LTC Restrictions

[tony1b200]

Ok, I read a ton of posts and still not clear on a few things.

I have an ltc a , with "no restrictions":

From what I read " I cannot carry in a school, federal or state building, On me while (if drinking with .08 Blood Alcohol Content (BAC). Is there anything else I am missing as I am new with this license and certainly don't want to screw up.

Thanks,

 

[TWBARRETT]

Logan Airport, Post Offices, teaching hospitals?

I meant to put a space and question mark after "teaching Hosptials" and just realised I didnt. I am interested in knowing if teaching hospitals fall under the school law

 

[Kneecapper]

Post Offices

Im pretty sure you can here and as well as a bank.

No you seem to be good with all your assumptions.

 

[bostonasphalt2]

The .08 BAC does not actually apply legally to "being intoxicated with a firearm". In fact, "intoxicated" is not defined in terms of firearms violations so in theory you can get hung up carrying a firearm with a .02 BAC

 

[TWBARRETT]

http://www.northeastshooters.com/vb...-NOT-carry-in-the-state?highlight=post+office

 

[TWtommers]

Ok, I read a ton of posts and still not clear on a few things.

I have an ltc a , with "no restrictions":

From what I read " I cannot carry in a school, federal or state building, On me while (if drinking with .08 Blood Alcohol Content (BAC). Is there anything else I am missing as I am new with this license and certainly don't want to screw up.

Thanks,

You cannot carry on school grounds. That would include the parking lot, ballfields, the college quad, as well as the building itself. It covers colleges as well. Courthouses are off limits when posted but not state buildings in general IIRC.

There is no limit on alcohol consumption. The law states that you cannot carry when you are under the influence. That means the .08 thing does not necessarily apply Not sure how much, if any case law there is on this but staying away from alcohol when carrying would be prudent.

Post Offices are more vague. The law is a little gray in that it allows licensed individuals to carry in their course of business or something to that effect. I believe there are cases pending on this which should iron it out a bit.

It's important to remember that prohibited places, that is places where it is expressly against the law to carry, are few in MA. Any private establishment can bar CCW but their only enforcement option is to kick you out if you are made, no arrest unless you don't leave ( trespassing).

As you'll hear 1,000 times here, concealed means concealed.

 

[tony1b200]

Thanks guys! Great info as always...

 

[cflshooter]

Logan Airport, Post Offices, teaching hospitals

Teaching hospitals? Really? What hospital is not a teaching hospital, at least in Boston? Is there case law on this issue?

 

[HorizontalHunter]

Teaching hospitals? Really? What hospital is not a teaching hospital, at least in Boston? Is there case law on this issue?

I never considerd that a teaching hospital would be considered a school. The thought never crossed my mind. I look forward to other replies.

Bob

 

[TWtommers]

Teaching hospitals? Really? What hospital is not a teaching hospital, at least in Boston? Is there case law on this issue?

Yeah, I don't know if anyone has ever been hassled for this. Most hospitals have a no weapon policy but it's not a prohibition. Paul Langone ( the man who killed the psych patient stabbing his doctor) was cleared legally of his actions and that was at Mass General which I'm pretty sure is a teaching hospital.

 

[el duderino]

Logan Airport, Post Offices, teaching hospitals

Does logan have a blanket policy? If im not mistaken, its only beyond the screening checkpoint, that goes for all major airports.

 

[Len-2A Training]

What hospital is not a teaching hospital, at least in Boston?

Exactly!

I never considerd that a teaching hospital would be considered a school. The thought never crossed my mind. I look forward to other replies.

Bob

The same way that if you anywhere that hires Co-Op Students from Northeastern University or Wentworth it suddenly becomes off limits! . . . NOT!!

There is a lot of MIS-INFORMATION in this thread!

Mass General which I'm pretty sure is a teaching hospital.

MGH definitely is a teaching hospital.

And my PCP (independent office) has had "Interns" from some medical schools too. I guess that I can only carry there when he has no Interns working for him, right?

 

[Kevlar]

Does logan have a blanket policy? If im not mistaken, its only beyond the screening checkpoint, that goes for all major airports.

Firearms are prohibited anywhere "on the airport"...http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/threads/77719-Logan-airport-and-guns-in-the-trunk

And also on the water near Logan...

...there is hereby created a security zone bordering the General Edward Lawrence Logan Airport that shall include the area between the mean high water line of said airport and a line measured 500 feet seaward of and parallel to said mean high water line from Wood Island Basin to the easterly end of Jeffries Cove as shown on a plan entitled “Plan of General Edward Lawrence Logan International Airport Security Zone” prepared by Massachusetts Port Authority Capital Programs Department, April 2002.

