-
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***
Is it possible for my buddy to get his ltc licence back
- Thread starter illu51ons
- Start date
- Status
![[wave]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/011.gif "Wave [wave]")
^^^^ 
George D
NES Member
Serious. One night my sister in law called freaking out because her horse was very sick. We had to get him to Tufts. I jumped in my truck, flew to her house and coaxed the horse in the trailer and off we went. Meanwhile, my brother was screaming up from RI to meet us.
He called me and we were passing the exit he got off of. We quickly met up an switched trucks. I suddenly remembered that I had bought a bunch of shotgun ammo that day so I grabbed it. I would have hated to see him arrested and the horse die in the trailer if he was stopped and the police saw all the ammo sitting there. He doesn't have any type of MA gun licnense.
I ended up walking down the road a bit to grab his truck. I was wearing boxers, work boots, no shirt, and a bathrobe carrying several boxes of 12 ga ammo.
That would have been an interesting stop.
It seems quite a bit of verbiage has already been utilized in replying to this thread. In my limited knowledge of the process, with what little knowledge I have being in a crimson red city, I'll leave the OP with my little kernel.
Possible: yes, as technically anything is "possible".
Likely: about as likely as Mumbles and Devalue advocating for constitutional carry
Possible: yes, as technically anything is "possible".
Likely: about as likely as Mumbles and Devalue advocating for constitutional carry
Hope your friend gets a second shot and gets their license back!
Extenuating circumstances and all, no one was hurt at the end of the day...
You really have to love the victimless crimes that jack people up and strip rights.
![[hmmm]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/009.gif "Hmm [hmmm]")
Bill Nance
Banned
Just an FYI from a "free state," a loaded gun "in plain view" violates our standards as well. A loaded long arm (one in the chamber) is automatically in violation of the law. A loaded pistol (in plain view) also violates the law.
Both are petty violations and neither one would prevent you from owning a firearm. The in plain view thing will get your CCW license suspended for 6 months. The loaded long gun thing gets you in violation of fish and game regulations, which are significantly more stringent. But still not a PP type offense.
Both are petty violations and neither one would prevent you from owning a firearm. The in plain view thing will get your CCW license suspended for 6 months. The loaded long gun thing gets you in violation of fish and game regulations, which are significantly more stringent. But still not a PP type offense.
fencer
NES Member
I agree with this whole heartedly. I think our goal should always be to encourage new people to enjoy the forum and welcome their opinions while presenting alternatives.
If they don't come around after reading the posts of some of the senior members, then we should break out the pitch forks and torches.
![[rockon]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/020.gif "Rockon [rockon]")
Or... we could invite them for a ride in a vintage Porsche.
To get your buddy's LTC back:
1. Present himself in the best light possible. Think "what traits does one require to safely carry a firearm".
2. What credentials does he have that would support his argument ? Life experience?
3. Does he have anyone in his life with personal knowledge of these traits?
He is in a hole and he must dig himself out.
4. What were the circumstances of the incident? Why did he leave gun like that?
5. Did he not understand the law? What steps has he taken to learn the law? Courses?
6. Was this an isolated act of irresponsibility?
7. Shit happens. CAREFULLY AND RESPECTFULLY cite examples of police officer accidental discharges, shootings etc etc.
There's a start. Good luck.
1. Present himself in the best light possible. Think "what traits does one require to safely carry a firearm".
2. What credentials does he have that would support his argument ? Life experience?
3. Does he have anyone in his life with personal knowledge of these traits?
He is in a hole and he must dig himself out.
4. What were the circumstances of the incident? Why did he leave gun like that?
5. Did he not understand the law? What steps has he taken to learn the law? Courses?
6. Was this an isolated act of irresponsibility?
7. Shit happens. CAREFULLY AND RESPECTFULLY cite examples of police officer accidental discharges, shootings etc etc.
There's a start. Good luck.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,711
- Likes
- 33,896
Jesse's advice is right on the money, however, I also suggest it is necessary for your friend to determine if he was actually convicted of a crime in relation to the incident, or merely had the license revoked.
If there was an unsafe storage conviction, there is an additional hurdle, and the use of legal counsel moves from "good idea" to "almost certainly necessary". If he goes the attorney route, using an attorney who does not specialize in gun related issues is probably a waste of money as negotiating such situations can be tricky for a general practice attorney not familiar with how firearms licensing is handled in MA.
As with many of these cases, NES postings are sometimes unclear on important details.
If there was an unsafe storage conviction, there is an additional hurdle, and the use of legal counsel moves from "good idea" to "almost certainly necessary". If he goes the attorney route, using an attorney who does not specialize in gun related issues is probably a waste of money as negotiating such situations can be tricky for a general practice attorney not familiar with how firearms licensing is handled in MA.
As with many of these cases, NES postings are sometimes unclear on important details.
Dream to Dream
NES Member
Not often you get free legal advice from someone who's qualified to give it. QFT.
ChevyGuy91
NES Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2008
- Messages
- 22,969
- Likes
- 23,650
Oh yeah?
Rob makes an important point. If he was convicted of unsafe storage then he has a real challenge ahead of him. He is therefor disqualified and must try to fix that situation so he can even begin to address the suitability issue with the chief. A conviction not only disqualifies him but also does major damage to his suitability.
flintoid
Banned
If you honestly believe this, please explain the following:
what part of "responsibility" qualifies or disqualifies someone to own a firearm, when in the Bill of Rights it states that it is a right of a human being to own and bear arms?
How does your definition of responsibility trump one's naturally given rights as a human being?
Is he harming anyone by keeping a firearm in his locked vehicle? Did [STRIKE=oops]you [/STRIKE] he hurt or impede your rights as a human by doing this?
Please explain. You then might understand why people may disagree with your statement in your post.
Last edited:
flintoid
Banned
then you don't really live in a free state. There are states where this is not a violation of any petty law, and leaving a loaded firearm in a locked vehicle, in plain view, does not ever violate your right as a human being to own firearms.
Bill, you do live in a state that is "better" than MA and trust me, I am jealous and happy for you at the same time. But you don't live in a state that I'd define as "free."
Last edited:
A range trip will make it all better...
Range trips make everything better. And Pink Floyd is still playing in my head whenever I start reading this thread.
A proactive approach is often better than reactive in these types of situations.
With caution and expertise he can build a case for himself before he even applies.
A sit down with the chief or licensing officer telling him about the situation and asking him what he can do for him to make him comfortable with issuing the license may help.
These chiefs want to be able to sleep at night without those they have issued licenses to doing stupid things. Put yourself in the chief's shoes and ask yourself what you would need to see from the applicant in order to be able to sleep at night.
He must only approach the chief in this fashion if he is highly confident in his ability to make a strong positive impression and is well prepared as to how he will explain the incident. This approach can backfire miserably if not executed with precision.
With caution and expertise he can build a case for himself before he even applies.
A sit down with the chief or licensing officer telling him about the situation and asking him what he can do for him to make him comfortable with issuing the license may help.
These chiefs want to be able to sleep at night without those they have issued licenses to doing stupid things. Put yourself in the chief's shoes and ask yourself what you would need to see from the applicant in order to be able to sleep at night.
He must only approach the chief in this fashion if he is highly confident in his ability to make a strong positive impression and is well prepared as to how he will explain the incident. This approach can backfire miserably if not executed with precision.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,711
- Likes
- 33,896
I think it was Langer who said something like "preparation is the essence of success".
You can't go in "cold" not knowing anything about how the town does business, or the licensing officer's approach to licensing. This is where good advice comes in - and if you don't know someone you really trust to understand the dynamics of the particular environment, it's worth paying Jesse or Keith for an office visit. Attorney help only hits the "big money" if you have the lawyer start doing stuff for you - a 30 or 60 minute talk is not going to break the bank.
In some towns, the licensing officer is indeed concerned about making the "right call" from a public safety perspective. In other towns (think Brookline), the licensing investigation and interview is a scavenger hunt in which the licensing officer looks for reasons to deny (as the preference would be to just deny everyone without very powerful social standing). Understanding where your town falls on this spectrum will go a LONG way towards helping you be properly prepared.
It is interesting that one can make a potentially lethal mistake with a car (DUI) and eventually get a driver's license back without having to get anyone's subjective approval, but when it comes to guns, it's "one strike, you're out". The reason we don't have lifetime "prohibited driver" laws for first offense DUI is the "there but for the grace of god go I" effect.
Boudrie is right, you have to do proper intel before you decide how to handle a situation with a particular chief.
Many chiefs have told me that a big concern of their's is training. They want to see individuals who have taken courses in concealed carry well beyond the basic firearm safety course. The more courses one has on their resume the more likely they will receive an unrestricted license.
Taking advanced firearms training courses shows a level of commitment and competence that "helps the chief sleep at night". (the common goal)
Many chiefs have told me that a big concern of their's is training. They want to see individuals who have taken courses in concealed carry well beyond the basic firearm safety course. The more courses one has on their resume the more likely they will receive an unrestricted license.
Taking advanced firearms training courses shows a level of commitment and competence that "helps the chief sleep at night". (the common goal)
US Citizenship.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,711
- Likes
- 33,896
Ever hear of Fletcher v. Haas?
What part of the bill of rights is not regulated by the rule of law? This guy violated a law that's extremely easy to comply with in one of the most difficult firearms states in the country. That's pretty stupid. What other stupid things would he do? Every part of responsibility qualifies or disqualifies someone from owning a gun.
How about the parolee who was released from three life sentences who shot the Woburn cop? Should he have been free to roll up to Four Seasons and purchase guns? Would you oppose his naturally given rights as a human being?
lancecolonel
NES Member
no, he should not have access to guns. he never should have been paroled.
if you are "safe" enough to be let out, you are safe enough to own anything i can own.
momentary lapses should never disqualify ANYBODY from owning a gun. the biggest problem here is that ASSachussets requires a license to own anything and the state yanked this guys license for a momentary lapse. i fail to see the fairness in that. yes, safe storage is part of the law, i get that. it's a godawful law that ensnares countless people for no good reason other than the state to say "gotcha!" no license for you!
ChevyGuy91
NES Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2008
- Messages
- 22,969
- Likes
- 23,650
Thanks bud, I was hoping you would clear up your post a little, and you did with this state falating, precrime prosecuting, straw man post. Way to be.
Overall, I like this thread, it is a good reminder that even the 2A "supporter's" in MA are no friend to the 2A (not everyone, you know what I mean). It is just more fuel to my I-gotta-move fire.
don't leave this statement out in plain view, i'm sure some sheep will find some way to rat you out to the AG for something.
I think that is a valid point. There is a "gotcha" component to this law just as Question 10 on the LTC application can be a "gotcha" question. I have seen individuals charged with unsafe storage after being ordered out of their car by a police officer for various reasons, often an OUI sobriety test, because they left the firearm in the center console of their vehicle. When they were sitting in their vehicle, the firearm was well under their control. That is certainly a "gotcha" in my book.
Maybe he is alluding to the conceptual comparison of yelling "fire" in a crowded theater as a limitation on the freedom of speech? Just as leaving a gun out in the open in a locked car could be a limitation of the Right to bear arms? Seems like a real stretch. Though I disagree with the ultimate assessment, I can see the logic in play.
- Status
