Guide To Gun Rights in your MA Town - 2020 + Edition

steveg241 said:
Experience for Arlington, MA for first time LTC: 65 days from interview, 82 days from the LTC class, no restrictions

Took LTC class on 4/1/2022
Turned in paperwork on 4/4/2022
Interview on 4/21/2022
Called on 6/2/2022 and found I was approved, waiting for license to be printed
License printed on 6/5/2022
License arrived at home via mail on 6/25/2022

Looks like I was approved in 40 days but the card wasn’t printed until day 45 then sat on someone’s desk before it got me. Since it’s a state license I’m not sure why it has to go to local PD which adds a bunch of time. Got no restrictions first time so that goes well in this town.
Click to expand...
The local PD is the issuing authority, When it comes from the FRB, it gets activated by the PD and the PD has the option of making you pick-up and sign for it.
 
Ok, I have a question and this seems as good a thread as any to put it in. I'm helping a couple folks prep their applications for Cambridge.

First, thanks @Len-2A Training, for linking the official MA application* the other day. It meant I didn't have to search for it. Now, looking on the Cambridge PD site, I find their page for the application process**. That page includes a link*** to the "CAMBRIDGE POLICE DEPARTMENT APPLICATION FOR LICENSE TO CARRY/FIREARMS ID CARD."

So my question - even disregarding Bruen, I thought the cities weren't supposed to use their own applications any more. Before I tell them to just use the (longer) MA form, does anybody have any experience to share?

* https://www.mass.gov/doc/resident-firearms-license-application/download
** https://www.cambridgema.gov/iwantto/applyforalicensetocarryfidcard
***https://www.cambridgema.gov/~/media/Files/policedepartment/Forms/ltcfidbopformtemplate.pdf
 
Mesatchornug said:
Ok, I have a question and this seems as good a thread as any to put it in. I'm helping a couple folks prep their applications for Cambridge.

First, thanks @Len-2A Training, for linking the official MA application* the other day. It meant I didn't have to search for it. Now, looking on the Cambridge PD site, I find their page for the application process**. That page includes a link*** to the "CAMBRIDGE POLICE DEPARTMENT APPLICATION FOR LICENSE TO CARRY/FIREARMS ID CARD."

So my question - even disregarding Bruen, I thought the cities weren't supposed to use their own applications any more. Before I tell them to just use the (longer) MA form, does anybody have any experience to share?

* https://www.mass.gov/doc/resident-firearms-license-application/download
** https://www.cambridgema.gov/iwantto/applyforalicensetocarryfidcard
***https://www.cambridgema.gov/~/media/Files/policedepartment/Forms/ltcfidbopformtemplate.pdf
Click to expand...
My reading is that you complete both. I think the shorter Cambridge form is just so they can track your official application:

Applicants are encouraged to complete the Cambridge Police Application for License to Carry/Firearms ID Card and the Massachusetts Resident LTC/FID/Machine Gun Application form online. Once completed, these forms may be emailed to the Records Unit. Blank copies of these forms are available at the police station for those unable to complete and submit the forms online.
Click to expand...

Note the and.
 
Sounds like these pending Watertown licenses might be an early test of Bruen in MA.

If they come back unrestricted, well and good.

If they come back restricted, just thumb your nose and carry anyway. Dare them to enforce the restriction, and in so doing set the anti CoP against the anti AG and watch what happens.
 
Picton said:
Sounds like these pending Watertown licenses might be an early test of Bruen in MA.

If they come back unrestricted, well and good.

If they come back restricted, just thumb your nose and carry anyway. Dare them to enforce the restriction, and in so doing set the anti CoP against the anti AG and watch what happens.
Click to expand...
Or contact Comm2A for some real help, assuming the plaintiff is sympathetic (no dirt that can be used for character assassination by the state)
 
Picton said:
Sounds like these pending Watertown licenses might be an early test of Bruen in MA.

If they come back unrestricted, well and good.

If they come back restricted, just thumb your nose and carry anyway. Dare them to enforce the restriction, and in so doing set the anti CoP against the anti AG and watch what happens.
Click to expand...

Of course mind you it might be an exceptionally long time.... whens the last time you ever heard of someone actually clipped for violating a restriction? 🤣
 
drgrant said:
Of course mind you it might be an exceptionally long time.... whens the last time you ever heard of someone actually clipped for violating a restriction? 🤣
Click to expand...

Oh, I don't think the Watertownies would actually enforce their restrictions. I think they'll obey Maura. So no, I don't think we'll ever find that out.

The thing I'm really curious about is whether they're still imposing the restrictions in the first place.
 
Picton said:
Oh, I don't think the Watertownies would actually enforce their restrictions. I think they'll obey Maura. So no, I don't think we'll ever find that out.
Click to expand...

I dont think it has anything to do with Maura but the fact that unlikely sequences of events have to happen before anyone's restriction becomes an issue with a LEO on the side of the
road. :) think about the hoops someone has to go through or how stupid they have to be to have a roadside convo with a LEO about your LTC restrictions.

Picton said:
The thing I'm really curious about is whether they're still imposing the restrictions in the first place.
Click to expand...

If what @Rob Boudrie says is correct, they're not going to even be physically able to do it once EOPS changes the system around. Restriction will be just "gone" in MIRCS, So there's that.
 
drgrant said:
I dont think it has anything to do with Maura but the fact that unlikely sequences of events have to happen before anyone's restriction becomes an issue with a LEO on the side of the
road. :) think about the hoops someone has to go through or how stupid they have to be to have a roadside convo with a LEO about your LTC restrictions.



If what @Rob Boudrie says is correct, they're not going to even be physically able to do it once EOPS changes the system around. Restriction will be just "gone" in MIRCS, So there's that.
Click to expand...
I was discussing what the SHOULD do, not what they WILL do. But, the FRB has shown the capability to modify MIRCS to accommodate changes in law.
 
Regarding the
drgrant said:
I dont think it has anything to do with Maura but the fact that unlikely sequences of events have to happen before anyone's restriction becomes an issue with a LEO on the side of the
road. :) think about the hoops someone has to go through or how stupid they have to be to have a roadside convo with a LEO about your LTC restrictions.



If what @Rob Boudrie says is correct, they're not going to even be physically able to do it once EOPS changes the system around. Restriction will be just "gone" in MIRCS, So there's that.
Click to expand...
Regarding Bruen, this was sent out to the all the licensing authorities in Massachusetts


States “if not a prohibited or unsuitable person an unrestricted LTC MUST BE ISSUED”


 
Picton said:
Oh, I don't think the Watertownies would actually enforce their restrictions. I think they'll obey Maura. So no, I don't think we'll ever find that out.

The thing I'm really curious about is whether they're still imposing the restrictions in the first place.
Click to expand...
I have a friend who is a Watertown resident, I just trained him on 7/2 and issued a certificate today. He will be going in to deliver his application to Watertown PD, Im curios as to what they will do. I advised him to take a printed copy of


In case they want to issue a restricted license, he can show this and see if they have a change of heart.
 
Hugh_Jazz said:
this just in boys
Click to expand...
FRB will not print a license with restrictions.
However it is up to each town to do what it likes with currently restricted licenses.
Looks like they know they are forced to remove restrictions but are letting shitty towns absorb the liability for the infringements.

Request away folks - do it in a reportable manner AND demand, not ask, for an unrestricted license within a reasonable time frame. Reasonable would be an immediate signed written response stating your restrictions are removed along with receiving a new card within 30 days.
Your demand must include immediate no restrictions with a reprinted license to follow - the Mass SJC has made it clear that you can't leave anything out or they will allow the police to stall forever.
 
pastera said:
FRB will not print a license with restrictions.
However it is up to each town to do what it likes with currently restricted licenses.
Looks like they know they are forced to remove restrictions but are letting shitty towns absorb the liability for the infringements.

