out-of-state (I'm using these terms to avoid the resident, business, non-res confusion) license. Once you no longer qualify for one or the other, a license issued under those qualifying factors is no longer valid.

I was seriously looking for an authoritative source, not someone making up their own logic and declaring they are right. Your response was an excellent example of what I was referring to: People keep spouting this but never seem to be able to cite an authoritative source other than "I've heard it", "Someone told me", or "I know I am right".

Let's take an example of the concept you came up with:

- An LTC holder is convicted of a misdemeanor crime of violence in another state, thus rendering him ineligible for a MA LTC but not a federal PP.
- MA has not yet caught up with this when the LTC holder is caught carrying in MA. At this time, he is ineligible to obtain and LTC but his existing LTC has not yet been revoked.

Is it your position that such an individual can be convicted of carrying without a license in MA?

Or another:

- An individual does not pay a speeding ticket, making him ineligible to obtain a MA driving license until paid.
- The system has not yet revoked his driving license.

Is it your position that such a person can be convicted of driving without a license?

If your concept is correct, both of these persons can be convicted of engaging in a licensed activity without a license, even though they possess a license that is considered valid in the records of the issuing authority.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also note that an LTC revoked for failure to file a change of address provides protection against criminal prosecution provided one has not become ineligible for an LTC, or applied for renewal and had it revoked.

Under your self-professed interpretation, does the person who still has a facially valid LTC issued while a resident, who has not had it revoked, enjoy this same protection or are they subject to the greater criminal penalty because their LTC has not been revoked?

 

[42!]

I was seriously looking for an authoritative source, not someone making up their own logic and declaring they are right. Your response was an excellent example of what I was referring to: People keep spouting this but never seem to be able to cite an authoritative source other than "I've heard it", "Someone told me", or "I know I am right".

Let's take an example of the concept you came up with:

- An LTC holder is convicted of a misdemeanor crime of violence in another state, thus rendering him ineligible for a MA LTC but not a federal PP.
- MA has not yet caught up with this when the LTC holder is caught carrying in MA. At this time, he is ineligible to obtain and LTC hut his existing LTC has not yet been revoked.

Is it your position that such an individual can be convicted of carrying without a license in MA?

Or another:

- An individual does not pay a speeding ticket, making him ineligible to obtain a MA driving license until paid.
- The system has not yet revoked his driving license.

Is it your position that such a person can be convicted of driving without a license?

If your concept is correct, both of these persons can be convicted of engaging in a licensed activity without a license, even though they possess a license that is considered valid in the records of the issuing authority.

My opinion has no better, or worse, position than yours. But mine is less likely to lead to a destroyed life. You think you're right, I think I am. Feel free to follow your interpretation and be the test case, let us all know how that works out for you. I'm not going to promote an interpretation that I wouldn't be willing to test out on myself.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

My opinion has no better, or worse, position than yours.

You did not answer any of my logic questions relating this concept to other licenses, or discussing the expired license protection issue.

My opinion is based on fact (what is not in the law); yours is based on assertion. All I asked for was a reference to law of case precedent. You provided neither.

And no, I am not going to move to prove a point.

--------------------------------------------------

As to risk - I am aware of one case in the MA courts now where someone has been charged with a non-crime related to firearms (not related to LTC status, as the validity of the subject's LTC is unquestioned). The police made up a law, charged someone with violating it, and it is slowly working its way through the system. The attorney argued it was not a crime and it is currently under judicial advisement. Since the case is extant, I am not at liberty to provide additional details.

So, obeying the law is not absolute protection against being charged.

 

[Len-2A Training]

You did not answer any of my logic questions relating this concept to other licenses, or discussing the expired license protection issue.

My opinion is based on fact (what is not in the law); yours is based on assertion. All I asked for was a reference to law of case precedent. You provided neither.

And no, I am not going to move to prove a point.

--------------------------------------------------

As to risk - I am aware of one case in the MA courts now where someone has been charged with a non-crime related to firearms (not related to LTC status, as the validity of the subject's LTC is unquestioned). The police made up a law, charged someone with violating it, and it is slowly working its way through the system. The attorney argued it was not a crime and it is currently under judicial advisement. Since the case is extant, I am not at liberty to provide additional details.

So, obeying the law is not absolute protection against being charged.

Like Rob's example, I testified for the defense in a criminal gun case. Guy had an expired (lifetime) FID that he never renewed, was charged with criminal possession of a gun and ammo (Norinco SKS) without a license (should have been civil) plus other charges. I refuted that charge and the judge dropped the charge but the ADA was balls-to-the-wall going after him on it and other non-criminal issues as if each thing was a criminal offense. So you may indeed beat the rap but you'll still end up going for the ride. It was 18 months from arrest to facing the judge in his case.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

The real question is "how far do you go to avoid getting accused of non-crimes"? The truly paranoid will refuse to carry a Glock out of fear some cops may think the little people cannot own them.

Len S forgot to mention that the persecution also tried to claim the SKS (unmodified, fixed 10 round mag) was a high cap gun.

the ADA was balls-to-the-wall going after him on it and other non-criminal issues as if each thing was a criminal offense.

