Pembroke, MA LTC policy.

[Len-2A Training]

You should have the right to fire him. He is your employee after all.

Sorry but that is laughable.

You have no idea how the "system operates"!

 

[Gabe]

Sorry but that is laughable.

You have no idea how the "system operates"!

It is laughable.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Applicants frequently have to choose between getting the license quickly and inexpensively, or making a point. I recently spoke to someone who was told they had to take TWO courses - the Worcester PD class and a state certified class.... and this is from a department that is "green" on this list.

So, the applicant has two choices:

- Pay an extra $50 for the NRA Home Firearms Safety course and have a complete application ready within about two weeks from today.

- Pay an attorney $200+/hour to argue the point that the course is not required - best case is an order to issue the license without the second course issued a couple of months from now at a cost sufficient to cover a nice gun and a case of ammo.

 

[KMaurer]

Rational discourse? Unlike sophistry and poor high school debating, rational discourse doesn't rely solely on sarcasm, straw man positions and argumentum ad hominem.

You explicitly accept that the course that you advocate is, to use your exact words, "Expensive? Yes; far too much so." Yet you still insist that "The ONLY venue for such individuals is court," while denigrating those whose preferences for a quick license or financial inability or unwillingness to go the long, expensive route leads them to grudgingly take a different tactical approach and comply with the extra-legal requirements imposed by the department. You then acknowledge the differences between tactics and strategy, and claim that you "don't denigrate those who work by other means," while characterizing those those who adopt those other, strategic means (and have the effrontery to point out your single-tool tactics neither work for everyone nor necessarily deal with the strategic issues) of believing only in a "path to enlightenment" or a "plan for a Great Leap Forward" undisclosed or perhaps unknowable to mere rational creatures, and who "still don't get it".

Ken

 

[Rob Boudrie]

"The ONLY venue for such individuals is court,"

In the case of the Fish Stick FID, this statement was indeed accurate as the issuing authority had formally refused to issue. In other cases, such as the one I just mentioned, compliance with the extra-legal requirement represents the quickest, least expensive, way to get the desired license.

 

[drgrant]

And of the fish stick matter, isn't it true that an FID is statutorily shall issue
anyways? So if someone is statutorily qualified, a court -SHOULD- back up
the issuance of an FID rather easily; compared to an LTC where discretionary
latitude is "allowed" by the system.

-Mike

 

[Scrivener]

Yet you still insist that "The ONLY venue for such individuals is court," while denigrating those whose preferences for a quick license or financial inability or unwillingness to go the long, expensive route leads them to grudgingly take a different tactical approach and comply with the extra-legal requirements imposed by the department. You then acknowledge the differences between tactics and strategy, and claim that you "don't denigrate those who work by other means," while characterizing those those who adopt those other, strategic means (and have the effrontery to point out your single-tool tactics neither work for everyone nor necessarily deal with the strategic issues) of believing only in a "path to enlightenment" or a "plan for a Great Leap Forward" undisclosed or perhaps unknowable to

Those who have actually read the statutes know that the only forum for an appeal is in district court. Period. Thus, as I stated, that is "the only venue" for any applicant denied a license.

Anyone who complies with unlawful demands is NOT working to prevent the abuses OR change the manner in which those abuses are permitted. Rather, such obeisance aids and abets the bullies, perpetuates existing abuses and encourages new ones.

Those seeking their first LTC may be excused, as they are in a less than stellar position to challenge the less egregious abuses. Those renewing existing LTC's or getting FID's are in a much stronger position, making mindless compliance far less excusable.

Note further that a constant, countervailing force is the only thing that will truly keep bullies in check and an accumulation of wins in court makes every such abuse less likely to occur and less tenable when it is challenged.

THAT is the difference.

As far as sophistry, you continue to evade, avoid and otherwise attempt to distract from your inability to document ANY policy of yours with documented results. Readers may infer accordingly.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

hus, as I stated, that is "the only venue" for any applicant denied a license.

There you go again, confusing the issue with relevant facts.

Anyone who complies with unlawful demands is NOT working to prevent the abuses OR change the manner in which those abuses are permitted. Rather, such obeisance aids and abets the bullies, perpetuates existing abuses and encourages new ones.

True, but not everyone is inclined to spend several thousand dollars and a whole bunch of time to make a point.

