recommendations please

DickWanner

Banned
Rating - 94.4%
17   1   0
Joined
Jul 26, 2007
Messages
5,766
Likes
371
Location
Seattle, WA
The best book, bar none is the one published annually by Chief Ron Glidden and used to <attempt to> teach LEOs about MA gun laws.

Law Enforcement Guide to Firearms Law

Available on CD or hardcopy. The 16th edition will be out very shortly.

http://chiefglidden.startlogic.com/store/index.html
Too bad some of his 'opinions' are disagreed with by many, including loaded storage in a car. The problem is because he wrote this to teach police officers that it is now commonly believed as truth. I will agree that right now it is the only comprehensive resource that we have on the topic though.
 

yanici

NES Member
Rating - 97.2%
35   1   0
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
11,473
Likes
2,380
Location
N/W of Boston
The laws are all gonna change next year when H2259 sails through the legislature and Governor Baker signs it. Nice, huh?
 

Len-2A Training

Instructor
Instructor
NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 98.4%
62   1   0
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
52,741
Likes
11,183
Location
90% in NH
Too bad some of his 'opinions' are disagreed with by many, including loaded storage in a car. The problem is because he wrote this to teach police officers that it is now commonly believed as truth. I will agree that right now it is the only comprehensive resource that we have on the topic though.
What you claim are Ron's "opinions" are nothing of the kind . . . they are the "holdings" of the current administration's lawyers in EOPS and CHSB!! Like it or not, those are the "opinions" that DAs will get when they prosecute people. Do you really expect MA judges to ignore them since they are strictly opinions of a bunch of lawyers? My bet is NOT!

Please NOTE: I do not agree with all of Ron's "opinions" on MA gun law either. I also know that some of his "opinions" are totally opposite some opinions offered up some years ago. In at least one case I discussed it with Ron and learned where the "opinions" came from and why. Bottom line is that each administration WILL interpret MGLs on gun issues as it suits them!! So what you do today may be compliant and may be a felony a few years later! Great isn't it! [rolleyes]

"Massachusetts Firearm User's Manual"
by William M. Cloran, $19.75
http://www.gunlaws.com/books2.htm
Bill Cloran is a nice guy, but his "understanding" of MGLs on guns is sadly lacking. IANAL but at a LE meeting where Bill was the guest speaker he stated some things that if followed could get people some serious time at Walpole State Prison!! [thinking] [sad]

Sorry, I would NOT use his book to guide me on gun laws in MA.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
368
Likes
55
Location
At or about the Great Hill
The best book, bar none is the one published annually by Chief Ron Glidden and used to <attempt to> teach LEOs about MA gun laws.

Law Enforcement Guide to Firearms Law

Available on CD or hardcopy. The 16th edition will be out very shortly.

http://chiefglidden.startlogic.com/store/index.html
Crap, I just ordered the 15th edition (and paid $5.00 more for it).

Oh well.
 

DickWanner

Banned
Rating - 94.4%
17   1   0
Joined
Jul 26, 2007
Messages
5,766
Likes
371
Location
Seattle, WA
What you claim are Ron's "opinions" are nothing of the kind . . . they are the "holdings" of the current administration's lawyers in EOPS and CHSB!! Like it or not, those are the "opinions" that DAs will get when they prosecute people. Do you really expect MA judges to ignore them since they are strictly opinions of a bunch of lawyers? My bet is NOT!

Please NOTE: I do not agree with all of Ron's "opinions" on MA gun law either. I also know that some of his "opinions" are totally opposite some opinions offered up some years ago. In at least one case I discussed it with Ron and learned where the "opinions" came from and why. Bottom line is that each administration WILL interpret MGLs on gun issues as it suits them!! So what you do today may be compliant and may be a felony a few years later! Great isn't it! [rolleyes].
Very interesting Len. Simply accepting the opinions of current lawyers of an administration as gospel is how we end up people falsely assuming something is written that way in law. It's one thing to mention that they are prosecuting as such, but as it is written it is not illegal.
 
Last edited:
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
May 23, 2010
Messages
148
Likes
33
Location
MA/NH
Very interesting Len. Simply accepting the opinions of current lawyers of an administration as gospel is how we end up people falsely assuming something is written that way in law. It's one thing to mention that they are prosecuting as such, but as it is written it is not illegal.
The text offers the statute, and then he forms his opinion at the end of each section. It is clear as to what the law is and what his opinion is. Regarding the 131C/131L issue, he specifically states that there is ambiguity and that there has been no case law that determined the issue. Though one could put forth a logical interpretation for either side, I suspect that his would prevail in court.

While this particular opinion may not favor gun owners (though it is important for owners to know), certainly his recommendation that only unrestricted Class A's be issued does.
 
Last edited:

DickWanner

Banned
Rating - 94.4%
17   1   0
Joined
Jul 26, 2007
Messages
5,766
Likes
371
Location
Seattle, WA
He only believes in issuing with no restrictions so CLEOs don't burn any bridges and can keep their suitability clause. It's in our favor in one area and against in another.
 

Len-2A Training

Instructor
Instructor
NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 98.4%
62   1   0
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
52,741
Likes
11,183
Location
90% in NH
He only believes in issuing with no restrictions so CLEOs don't burn any bridges and can keep their suitability clause. It's in our favor in one area and against in another.
Again you are trying to present FACTS, based on your own prejudices (we all have them).

Have you EVER spoken with Ron Glidden by phone or in person?

Have you EVER talked with him about these issues you present as "facts"?

HOW do you know that this is what he believes?

--------------

Here's some facts for you!

I've known Ron Glidden personally since 1998. I attended one of his first LEOs-Only seminars on the "new law" at one of the state police academies. A very good friend (former COP and head of all the police academies at that time) invited me to the seminar and introduced me to Ron.

Ron and I have stayed in touch ever since that time. I have spent more hours than I can recall on the phone, in person and in Email with him to hash over many of these items. I was responsible for having Ron speak at Braintree R&P 5 times (club picked up the speakers fee) for ~100 people at each seminar about these laws.

I sold Ron's books back in the days of the 2nd and 4th Editions.

I attended his LE Seminar in May 2009 ($135) to keep reasonably up to date on this (there were 2 other NES'rs present that I know).

I have testified at numerous public hearings, presented testimony to and spoke with Jason Guida (and Catherine Bailey, EOPS Atty) afterwards.

----------------

Now, would you please inform us of YOUR credentials to state as FACT what other peoples thinking process is?

----------------

I'll address the specifics of your "facts" in my next post, not to muddy up my message above.
 

Len-2A Training

Instructor
Instructor
NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 98.4%
62   1   0
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
52,741
Likes
11,183
Location
90% in NH
He only believes in issuing with no restrictions so CLEOs don't burn any bridges and can keep their suitability clause. It's in our favor in one area and against in another.
To your specifics . . .

Having discussed this with Ron and being in a "LE loop", I can tell you that these are the following reasons why Ron preaches LTC-A only and "prefers" (he's sort of backed down on this one) that they issue non-restricted permits:

- Avoid confusion of what's prohibited vs. what's allowed (i.e. LTC-B and "what's a hi-cap") for officers in the field. Ron recognizes that few know enough about guns to be sure what's legal for LTC-B vs. illegal.

- Avoid confusion on "what did the LO mean" when they put "sport and target" as a restriction . . . can they carry to/from, what's a "sport"? Can they stop for gas/coffee/etc. legally? The officer in the street has seconds to decide "legal vs. illegal" and can NOT get into the mind of the issuing authority.

- Suitability and trust! If the LO finds someone "suitable" to own, but not carry, what makes the LO think that the person can be trusted to abide by restrictions? Ron's approach is that he either trusts them with a gun or not . . . not that he trusts them to do something right "part of the time" and something bad "part of the time". He'd prefer that if the person isn't trustworthy, that the LO deny on "suitability" outright.

- Yes, Ron wants LOs/Chiefs to maintain discretionary licensing. If you ever wore a blue suit and a badge, you could understand WHY Chiefs think that way (and if you never have, you would NEVER UNDERSTAND . . . just like those of us who never went to war don't understand what our troops go thru even if we are sympathetic to their cause). Putting aside the debate on 2nd A for a moment, there ARE people out there, loose on the street that are psychos, mentally unbalanced, criminal (but don't get convicted) that you or I would possibly NOT want carrying a gun if we were in the situation to make those decisions. [e.g. There was the mastermind of the largest bank heist up to that time, peacefully living in a suburban community for many years. He kept a very low profile and since he hadn't been convicted of anything, only "discretion" could ever be used to deny someone like that a LTC. My late Sister was born with Downs Syndrome, could read and memorize things, but had the mental ability of a 9 yo, easily met all the criteria for a LTC, but due to her inability to make good intelligent decisions, nobody would have ever wanted her to own a gun.]

For the record, Ron and I disagree on a number of legal issues and some have resulted in rather heated "discussions" on my part. At least he and I have talked and I understand where these "opinions" came from and their thought process WITHOUT making stuff up based on my own prejudices and passing it off as "FACT" like so many others do here on NES and elsewhere.
 

DickWanner

Banned
Rating - 94.4%
17   1   0
Joined
Jul 26, 2007
Messages
5,766
Likes
371
Location
Seattle, WA
You're obviously biased because he is a friend and I understand that. I wasn't aware that I couldn't put forth my opinion on anything though.

As far as I am concerned, he is just another CLEO who supports an abused and unconstitutional system. That's my opinion, I don't need fact to back it up.
 
Last edited:

Len-2A Training

Instructor
Instructor
NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 98.4%
62   1   0
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
52,741
Likes
11,183
Location
90% in NH
You're obviously biased because he is a friend and I understand that. I wasn't aware that I couldn't put forth my opinion on anything though.
Did you try re-reading what you wrote?

With good reading comprehension . . . you tried to state as FACT that which is your personal opinion based on NO knowledge of the person, how they operate or what they have "decided".

When I state MY OPINION, I am obviously biased AND I always try to make it clear that I am offering MY OPINION and not stating something as fact. Try that and we'll all get along just fine. [wink]
 
Top Bottom