No doubt to try to punish him for not copping a plea. He was a thread to that ADAs conviction rate. (Plea bargains and CWOFs count in the ADAs favor)

 

[Len-2A Training]

The real question is "how far do you go to avoid getting accused of non-crimes"? The truly paranoid will refuse to carry a Glock out of fear some cops may think the little people cannot own them.

Len S forgot to mention that the persecution also tried to claim the SKS (unmodified, fixed 10 round mag) was a high cap gun.

No doubt to try to punish him for not copping a plea. He was a thread to that ADAs conviction rate. (Plea bargains and CWOFs count in the ADAs favor)

Yes and to make it sadder yet, I possess a MSP "Ballistics Expert" report (Super Trooper that wrote it and testified before me had 15 yrs experience) on that gun, claiming that the unmodified SKS was a 11 rd (+1 in chamber) gun with 11 rd clips (yes, clips feed the internal mag on an SKS). All charges that I disputed and the judge dropped.

 

[glide]

Can you substantiate this declaration with anything other than "someone told me"? I am interested in a statute or case law. People keep spouting this but never seem to be able to cite an authoritative source other than "I've heard it", "Someone told me", or "I know I am right".

This "algorithmic revocation" is a myth made out of thin air. And, even if it is specifically revoked for failure to change address, that is the only revocation reason that does not deprive one of the lifetime protection against criminal charges afforded by an expired license (it becomes a civil failure to renew offense, non criminal).

It is (or should be) revoked when one submits their change of address and it lists an out of state address.

Whether this is done upon receipt of notification, seven weeks later, or never, I cannot rightfully say.

All I know is I would not want to explain why I am carrying on a MA resident LTC after I sent in my papers stating I was moving to NH.

YMMV.

Edit: also, I never claimed the license would be “revoked”. I said “will no longer be valid”. There is a difference.

 

[BryMan92]

Hi all, glad for all the input.

To clarify, I alerted my CLEO by filling the "Change of Address" paperwork and submitting the paperwork via certified mail to the specific places. Some time later, my LTC is still valid. Again, my mailing address, is still my permanent home-home in MA (which is why I posted that IRS stuff above). If there is no way to go from in-state to out-of-state then I have to move everything out-of-state whilst they "process" the paperwork.

Also, in my opinion, it seems Rob has nailed my situation rather well.

Also, please enjoy this thread from 11 years ago:
LTC and moving out of state

 

[AHM]

To clarify, I alerted my CLEO by filling the "Change of Address" paperwork and submitting the paperwork via certified mail to the specific places. Some time later, my LTC is still valid.

The mailing details were a fundamental concern of mine, thanks for elaborating.
And thanks for sharing the LTC status.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

It is (or should be) revoked when one submits their change of address and it lists an out of state address.

True, but someone has to do something to make this happen. It does not happen automatically.

 

[BryMan92]

So, I suppose, since I submitted a Change of Address and my new address is shown on the Gun Portal (for rather long time) as valid, then I've done my part?

 

[Rob Boudrie]

So, I suppose, since I submitted a Change of Address and my new address is shown on the Gun Portal (for rather long time) as valid, then I've done my part?

As long as you have sent certified letters to the FRB, issuing authority and authority in charge of licenses in your new town. Note the statute requires "certified mail", though I doubt anyone will get prosecuted for using the state provided on-line system.

 

[BryMan92]

As long as you have sent certified letters to the FRB, issuing authority and authority in charge of licenses in your new town. Note the statute requires "certified mail", though I doubt anyone will get prosecuted for using the state provided on-line system.

Marvelous. I guess we will revisit this in a few years.

 

[JenkkiMike]

Even if you send the certified letters as mentioned above, it doesn't mean that the FRB actually gets around to cancelling your LTC. I had a MA LTC, moved to CT and sent the necessary certified letters and assumed it was invalidated after that. I lived in CT for three years and then moved back to a new town in MA where I applied and was granted an LTC. The first time I attempted to do an eFA10 with my newly minted LTC it was rejected. After some calls it was discovered that my old LTC was still valid and sure enough the old LTC and pin worked for the eFA10. Basically the state treated my LTC like a renewal and the old one was never invalidated. It was as if I had never left the state.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Based on what I've learned from the directors of FRB, it seems that the LTC is ONLY cancelled (expired early) IFF the issuing PD makes that request of the FRB. So when we notify, if the PD files the notification but doesn't request FRB to do anything, it just continues on until the natural expiration. When I've attended Glidden's seminars to LOs and Chiefs, I don't recall hearing him ever instructing them what to do on a notification of someone moving out of state.

As long as we notify, have proof (return receipt), we are good. What they do or don't do with that info is on them.

 

[BryMan92]

Based on what I've learned from the directors of FRB, it seems that the LTC is ONLY cancelled (expired early) IFF the issuing PD makes that request of the FRB. So when we notify, if the PD files the notification but doesn't request FRB to do anything, it just continues on until the natural expiration. When I've attended Glidden's seminars to LOs and Chiefs, I don't recall hearing him ever instructing them what to do on a notification of someone moving out of state.

As long as we notify, have proof (return receipt), we are good. What they do or don't do with that info is on them.

Straight into a filling cabinet. This news is great to hear as I will be coming home for the Holidays!