(b) No person, except authorized law enforcement or military personnel and authorized personnel of the authority, shall: (1) carry or otherwise possess a firearm, rifle, shotgun, assault weapon, ammunition, explosive device or material, or any hoax device as defined by section 102A1/2 of chapter 266, within said security zone;...

http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXIV/Chapter90/Section61

 

[TWBARRETT]

Teaching hospitals? Really? What hospital is not a teaching hospital, at least in Boston? Is there case law on this issue?

I dont make the policies.

 

[Len-2A Training]

I dont make the policies.

Please do not espouse "policies" as law!

They are two very different things, with tremendously different impact.

All the big shopping malls and chain theaters also have GFZ policies posted by some doors . . . but they have no legal weight. As for "trespass" issues, a merchant does NOT need a reason to tell you to leave, so if they do tell you to leave, just do so or you will face charges of criminal trespass. Nothing to do with firearms or any other weapons, it's the law (once you are told to leave).

 

[TWBARRETT]

Yeah, I don't know if anyone has ever been hassled for this. Most hospitals have a no weapon policy but it's not a prohibition. Paul Langone ( the man who killed the psych patient stabbing his doctor) was cleared legally of his actions and that was at Mass General which I'm pretty sure is a teaching hospital.

Yes MGH is a teaching hospital, but Paul Langone was also an SPO and saved lives that day of the shooting and was cleared. I was giving out the policies for teaching hospitals which states no firearms but Im not sure if its law. I thought teaching hospitals fall under schools?

 

[crazymjb]

So what about Umass Memorial Medical Center?

Mike

 

[Len-2A Training]

So what about Umass Memorial Medical Center?

Mike

This has been hashed out before, many times. Try a Search and read all the diverse opinions.

[The following is not addressed to anyone in particular.]

If you are paranoid about hospitals, doctors' offices, restaurants, banks, malls, <walking thru> bars <to get to restrooms>, gov't buildings, town halls, police stations, etc. just leave it home. You'll never get into trouble that way . . . although you may get dead if TSHTF while you are there, but at least you don't risk any legal action.

MGLs is very clear on where it's prohibited and it takes only a few minutes to read it. Anything else is pure poppycock (we're leaving federal facilities out of this discussion).

Best rule of thumb (beyond MGL) is anywhere where you have to walk thru a metal detector or get wanded, don't carry anything. But it may not be "law", they just won't let you in.

 

[GSG]

Teaching hospitals? Really? What hospital is not a teaching hospital, at least in Boston? Is there case law on this issue?

No, there's no caselaw on how to determine what is school grounds.

Yes MGH is a teaching hospital, but Paul Langone was also an SPO and saved lives that day of the shooting and was cleared. I was giving out the policies for teaching hospitals which states no firearms but Im not sure if its law. I thought teaching hospitals fall under schools?

As an SPO, he would be exempt from the prohibition against carrying on school grounds if it was considered that, so that's not a great comparison.

So what about Umass Memorial Medical Center?

Mike

http://www.northeastshooters.com/vb...Please-don-t-post-this.?p=1729646#post1729646

 

[TWtommers]

Yes MGH is a teaching hospital, but Paul Langone was also an SPO and saved lives that day of the shooting and was cleared. I was giving out the policies for teaching hospitals which states no firearms but Im not sure if its law. I thought teaching hospitals fall under schools?

He was not an SPO. He was well trained on his own and attempting to become a LEO. It was the media, which could could not handle the fact that an average CCW citizen was able to save the day. Even if he was, at any point, an SPO he was not there that day in that capacity which would have made his possession illegal and not just outside of policy. My pointis that if he didn't get charge with possession in a prohibited place, it's likely that a teaching hospital is not technically a school.

 

[DickWanner]

He was not an SPO. He was well trained on his own and attempting to become a LEO. It was the media, which could could not handle the fact that an average CCW citizen was able to save the day. Even if he was, at any point, an SPO he was not there that day in that capacity which would have made his possession illegal and not just outside of policy. My pointis that if he didn't get charge with possession in a prohibited place, it's likely that a teaching hospital is not technically a school.

How you figure?

 

[Rob Boudrie]

How you figure?

SPO "police status" when off the job is a gray area, and the enabling policies grant police powers only when "on the job". The Boston PD is very protective of its turf, and has crafted the SPO rules so grant the absolute minimum amount of authority these individuals require to do the job. I don't know if an SPO is considered a "police officer" for the purposes of 269-10j et. al. when not on the job in the area of their jurisdiction. Everyone here who claims to have the answer has been offering opinion rather than cites to statute and/or case law, so the question remains unanswered.

 

[TWBARRETT]

He was not an SPO. .