 

[dwarven1]

Ayone want to give me their take on this? Friend is looking into getting their LTC.

First impression: You friend (or friends; you're mixing up tenses in your statement) should move out of Pembroke. Or hire a good lawyer.

Second impression - if this thread keeps going, I need more

True, but not everyone is inclined to spend several thousand dollars and a whole bunch of time to make a point.

Some of us, however, are stubborn and would pay that money to simply have the win and rub the fascists' nose in it.

 

[Scrivener]

Some of us, however, are stubborn and would pay that money to simply have the win and rub the fascists' nose in it.

Glad to see my Garand is in good hands.

 

[depicts]

I found great satisfaction in winning my case.

The judge ordered the chief to issue. I called the chief and asked him where was my license. He said, "Oh, just come up here and fill out a current application, and you'll be all set."

Something didn't sound right. I called my lawyer. She told me NOT to do what the chief said. Karen said if I did go and fill out another application, the Chief could then deny me as an unsatisfactory candidate. Since he refused for cause with the first application, I could win in court and get the judge to order the issuance of the license. But if I had submitted another form, he could, and would, deny me and have every right to do it.

Only lawyers know these little details. If it wasn't for that piece of advice, I'd probably have filled out another application, and today I wouldn't have a permit.

Some CLEOs play dirty. You need any tool you can get to beat the bad ones.

Karen about cut his balls off when he told me that. She called him and told him what the meaning of the judge's order was, she sent him registered mail with the decision and her cover letter saying why I would NOT fill out another application, and she contacted the court to start contempt charges against the chief. I got the license within 3 days.

It was a beautiful thing to watch and learn from. It was SOOOOO cool!

 

[KMaurer]

As far as sophistry, you continue to evade, avoid and otherwise attempt to distract from your inability to document ANY policy of yours with documented results. Readers may infer accordingly.

Inability? Look at every single stupid gun law that's ever been proposed that never managed to get passed. That's my approach has to show. The first one I worked hard on is still my favorite, the California proposal that would have outlawed all handguns not registered there within x days after its passage. All the polls showed it winning big time, and it would have made all my handguns worth a hell of a lot of more money than even Massachusetts laws have managed to do, but it somehow ended up losing by better than 2 to 1. Among the side benefits was the creation of Gun Owners of California and later Gun Owners of America. But since the law never passed, I guess that doesn't count for anything in your calculus. I've got a great idea: let's pass a lot of stupid gun laws, then a tiny minority of them can be overturned in court, dozens and dozens of individuals (who can afford it) can get the abuse they suffer at the hands of overzealous officials reversed, and those officials deterred somewhat from doing it to others. After all, that's all that counts isn't it?

I think the readers can easily decide whether they'd prefer to spend their money on legal fees in the hope of defeating or getting exempted from more draconian laws, or see those proposed laws go down in flames and spend that same money on more guns and ammunition. I know what my choice is, but of course YMMV.

Ken

 

[dwarven1]

Boys and girls, can we just agree that BOTH approaches are necessary? Ken's for legislation that hasn't yet been passed and Keith's for the onerous regulations that we currently suffer under.

If not, well then... carry on.

 

[Scrivener]

Boys and girls, can we just agree that BOTH approaches are necessary? Ken's for legislation that hasn't yet been passed and Keith's for the onerous regulations that we currently suffer under.

And when did I ever say otherwise?

Anyhow, it works for me.

 

[Mass-diver]

I found great satisfaction in winning my case.

The judge ordered the chief to issue. I called the chief and asked him where was my license. He said, "Oh, just come up here and fill out a current application, and you'll be all set."

Something didn't sound right. I called my lawyer. She told me NOT to do what the chief said. Karen said if I did go and fill out another application, the Chief could then deny me as an unsatisfactory candidate. Since he refused for cause with the first application, I could win in court and get the judge to order the issuance of the license. But if I had submitted another form, he could, and would, deny me and have every right to do it.

Only lawyers know these little details. If it wasn't for that piece of advice, I'd probably have filled out another application, and today I wouldn't have a permit.

Some CLEOs play dirty. You need any tool you can get to beat the bad ones.

Karen about cut his balls off when he told me that. She called him and told him what the meaning of the judge's order was, she sent him registered mail with the decision and her cover letter saying why I would NOT fill out another application, and she contacted the court to start contempt charges against the chief. I got the license within 3 days.

