Unlicensed concealed carry

[M1911]

How'd that turn out for you?

I was talking at the time and she was listening to me. So I kept talking, leaned over, picked up my mag, put it back in my pocket, pretended that nothing ever happened, and continued the conversation. She didn't say anything and I didn't volunteer.

I did my best to keep a poker face, but inside I was mortified.

 

[vellnueve]

Did you ever speak again after that day?

 

[pdm]

I was talking at the time and she was listening to me. So I kept talking, leaned over, picked up my mag, put it back in my pocket, pretended that nothing ever happened, and continued the conversation. She didn't say anything and I didn't volunteer.

I did my best to keep a poker face, but inside I was mortified.

Smoove B move.

 

[M1911]

Did you ever speak again after that day?

Yes, actually. We're still friends.

 

[Lugnut]

Yes, actually. We're still friends.

I'm sure the way you handled it so gracefully helped... plus the fact that you didn't start blasting the gun with reckless abandon as the media would like people to believe we are inclined to do in those situations...

 

[bazzo7669]

This state (MA) sucks. These little gangbanger idiots get treated BETTER than people who OBEY they law....
1st hand knowledge and experince. How's a $5,000 bail for dischargeing 5 rounds at people at a bus stop. Sucker got locked up 2 weeks later for another shooting.

Gotta hate the liberals!!

"A liberal is a conservitive that hasn't been mugged yet"

Well, if you think about it- living in this state, if a situation arose and you had to use a firearm in self defence, legal or not, you still would be arrested and charges brought against you. Even if you were not in the wrong. (Discussed many times so no need to rehash this argument) Chances are that the 'carrying a firearm without a FID/LTC' charge would be dropped for the greater charge of murder or manslaughter (best case).

You see this time and time again with the gun crimes already happening in this state. You will be treated no different than the gang bangers killing each other. So in essence, it makes no difference carrying with or without a license.

I believe it has also been established that if you 'got made' and stopped by the police, you will most likely have your LTC revoked in short order. So concealed means concealed. That 'automatic insulin pump', cellphone, pager, 'I'm just happy to see you' bump on your hip is just that.

I don't condone carrying without proper license but the reality is that it doesn't matter if you are legal or not. That license is only good to show the nice man behind the counter that you're ok to purchase.

 

[bazzo7669]

Ok...I'll bite...Where in Boston is your "bad area"

Where is a "bad area" ?
show us a city or town in the US where theres never been a crime committed

Ive lived in Boston for over 20 years, and its been called a "bad area" (?) , yet I have never been the victim of a crime ( except for my denied rights by the State Government )
I have however, had my vehicle stolen in Newton before, who would've think that could happen (?) Newton in recent years has been named "Safest City in America" ( or 1 of the top 5 safest city to live in America )
Many also considered North Andover, MA a "good area" , but look at the news from November 15th 2007



Bad guys are , everywhere.

 

[Doctordrew]

i dont know if this has been said yet, but if we (as legal gun owners) dis obey gun laws by carrying illegally, were only making ourselves look bad and thus making more strict laws.

instead of people ILLEGALLY owning and ILLEGALLY carrying a weapon, they shouldnt have it in the first place so therefore gun laws shouldnt be made more strict (law makers views)

my 2 cents.

(one more cent) even if you carry on a restricted and legit defend yourself from an attacker, you may still be charged with a felony.

 

[WayneWong]

...
(one more cent) even if you carry on a restricted and legit defend yourself from an attacker, you may still be charged with a felony.

Technically, with a restricted license I don't know if I can fire on someone committing a home invasion. Any reasonable man would of course say "yes," but there are a shortage of reasonable people in this clusterf*** of a communist shit hole.

I believe the felony you are alluding to will result in a hefty fine rather than a prison sentence. Anybody thinking they can get away with it should think real hard, because if you get in a car accident that firearm will likely become exposed for the police, fire, and ems to see.

 

[drgrant]

(one more cent) even if you carry on a restricted and legit defend yourself from an attacker, you may still be charged with a felony.

