Guide to gun rights in your Massachusetts town

Status
Not open for further replies.
Coyote33 said:
Charge YOU, or the data entry clerk? Wait, isn't perjury when you lie to a jury?
Click to expand...

Not necessarily, lying to an officer of the law and / or on an official document can be considered perjury. If you don't have the original paper application that you filled out the "clerk" (usually a uniformed cop) could just say that he entered the info that you told him and you'd have no proof otherwise.
 
Innocent until PROVEN guilty!

This is now just a he said/she said.

I really doubt this is anything to think about, let alone worry about; and I doubt it has ever happened nor will it happen.
 
Coyote33 said:
Wait, isn't perjury when you lie to a jury?
Click to expand...
People have been charged with perjury for lying on their LTC application. I believe the banned barrister has defended one such case.

Coyote33 said:
Innocent until PROVEN guilty!

This is now just a he said/she said.
Click to expand...
Yes. And who do you think the jury will believe? You? Or Officer Friendly?
 
Coyote33 said:
Innocent until PROVEN guilty!

This is now just a he said/she said.

I really doubt this is anything to think about, let alone worry about; and I doubt it has ever happened nor will it happen.
Click to expand...

That's really quite naive.
 
drumenigma said:
I had my friend send them an e-mail about it. He recently joined GOAL and the NRA. Hopefully they can provide some relief to the situation.

Here is a link to their requirements http://town.freetown.ma.us/forms/police_firearmmatrixapplicationrequirements.pdf

Not only are they looking for two reference letters but they need to be notarized. This could add an additional cost to the process since notaries are not generally free. Also they require a membership to a gun club but the club he wants to join won't let him join unless he has his license.
Click to expand...
What a quandry. I wonder how an Ezelle argument would fare here (answer: probably not so well in this state.)
 
OfficerObie59 said:
What a quandry. I wonder how an Ezelle argument would fare here (answer: probably not so well in this state.)
Click to expand...

Or you can wait for suitability to die through Hightower/TBD and then when a PD adds the requirement, they don't have an authority for the requirement or the denial if you tell them the to pound sand on the requirement.

PS: Thats a much cleaner case than doing it today.
 
Last edited:
jasons said:
Not necessarily, lying to an officer of the law and / or on an official document can be considered perjury. If you don't have the original paper application that you filled out the "clerk" (usually a uniformed cop) could just say that he entered the info that you told him and you'd have no proof otherwise.
Click to expand...

Perjury is generally when you like under oath (verbal or written). There are numerous other circumstances in which unsworn testimony can result in charges of lying to a law enforcement officer, but not perjury charges. It's become fairly common in terrorism cases to charge people they can't get with an actual crime (do that pesky "proof" and "evidence" thing) with lying to a federal officer.

Although not relevant to the LTC application process, it is very hard to charge someone who exercises their right to remain silent - as both Billy Bulger can answer in a positive way, and Martha Stewart can answer in a less positive manner.
 
Update on Merrimac MA: My wife and I went to the PD to apply for our licenses today and the licensing officer informed us that currently they are only issuing LTC-B licenses, following the previous chief's policy. However, come the first of the year the new chief's policy will take effect and they will be issuing LTC-A licenses. He suggested we wait, so we shook hands and said "see you next year" LOL. Needless to say we're anxiously awaiting 2012 as it appears Merrimac is going from Red to Green!
 
Gastrok said:
Update on Merrimac MA: My wife and I went to the PD to apply for our licenses today and the licensing officer informed us that currently they are only issuing LTC-B licenses, following the previous chief's policy. However, come the first of the year the new chief's policy will take effect and they will be issuing LTC-A licenses. He suggested we wait, so we shook hands and said "see you next year" LOL. Needless to say we're anxiously awaiting 2012 as it appears Merrimac is going from Red to Green!
Click to expand...

Did the licensing officer say they would give out ALP? That situation there, from what you said, suggests going from Black (LTC-B) to either Red or Green (depending on which restrictions on the LTC-A).
 
bostonasphalt2 said:
Did the licensing officer say they would give out ALP? That situation there, from what you said, suggests going from Black (LTC-B) to either Red or Green (depending on which restrictions on the LTC-A).
Click to expand...

He didn't specify, nor was I savvy enough to ask. I don't yet fully understand the nuances between the LTC-A, and ALP, but I think I'm starting to get it now. What particular restriction might be applied to an LTC-A? Sorry, I'm a noob here and I've only been shooting for about 6 weeks.

BTW - playing much bass lately? I remember you from the Warwick forum! :-)
 
Gastrok said:
He didn't specify, nor was I savvy enough to ask. I don't yet fully understand the nuances between the LTC-A, and ALP, but I think I'm starting to get it now. What particular restriction might be applied to an LTC-A? Sorry, I'm a noob here and I've only been shooting for about 6 weeks.

BTW - playing much bass lately? I remember you from the Warwick forum! :-)
Click to expand...
The correct distinction is between an LTC/A issued with restrictions or one issued "Restrictions: None". The latter allows you to carry a concealed handgun on a "public way". The LTC is always issued for All Lawful Purposes
for all lawful purposes, subject to such restrictions relative to the possession, use or carrying of firearms as the licensing authority deems proper
Click to expand...
 
You may also want to add that Littleton is not only ALP, but Green Card friendly.

Maybe we can add a new code for that?
 
The chief imposes the restrictions. Also, those from Peabody know the old licensing officer was a nightmare to deal with. I called the other guy every week for months and never got a return call. Dozens of messages, emails, and letters and nothing from him. Detective Crane called me the day I submitted my application.
 
loki32687 said:
The chief imposes the restrictions. Also, those from Peabody know the old licensing officer was a nightmare to deal with. I called the other guy every week for months and never got a return call. Dozens of messages, emails, and letters and nothing from him. Detective Crane called me the day I submitted my application.
Click to expand...

That is good news.
 
I heard a rumor that Framingham has recently changed their issuing policy and is now handing out restricted sporting LTC's. Has anyone else heard or experienced this?
 
The LTC is always issued for All Lawful Purposes
Click to expand...

Back in the old days, the LTC nomenclature was "Reason for issuance", and "All lawful purposes" was the phrase commonly used to designate an unrestricted LTC. Current LTCs bear the designation "Restriction"(*). For a short period of time, LTCs were issued "Restriction: All lawful purposes", but MIRCS was updated for a more grammatically correct "Restriction: none".

So, when someone refers an "All lawful purposes" LTC, they are generally referring to an unrestricted LTC. Although LTCs are issued for lawful purposes, it is not really accurate to say that they are all issued for "all lawful purposes", as many are restricted to preclude defensive carry.

* - This is because GOAL made an issue about "what does reason mean" .... as if the state would respond with "You are right, it's just an administrative reason, not a restriction". Nope, the state responded with "We are clarifying it and changing the wording to Restriction so there can be no doubt what it means".
 
Way back in the day, I remember Target and Hunting or Protection of Life and Property as the reasons for issuance. With of course Life and Prop being the concealed carry license.
 
It appears with Bob Barker becoming Chief things have changed for the better. Badtangle says he had no problem getting an Class A and I know another kid (22ish) that got his Class A last week. The person that handles the licensing is Officer Dottie Tobin. Walk in on Monday, Wednesday or Thursday 7:30 to 2:30. I was told to call first (978) 948-7644. I'm trying to get my parents in to apply by Christmas. I don't live in Rowley but I've worked there for thirty years.
I think Rowley may go from Black to Green [banana]


TLB said:
Anybody have updated information for Rowley with the new chief? I know they were B-ramming before under the old one. Anybody heard of first-timer getting ALP in Rowley recently?

I do own a business, clean record, middle-aged, lived in town for some time.

Any help appreciated. Have been very busy since I joined the forum, so I have not pursued information recently.

Also, curious if they typically give an ALP later after you don't shoot up the town with your Class B?

I'm in no rush, really. But, I am determined. Willing to consider an attorney if that would help.

Thanks,
TLB
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Legislative push starts to repeal Massachusetts gun law
Replies
5
Views
320
chuckules
chuckules
Easton LTC ? 2A friendly?
Replies
2
Views
176
appraiser
appraiser
Is it time For a Shots Fired in My Town thread?
Replies
26
Views
655
namedpipes
namedpipes
What Would Happen If A Civilian Decided To Walk Around Town In Full SWAT Combat Gear??? (No Guns)
Replies
26
Views
558
jkelly1229
J
Kamala Harris Bans Virtual Guns In Her Own ‘Freedom Town’ Fortnite Game
Replies
10
Views
400
not new guy
N
Back
Top Bottom