Restrictions Hunting Target and Protection???????????

dannyk45

NES Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2007
Messages
805
Likes
49
Location
western mass
Feedback: 14 / 0 / 0
My brother just got his LTC A. and the restrictions are Hunting, Target and Protection what does that mean. He is in Russell, Ma.
 
That blows! What did he place down as reason for issue?

Just called my brother and he said he asked for target practice protection and hunting. The chief said it was approved, you just have to be careful. For example don't carry in bars. It sounds to me that they made a mistake and put reasons instead of restrictions.
 
My brother just got his LTC A. and the restrictions are Hunting, Target and Protection what does that mean. He is in Russell, Ma.

It means his LTC was issued by a clueless cop. "Reason(s) For Issuance" was replaced by "Restriction(s) over two, if not three, years ago.

It's partially your brother's own fault for submitting a poorly-written app. He should have written:

Restriction(s): NONE (formerly "All Lawful Purposes")

instead of that laundry list of possible uses. [rolleyes]
 
Just called my brother and he said he asked for target practice protection and hunting. The chief said it was approved, you just have to be careful. For example don't carry in bars. It sounds to me that they made a mistake and put reasons instead of restrictions.
Why is carry in a bar wrong?
 
It means his LTC was issued by a clueless cop. "Reason(s) For Issuance" was replaced by "Restriction(s) over two, if not three, years ago.

It's partially your brother's own fault for submitting a poorly-written app. He should have written:

Restriction(s): NONE (formerly "All Lawful Purposes")

instead of that laundry list of possible uses. [rolleyes]


good lord scriv, not everyone understands the climate of gun ownership in this state prior to their own application, so try lightening up.[slap]
 
good lord scriv, not everyone understands the climate of gun ownership in this state prior to their own application, so try lightening up.[slap]

And such a vapid, willful ignorance is precisely WHY they get into the difficulties they come on this forum - or call me - and whine about.

Any present or intended firearms owner who doesn't grasp the fact that Massachusetts is actively hostile to gun owners has his or her head so far up his/her backside, they must need a snorkel to breathe.

Apologists for such behavior enable such stupidity.
 
If he is restricted to carrying for "hunting, target or protection" doesn't the "protection" allow him to carry pretty much like an ALP?
 
If he is restricted to carrying for "hunting, target or protection" doesn't the "protection" allow him to carry pretty much like an ALP?

I think that would be reasonable to assume, since the chief's statement to "be careful carrying in a bar," would seem to indicate he meant for the license to allow for everyday carry.
 
And such a vapid, willful ignorance is precisely WHY they get into the difficulties they come on this forum - or call me - and whine about.

Any present or intended firearms owner who doesn't grasp the fact that Massachusetts is actively hostile to gun owners has his or her head so far up his/her backside, they must need a snorkel to breathe.

Apologists for such behavior enable such stupidity.

Ok Herr firearm god [rolleyes][rolleyes]

and the assumption that everyone knows as much as someone whose career is firearms law is just that - stupidity. oh well.
 
and the assumption that everyone knows as much as someone whose career is firearms law is just that - stupidity. oh well.

Spare us your desperate and disingenous "assumption."

It takes NO special skill or knowledge to grasp the obvious; i.e. that this state is hostile to firearms ownership.

It takes only minimal effort - like bothering to actually read a few threads on this forum (or any other dealing w/MA law) or the GOAL site - to realize that, given the consequences of unpreparedness, a little attention to the process is in order.

It's called "Special Ed" for a reason - normal people are supposed to be able to take such basic precautions, instead of being wet-nursed their entire lives. [rolleyes]
 
It's called "Special Ed" for a reason - normal people are supposed to be able to take such basic precautions, instead of being wet-nursed their entire lives. [rolleyes]


Nice to see your true colors. There is that cute little high horse of yours neighing for you. The comment about special ed was especially fitting. [rolleyes] Bite me, douchebag.
 
Spare us your desperate and disingenous "assumption."

It takes NO special skill or knowledge to grasp the obvious; i.e. that this state is hostile to firearms ownership.

It takes only minimal effort - like bothering to actually read a few threads on this forum (or any other dealing w/MA law) or the GOAL site - to realize that, given the consequences of unpreparedness, a little attention to the process is in order.

[rolleyes]


want to talk assumptions? How about your assumption that every person knows this forum, with all its information, exists. You know that is not true, yet that is what you are trying to tell me. Many people don't know about all the sites and sources out there. You just simply can't assume they do. You probably also automatically assume that every person looking to you for legal advice when they come to your office is dumb and a nuisance because you have to do your job when they show up....

gee, what a nice guy you are, and levelheaded too![rofl]
 
want to talk assumptions? How about your assumption that every person knows this forum, with all its information, exists. You know that is not true, yet that is what you are trying to tell me. Many people don't know about all the sites and sources out there. You just simply can't assume they do.


Your little apologia can be disposed of with one word:




GOOGLE.


Grasp the concept. [flame]
 
Your little apologia can be disposed of with one word:




GOOGLE.


Grasp the concept. [flame]

I'm sure you've heard "don't believe everything you read on the Internet." this applies just as much to firearms info as anything else. So let's say someone searches and finds some NES links on what they need. They ask a question based on what they have already been told and have read. some people share their misinformation, which looks similar to the information they already found (which is incorrect). So they have used google and found poor info and one of the few people who can correct that says nothing but "try searching" and dismissed their want to participate in shooting culture.

So I would not only say google isn't an acceptable answer only if everythicng on google is true but also your snobby attitude towards those who want the proper info is doownright embarassing.

Your move.
 
GOOGLE would have kicked up both the news coverage of the enactment of Chapter 180 and the subsequent coverage of news articles of those charged with unlawful possession because their "lifetime" FID is no longer valid. It would also bring up sites with links to the statute, like GOAL's.

In short, while there is quite a lot of dreck on the net, there are ample opportunities to find the facts. It simply requires one to actually look.

There is little basis for your excuses, especially when one has had the facts available for over a DECADE. Your rationalizations for ignorance and inertia keep ignoring that salient fact.
 
Last edited:
LOL you're funny scriv (and also great at hearing only what you want to hear). I sure hope you don't feel put because your clients make you work. Enjoy the rest of your day I have to go run afternoon classes with my special needs guys who you felt the need to bring up and attack.
 
want to talk assumptions? How about your assumption that every person knows this forum, with all its information, exists. You know that is not true, yet that is what you are trying to tell me. Many people don't know about all the sites and sources out there. You just simply can't assume they do. You probably also automatically assume that every person looking to you for legal advice when they come to your office is dumb and a nuisance because you have to do your job when they show up....

gee, what a nice guy you are, and levelheaded too![rofl]

Assumptions? You mean like a person who moves from California to NH then companies that there's SNOW, even in Nashua! And people carry guns and put dead deer on their car and don't even cover it? (There was a post on here about this person's complaints on city-data or something).

Before I knew this site I knew MA was hostile to gun owners. That's why I had been planning to GTF out of MA for 3-4 yrs. I got my LTC just as the writing on the wall said, GTFO now. I'm glad I did. The housing market crashed even more where I lived. Two houses sold through foreclosure for 20-45k below what I sold for.

Yes, people should do research before doing something. IIRC the applications say, "under the penalty of perjury, you agree this is all accurate" (or whatever the legal terms really are, I don't have it in front of me). Anyone who assumes they know the law when they go to sign something like that sure as heck better be prepared with a bottle of KY if they didn't do something correctly.
 
Two houses sold through foreclosure for 20-45k below what I sold for.
They were lucky. The house down the street that sold a year or so ago for $385k is up with an asking price of $295k (foreclosure sale through traditional real estate agent).
 
Scrivener, you should be honored when people ask for your opinions and advice.

You should find pleasure in discussing and debating all the issues that are brought up here. Even when they come up repeatedly, it's because times change, people change, situations change. I think that the guy's LTC situation is pretty funny because it it proof that the system here is insane.

And it's insane because of the incompetence of Angus, Cheryl, the 1998 legislature, and that turd RINO Paul Cellucci who should all burn in Hell.

My restriction was removed after a year of asking stupid questions, making correct and incorrect assumptions, and stepping up to the plate with an updated request. Don't deprive others of making the same mistakes and learning the same lessons.

Never judge a man by the way he falls, judge by the way he gets back up.
 
It takes NO special skill or knowledge to grasp the obvious; i.e. that this state is hostile to firearms ownership.

It takes only minimal effort - like bothering to actually read a few threads on this forum (or any other dealing w/MA law) or the GOAL site - to realize that, given the consequences of unpreparedness, a little attention to the process is in order.

It should become obvious that MA is hostile to gun ownership when you walk into a gun store and they ask to see your LTC/FID before they can sell you something.
 
They were lucky. The house down the street that sold a year or so ago for $385k is up with an asking price of $295k (foreclosure sale through traditional real estate agent).

Who was lucky? One foreclosure sold for 140k less than the sale price 2 years earlier, the other not so bad, only 110k below the sale price a year earlier. I sold at a 10k hit over 4 years.

ETA: had I waited another 2-3 months, I probably would have had a 40-50k hit or a long wait.
 
Last edited:
They were lucky. The house down the street that sold a year or so ago for $385k is up with an asking price of $295k (foreclosure sale through traditional real estate agent).

It's gonna get worse too (and I'm personally glad becuase I'll be looking to buy my first house next summer/early fall). Home prices historically appreciate by about 1.6% per year. Even with today's seemingly low prices compared to 2003/2004, the prices are still grossly overinflated assuming the 1998 prices were in line (which most real estate experts think is the case). SO, assuming a house that sold in 1998 for 200K, it shoul be selling for about 230-240K. All you have to do is check the real estate pages and see that some of these tiny little houses with asking prices of +300K are ridiculously bogus. I laugh when i look at listings now, knowing no one's buying and how much lower they'll be next year. We're no where near the bottom right now. Anyone who bought between 2002 and 2006 and thought they would have equity now is an idiot. People will have to realize that they must either sell now to get out and take a hit or in some cases break even OR wait another 10+ yeas before selling if they want to make a profit.

For some crazy reason people still don't get the concept of buy low sell high or they thought it only applied to stocks and not every other asset class. Gee I'll pay $350K for a 1100 square foot one bath house in 2004 and wonder why no one's buying it now. Sorry pal but you overpaid like a mo fo in 04 and you can knock 90K off what you paid and it's STILL over priced.
 
Back
Top Bottom