The question is, is carrying against restriction on an LTC-A a
felony? I know there's a hefty fine involved and revocation of license,
but I didn't see anything about jail or a "felony". (Cross-X, Scriv,any
Legal eagles know the specifics on this?)

Just to be 110% CLEAR, here, I am NOT suggesting
that anyone carry against a restriction- that being said, I think it
is important to understand the punishments, etc, that would be
levied if someone did break the law in that manner. It's certainly
not a walk in the park.

-Mike

 

[M1911]

The question is, is carrying against restriction on an LTC-A a
felony? I know there's a hefty fine involved and revocation of license,
but I didn't see anything about jail or a "felony". (Cross-X, Scriv,any
Legal eagles know the specifics on this?)

The law is pretty easy to look up. MGL Ch 140 S131

A violation of a restriction imposed by the licensing authority under the provisions of this paragraph shall be cause for suspension or revocation and shall, unless otherwise provided, be punished by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000; provided, however, that the provisions of section 10 of chapter 269 shall not apply to such violation.

Full text is here: http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/140-131.htm

IANAL, nor do I play one on TV. It would appear to me that there is no jail time associated with breaking this portion of the law and that it is not a felony. Perhaps the legal eagles will clarify for us.

Just to be 110% CLEAR, here, I am NOT suggesting that anyone carry against a restriction

Agreed, nor am I.

As for carrying without a license, a number of years back Ayoob testified for the defense in a self defense case in Florida. Unfortunately, I'm not able to find the case in question offhand. IIRC, the young man had never been in trouble. He was black, very poor, living in a very bad neighborhood. He was carrying for protection, but had neglected to get a concealed carry permit (even though he would have received one if he had applied). Ayoob was convinced that he was a good guy and it was a good shoot. But the fellow was convicted. Of course, you never know what swayed the jury, but Ayoob felt that the fact that the fellow was carrying illegally convinced the jury that he was up to no good and therefore influenced their decision to find him guilty of murder.

 

[kevin9]

Technically, with a restricted license I don't know if I can fire on someone committing a home invasion. Any reasonable man would of course say "yes," but there are a shortage of reasonable people in this clusterf*** of a communist shit hole.

I was specifically told by the LEO who processed my application that at-home self-defense was allowed even with a restricted license (LTC A-T&H). YMMV & CE.

 

[M1911]

I was specifically told by the LEO who processed my application that at-home self-defense was allowed even with a restricted license (LTC A-T&H). YMMV & CE.

And we all know what legal experts such LEO's are...

I agree with what he said. I've just heard a lot of things that were supposedly told to people by licensing officers that are beyond belief. A recent example was a licensing officer from a city in eastern MA who allegedly told an applicant whose license was expiring that if the applicant didn't want to take the range test in the winter, that said applicant could just leave the gun in their closet and apply for the renewal the following summer.

Don't bet your freedom on what a licensing officer says.

 

[doobie]

.....eastern MA who allegedly told an applicant whose license was expiring that if the applicant didn't want to take the range test in the winter......

Range test? What type of range test does one need to take?

 

[M1911]

Range test? What type of range test does one need to take?

It is unique to that particular department and not of much import to the issue at hand. The issue at hand was that the LEO was telling the applicant that they could keep their gun, even though their LTC would be expired and well beyond the 90-day grace period.

 

[doobie]

It is unique to that particular department and not of much import to the issue at hand. The issue at hand was that the LEO was telling the applicant that they could keep their gun, even though their LTC would be expired and well beyond the 90-day grace period.

I was just more curious about the range test....I just have this picture in my head, "We need you to bring your guns to the range so we can certify you can shoot it safely, but you need to do this before we give you your license." Then you show up.. "Lets see your LTC for that... No LTC, you are now under arrest..."

 

[WayneWong]

I was specifically told by the LEO who processed my application that at-home self-defense was allowed even with a restricted license (LTC A-T&H). YMMV & CE.

I found this on the interwebs, from the Goshen (WTF?) PD. Again, how credible it is, I don't know, but it's interesting. Read this paragraph and click the link for an interesting read.

http://www.egoshen.com/Police.html
------------------------
Q. What reasons do licensing authorities (Police Chiefs) issue licenses for?
A. This is an issue that causes more problems between applicants and licensing authorities than all other issues combined. There are very strong feelings on both sides of this issue.