Can all these stories about him being an SPO be false? You must know him personally. He graduated from The Willaim Clorian Academy which only class is to become an SPO. http://bostonspo.com/special-police-officer

Here is another 20 plus articles claiming he is an SPO.

http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&...oq=Paul+Langone+spo&pbx=1&fp=3b15e1a9e1579b3b

 

[Len-2A Training]

He was not an SPO. He was well trained on his own and attempting to become a LEO. It was the media, which could could not handle the fact that an average CCW citizen was able to save the day. Even if he was, at any point, an SPO he was not there that day in that capacity which would have made his possession illegal and not just outside of policy. My pointis that if he didn't get charge with possession in a prohibited place, it's likely that a teaching hospital is not technically a school.

Once again you are spouting personal opinion as "law" with no knowledge of law.

SPO "police status" when off the job is a gray area, and the enabling policies grant police powers only when "on the job". The Boston PD is very protective of its turf, and has crafted the SPO rules so grant the absolute minimum amount of authority these individuals require to do the job. I don't know if an SPO is considered a "police officer" for the purposes of 269-10j et. al. when not on the job in the area of their jurisdiction. Everyone here who claims to have the answer has been offering opinion rather than cites to statute and/or case law, so the question remains unanswered.

Boston (and some other communities) try to rope in anyone they appoint as a Special PO, probably for political reasons.

However, a very good friend took over a very small PD North of Boston, where they used a number of SPOs to augment their full-time force of 8 men. He did significant research on the authority of a SPO by statute and determined a few things.

- MGLs actually categorizes SPOs that work for a municipality as Reserve/Intermittent POs, not Special POs. [SPO is the correct category per MGLs if appointed to work for a PRIVATE company, e.g. private school, cemetery, store security, etc.]
- That a SPO or R/I PO is a PO 24x7 according to statute (his discovery, I can't prove it).
- MGL does not differentiate on ccw in generally "prohibited" areas wrt to any LEO, whether they are working or not, within their jurisdiction or not.

 

[GSG]

Even if he was, at any point, an SPO he was not there that day in that capacity which would have made his possession illegal and not just outside of policy.

This is a gray area of law, but IMO that's not the case.

My pointis that if he didn't get charge with possession in a prohibited place, it's likely that a teaching hospital is not technically a school.

I disagree. I recall a few specific incidents that I've read about on NES where an LTC holder wasn't charged with something that they could have been. The laws are confusing, and people "luck out" sometimes, so a lack of prosecution doesn't say much, unless the reasoning behind it is specifically stated by a DA or investigating officer.

I don't know if an SPO is considered a "police officer" for the purposes of 269-10j et. al. when not on the job in the area of their jurisdiction. Everyone here who claims to have the answer has been offering opinion rather than cites to statute and/or case law, so the question remains unanswered.

269-10(j) says "law enforcement officer," not "police officer," which is slightly less specific. I'm always looking for it, but I've never found any caselaw on school grounds where LE status is examined or where an LTC holder was involved.

- MGLs actually categorizes SPOs that work for a municipality as Reserve/Intermittent POs, not Special POs. [SPO is the correct category per MGLs if appointed to work for a PRIVATE company, e.g. private school, cemetery, store security, etc.]
- That a SPO or R/I PO is a PO 24x7 according to statute (his discovery, I can't prove it).
- MGL does not differentiate on ccw in generally "prohibited" areas wrt to any LEO, whether they are working or not, within their jurisdiction or not.

Interesting. I'm going to look into this further.

 

[GSG]

Even if he was, at any point, an SPO he was not there that day in that capacity

Hold on, I just realized, are you saying that he wasn't on duty at the time, or that his SPO license/warrant wasn't current at the time?

 

[TWtommers]

Can all these stories about him being an SPO be false? You must know him personally. He graduated from The Willaim Clorian Academy which only class is to become an SPO. http://bostonspo.com/special-police-officer

Here is another 20 plus articles claiming he is an SPO.

http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&...oq=Paul+Langone+spo&pbx=1&fp=3b15e1a9e1579b3b

Okay, the issue I have is the semantics and it's a problem on my end. Langone was clearly very well trained but in all of those articles I do not see by whom he was employed. This led to my belief that he was unemployed and not an officer. According to what LenS is citing and what some of the articles are saying that the SPO designation is independent of employment?

Once again you are spouting personal opinion as "law" with no knowledge of law.


Boston (and some other communities) try to rope in anyone they appoint as a Special PO, probably for political reasons.

However, a very good friend took over a very small PD North of Boston, where they used a number of SPOs to augment their full-time force of 8 men. He did significant research on the authority of a SPO by statute and determined a few things.

- MGLs actually categorizes SPOs that work for a municipality as Reserve/Intermittent POs, not Special POs. [SPO is the correct category per MGLs if appointed to work for a PRIVATE company, e.g. private school, cemetery, store security, etc.]
- That a SPO or R/I PO is a PO 24x7 according to statute (his discovery, I can't prove it).
- MGL does not differentiate on ccw in generally "prohibited" areas wrt to any LEO, whether they are working or not, within their jurisdiction or not.

Len, to be fair, it's confusion over a law that is a bit confusing rather a complete lack of knowledge. Point taken that i should have either cited law or proclaimed opinion first.

Hold on, I just realized, are you saying that he wasn't on duty at the time, or that his SPO license/warrant wasn't current at the time?

I was under the belief that a LEO, whether an SPO or full time, needed to be on duty to be carrying in a school. It looks Ike i may be wrong? My understanding is that he was not in MGH in an official capacity (on duty) although I've never read a definitive article stating his reason for being there.

Frankly, it's all a different argument now since, to your earlier point, a lack of charge in this case does not necessarily mean a law was not broken. I think it still comes down to actual case law which no one has been able to dig up.

Sorry for all the confusion there.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Okay, the issue I have is the semantics and it's a problem on my end. Langone was clearly very well trained but in all of those articles I do not see by whom he was employed. This led to my belief that he was unemployed and not an officer. According to what LenS is citing and what some of the articles are saying that the SPO designation is independent of employment?

Len, to be fair, it's confusion over a law that is a bit confusing rather a complete lack of knowledge. Point taken that i should have either cited law or proclaimed opinion first.

I was under the belief that a LEO, whether an SPO or full time, needed to be on duty to be carrying in a school. It looks Ike i may be wrong? My understanding is that he was not in MGH in an official capacity (on duty) although I've never read a definitive article stating his reason for being there.

Frankly, it's all a different argument now since, to your earlier point, a lack of charge in this case does not necessarily mean a law was not broken. I think it still comes down to actual case law which no one has been able to dig up.

Sorry for all the confusion there.

From memory when this happened. He was allegedly a Boston SPO at some housing authority in Boston.

Please realize that 100s (if not 1000s) of NES'rs and lurkers may read any post here. Nothing personal, but a pet beef of mine is when someone states opinion as if it were law, instead of stating clearly that it is strictly personal opinion. Last thing I ever want to see/hear is that someone got jammed up legally by following advice here or elsewhere that was opinion and not in accordance with the law.

Here's an anecdote going back to the late-1970s or early-1980s.

An off duty officer was attending NU for classes. The story as told to me (sounds a little unbelievable however) was that his holster/gun got caught on some handrail and "went off". NU wanted to ban all off-duty officers from ccw'g on campus and upon investigation they found that they could not do that legally. Thus, it is alleged that they asked that all officers keep their guns concealed and take better care not to have NDs. [I knew damn near everyone at NU on a first-name basis from the President downward and chatted with their Director of Security regularly back in those days, so no idea who I heard it from, but it was likely an official within the university.]

When I taught at Suffolk (School of Management) there was one day that I high-tailed it into Boston to teach after working a detail and gave serious thought to going directly into Boston in uniform. Nothing the school could have done about it either. I did go home first and change, but always ccw'd while teaching there.

Sometime in the 2002-4 time-frame I dropped by the County Land Court to file Homestead paperwork. It was a hot Summer day and I was dressed in shorts and a t-shirt. Since the courthouse also housed Probate Court in the same building they had metal detectors/x-ray and security at the door. I just showed my badge and was waved by all the detection equipment. I've never been asked if I was working or not (I wasn't).

 

[atmay]

I was under the belief that a LEO, whether an SPO or full time, needed to be on duty to be carrying in a school. It looks Ike i may be wrong? My understanding is that he was not in MGH in an official capacity (on duty) although I've never read a definitive article stating his reason for being there.

The law: (269 10j)

(j) Whoever, not being a law enforcement officer, and notwithstanding any license obtained by him under the provisions of chapter one hundred and forty, carries on his person a firearm as hereinafter defined, loaded or unloaded or other dangerous weapon in any building or on the grounds of any elementary or secondary school, college or university without the written authorization of the board or officer in charge of such elementary or secondary school, college or university shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or both. For the purpose of this paragraph, “firearm” shall mean any pistol, revolver, rifle or smoothbore arm from which a shot, bullet or pellet can be discharged by whatever means.

Any officer in charge of an elementary or secondary school, college or university or any faculty member or administrative officer of an elementary or secondary school, college or university failing to report violations of this paragraph shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and punished by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars.