• 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.

Message from Comm2A to people applying/renewing post 1/1/15

Gillham said:
Just +1'ing the Boston experience.
Having gone through it, you fill out "Boston's" LTC application. Which is essentially a questionnaire that reflects the state form.
I put, ALP on my Boston App. I noticed the licensing officer put in Sport/Target, No conceal carry, when typing the Boston application into the State PDF - challenged him on it.
He said it would never happen. He printed out the State form, put it in front of me to sign and that was that.

I'm going to be writing to Boston to request my restrictions be lifted due to some circumstances as well as being a licensed holder for 4 years without issue.
Click to expand...

I wonder what they'd do if you quietly crossed out the "Sport/Target, No conceal carry" and write "All lawful purposes" and then initial it. It's your application and your signature on the bottom of the form.
 
JZ1018 said:
Interesting situation has come up. My daughter has her Moon Island qualification tomorrow. Yesterday, she turned her ankle pretty bad and is on crutches. She thinks she will be able to shoot OK. She can support some weight on her injured foot and stand without crutches. We are going to practice tomorrow morning to see how she does. Now here's the thing. She leaves for an internship at Disney World next Sunday. If she does not complete the Moon Island test within 2 weeks of the interview, her application will be denied. What are our possible options if she cannot, or they will not let her shoot?
Click to expand...

Good luck,I hope she does ok.
 
JJ4 said:
I wonder what they'd do if you quietly crossed out the "Sport/Target, No conceal carry" and write "All lawful purposes" and then initial it. It's your application and your signature on the bottom of the form.
Click to expand...

Not possible. They fill it out on their taxpayer provided computer, print, and force applicant to sign it.
 
JJ4 said:
I wonder what they'd do if you quietly crossed out the "Sport/Target, No conceal carry" and write "All lawful purposes" and then initial it. It's your application and your signature on the bottom of the form.
Click to expand...

The last person I know of that insisted on changing the words on that form ended up arrested and prosecuted maliciously. According to him it cost him $20K in legal fees, took more than a year before all charges were dropped. There may have been others with potentially different results but it is a risky affair given our current laws. Besides, the only thing that counts is the wording put on the computer, that signed form never leaves the PD.
 
Len-2A Training said:
The last person I know of that insisted on changing the words on that form ended up arrested and prosecuted maliciously. According to him it cost him $20K in legal fees, took more than a year before all charges were dropped. There may have been others with potentially different results but it is a risky affair given our current laws. Besides, the only thing that counts is the wording put on the computer, that signed form never leaves the PD.
Click to expand...

So the PD criminally charged someone with altering an application that those same ****ers altered not 5 minutes earlier in the same manner? That PD and LO are no better than the criminal scumbags they pretend to protect us from. That is straight up "respect my authority" type bull shit. It's hypocritical and thugish at a minimum. I would love to know what the **** they charged him with, since it was his application, that he was forced to SIGN as being correct, that he corrected. Ugh. It's 10 AM on a monday and my BP is through the roof. This week is not starting off well.
 
terraformer said:
So the PD criminally charged someone with altering an application that those same ****ers altered not 5 minutes earlier in the same manner? That PD and LO are no better than the criminal scumbags they pretend to protect us from. That is straight up "respect my authority" type bull shit. It's hypocritical and thugish at a minimum. I would love to know what the **** they charged him with, since it was his application, that he was forced to SIGN as being correct, that he corrected. Ugh. It's 10 AM on a monday and my BP is through the roof. This week is not starting off well.
Click to expand...

The story has been repeated here a number of times. Some here (not me) sat thru numerous court sessions. It happened before NES was created and the guy (Don Swartz) wanted to modify the form with "all rights reserved" and the PD refused to let him do so, ordered him to leave and he instead asked to file a complaint against the numerous officers involved, they ordered him to leave the PD (refused to take his complaint) and ended up arresting him for trespassing! Eventually he tried to sue the sitting judge (they are protected from suit), the chief and a bunch of officers. He tried to get me to serve the papers and I refused, the Sheriffs Dept also refused and the last time I saw Don he told me that he served the papers himself (improper, must be a "disinterested" party). This was Stoughton PD and 2 chiefs ago.

If you want more info reach out to me directly. There is more back story, it was the opportunity for SPD to get "even" with Don.
 
Len-2A Training said:
The story has been repeated here a number of times. Some here (not me) sat thru numerous court sessions. It happened before NES was created and the guy (Don Swartz) wanted to modify the form with "all rights reserved" and the PD refused to let him do so, ordered him to leave and he instead asked to file a complaint against the numerous officers involved, they ordered him to leave the PD (refused to take his complaint) and ended up arresting him for trespassing! Eventually he tried to sue the sitting judge (they are protected from suit), the chief and a bunch of officers. He tried to get me to serve the papers and I refused, the Sheriffs Dept also refused and the last time I saw Don he told me that he served the papers himself (improper, must be a "disinterested" party). This was Stoughton PD and 2 chiefs ago.

If you want more info reach out to me directly. There is more back story, it was the opportunity for SPD to get "even" with Don.
Click to expand...

So, why did everyone refuse to serve the papers? I also think he had a bad lawyer..IMHO
 
Len-2A Training said:
The story has been repeated here a number of times. Some here (not me) sat thru numerous court sessions. It happened before NES was created and the guy (Don Swartz) wanted to modify the form with "all rights reserved" and the PD refused to let him do so, ordered him to leave and he instead asked to file a complaint against the numerous officers involved, they ordered him to leave the PD (refused to take his complaint) and ended up arresting him for trespassing! Eventually he tried to sue the sitting judge (they are protected from suit), the chief and a bunch of officers. He tried to get me to serve the papers and I refused, the Sheriffs Dept also refused and the last time I saw Don he told me that he served the papers himself (improper, must be a "disinterested" party). This was Stoughton PD and 2 chiefs ago.

If you want more info reach out to me directly. There is more back story, it was the opportunity for SPD to get "even" with Don.
Click to expand...

I know of whom you speak. So the actual charge was not related to the docs, but to trespassing? Very, very different issue.
 
Weymouth

terraformer said:
Not to brag, but this was a direct result of outlaw suit on them. They called an audible when we sued them and altered their policy to have a sheen of constitutionality and to match the quasi ad hoc policy of Peabody. They shared a lawyer who we think read the riot act on them over the sheer lunacy of the non policy both towns had. It was basically who you knew, not who you were. We knew it but when their lawyer proposed a different form of fictional policy, we let them as we knew it was an improvement.

Any Weymouth resident getting unrestricted licenses now can thank the plaintiffs who went out on a limb on this one. They made it possible.
Click to expand...

I totally agree thanks and thanks com2A
 
Just got back from Moon Island test for my daughter. The range officers were very accommodating to her since she was on crutches. She had practiced earlier in the day at MFS, so we knew she could stand and shoot. Since she couldn't bend down too well, they let me hold the bucket for her. One officer said that I could load the gun for her, but that was not necessary. She ended up with a 277/300. Now we just have to wait for her LTC to arrive in the mail.
 
Len-2A Training said:
The story has been repeated here a number of times. Some here (not me) sat thru numerous court sessions. It happened before NES was created and the guy (Don Swartz) wanted to modify the form with "all rights reserved" and the PD refused to let him do so, ordered him to leave and he instead asked to file a complaint against the numerous officers involved, they ordered him to leave the PD (refused to take his complaint) and ended up arresting him for trespassing! Eventually he tried to sue the sitting judge (they are protected from suit), the chief and a bunch of officers. He tried to get me to serve the papers and I refused, the Sheriffs Dept also refused and the last time I saw Don he told me that he served the papers himself (improper, must be a "disinterested" party). This was Stoughton PD and 2 chiefs ago.

If you want more info reach out to me directly. There is more back story, it was the opportunity for SPD to get "even" with Don.
Click to expand...

IANAL but isn't it wrong for a PD to refuse to take a complaint? Unless he was belligerent, I can't see why they would be in the right for kicking him out of a public building while trying to file a formal complaint.

I'm sure there is more to it but in any case it seems thuggish on SPD's part.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
jho said:
IANAL but isn't it wrong for a PD to refuse to take a complaint? Unless he was belligerent, I can't see why they would be in the right for kicking him out of a public building while trying to file a formal complaint.

I'm sure there is more to it but in any case it seems thuggish on SPD's part.
Click to expand...

To know him is to know that he's belligerent! He worked for Four Seasons for a while and used to rant at customers that the laws were all their fault, etc. I saw this with my own eyes/ears!

He'd been a thorn in the side of SPD for a very long time and that was their opportunity to "make him pay for it". It wasn't right, but that's what happened.

He's also the guy that used to write ranting letters to the editor that were frequently published in The Outdoor Message back when it was GOAL's paper.
 
Len-2A Training said:
To know him is to know that he's belligerent! He worked for Four Seasons for a while and used to rant at customers that the laws were all their fault, etc. I saw this with my own eyes/ears!

He'd been a thorn in the side of SPD for a very long time and that was their opportunity to "make him pay for it". It wasn't right, but that's what happened.

He's also the guy that used to write ranting letters to the editor that were frequently published in The Outdoor Message back when it was GOAL's paper.
Click to expand...

Belligerence rarely has a good outcome! Right and right and wrong is wrong, and that's unfortunate that they did that do him. Though I guess he can't say he didn't see it coming.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
jho said:
IANAL but isn't it wrong for a PD to refuse to take a complaint? Unless he was belligerent, I can't see why they would be in the right for kicking him out of a public building while trying to file a formal complaint. I'm sure there is more to it but in any case it seems thuggish on SPD's part. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Belligerent? [laugh] yea that describes him quite well.
 
jho said:
IANAL but isn't it wrong for a PD to refuse to take a complaint? Unless he was belligerent, I can't see why they would be in the right for kicking him out of a public building while trying to file a formal complaint.

I'm sure there is more to it but in any case it seems thuggish on SPD's part.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


Some blogger or tv station went into a bunch of police stations with hidden cameras posing as regular people and asked for complaint forms. The reaction from the police in most of the cases was downright hostile.

Edit: Found the video, not sure if this is the original: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8v7lF5ttlQ&feature=player_embedded
 
JJ4 said:
Some blogger or tv station went into a bunch of police stations with hidden cameras posing as regular people and asked for complaint forms. The reaction from the police in most of the cases was downright hostile.

Edit: Found the video, not sure if this is the original: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8v7lF5ttlQ&feature=player_embedded
Click to expand...

Jeez
at 0:45
If their buddies investigate them and the allegations are unfounded, the officer would sue you?
That can't be right.
 
The complaint thing doesn't really surprise me. It's probably easier to find out who a commanding officer is. For the most part, Command Staff isn't union - and they'll do something about it. Write a letter, registered mail it, return receipt.

BPD has an online complaint form: http://bpdnews.com/commend-an-officer-1/

Cambridge Police complaint process/form: http://www.cambridgema.gov/cpd/policeunits/officeofthecommissioner/professionalstandardsunit.aspx

Stoughton's goes to the Chief: http://www.stoughtonpolice.org/SPDDocs/ComplaintForm.pdf
 
Last edited:
If you want more info reach out to me directly. There is more back story, it was the opportunity for SPD to get "even" with Don.
Click to expand...
Don also made a big mistake - he was so vocal in his bluster about suing the PD that the prosecutor objected to a very standard deal to drop or CWOF the charges on his very minor alleged offense.

I heard the officer who arrested him speaking during a break at a Glock armorer's course - among other things, he was talking about how he got a lot of overtime out of that arrest.
 
So I have an update. Tried to talk to the lo by calling when he was on his shift and was not allowed to this was Tuesday so today I called the frb to find out what was going on since the only response I have received from the dudley police department was we don't have it the frb told me it was active telling him that the pd did have it cause they are the only ones who can activate it and they should be giving me the license. OK so that was around 3 o'clock called the pd at 5 o'clock to see if it was ready and was still told they don't have it what am I to think on this I'm starting to feel discrimination against myself cause I have not got a straight answer and I'm sure I'll have a restricted for pushing the issue so now what?
 
If you draw attention to your self you shouldn't bitch when you get attention. What I'm getting from this thread is that he was "blustery"... and "belligerent" and "loud"..."obnoxious" etc etc etc...
Proof, yet again, that it's not what you say, but how you say (or ask) it that matters, right?
 
Ok got call today my license came Friday and they took care of it right away for me they said officer seem like a good guy but the lack of communication with them was very poor glad it's over with I have my ltc alp thanks to the guys that gave me info
 
so what happens if you the Boston licensing officer options to change your unrestricted request? What if you call him on it and insist the application go ahead with Unrestricted?
 
Neuro said:
so what happens if you the Boston licensing officer options to change your unrestricted request? What if you call him on it and insist the application go ahead with Unrestricted?
Click to expand...

Bring a printed, signed and completed app with you. Hand them that. Keep a copy of that.
 
terraformer said:
Bring a printed, signed and completed app with you. Hand them that. Keep a copy of that.
Click to expand...

Boston uses their own nonstandard application which isn't available online so one can not complete it in advance. The only opttions on the form are "condition of employment" and "target/hunting"

Note how the department describes these as "entitlements".

Edit:
Under the "your safety" tab
http://bpdnews.com/resources/
Online the application process is detailed but no application is provided.

Information including the mace FID-D card no longer existing has not been updated with the changes to the law in 2015.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Shipping gold chain from Fla to Ma?
2 3
Replies
63
Views
961
Rob Boudrie
Rob Boudrie
10 +1
2 3 4
Replies
114
Views
3K
namedpipes
namedpipes
Democrat Ruben Gallego Would Prohibit Arizonans From Buying AR-15s
Replies
6
Views
230
Lank
Lank
Pennsylvania Court Upholds Right of Young People to Carry Guns in Public
Replies
6
Views
209
Coyote33
Coyote33
Over 140 House Democrats Demand Ability to Block Veterans from Purchasing Guns
Replies
1
Views
515
bigbravehog
bigbravehog
Back
Top Bottom