• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Weymouth PD REQUIRES live fire for LTC.

kimmie1911 said:
Thanks for the replies thus far. As I said, I personally believe that the student should do the research prior to taking the class. I guess that I was a little taken aback that a student from X town, took a course from an instructor in that same town, live fire wasn't a part of the course, and, the instructor never mentioned that it would be needed for that town. In the end, it was on the student for not researching prior to handing over his money but I felt that the instructor could have mentioned it. We have live fire in our classes so that's not an issue however we also inform our students that they need to contact their individual police departments to find out what other requirements there are such as letters of reference, etc.
Click to expand...

This is a tad different, IMO, from the way you stated your previous question. If the class too place in East Treestump, for a resident of East Treestump, then, yes, there should be some familiarity, especially if the instructor resides there, too. That said, just as learning to make sure you have the correct ammo is part of the learning curve, so should the hoop-jumping process be learned.
 
ISOTOX said:
Me personally I would never want to take a course without a live fire component... Just saying.
Click to expand...

Both my kids got FIDs on the strength of HE cards, but they had plenty of range time, before. In fact, one was an NRA Instructor when he applied for the FID. I tell all HE folks that are using the HE course for licensing purposes: if you don't have someone to show you what to do in real life, take another course.
 
MisterHappy said:
This is a tad different, IMO, from the way you stated your previous question. If the class too place in East Treestump, for a resident of East Treestump, then, yes, there should be some familiarity, especially if the instructor resides there, too. That said, just as learning to make sure you have the correct ammo is part of the learning curve, so should the hoop-jumping process be learned.
Click to expand...

Yes, I wasn't clear. The instructor and student were from the same town and that town requires live fire. The student should have researched the requirements prior to the class but I question the ethics of someone that knows that this is a requirement yet doesn't divulge this information, even during the class. The student didn't become aware of this until he went to the PD to apply for his license.
 
ISOTOX said:
Me personally I would never want to take a course without a live fire component... Just saying.
Click to expand...

That’s nice. Here’s the problem for the hoi paloi: Mr Mass resident wants to buy a gun. He’s never shot one before. He doesn’t have any friends who shoot cause MA. He doesn’t live anywhere near any of the like 2 commercial ranges that rent guns to people w/o LTCs. He can’t join a private club without an LTC. He can’t buy a gun without an LTC and in Weymouth he can’t get an LTC without live fire so he has 0 opportunity to practice. Further, an instructor can’t run classes at a private gun club w/o causing tax issues for the club.

I live in TX now. For an LTC in TX you need live fire. The big difference is you don’t need an LTC in TX to buy a gun or to go to the range with one, hell if you have the space you don’t even need to go to a range to shoot.

A MA ‘LTC’ isn’t an LTC. It’s a permission slip to own a gun. Most MA LTC’s don’t actually let you carry.
 
M1911 said:
A lot of instructors teach at private clubs. I haven’t heard of that causing any tax issues for a club.
Click to expand...

If they’re doing it FOR the club - IE sponsored by the club as a sanctioned club activity - there is no issue. If they’re doing it on their own using the private club they’re putting the club at risk.
 
terraformer said:
Great, I am so glad you have the moral authority and technical knowledge to tell us how to live our lives. Here is the problem with this. There are all of one commercial training facilities (Bob's in Salisbury may have classes, but I don't know, they would be the second one) that can support live fire. The rest are non profit clubs of some form or another. The clubs can not, per their charter, rent out their facilities to trainers on a for profit basis without having all sorts of problems with the IRS. If MA mandated live fire, the number of trainers available to teach would shrink to about 10% of the current. The clubs could allow trainers to come in for free and teach the club courses, but not allow them to teach their own classes.

A requirement for live fire would be MFS corporate welfare if this requirement were put in place and cut LTC applications to about 25% of where they are now.

