Question for my Fellow Mass Instructors

[USMA-82]

I should know the answer to this scenario, but I don't -
some help needed here, fellow instructors or Cross-X!!!

You get a LTC A from your hometown Chief of Police, but he places restrictions on it. Unhappy with the situation, and having the means to do so, you open up a little business (a rented office with a desk and computer even) in a "green" town.

Can you now get your coveted "All Lawful Purposes" LTC (in the town you own a business in) for the additional $100 fee and supercede the previous restricted license?

Inquiring minds want to know!!!

KK

 

[Len-2A Training]

The answer to that is multi-part:

- Legally speaking, YES, you can do this. A "newly issued" LTC does supersede a current active (older) LTC.

- Practically speaking, in most cases, the chief in the town you have your business in will REFUSE to take your application, telling you that they will NOT supersede the "discretion" used by your local chief!

This has been the topic of discussion amongst chiefs and licensing officers within the last year and the general consensus is as I stated above.

 

[Chris]

Of course, with the "means", it might be easier to move. There are some lovely homes here in Bolton for sale. Easy access to Rt 495, minutes from Riverside Gun Club, and more....

OH, and it's a Class A ALP or nothing town. (unless you are under 21, then it's just the FID unfortunately.)

There's just nothing 'affordable'. My family couldn't even look at this town if we were house shopping today. As a member of the Bolton White Trash, I'm in constant amazement of where the hell people get the money....

(^_^)

 

[Producer]

Out of curiosity, could you appeal to Goal?

 

[Len-2A Training]

Out of curiosity, could you appeal to Goal?

What court jurisdiction is that? [roll]

Seriously, "appealing to GOAL" is like appealing to me . . . IF it were within my power, there would only be one class of license (LTC-A/ALP) . . . but GOAL has as much power (think like a court of law) as I do here. The chief is a tin-g_d under our laws. Courts can overrule them, but will NOT when it comes to "class of license" (to the courts, any license is a license and the rest doesn't matter) and restriction authority is specifically given to the chiefs under MGL. So. overrule them on what legal grounds?

 

[DR]

The answer to that is multi-part:

- Legally speaking, YES, you can do this. A "newly issued" LTC does supersede a current active (older) LTC.

- Practically speaking, in most cases, the chief in the town you have your business in will REFUSE to take your application, telling you that they will NOT supersede the "discretion" used by your local chief!

This has been the topic of discussion amongst chiefs and licensing officers within the last year and the general consensus is as I stated above.

Len,

Do you think your chances might be better without the existing restricted LTC? Same scenario as above, but (since you know your Chief won't issue ALP) you skip right to a business-based application in a green town. Are business-based applications generally frowned upon?

 

[Len-2A Training]

DR,

YES, that is what I'm trying to say.

MOST business-based applicants are being turned away and told to go to the chief in the town they live in. Even those that do not have permits currently.

The feelings of the chiefs/licensing officers is: damn the law, you should go to your own (resident) chief! Since the license is discretionary, you really can't force them to issue them to business-owners.

 

[KMaurer]

The chiefs know perfectly well that if you're a Mass resident and apply based on your business location rather than your residence, then you're shopping for a favorable decision. If they give you something that your home town Chief won't, then they'll end up taking heat from other Chiefs. Call it professional curtesy or call it covering their asses, the result is the same.

There similar was a situation in California a few years back; I don't know the resolution, if any, or whether it's still going on. Either local PD's or the county sheriff offices are authorized to issue concealed carry permits, but as a general rule, sheriffs defer to the local PD's for people living in incorporated areas with their own PD. The Sacramento sheriff, however, was accepting permit applications from all county residents, knowing that the Sacramento PD refused to issue to anyone. The Sacramento Chief got totally outraged, went on a jihad against the Sheriff in the media, the legislature and the courts. While the Sheriff seemed perfectly willing to fight back, as a general rule, who wants to get into a pissing contest?

Ken