The licensing authority has the discretion to issue for any purpose he/she deems proper. That may include an unrestricted LTC issued for "All Lawful Purposes" or one with restrictions such as Target and Hunting, Sporting, Personal Protection, employment or any of a number of other restrictions. A violation can result in a $5000 fine plus loss of the LTC. The problem is that there are no statutory criteria for the imposed restrictions. As such, what "Sporting" means in one jurisdiction may have an entirely different meaning in another. Does it really mean just target and hunting? It does in some jurisdictions, while in other jurisdictions it includes hiking, camping and protection from rabid animals. Can a person with a Target and Hunting or Sporting LTC defend themselves with a handgun in their home? Some Police Chiefs have said yes while others say no. This lack of clarity will likely cost an unsuspecting licensee a $5000 fine. A license issued for "All Lawful Purposes" eliminates the ambiguity of these restrictions. While some have argued that such a license is not allowed, the words "All Lawful Purposes" are not included in section 131 of chapter 140 as a reason for issuance. There is no statutory requirement to impose specific restrictions. They must be imposed only if the licensing authority deems that it is proper to do so. Again, the licensing authority might consider that if restrictions are appropriate because of suitability, he/she might be better served by denying the LTC altogether.

According to the Firearms Record Bureau, over three quarters of the departments in the state are issuing licenses for "All Lawful Purposes". This is also how the Police Chief in Williamsburg issues licenses to alleviate this problem. Departments issuing primarily "All Lawful Purpose" LTC’s still have the option of issuing restricted licenses where appropriate to certain individuals, or denying licenses entirely for suitability.

 

[Scrivener]

I was just more curious about the range test....I just have this picture in my head, "We need you to bring your guns to the range so we can certify you can shoot it safely, but you need to do this before we give you your license." Then you show up.. "Lets see your LTC for that... No LTC, you are now under arrest..."

If you are talking about the Moon Island "range test" places like Boston, Brookline and Newton demand, you most definitely do NOT bring a gun!

You are given a bucket with some POS revolver in it; a beat-up Security Six or Model 10, and have to shoot it - with one hand, for part of the test.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

If you are talking about the Moon Island "range test" places like Boston, Brookline and Newton demand, you most definitely do NOT bring a gun!

If you are talking about the Brookline range test, you don't even meet someone who can arrest you - they accept signoff by an NRA instructor (at least on renewals).

 

[Scrivener]

If you are talking about the Brookline range test, you don't even meet someone who can arrest you - they accept signoff by an NRA instructor (at least on renewals).

For those who, for whatever deficiency, still crawl to file applications, even after the Brookline District Court (2 doors down from the PD and across the street from the town hall) found the chief had no authority to impose the "test" under the controlling statute.

 

[rjnsn312]

I was specifically told by the LEO who processed my application that at-home self-defense was allowed even with a restricted license (LTC A-T&H). YMMV & CE.

Amazingly enough, I was told by an LEO in my community (Northampton, MA) "If we find out you have been carrying too much, we will take your license away from you for a while". Fortunately, this LEO is no longer employed here, but this illustrates the need to consult a lawyer, not law enforcement before making any judgements.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

For those who, for whatever deficiency, still crawl to file applications

These are people who just want to get their permit without paying $250 or so an hour to argue a point they will win.

 

[Scrivener]

These are people who just want to get their permit without paying $250 or so an hour to argue a point they will win.

Thus enabling and further encouraging bullies.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Thus enabling and further encouraging bullies.

Absolutely, 100.00% true.

As a matter of practicality, it's not reasonable to expect an individual applicant to spend thousands to make the point - although I have the greatest respect and admiration for those who do.

 

[Admin]

Amazingly enough, I was told by an LEO in my community (Northampton, MA) "If we find out you have been carrying too much, we will take your license away from you for a while". Fortunately, this LEO is no longer employed here, but this illustrates the need to consult a lawyer, not law enforcement before making any judgements.

Did you try not to laugh in his face.

Only in MA.