It was a beautiful thing to watch and learn from. It was SOOOOO cool!

Good Post!

 

[masssheltie]

I like the idea of living in a town that has a more enlightened police chief. Failing that, what about running for the board of selectman, and taking steps to find a new police chief who holds different political views?

 

[Mr Weebles]

Anyone see the link at the very bottom of the Pembroke PD's page?

Yup, the VPC.

It figures.

 

[jon]

Well,

After the Egotistical bull crap that strayed this thread from its original purpose, I thought I would update everyone on the original purpose of the thread.

My friend went in earlier this month to apply for their LTC. Officer gave them an LTC-A ALP with no problems. Didn't blink. Went in and in one trip did the fingerprints, all MIRCS stuff. Was called the end of the next week that the LTC was in and to come and pick it up. The Issue date on the LTC was 3 days after the day they went in.

Yes they asked for two letters of reference, but considering the timely manner No questions ask LTC-A ALP I would have to say the town is Green

 

[vellnueve]

Less than two freaking weeks? I'd say God was watching over your friend.

 

[masssheltie]

Wow. Amazing. The last license for which I applied took almost 5 months from application to delivery of the actual document. Two weeks is New Hampshire time.

C

 

[digitech]

I talked to an LEO from Pembroke and the old issuing officer is gone and he was not sure of the new officers opinions on the issue yet, but it is looking better i guess.

 

[Roof gunner]

Thanks for the answer Scrivener.

After 15 years of having my LTC, the 1998 gun laws made my CLEO question my right to be licensed, due to a misdemeanor conviction that would have made me a non eligible person according to his interpretation of the new laws.

It cost me plenty overall for Karen to win my case, but I'd say it was worth every penny of it. It took almost 8 months, and ran my business into the ground (Gun photography for several major manufacturers magazine ads and catalogs. I'd rather not name the companies involved, but my work was full page covers on Guns and Ammo, Handguns, The American Rifleman, Shooting times, Dillon Blue Press and many more for many years). I couldn't handle handguns due to his delayed issuing of my license, which he was eventually ordered to do in court. Before that decision, my business had gone away as I couldn't solicit work or bring handguns into my studio. I was told that I could not even touch a pistol to get the correct angle on my photos, even if I had another licensed assistant to help me. I couldn't even store handguns in the safe at my studio, as I was not holding a current license.

I'm with you, I couldn't tolerate the CLEOs decision, so I fought back, and paid the price. Now if I even got a hint that there would be a problem with a renewal, I'd be on the phone to you so fast you'd think I had a direct line.

The CLEOs know they can get away with this stuff, and the town pays their court costs, so they don't care how many people threaten to take them to court. More people have to actually TAKE THEM TO COURT, to correct their actions.

Next to my Wife, Family, Country and my God, there is nothing more important to me than my right to own and carry firearms. I will not sit back and let someone push me around without a fight.

The sad part is that this "question" he asked about my right to be licensed came about very shortly after I spoke at town meeting against increasing the CLEO's educational expenses for the following budget year by $5500.

I’m totaly with you !! I spent over ten grand for my right to Cary ! Further more I’m collateral damage from Darius arbarbi and jessy cohen ! Represented myself at the flrb hearing and got a favorable decision ! That’s how much it means to me !!

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Represented myself at the flrb hearing and got a favorable decision ! That’s how much it means to me !!

Looks like you lost the right again, due to the BATFE interpretation of Logan v. US.

 

[Len-2A Training]

I’m totaly with you !! I spent over ten grand for my right to Cary ! Further more I’m collateral damage from Darius arbarbi and jessy cohen ! Represented myself at the flrb hearing and got a favorable decision ! That’s how much it means to me !!

I was friends with depicts, but was never made aware of his legal situation, which sounds like this happened prior to NES being created.

Looks like you lost the right again, due to the BATFE interpretation of Logan v. US.

Sadly wrt depicts, Bill lost more than that, he passed on many years ago now and is sorely missed by me and many that knew him (especially SkySoldier).

 

[Roof gunner]

Looks like you lost the right again, due to the BATFE interpretation of Logan v. US.

Yes sir

 

[Roof gunner]

No harsh words for Darius. He passed during my first attempt at getting my license. Jessy on the other hand took a pile of $$ from me and just vanished. He was a no show at my hearing