Is this brandishing in Mass. ?

Len-2A Training

Instructor
Instructor
NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 98.6%
71   1   0
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
54,931
Likes
15,781
Location
NH
No, I don't think it was appropriate. But MA law gives police chiefs a great deal of discretion in issuing or revoking LTCs. After several years and undoubtedly large legal fees, the gun owner as able to get a judge to order the chief to issue him an LTC.

I don't think most Chiefs would go as full retard as this chief did, but that is the risk with discretionary licensing. None of us like it, but we don't have the votes on Beacon Hill to get shall issue licensing.

Correction due here:

The affected person did post here after it was all over, so a search might (maybe) yield that explanation. I remember only his first name, Joe.

He lost all of the court cases.

His lawyer negotiated a deal when the chief retired that the next chief would issue, but only a restricted (no CCW) LTC. It was something like 5+ years from the incident and he was a gun collector. No idea what happened to his collection or how much the legal fees cost him.

He came out of a pizza joint in Dedham Square with a couple of pizza boxes and the wind caught his jacket. The PD is across the street and an officer spotted the gun, called him over, checked him out and let him continue on his way. However the report he wrote up caught the chief's eye (or perhaps he reported it verbally as well - unknown) and the chief revoked his LTC as "unsuitable".
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 17, 2016
Messages
11
Likes
2
So just last night I watched a live broadcast that the USCCA had about various topics. The topic of your concealed gun becoming exposed came up. Kevin Michalowski stated that the laws differed in each state, but he used Massachusetts as an example and said that if your concealed gun becomes exposed, it's a felony. I was like, "Whoah! That's not right!" I know I'm a new LTC holder and there's a lot to wrap my head around, but I knew that wasn't correct. [grin] Is there something else he could have been thinking that I missed the meaning of? Thanks.
 

the_shootist

Banned
Rating - 100%
21   0   0
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
10,110
Likes
1,590
Location
Nowhere near Mass!
Everything is brandishing in Massachusetts!

fark_l6wRi8FCW-pd1485MxmuHNsvDvE.jpg
 
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Dec 26, 2015
Messages
806
Likes
285
Location
Dedham
How long ago was this?
This doesn't sound like something the current Chief in Dedham would do?


Correction due here:

The affected person did post here after it was all over, so a search might (maybe) yield that explanation. I remember only his first name, Joe.

He lost all of the court cases.

His lawyer negotiated a deal when the chief retired that the next chief would issue, but only a restricted (no CCW) LTC. It was something like 5+ years from the incident and he was a gun collector. No idea what happened to his collection or how much the legal fees cost him.

He came out of a pizza joint in Dedham Square with a couple of pizza boxes and the wind caught his jacket. The PD is across the street and an officer spotted the gun, called him over, checked him out and let him continue on his way. However the report he wrote up caught the chief's eye (or perhaps he reported it verbally as well - unknown) and the chief revoked his LTC as "unsuitable".
 
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
5,419
Likes
1,897
Off topic, but regarding the Simkin case, what was the reason for not granting him reimbursement for legal fees? It seems to me the system dragged him through the wringer for no good reason. Whats the legal threshold for a court deciding whether to reimburse someone for fees if the court ultimately finds they did nothing wrong? (I know in reality, they can do whatever they want, just curious.)

"Loser pays" is a controversial tort reform issue. Proponents say it discourages frivious lawsuits, while opponents say it discourages all suits and encourages out-of-court resolutions.

It's also worth noting there's a bit of distinction for someone to file a lawsuit that's "frivolous" based on law and someone who files a lawsuit in good faith but simply can't prove their case beyond a preponderance of the evidence--or they simply loose because an appeals court decides the law in the other side's favor on a legal issue that's never been decided before.

Attorneys who file frivolous suits can get into trouble under Rule 11 and even face bar punishment. For purely frivolous lawsuits, courts often will make the loser pay attoney's fees. Also, if a plaintiff wins his case under certain laws, like suing based on deceptive business practices, winning will trigger fees under that particular law as an extra incentive to not commit the tort in the first place.
 

Len-2A Training

Instructor
Instructor
NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 98.6%
71   1   0
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
54,931
Likes
15,781
Location
NH
IIRC, he wasn't from Dedham. So it wasn't the chief of police in Dedham who pulled his LTC. But I may be misremembering.

You are mis-remembering. Victim was Joe (something) from Dedham who posted here after it was all resolved. He walked out of a Downtown pizza joint in Dedham, across the street from Dedham PD and the rest was history. Over time he sued using both Jesse and Keith to represent him in the two appeals but lost both times.
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Jul 30, 2009
Messages
4,718
Likes
536
You are mis-remembering. Victim was Joe (something) from Dedham who posted here after it was all resolved. He walked out of a Downtown pizza joint in Dedham, across the street from Dedham PD and the rest was history. Over time he sued using both Jesse and Keith to represent him in the two appeals but lost both times.

Joe Landers
 

MachineHead

NES Member
Rating - 100%
65   0   0
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Messages
8,331
Likes
3,559
Location
Central MA
Top Bottom