Also, how the **** do you think people learn to shoot? They practice. How the **** can someone practice shooting a gun in MA if they don't have their ****ing LTC? What may be a perfectly reasonable requirement in a state like NH where places to shoot are abound and the ability to practice exists without first sucking the kings cock, is a major burden and infringement of rights down here in this this shithole.
Click to expand...

M1911 said:
A lot of instructors teach at private clubs. I haven’t heard of that causing any tax issues for a club.
Click to expand...


If you know who Terraformer is you know he speaks with authority on this issue. IANAL but I’ve a little exposure to this as well.
 
In Chelmsford they have the "right" to ask you to demonstrate proficiency with a firearm during live fire. I have never heard of them every actually asking for it. Town is very green.
 
Bob P said:
If they’re doing it FOR the club - IE sponsored by the club as a sanctioned club activity - there is no issue. If they’re doing it on their own using the private club they’re putting the club at risk.
Click to expand...
Much of the time claims like this, as well as the everpresent "our insurance require that...." or "our insurance prohibits..." is done without researching the claim, just offering it as a source of authority.

Clubs can charge membership without creating tax problems. If having an "instructor member" with privileges would cause problems, a non-profit can always declare "non related business activities" on the annual tax filing and pay taxes on that income.

"Causes tax problems" ranks right up there with "I'd love to, but a wrote a memo to myself prohibiting myself from doing so, therefore, it is out of my hands and there is nothing I can do." Such prohibitions are generally driven by a desire to avoid the freeloader effect (nominal fee for a class with the club covering the big overhead).
 
Rob Boudrie said:
Much of the time claims like this, as well as the everpresent "our insurance require that...." or "our insurance prohibits..." is done without researching the claim, just offering it as a source of authority.

Clubs can charge membership without creating tax problems. If having an "instructor member" with privileges would cause problems, a non-profit can always declare "non related business activities" on the annual tax filing and pay taxes on that income.

"Causes tax problems" ranks right up there with "I'd love to, but a wrote a memo to myself prohibiting myself from doing so, therefore, it is out of my hands and there is nothing I can do." Such prohibitions are generally driven by a desire to avoid the freeloader effect (nominal fee for a class with the club covering the big overhead).
Click to expand...

You may want to align with Tom on that.
 
Bob P said:
You may want to align with Tom on that.
Click to expand...
I'll ask my CPA after tax season is over. I know a national level shooting oriented 501(c)(3) files "unrelated business income" for things like T shirt sales.

If a club cannot accept income from reselling an instructor's class, then how can GOAL sell hats and the like?

The secondary issue tax wise is making sure all activity is aligned with the mission of the non-profit, and it is not a veil for running a business.
 
Rob Boudrie said:
I'll ask my CPA after tax season is over. I know a national level shooting oriented 501(c)(3) files "unrelated business income" for things like T shirt sales.

If a club cannot accept income from reselling an instructor's class, then how can GOAL sell hats and the like?

The secondary issue tax wise is making sure all activity is aligned with the mission of the non-profit, and it is not a veil for running a business.
Click to expand...

GOAL is selling the hat. The income goes to the NP. The club would be letting a member use the premises for a commercial enterprise. It’s an entirely different animal.
 
GOAL is selling the hat. The income goes to the NP. The club would be letting a member use the premises for a commercial enterprise. It’s an entirely different animal.
Click to expand...
If that makes a tax difference, the club could hire the instructor on a per-head fee, and resell the service at a markup ... just like GOAL does with hats. The club would then have to file a 1099 for the instructor. There is also a chance the club would need to file a 990-T with its return to cover the unrelated business income.

But, renting out the space appears to be simple unrelated business activity (though an argument can be made it would be related to the purpose of the non profit). A good article on this is here: UBIT – Issues for Shared Spaces - Nonprofit Law Blog

These statements about "tax problems" remind me about those who claim an LTC self-revokes if you move out of MA. Lots of proof by assertion, but no cite to law, regulation of government code to back it up. Can you provide any such proof of a ban? If you claim it is my obligation to prove it is illegal, please start by citing the law that allows me to wear mismatched socks on Tuesdays.

Many of these clubs rent out their function hall for parties, wedding receptions, funerals (though in that case I think the dead member got it for free), family reunions, etc. - including those in which the attendees pay a fee for their dinner. Is this going to create the mythical "tax problem" and if not, how does that differ from renting the club facilities to an instructor?

The real reasons club's don't do it is turf. Instructors want to pay a nominal fee, take most of the excess of income over expense, and rely on the club to cover the overhead of maintaining the building, utilities, parking and heat, while simultaneously competing with their in club instructor who is probably well respected by club leadership and runs classes in which the entire take goes to the club. In some cases, these "no ourside instruction without permission you will not get" make exception for big name instructors coming in to teach a class. My club (Hopkinton) hosted outside instructors from Armalite a number of years ago and the club got a very small cut of the action (if any), but it was of great benefit to members who chose to attend.
 
Last edited:
Bob P said:
That’s nice. Here’s the problem for the hoi paloi: Mr Mass resident wants to buy a gun. He’s never shot one before. He doesn’t have any friends who shoot cause MA. He doesn’t live anywhere near any of the like 2 commercial ranges that rent guns to people w/o LTCs. He can’t join a private club without an LTC. He can’t buy a gun without an LTC and in Weymouth he can’t get an LTC without live fire so he has 0 opportunity to practice. Further, an instructor can’t run classes at a private gun club w/o causing tax issues for the club.

I live in TX now. For an LTC in TX you need live fire. The big difference is you don’t need an LTC in TX to buy a gun or to go to the range with one, hell if you have the space you don’t even need to go to a range to shoot.

A MA ‘LTC’ isn’t an LTC. It’s a permission slip to own a gun. Most MA LTC’s don’t actually let you carry.
Click to expand...


Again I was making a statement of my personal preference...no more no less.

Funny part is how threads like this get pulled in so many directions.... [rofl]
 
Funny part is how threads like this get pulled in so many directions.... [rofl][/QUOTE]

Yes. My original question was asking for thoughts on an instructor knowing that the town he is teaching in requires a live fire portion but his class doesn't offer that and he doesn't inform students from that town that it is necessary. Again, I understand the students should do their own research but my question was concerning the ethics of said instructor. Thoughts?????????
 
kimmie1911 said:
My original question was asking for thoughts on an instructor knowing that the town he is teaching in requires a live fire portion but his class doesn't offer that and he doesn't inform students from that town that it is necessary.
Click to expand...
That ranks right up there with offering to rebuild a customer's computer with Windows 7 without telling the customer mainline support for that OS already ended and extended support ends mid January 2020.
 
Rob Boudrie said:
If that makes a tax difference, the club could hire the instructor on a per-head fee, and resell the service at a markup ... just like GOAL does with hats. The club would then have to file a 1099 for the instructor. There is also a chance the club would need to file a 990-T with its return to cover the unrelated business income.

But, renting out the space appears to be simple unrelated business activity (though an argument can be made it would be related to the purpose of the non profit). A good article on this is here: UBIT – Issues for Shared Spaces - Nonprofit Law Blog

These statements about "tax problems" remind me about those who claim an LTC self-revokes if you move out of MA. Lots of proof by assertion, but no cite to law, regulation of government code to back it up. Can you provide any such proof of a ban? If you claim it is my obligation to prove it is illegal, please start by citing the law that allows me to wear mismatched socks on Tuesdays.

Many of these clubs rent out their function hall for parties, wedding receptions, funerals (though in that case I think the dead member got it for free), family reunions, etc. - including those in which the attendees pay a fee for their dinner. Is this going to create the mythical "tax problem" and if not, how does that differ from renting the club facilities to an instructor?

The real reasons club's don't do it is turf. Instructors want to pay a nominal fee, take most of the excess of income over expense, and rely on the club to cover the overhead of maintaining the building, utilities, parking and heat, while simultaneously competing with their in club instructor who is probably well respected by club leadership and runs classes in which the entire take goes to the club. In some cases, these "no ourside instruction without permission you will not get" make exception for big name instructors coming in to teach a class. My club (Hopkinton) hosted outside instructors from Armalite a number of years ago and the club got a very small cut of the action (if any), but it was of great benefit to members who chose to attend.
Click to expand...

My Club (Southborough) has an NRA Training Committee, that does classes on the behalf of the Club. The Instructors, and range coaches do it for Lunch. The Club gets the small income. After materials, ammo, and feeding everyone, it's not phat stax.

I've had people ask, "Why don't you let people teach classes on their own, and use the range?" My take is that it's MY Club, and to have the facilities taken over (so that I'm not allowed to use it) for someone else to make a buck is a non-starter. I understand the philosophical part about increasing the number of shooters, and all, but it's a matter of practicalities. Hell, we have members that can't read the calendar, and get upset when they show up on a Sunday morning, and find the range closed for a scheduled event. Which is pretty much every 2nd and 3rd Sunday, year-round. Once, I had a Member complain to me about the rifle range (and I'm the Trap chairman! [laugh]) schedule not being up to date on the website. "You're an IT guy, right? Why don't you volunteer to take care of that?" Crickets. [laugh]
 
After materials, ammo, and feeding everyone, it's not phat stax.
Click to expand...

There is also the question of the overhead. Building maintenance, unplugging shitters, light, heat, AC, cleaning, etc. is not free. Of course, the usual argument is "you were going to pay that anyway" - yeah, but if the club is going to pay that "anyway" it should reap the economic benefits of activities that use the facility.
 
Rob Boudrie said:
There is also the question of the overhead. Building maintenance, unplugging shitters, light, heat, AC, cleaning, etc. is not free. Of course, the usual argument is "you were going to pay that anyway" - yeah, but if the club is going to pay that "anyway" it should reap the economic benefits of activities that use the facility.
Click to expand...


Funny how many good ideas people have for other people to exercise. They mostly shrink when offered the responsibility.
 
MisterHappy said:
Are you for or against letting instructors use the Club facilities for their own classes? Not sure from your post....
Click to expand...

Well I didn't express an opinion either way. The point is other people always seem to know what someone else should do with their own time, money, or assets.

Clubs should do as they believe is prudent and in their best interests.

Frequently people with "great ideas" aren't willing to take on the responsibility to enact them.
 
Gotcha.

I get, "We should [insert project here]," at the Club, often.

"Great. You're in charge. Keep your receipts!" Mostly, it does not happen. That said, we have a good bunch of Members that are part of the 5% of the membership that makes the Club work. Officers, Committee Members, BoD, and people with Time and Skills that step up.
 
MisterHappy said:
Gotcha.

I get, "We should [insert project here]," at the Club, often.

"Great. You're in charge. Keep your receipts!" Mostly, it does not happen. That said, we have a good bunch of Members that are part of the 5% of the membership that makes the Club work. Officers, Committee Members, BoD, and people with Time and Skills that step up.
Click to expand...


Over the years I have observed clearly informing the membership as a whole just how few people are making things work often (but certainly not even a majority of the time) encourages others to get involved. Most folks don't believe how few people step up and how much depends on so few.
 

Similar threads

Going to reapply for my FID/LTC back after it being revoked about 10 years ago.
Replies
17
Views
424
AMV
A
LTC Renewal Received in Natick
Replies
0
Views
155
RockStar
R
LTC references
2
Replies
31
Views
1K
paul73
paul73
LTC Received
Replies
21
Views
830
G4Y4HK
G
FFL Refuses Transfer Because Address on LTC not matching DL address
4 5 6
Replies
159
Views
4K
EddieCoyle
EddieCoyle
Back
Top Bottom