She got her Class A

I'm curious.

If someone has an LTC-A, restricted this way, does that preclude them from using the gun for self defense in the home, or is that implicit?
.
 
Mike1911 said:
Well the liitle lady just picked up her LTC Class A, (Hunting & Target) but she doesn't care. She's soooo happy!

She's also a member of G.O.A.L and the NRA.
Click to expand...

That's great!

My wife loves to shoot and she took the certification class 2 years ago. She hasn't bothered to go get a license[thinking] Maybe I'll drag her into the station and get it done this summer.
 
JonJ said:
That's great!

My wife loves to shoot and she took the certification class 2 years ago. She hasn't bothered to go get a license[thinking] Maybe I'll drag her into the station and get it done this summer.
Click to expand...

She still hasn't?????? Oh man....I failed as an instructor. [crying]
 
Lynne said:
She still hasn't?????? Oh man....I failed as an instructor. [crying]
Click to expand...

Hell no you didn't fail! She gets up at 3:30am and doesn't get home till 5:30-6pm. I'll get her in. Don't worry. It just hasn't been one of her priorities.
 
Lynne said:
A restricted A means she can't carry loaded and/or concealed.
Click to expand...

Lynne,

Thanks for the quick reply. I understand this view, but here's the basis of my confusion....

Since no possession (even for home defense) is legal without an FID or LTC, then the FID or LTC would appear to cover 'ownership and use' and not just carry status.

In that case, isn't it normal to interpret LTC restrictions as being true restrictions and not just carry restrictions?

I can't find language in the laws themselves that provide clarity on this issue.
.
 
Titan said:
Lynne,

Thanks for the quick reply. I understand this view, but here's the basis of my confusion....

Since no possession (even for home defense) is legal without an FID or LTC, then the FID or LTC would appear to cover 'ownership and use' and not just carry status.

In that case, isn't it normal to interpret LTC restrictions as being true restrictions and not just carry restrictions?

I can't find language in the laws themselves that provide clarity on this issue.
.
Click to expand...

Titan - the LTC is saying you can now possess firearms but the restriction says you can't carry it concealed outside your home IE taking to the range/hunting/etc is allowed (and theres a whole debate over if you can carry concealed to these activities, and your best bet for an answer to that is to ask your licensing authority)

Anyway, back on topic, congrats on getting her to get the LTC!! I'm in the process of convincing my gf to get her LTC as well, which would be from Medford too
 
Titan said:
Lynne,

Thanks for the quick reply. I understand this view, but here's the basis of my confusion....

Since no possession (even for home defense) is legal without an FID or LTC, then the FID or LTC would appear to cover 'ownership and use' and not just carry status.

In that case, isn't it normal to interpret LTC restrictions as being true restrictions and not just carry restrictions?

I can't find language in the laws themselves that provide clarity on this issue.
.
Click to expand...

The way I interpret (I may be wrong) LTC=License to Carry. Carry what? A Firearm. Restrictions: Target & Hunting. It did not say unloaded, locked in a case/trunk of your car or anything else.

So on the way to the Target shooting or hunting she's legal carrying a firearm on her person loaded. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
 
Mike1911 said:
The way I interpret (I may be wrong) LTC=License to Carry. Carry what? A Firearm. Restrictions: Target & Hunting. It did not say unloaded, locked in a case/trunk of your car or anything else.

So on the way to the Target shooting or hunting she's legal carrying a firearm on her person loaded. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

you would only be correct if that is how your licensing officer defines it. THe major mistake many people make is assuming what a restriction means. THe definition needs to come from the licensing officer, not from ones' own logic.

Of course, even better would be to get that definition in writing, in department letterhead.
 
Congrats to your lady. [grin] My wife and I just got ours too. You know every time someone gets their license a moonbat loses their mind. [cheers] Here's to moonbats everywhere going brain dead.....
_slaps_forehead__by_death_au.gif
wait forget it there's no mind in there to lose.
 
dagwag77 said:
Titan - the LTC is saying you can now possess firearms but the restriction says you can't carry it concealed outside your home IE taking to the range/hunting/etc is allowed (and theres a whole debate over if you can carry concealed to these activities, and your best bet for an answer to that is to ask your licensing authority)

Anyway, back on topic, congrats on getting her to get the LTC!! I'm in the process of convincing my gf to get her LTC as well, which would be from Medford too
Click to expand...

Your explanation makes a lot of sense.

Sorry if I pulled us off topic for a bit.
.
 
Congrats to her. Do those restrictions mean she cannot carry concealed even though she received a class A?
 

Similar threads

you got a pet firearm?
Replies
12
Views
580
pinefd
pinefd
Fudds gotta fudd. No AR class in Maine.
Replies
6
Views
486
rogersmithiii
R
Tyrant NY judge says Second Amendment doesn't exist in her court room
2 3 4
Replies
95
Views
4K
paul73
paul73
Insane Video Shows Police Gun Down Teenage Kidnapping Victim as She Ran To Them for Help
2
Replies
35
Views
906
Token_Black_Guy
T
Purchase a lower as a lower or rifle?
Replies
23
Views
557
Twigg
Twigg
Back
Top Bottom