Request away folks - do it in a reportable manner AND demand, not ask, for an unrestricted license within a reasonable time frame. Reasonable would be an immediate signed written response stating your restrictions are removed along with receiving a new card within 30 days.
Your demand must include immediate no restrictions with a reprinted license to follow - the Mass SJC has made it clear that you can't leave anything out or they will allow the police to stall forever.
Click to expand...
I heard some counties in upstate NY are just automatically converting licenses. We’ll see what they do here
 
The problem is that the law requiring an LTC holder to observe their license’s restrictions is still on the books. Until that law is either directly struck down by SCOTUS or the legislature changes it, it is still enforceable. The AG can say that they will not enforce it, but that doesn’t mean any other DA or cop could not go ahead and hassle someone for it if they wanted to. They law needs to be corrected ASAP.
 
cathouse01 said:
The problem is that the law requiring an LTC holder to observe their license’s restrictions is still on the books. Until that law is either directly struck down by SCOTUS or the legislature changes it, it is still enforceable. The AG can say that they will not enforce it, but that doesn’t mean any other DA or cop could not go ahead and hassle someone for it if they wanted to. They law needs to be corrected ASAP.
Click to expand...
You need to be careful with the "law changed quick" stuff. Once you open the can, the legislature can toss in all sorts of NY style stuff. Fortunately, MA does not have a NY style tradition of taking "emergency measures" to pass anti-gun laws without debate or feedback. GOAL will no doubt be working carefully with the legislature to avoid damage to the extent possible.

For example, last I checked only 8% of LTCs were restricted. Unlike NYC and NJ, there is not going to be a huge flood of hundreds of thousands of new gun owners carrying, and if the legislature understands this, will be less likely to engage in knee jerk, feel good, accomplish nothing reactions.

This must be pursued in a careful, well though out manner in order to avoid unintended consequences.
 
Last edited:
pastera said:
FRB will not print a license with restrictions.
However it is up to each town to do what it likes with currently restricted licenses.
Click to expand...
Feels like when LTC-Bs went away. Old ones were still active until expiry but even hard towns were forced to issue only LTC-As going forward.

Hopefully a useful metric for GOAL and Comm2A is if they can show no uptick in crime/danger to public associated with the more restrictive LTC-Bs going away and issuing more permissive As.
 
Rob Boudrie said:
You need to be careful with the "law changed quick" stuff. Once you open the can, the legislature can toss in all sorts of NY style stuff. Fortunately, MA does not have a NY style tradition of taking "emergency measures" to pass anti-gun laws without debate or feedback. GOAL will no doubt be working carefully with the legislature to avoid damage to the extent possible.

For example, last I checked only 8% of LTCs were restricted. Unlike NYC and NJ, there is not going to be a huge flood of hundreds of thousands of new gun owners carrying, and if the legislature understands this, will be less likely to engage in knee jerk, feel good, accomplish nothing reactions.

This must be pursued in a careful, well though out manner in order to avoid unintended consequences.
Click to expand...
You’re absolutely right. The changes do have to balance speed with getting it right. For a moment I forgot where I was. The MA legislature will never move quickly to just fix a law that is inconveniencing gun owners, it’s just not in their makeup. They will do anything they can to make it as difficult as possible on folks who want to have some responsibility for their own self defense. In that respect, maybe those with restrictions will need to start forgetting their LTC in the the laundry they sent out to the dry cleaners.

In the case of a lost or stolen firearm license issued pursuant to the provisions of M.G.L. c 140, §§ 129B, 131, 131F or 131H, the licensing authority shall issue a new license at no cost to the license holder. A person seeking a license under 501 CMR 9.00 must have an active and valid license and must have reported such license lost or stolen to the Criminal History Systems Board and to the local issuing licensing authority prior to seeking a new license. In connection with an application for a new license to replace the lost or stolen license, the licensing authority shall confirm the applicant's identity and update its files as the licensing authority deems necessary prior to issuing a new license. The licensing authority, in consultation with the Criminal History Systems Board, shall issue a new license with a term coterminous with the original license period.
501 CMR 9.02
501 Mass. Reg. 9.02
Click to expand...
 
cathouse01 said:
You’re absolutely right. The changes do have to balance speed with getting it right. For a moment I forgot where I was. The MA legislature will never move quickly to just fix a law that is inconveniencing gun owners, it’s just not in their makeup. They will do anything they can to make it as difficult as possible on folks who want to have some responsibility for their own self defense. In that respect, maybe those with restrictions will need to start forgetting their LTC in the the laundry they sent out to the dry cleaners.
Click to expand...
That's why any proposed law needs to start the title with "An act to further regulate ......"

I just hope the system is not distracted with "on behalf of" bills.
 
Glockman357 said:
They are all green now. No more restrictions in Mass
Click to expand...
They are effectively all green now.

Going forward the distinction will be between towns that require only the most basic info filled out, and those that still require reference letters or other burdens.

There are a lot of situations where reference letters can become an undue burden for people, especially in a state where you might not know many (or any) people who are comfortable with the idea of owning firearms.
 
P51MA said:
They are effectively all green now.

Going forward the distinction will be between towns that require only the most basic info filled out, and those that still require reference letters or other burdens.

There are a lot of situations where reference letters can become an undue burden for people, especially in a state where you might not know many (or any) people who are comfortable with the idea of owning firearms.
Click to expand...

I see what you're saying, but it's unclear to me how denying an LTC based on reference letters can survive scrutiny.

The license must be issued unless there's a statutory reason not to issue it. There can't be any discretion on the part of the civil "servants" who do the interviews. To me, that means that an LO who denies your license because you didn't bother turning in "required" (by the TOWN, not by the statute) letters of reference should be taken straight to court, and should lose based on any reading of Bruen. Because of what possible value can those letters be, other than to "assist" the LO in making a SUBJECTIVE judgment?

I can see why an applicant would just do the letters instead of putting up with that hassle. But the letters are not really required, under the law.
 
Picton said:
To me, that means that an LO who denies your license because you didn't bother turning in "required" (by the TOWN, not by the statute) letters of reference should be taken straight to court, and should lose based on any reading of Bruen.
Click to expand...
You underestimate the bureaucracy. Without reference letters attached the town simply won't take the application from you so there won't be a denial issued that you can sue over.
 
Last edited:
My understanding is that all new ltcs must come through MIRCS as unrestricted, any pending applications will be returned to the licensing authority for the removal of the restrictions or the FRB won’t print the ltc.

Existing LTC with any restriction MAY stay the same or MAY have the restrictions removed, at the discretion of the licensing authority. If the licensing authority agrees to remove restrictions the frb will ptint new ltc without restrictions. If the licensing authority doesn’t want to change any restrictions the ltc will remain restricted until renewal.

My thought is that IF you lost your LTC, report loss and you will get a replacement, if the fbr only prints unrestricted…any restricted ltc printing should get bounced back until changed to unrestricted.
 
Picton said:
I see what you're saying, but it's unclear to me how denying an LTC based on reference letters can survive scrutiny.

The license must be issued unless there's a statutory reason not to issue it. There can't be any discretion on the part of the civil "servants" who do the interviews. To me, that means that an LO who denies your license because you didn't bother turning in "required" (by the TOWN, not by the statute) letters of reference should be taken straight to court, and should lose based on any reading of Bruen. Because of what possible value can those letters be, other than to "assist" the LO in making a SUBJECTIVE judgment?

I can see why an applicant would just do the letters instead of putting up with that hassle. But the letters are not really required, under the law.
Click to expand...
I’ve renewed my license twice and never once had the PD called my references
 

Similar threads

Website in MA to view guns you own?
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
Tartakovsky
Tartakovsky
What Would Happen If A Civilian Decided To Walk Around Town In Full SWAT Combat Gear??? (No Guns)
Replies
26
Views
553
jkelly1229
J
1977 Colt Python legal to own/get shipped to MA from GunBroker?
Replies
24
Views
703
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
  • Poll Poll
Which gun to shoot for complete gun n00b?
2
Replies
56
Views
755
Cuz
Cuz
Is it time For a Shots Fired in My Town thread?
Replies
26
Views
652
namedpipes
namedpipes
Back
Top Bottom