New firearms attorney

What to make of this?

Attorney Jason Guida has been appointed the new Director of the Firearms Support Services for the Criminal History Systems Board.

Attorney Guida came to this position from the Hampden County District Attorney's Office. For the past two years, Attorney Guida worked as an Assistant District Attorney in the Springfield, Holyoke and Palmer District Courts dealing primarily with firearm and drug cases.

Prior to the District Attorney's Office, Attorney Guida worked as a Legislative/Budget Director for the State Senate. In this position, he worked on various public safety issues throughout the Commonwealth. Attorney Guida has participated in drafting influential reports on decreasing gang violence in Massachusetts that ultimately led to legislation. He has been an intricate part of drafting various gun bills for the Commonwealth and was involved in a legislative bill that established the Massachusetts Firearms License Review Board (FLRB). The Firearms License Review Board (FLRB) was created to allow the public an opportunity to petition the members of the Firearms License Review Board (FLRB) to reinstate a firearms license that may have been previously denied and/or revoked.

Attorney Guida received a law degree from Suffolk University Law School and Bachelors in Public Administration from James Madison University in Virginia.

As Director, Attorney Guida will oversee and direct the Firearms Support Services Unit and serve as a liaison with federal, state and local law enforcement agencies, including the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security, the Massachusetts State Police, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) and local licensing authorities in affording information in regards to the federal and state firearms regulations.

http://www.mass.gov/eopss/agencies/dcjis/attorney-jason-guida-appointed-director-of.html


The FLRB is a positive thing, but "He has been an intricate part of drafting various gun bills for the Commonwealth" part could mean anything as simple as being the guy assigned to make sure all the I's are dotted and T's are crossed, to actually formulating ideas and having input to legislation that has made life Hell for us.
 
What to make of this?



http://www.mass.gov/eopss/agencies/dcjis/attorney-jason-guida-appointed-director-of.html


The FLRB is a positive thing, but "He has been an intricate part of drafting various gun bills for the Commonwealth" part could mean anything as simple as being the guy assigned to make sure all the I's are dotted and T's are crossed, to actually formulating ideas and having input to legislation that has made life Hell for us.

I think we should replace the girl in your avatar with Guida.
 
I can't wait to find out his replacement.

I won't be waiting, unfortunately. The devil you know is better than the devil you don't. My Non-Resident LTC-A renewal application is going in next week - six freaking months before it expires, as they said to reapply 5-6 months early last time due to the backlog and delays.

Just another reason to delay or deny renewal after cashing my $100 yearly check. This will be an accumulated $1400 paid to MA for the RKBA [angry]
 
no, i just like the new Hampshire system better.

where it is not encouraging lawyers and cops to play the "lets refuse the license till they lawyer up and we cash in " game.
 
There is. He wants to cash in, and there's nothing wrong with that.

It is the American Way. I know several former ADAs and a couple of AUSAs who took their considerable experience at putting people in prison, went into the dreaded private sector, and have had very successful careers as defense attorneys. There are also several companies started by former IRS agents that specialize in helping people out of tax trouble. Not to mention the retired military officers (below flag rank) who went to work for defense contractors.
 
Is Guida still working for the state or not?
Atty Guida is now private sector.

I know several former ADAs and a couple of AUSAs who took their considerable experience at putting people in prison, went into the dreaded private sector
This is so standard for ADA's that the Nassau County (NY) DA's office requires a 3 year commitment from new ADAs, and one of the employment conditions is that any ADA who resigns before the 3 year period is up will receive a negative reference from the DA's office. Off topic a bit, but that office also requires that all ADAs not hold a pistol possession or carry permit from any jurisdiction.
 
Atty Guida is now private sector.

So who is now the director of the FRB?

This is what confuses me:

Attorney Jason Guida joined Principe & Strasnick as “Of Counsel” in 2009. He is a former Hampden County Assistant District Attorney and a former legislative aide in the Massachusetts State Senate. Atty. Guida currently serves as the Director of the Firearms Records Bureau for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Hasn't Guida has been director of the FRB during this time? Has he has also been moonlighting at Principe & Strasnick? Was he a full-time employee of the Commonwealth as director of the FRB? Or has the Commonwealth been employing his firm on an hourly basis?
 
Last edited:
So who is now the director of the FRB?

This is what confuses me:



Hasn't Guida has been director of the FRB during this time? Has he has also been moonlighting at Principe & Strasnick? Was he a full-time employee of the Commonwealth as director of the FRB? Or has the Commonwealth been employing his firm on an hourly basis?

At the time... he had his private practice contact info listed as the CHSB

Jason A. Guida, Attorney at Law.
Jason Guida has a law practice in Chelsea (MA)

This Lawyer has extensive experience representing clients in Business Law, Trusts & Estate Planning matters.
Contact Info:
Phone: 617-742-9400
Fax: 305-535-2529
WebSite: www.principelaw.com
Main Office Location:
Criminal History Systems Board
Chelsea, MASSACHUSETTS, 02150

http://lawyers.legalhelpmate.com/MA-Lawyer-Jason-Guida-892928.aspx
 
I still think this is 'just business'. There's no question at all that this guy can be VERY effective in representing gun owners. So, how can that be bad for us collectively? Because he previously worked for the other side? That's exactly where he brings unique value to our side.

In my job, I work for a regulatory agency - and I have nothing to do with creating those regulations. But when I retire in 7 more years, I'll most likely do some consulting in that area providing training and assistance to comply with those regulations - because it's something I know this side of very well, and that would make me very effective at it. Simple business. Continue to make money don't what I know well. It has nothing to do with personal convictions or philosophies - just business.
 
Does this mean that he is no longer employed by the state?

Jason left the employ of the Commiewealth last week.

I've always thought that he was NOT the guy making all the rules, policies, etc. that came out of CJIS. I think he was merely the fall guy told to do that dirty work.

Time will tell how helpful Jason will be to our side, but I certainly don't condemn him for making that move. He has lost ~2/3 of his original staff since he took the job and was prohibited from replacing them. His pay was pathetic IIRC (I think I recall looking it up at one time on the public website with state employee earnings), so this is his opportunity to earn real money using his unique knowledge.

Almost all state reps/sens have side law practices, etc. I'm guessing that it isn't a problem for them to do this while employed by the Commiewealth!

I really hope that Jason is truly on our side now. It will be interesting to sit back and watch how this plays out.

As for his replacement, I believe that the Devil has to approve any appointment at this level and so we can expect another anti-gun person to fill his shoes. Usually these are political appointments and "do as you are told or you will be replaced" seems to be SOP.
 
Well that to me is a bigger thing to watch here, who they appoint at the DCJIS. If the douchebag wants to be a firearms attorney, fine. I want to see how the other side plays out.
 
So he was doing private practice work out of his state office? Is that legal?

NO, that is incorrect. All lawyers admitted to the bar have to list where their "offices" are. In his case it's at the FRB. As long as he is not representing clients with matters before the FRB and he does not do it on state time he can also (I think) maintain a private practice. I know that elected officials can and do.

For example he could do home closings when he's not working. He could also take a vacation day or other personal time during work hours to do private legal work. Again, as long as he is not working out of his state office during work hours, he is OK.

What he could NOT do, is work at the FRB and represent clients in front of the FRB.

That isn't limited to lawyers either, it's binding on all state, county, and local employees. Unless I really screwed up my annual mandated ethics test. ;)
 
I've always thought that he was NOT the guy making all the rules, policies, etc. that came out of CJIS. I think he was merely the fall guy told to do that dirty work.

Maybe that's true but he crossed a lot of lines, and anyone with any morals or scruples would have told them to **** off and die and hand in their resignation papers a long time ago.... he didn't. On the other hand maybe his conscience finally got the better of him- being told to intentionally lie to others about the law in the course of your employment must make it difficult to sleep at night.

I really hope that Jason is truly on our side now. It will be interesting to sit back and watch how this plays out.

Well, he has a lot of work to do to change my mind, I'll tell you that much. Maybe his replacement will be worse, only time will tell, but as far as I'm concerned, he was "part of the problem" at that organization.

-Mike
 
Last edited:
Maybe that's true but he crossed a lot of lines, and anyone with any morals or scruples would have told them to **** off and die and hand in their resignation papers a long time ago.... he didn't. On the other hand maybe his conscience finally got the better of him- being told to intentionally lie to others about the law in the course of your employment must make it difficult to sleep at night.



Well, he has a lot of work to do to change my mind, I'll tell you that much. Maybe his replacement will be worse, only time will tell, but as far as I'm concerned, he was "part of the problem" at that organization.

-Mike
There are few thins as certain as the likelyhood that hisreplacement will be worse.
 
60k seems a bit low for an attorney and manager in government.

Guess he didn't know the T is where the real money is at
 
Mike, don't you know better than to use "ethics and scruples" in the same sentence when discussing attorneys?

REALLY!!!
 
NO, that is incorrect. All lawyers admitted to the bar have to list where their "offices" are. In his case it's at the FRB. As long as he is not representing clients with matters before the FRB and he does not do it on state time he can also (I think) maintain a private practice. I know that elected officials can and do.

By using the address of his state office, does that imply that he was performing private work out of his state office? Whether on his own time or not, is that kosher?
 
Last edited:
As a citizen of the Commonwealth, the ethics of our state employees IS my business. I don't know the laws and regulations in this regard, which is why most of my posts have been questions, not statements. I don't know whether what he did was a violation of the laws or regulations.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom