DickWanner
Banned
Would you rather we lie to you? We're just telling you what the laws are and what they mean.
Last edited:
-
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.
What is the legality of a "Target and Hunting" LTC-A?
- Thread starter Lank
- Start date
Would you rather we lie to you? We're just telling you what the laws are and what they mean.
H 2259 is dead until next year. It'll need to be re-filed and hope for more guts in the Jt. Comm for Public Safety to tell MCOPA to shove off and move the bill off the dime.
You had to be there in 1998 to appreciate the screw job and corrupt leadership.
They can and they do. When I took my LTC class in Mass. the instructor told us about his student who'd been issued an LTC that was marked "valid for carry between 2 and 3 a.m." He'd been denied the LTC before, that's what he got when he appealed the denial in court and the judge ordered a license to be issued. The restriction was obviously the chief tossing the LTC holder "the Hawaiian good luck sign" for standing up to him. I know of other similar restrictions as well.
In Mass., the chief can restrict an LTC to anything they want, and they can and do restrict your activity on private property with those licenses. The restriction literally means whatever the chief says it means. This is why if you have a restricted LTC I'd suggest getting something in writing from the PD explaining what yours in particular mean, so that you'll have at least some shred of help on your side if you ever get in trouble for violating them.
Not apathy. You posted a meandering series of questions that get asked on a daily basis here, the responses are mechanical at this point. If your thread were focused you'd get more intensity, no doubt.
Check out the links in my signature line (at the bottom of my posts), specifically the one related to DQ's for a Mass. LTC, I touched on that topic there. The short answer is that the hunting laws apply to you even if you've never hunted before in your life, and with no binding case law on the subject, if you violate them, your guess is as good as mine as to what will happen.
I was all about getting H2259 passed a few months ago, before the recent Supreme Court case, and I'm not even a Mass. resident. I wrote letters, made phone calls and rounded up others to get involved. Now I think it'll do more harm than good with the things that it sacrifices to get shall issue LTC's, because compromise is no longer neccessary on most of the subjects that bill touches on.
Granted, that's easy for me to say since I live in a free state under different laws, but as a fairly objective observer, I think that with the recent pro-RKBA ruling the common good will be served much better by delaying gratification, rather than a fast food drive through solution to fixing the MGL's. I've read the entire text of H2259, and the tempting morsels that it offers (no LTC restrictions, shall issue, no discretionary revocations, longer terms for non-res. LTC's, etc.) were the only hope you guys in Mass. had for getting some of those things changed before that ruling came down. Now the caveats aren't as easy to gloss over...a division of MSP set up to combat firearms trafficking (read between the lines, essentially they would harass FFL's and legal gun buyers), a tightening of the noose around machine gun owners, increasing penalties for laws that already aren't being enforced...those are just the consequences that are easier to see.
It may not be fun for you to read this, but McDonald v. Chicago didn't put an end to the legal fight for Mass. gun owners, it opened the door for a bigger, longer fight. It will mean time, money and agony for the "test cases" involved, but it will be worth it in the long run. The Mass. gun laws are broken at every level; how can we expect the groups in charge of licensing to toe the line for H2259 when they don't even uphold the things that they are required to do by law right now? The LTC restrictions that vex you are just a sympton of the greater problem in Mass.
I agree with GSG.
It's time now to take the Summer and Fall to re-craft a new bill that takes Heller/McDonald into consideration and file that at the end of the year (there is a narrow window for timely filing bills).
Then we crank up the heat on the newly elected officials to do the right thing. Regrettably, many run unopposed and will still give us trouble with a "you can't touch me attitude"!
ETA: It will also be interesting to see what spin our enemies (MCOPA) come up with in their next few monthly publications.![[thinking]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/010.gif "Thinking [thinking]")
It's time now to take the Summer and Fall to re-craft a new bill that takes Heller/McDonald into consideration and file that at the end of the year (there is a narrow window for timely filing bills).
Then we crank up the heat on the newly elected officials to do the right thing. Regrettably, many run unopposed and will still give us trouble with a "you can't touch me attitude"!
ETA: It will also be interesting to see what spin our enemies (MCOPA) come up with in their next few monthly publications.
Len, I think the first thing to do is to bring the MCOPA into our camp, rather than make enemies out of someone who isn't necessarily that. Look at the NRA and their law enforcement competitions. We need to build confidence and trust in both directions. I really think there is room for education and a change in ways.
Edit to add:
This "recraft a new bill..." is how we ended up with 2259, which basically was treading water all year, and is now floundering, with 4102 standing on its shoulders, almost drowning it. While I appreciate and agree with 2259, I think we should simultaneously be submitting smaller bills and GET THEM PASSED DURING THE YEAR, and not put all our eggs in one basket hoping it happens at year-end.
Edit to add:
This "recraft a new bill..." is how we ended up with 2259, which basically was treading water all year, and is now floundering, with 4102 standing on its shoulders, almost drowning it. While I appreciate and agree with 2259, I think we should simultaneously be submitting smaller bills and GET THEM PASSED DURING THE YEAR, and not put all our eggs in one basket hoping it happens at year-end.
Last edited:
Apparently you missed the whole letter writing thread etc that went on here. There were at least a dozen of us, or more, that fired off a metric ton of letters and phone calls to various legislators in support of H2259. A fair number of people here were pretty relentless about it, too.
If you detect any "lack of enthusiasm" it's because in MA RKBA issues are a pretty big
uphill battle. It starts with the fact that licensed gun owners, even if they all
voted correctly in MA, don't create enough of a political threat to destroy an
election, and it gets worse from there. The numbers are clearly against us. The only power we have is by harnessing the power of the few individuals in government that agree with us- and taking whatever judicial routes possible to recover rights or at least survive. Making forward progress in MA is extraordinarily difficult because of this. The recent supreme court decision will help but there are still lots of uphill
battles ahead. Even then the best MA residents can hope for is going to be a partial
restoration of rights- but that end game will be far better than what we have now,
which is 110% tyranny.
A bunch of prominent antis had high government posts and basically rammed
anti gun legislation in place. This problem you speak of, however, existed long
before 1998. I don't think that the licensing system in MA was ever non discretionary for anything other than an FID, which is almost worthless.
-Mike
There's plenty of intensity, but there is also plenty of political reality. We don't have the votes to get it passed. Deval is very likely to get his one-gun-a-month bill passed, but we've got zero chance of getting 2259 passed.
Lank
NES Member
Not good enough. I work in Boston, and have participated and commented on some of the sausage grinding that results in these laws becoming nightmares. Confront, question, and never give up. I'm not sure my earlier post made it, however I am willing to fight for the privalege (e.g right) I have yet to be granted. Anyway, thanks all for your time. My questions may be naive, meandering or what have you. They will continue, until justice prevails. Sleep well.
ETA: It will also be interesting to see what spin our enemies (MCOPA) come up with in their next few monthly publications.
Yeah, I thought the recent "Stop playing with LTC's so much before H2259 ruins it for all of us" was cute.
I'm a firm believer that in general street cops in Mass. are pro-legal gun ownership, or at least as indifferent as other average everyday Americans. The issue is that police chiefs are politicians at heart, and MCOPA has a history of fighting to hold onto their power in several areas. When a chief is handed power over LTC's, it's difficult to try to get them to give it up, even if they're reasonable and "only using their power for the good."
It'd be nice if we could get MCOPA on our side, but their actions show that the organizations stance is 180 degrees opposite of ours. That doesn't mean that every member chief thinks that way, just like how various political parties have members with differing views, but as a whole, they're no friend to gun owners.
This, especially when many of the Chiefs in MA which are functionary types and not people who moved up into the job from being part of the rank and file.
Another problem that is ignored is the fact that this authority also can be manipulated
by people further up the food chain. I have no doubt there are some towns in MA
where the "red" comes from higher up.... eg, places like Brookline, Lowell, Lawrence,
etc.... meaning that even if a hypothetical chief in one of those towns wanted to be
pro RKBA, they couldn't because of "town politics". This is why those towns never
roll green, they always stay red, even despite periodically getting a new Chief.
Get rid of the discretionary issue, and then these people can no longer manipulate the
chiefs as a proxy for restriction of rights.
-Mike
GSG is right. Rank & file cops are mostly indifferent or have no problem with legal gun ownership.
MCOPA on the other hand is run by politicians whose mission in life is "control" (of everything) . . . as a group they are the Brady Bunch with scrambled eggs!!
MCOPA never will poll the rank & file on any issue, not gonna happen.
Mike is right that many chiefs take their marching orders from "on high" and do as they are told by the mayor, town manager, selectmen, etc. "or else". They aren't about to lose their jobs/career over LTC issues. Therefore the mess in MA is what it is.
To change policies in Carver it took electing some pro-gun selectmen who then forced the chief to resign.
To change policies in Quincy it took electing a pro-gun mayor who then forced the chief to retire early.
MCOPA on the other hand is run by politicians whose mission in life is "control" (of everything) . . . as a group they are the Brady Bunch with scrambled eggs!!
MCOPA never will poll the rank & file on any issue, not gonna happen.
Mike is right that many chiefs take their marching orders from "on high" and do as they are told by the mayor, town manager, selectmen, etc. "or else". They aren't about to lose their jobs/career over LTC issues. Therefore the mess in MA is what it is.
To change policies in Carver it took electing some pro-gun selectmen who then forced the chief to resign.
To change policies in Quincy it took electing a pro-gun mayor who then forced the chief to retire early.
People also have lives to lead and can't spend every free hour on this subject. They have jobs,families and would presumably like to go shooting occasionally.
I've spent a fair bit of time on pro RKBA activities as have many others on this board. When you have a lot more than 52 posts you can come back and say what is and isn't enough.
Last edited:
"At least a dozen of us" IS quite a bit of the problem. In fact, I'd say "Fudds" are a big problem. Figuring out how to get them more involved is a step towards a solution.
See my previous statement above.
GSG is right. Rank & file cops are mostly indifferent or have no problem with legal gun ownership.
MCOPA on the other hand is run by politicians whose mission in life is "control" (of everything) . . . as a group they are the Brady Bunch with scrambled eggs!!
MCOPA never will poll the rank & file on any issue, not gonna happen.
Mike is right that many chiefs take their marching orders from "on high" and do as they are told by the mayor, town manager, selectmen, etc. "or else". They aren't about to lose their jobs/career over LTC issues. Therefore the mess in MA is what it is.
To change policies in Carver it took electing some pro-gun selectmen who then forced the chief to resign.
To change policies in Quincy it took electing a pro-gun mayor who then forced the chief to retire early.
"All politics is local!"
Last edited:
Lank
NES Member
Until there is between 1-3K RKBA activists on the lawn of the State house, not enough has been done.
Dont tell me what I can or cannot say or post. I am abiding by the rules of these boards, so save it.
BTW- I work 6 days a week and am wrapping up an MS. I still have a little time every other sunday to go shooting.
Finally, you are under no obligation to read, participate or respond to my posts.
There's 53. (That's 58, no 59)
Dont tell me what I can or cannot say or post. I am abiding by the rules of these boards, so save it.
BTW- I work 6 days a week and am wrapping up an MS. I still have a little time every other sunday to go shooting.
Finally, you are under no obligation to read, participate or respond to my posts.
There's 53. (That's 58, no 59)
Last edited:
The issue is that they don't have to listen or even pay attention. Get 1,000-3,000 people to appeal license denials/restrictions in court and a bunch of towns are going to face bankruptcy paying all those lawyers to defend the behavior of local police chiefs. Ultimately begging them to change the laws isn't working in Mass., people need to get out there and risk something to fight.
ETA I mean fight this in court, not in the PD lobby.
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
Last edited:
In 1999 we had 5K people show up on Boston Commons and then march around the state house, plus attempt to meet with the chicken-shit governor. The media ignored us (I was there), my state rep asked me "what's going on" (he had no idea about the rally), and nothing changed!
They ignore us.
They glad-handed our people at the gun hearings, on H. 2259, etc. They tell you that they agree with you and things need to change . . . then they get a visit in the back room by a lobbyist and proceed to ignore our requests for change.
Since most run unopposed, threats of voting them out are hollow and a joke.
Lank
NES Member
Sorry to hear this; it must have been frustrating and humiliating.
I think the current political climate could be helpful for us. Nationwide, many of us are fighting against establishment politicians. If we keep the pressure alive, and remind our ELECTED officials that they serve at our discretion, perhaps enough of them will listen.
Does anyone know of what a private citizens rights are, if any, to review the minutes of committee meetings?
Frustrating doesn't begin to explain it!
![[angry]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/008.gif "Angry [angry]")
I've never seen anyone taking minutes of the committee hearings. I would expect that if they did, they would have to be made available as a public record . . . which might explain why they don't record minutes!
![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
I think they mean using the handgun or dog to hunt the deer. I really can't see someone getting into trouble for carrying in the woods or walking their dog.
Check out the top thread in my signature line about Mass. LTC DQ's. There's no case law on the subject that I've been able to find, so collectively we have no idea who can be charged and convicted for that.
Lank
NES Member
I can see an arrest becoming reality for walking your dog in the woods. We are in Ma after all.
Still no word from my representative about reviewing written testimony. Stay tuned.
That's 61 posts.
Still no word from my representative about reviewing written testimony. Stay tuned.
That's 61 posts.
Similar threads
