Mass LTC Restriction Definitions

[Rob Boudrie]

dude: I would like to see where in the MGL it states that CCW is illegal. A Class A Permit clearly states that CCW is Allowed unless restricted by issuing authority, If the issuing authority did not want concealed carry they would place that as a restriction. OR issue a class B permit.

'
The hurdle for conviction on a restriction violation (MGL 141-131) is fairly high. Conviction is not required to revoke the LTC and the hurdle for proving the issuing authority's decision to revoke was arbitrary, capricious and an abuse of discretion is even higher.

Some issuing authorities may very well consider "target/sporting only" to preclude concealed carry; other may not.

I other words, YMMV and GLWT.

 

[SkuaSeptember]

I think we are all missing something very important. what is the definition of "RESTRICTION"
a : a regulation that restricts or restrains

b : a limitation on the use or enjoyment of property or a facility
Those are a couple of definitions from websters dictionary. That being said if I am being restricted from target and hunting does that mean I cannot hunt or target shoot with those restrictions imposed on a permit that by state statute (with class A permit) allow concealed carry. With all the clubs offering 24/7 access you could be on your way to or from the range at any time of the day or night. And there is nothing to say that you were not on your way home from the range at a friends house that lives hours away from you. traveling to and from is pretty broad It can be anything you say it is. If you are carrying concealed there should never be an issue anyway.

The restriction is "TO" target and hunting, not "FROM" target and hunting and not " TO and FROM "
In this case the word TO is intended to mean FOR.

 

[ghurley777]

For the 65,536th time..... you need to ask your issuing authority what the restriction means. Nothing else matters as they have the ability to determine that. If you're too lazy to find out what it means, then I would go with M1911's advice. Basically, the issuing authority never wants to find out you were carrying a loaded gun.

-Mike

I did ask my issuing authority and was told that there isn't much out there as far as information on restrictions. I was also told that during transportation the gun must be unloaded and locked in the trunk. I'm going to play it safe and not play games with leaving it to LEO discretion and ending up in a heap of trouble. BTW I am in one of those cities that does not issue unrestricted LTC-A to anyone unless for employment.

 

[drgrant]

I did ask my issuing authority and was told that there isn't much out there as far as information on restrictions.

Did you tell them that the law stipulates that the restrictions are determined by the issuing authority? (which they are). Tell them that if you are restricted and you don't have a definition of what those restrictions are, that it may be impossible for you to comply with the law. If they are not willing to give you a letter ask them straight out whether or not their restriction is equivalent to the one that EOPS has defined (and show them the EOPS restriction definition list. ) That'll probably give you a more accurate indication. That said, I wager my default red town assertion probably still stands... what the restriction really means is "We never want to hear about you carrying a gun".

-Mike

 

[ghurley777]

Did you tell them that the law stipulates that the restrictions are determined by the issuing authority? (which they are). Tell them that if you are restricted and you don't have a definition of what those restrictions are, that it may be impossible for you to comply with the law. If they are not willing to give you a letter ask them straight out whether or not their restriction is equivalent to the one that EOPS has defined (and show them the EOPS restriction definition list. ) That'll probably give you a more accurate indication. That said, I wager my default red town assertion probably still stands... what the restriction really means is "We never want to hear about you carrying a gun".

-Mike

From what I know and have heard, what you say about "We never want to hear about you carrying a gun" seems to hit the nail on the head. I'll probably leave things as they are and play it safe as i said before.

 

[Peicemaker]

This convoluted nonsense is pissing me off. I was issued an LTC with a target and hunting restriction... However, if the gun must be locked up and not in the passenger cabin of your vehicle while en route to and from the range/ WMA, I cannot possibly abide by that restriction, given that the nature of my vehicle prohibits it. My standard cab pickup truck has no locked compartment in which to store a gun, and i have no other vehicle.... so what then? I intend on asking my CLEO what exactly all this hoohaa means. Also, i am completely flustered by the glaring contradictions in the semantics. The card says "License to CARRY firearms" yet there are restrictions on it that presumably prohibit the CARRYING of firearms... WHAT? New Hampshire is looking better and better by the day. I'm sick of jumping through hoops, only to get partial gun rights granted to me, and I'm sure that when I go to ask the COP wtf this all means hes just gonna take a proverbial dump on my face about the whole thing and tell me that indeed i do have to wait till 2018 and Im 29 yrs old to be able to CC my pistol.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Your gun course to get your LTC should have covered this wrt pickup trucks/SUVs. MGL is clear on this, locked case out of reach of driver meets the law.

 

[M1911]

This convoluted nonsense is pissing me off. I was issued an LTC with a target and hunting restriction... However, if the gun must be locked up and not in the passenger cabin of your vehicle while en route to and from the range/ WMA, I cannot possibly abide by that restriction, given that the nature of my vehicle prohibits it. My standard cab pickup truck has no locked compartment in which to store a gun, and i have no other vehicle.... so what then?

You are misinformed. There is no requirement in Mass law for the guns to not be in the cabin of your vehicle. The statute requires transport in a locked trunk, locked case, or other secure container. Since you don't have a trunk, you just need to transport in a locked case.

Note that non-large capacity long guns do not need to be locked up while being transported. However, I suspect that many police officers don't know that, so I recommend that you transport them in a locked case.

The full text of the statute is here: http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXX/Chapter140/Section131c

As you can see, there is nothing in the statute that requires transport outside the passenger compartment.

 

[drgrant]

Your gun course to get your LTC should have covered this wrt pickup trucks/SUVs. MGL is clear on this, locked case out of reach of driver meets the law.

Len does it even have to be out of the reach of the driver if it is unloaded and locked in a case? I thought after it was in a secure container it doesn't really matter where it is (although common sense would dictate keeping the case out of sight, if possible).

-Mike

 

[bostonasphalt2]

Len does it even have to be out of the reach of the driver if it is unloaded and locked in a case? I thought after it was in a secure container it doesn't really matter where it is (although common sense would dictate keeping the case out of sight, if possible).

-Mike

That is my understanding as well

 

[MisterHappy]

I thnk the "out of reach" is out of prudnece, not black-letter law.

Like the thing about your non-hi-cap long gun not needing to be locked.

It may be legal, but the side of the road is not the place to argue law.

"Concealed means concealed" applies to more than just carry....

 

[Len-2A Training]

Len does it even have to be out of the reach of the driver if it is unloaded and locked in a case? I thought after it was in a secure container it doesn't really matter where it is (although common sense would dictate keeping the case out of sight, if possible).

-Mike

I thnk the "out of reach" is out of prudnece, not black-letter law.

Like the thing about your non-hi-cap long gun not needing to be locked.

It may be legal, but the side of the road is not the place to argue law.

"Concealed means concealed" applies to more than just carry....

Mike & MisterHappy are both right. Law says locked case on the seat beside the driver is legal.

MA LEOs will likely take a dim view of it and the person spotted/stopped is in for the "inquisition", thus prudence dictates out of reach and out of sight (case covered over). Thus, one shouldn't have to answer any questions about guns if stopped if the LEO can't see it.

 

[MisterHappy]

A guy I know was on the way to a Trap shoot, and went a bit too fast for John Law's taste....the fact that he was in a red Corvette Convertible probably was a factor.

His shottie was in a rectangular hard case on the passenger's seat.

After the license & Registration request, the conversation was along the lines of;

"Is that a gun?"
"Yes"
"Where are you going?"
"A Trap shoot?"

Not sure if he got ticketed, but he decided that it wasn't going to be his day, and he went home....

As far as I remember, the LTC/FID was not requested....I guess he figured that gang-bangers don't do drive-bys in 'Vettes.....

This is one reason I drive a minivan, with no bumper stickers, and generally bury items that would attract attention under inoffensive stuff.

 

[DNTTexan]

This is one reason I drive a minivan, with no bumper stickers, and generally bury items that would attract attention under inoffensive stuff.

That explains a lot, although I'm not sure "inoffensive" is the term I'd use ...

 

[Patrick9098]

I got my LTC A on Friday with restrictions: Protection, Hunting & Target. What "wouldn't" this cover?

 

[fencer]

I got my LTC A on Friday with restrictions: Protection, Hunting & Target. What "wouldn't" this cover?

Carrying at Walmart or Home Depot.

My understanding, and I am sure that one of the experts will chime in, is that it means unloaded, in a locked case, until you get to the range or hunting grounds

 

[Patrick9098]

Carrying at Walmart or Home Depot.

My understanding, and I am sure that one of the experts will chime in, is that it means unloaded, in a locked case, until you get to the range or hunting grounds

One of the restrictions is "protection", so I just have to pistol whip the bad guy? ( I assumed you missed that)
And god knows I need protection while going to the Walmart in Springfield.

 

[Kevlar]

I got my LTC A on Friday with restrictions: Protection, Hunting & Target. What "wouldn't" this cover?

It would stand to reason that "restrictionsrotection" would be analogous to "restrictions:none", but only your Issuing Authority can definitively answer your question.

 

[fencer]

One of the restrictions is "protection", so I just have to pistol whip the bad guy? ( I assumed you missed that)
And god knows I need protection while going to the Walmart in Springfield.

Yep, I missed that. Damn that speed reading!

I'd carry everywhere it was legal to carry. I figure we all need all the protection we can get

 

[WPDC13]

This whole definitions of restrictions is assinine. Had a dealer come in the other day to ask me what they meant, told him that supposedly it is up to me, but the next town could be different and thats why i dont give restrictions. The license was issued prior to me working there so i pulled it up on the computer and changed the restrictions to "none".

 

[Patrick9098]

It would stand to reason that "restrictionsrotection" would be analogous to "restrictions:none", but only your Issuing Authority can definitively answer your question.

So I decided to call about my restriction "protection" and was told, in a whispering voice, I am legal to "carry concealed wherever it is leagal to do so".

 

[PatrickxJonathan]

I don't even know how I ended up here but this thread is pure gold.

 

[faheyra9]

Hey guys, I have an employment restriction (which makes no sense because I am not even allowed to carry on the job, its being challenged), but in the mean time am I allowed to use my firearm for protection while in my home? It's not mentioned in that description in the beginning, but I don't see how I wouldn't be allowed to protect my self?

 

[Sparky123]

It would stand to reason that "restrictionsrotection" would be analogous to "restrictions:none", but only your Issuing Authority can definitively answer your question.

The older licenses were issued for the protection of life and property.

 

[kingfisher]

Hey guys, I have an employment restriction (which makes no sense because I am not even allowed to carry on the job, its being challenged), but in the mean time am I allowed to use my firearm for protection while in my home? It's not mentioned in that description in the beginning, but I don't see how I wouldn't be allowed to protect my self?

Yes.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

The older licenses were issued for the protection of life and property.

That's because older licenses had a "reason" rather than a "restriction". The term was changed because GOAL made a big deal about "is a reason a restriction?" and the FRB decided to answer the question.

 

[MisterHappy]

That's because older licenses had a "reason" rather than a "restriction". The term was changed because GOAL made a big deal about "is a reason a restriction?" and the FRB decided to answer the question.

Back before the wording was changed, I was told that "Reason for issuance" was not a restriction, under the law. Kind of like buying a convertible Mustang, and using it to pull a trailer. Just because that was not the "intent", did not mean that you could do it. It was never a factor for me, as mine all said "All Lawful Purposes", but for persons with other wording, it could make a difference.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Back before the wording was changed, I was told that "Reason for issuance" was not a restriction, under the law. Kind of like buying a convertible Mustang, and using it to pull a trailer. Just because that was not the "intent", did not mean that you could do it. It was never a factor for me, as mine all said "All Lawful Purposes", but for persons with other wording, it could make a difference.

That was debatable, although one district court in Ipswitch took the position that "reason" was not a "restriction". The change in nomenclature removed that possible defense.

In practicality, it makes little difference as departments could still revoke LTCs for violation of a "reason", and actual criminal (now civil) prosecution for violation of the restriction is exceedingly rare.

 

[faheyra9]

thank you