Mass LTC Holders with FLRB Reliefs Will Be revoked !

Who at the FLRB or the ATF called for the meeting from which this letter resulted? What was the purpose of the meeting if not to arrive at this particular conclusion such that they can put the screws to otherwise good people?
 
ArmySarge said:
Any updates? I’m one of those on the non-renewal list and a little anxious to know what my future holds
Click to expand...
Hey sarg , I’m in the same boat as you with the no renewal of my ltc. Have you herd anything ? Seems like a lot of secret squirrel stuff going on !
 
Roof gunner said:
hey K D any word reguarding the frb suspensions ????
Click to expand...
YES! We're up to four or five wins on this subject and a couple of losses. One judge even reversed herself after we appealed her decision. Another
Court held that the directive by DCJIS “exceeded the scope of its authority and is not controlling and obstructs the legislative intent of G.L. c. 140, § 130B.”

To date, DCJIS has failed comply with any of the court orders directing them to return licenses. We're ready to take the next step and hope to have an announcement about that next week. I think folks will like what we're doing here.

A big shout-out goes to attorneys Jason Guida and Jeff Scrimo. They've taken this issue by the horns and haven't let go. Although they give us preferential rates on their legal services, they don't work for free and we've committed to supporting about a dozen of these cases. Folks can show their support for this project here.
 
Awesome !!!!! Thanks for the update ! Love having new info ! Thanks for working so hard Jason and Jeff , thanks for being my voice. Good luck next week!!
 
Any consideration given to going after the DCJIS, ATF and FRB? Lawsuit, guidance for small claim case (wording to use) for petitioners of flrb.

If they exceeded their authority and obstructed the law by ordering licensing authorities revoke and not renew FLRB people.

If they have that authority then they have the authority to refund their filing fee and reimburse them for their legal fees.

If they feel the law is not proper they should take it up with legistive branch who past the law. If they have power to nullify a law then they have power to reimburse the monies spent to follow the law.

They should have monies as the FLRB is not conducting hearing and not spending monies.
 
Jim Tierney said:
Any consideration given to going after the DCJIS, ATF and FRB? Lawsuit, guidance for small claim case (wording to use) for petitioners of flrb.

If they exceeded their authority and obstructed the law by ordering licensing authorities revoke and not renew FLRB people.

If they have that authority then they have the authority to refund their filing fee and reimburse them for their legal fees.

If they feel the law is not proper they should take it up with legistive branch who past the law. If they have power to nullify a law then they have power to reimburse the monies spent to follow the law.

They should have monies as the FLRB is not conducting hearing and not spending monies.
Click to expand...


If you look at the posted DCJIS letter at the top of the thread, the last paragraph encourages the licensing authority to consider revoking, because CJIS isn't allowed to revoke existing licenses. I'm sure the party line will be for the cities & towns to follow their suggestion, but that won't be totally consistent even here in the Democratic People's Republic of Massachusetts.
 
There are many steps to resolve this issue - getting the state to issue LTCs to persons with FLRB relief is only the first step. Out of strategic necessity, Comm2A is limited in what details it can discuss regarding future steps.

A FLRB relieved LTC holder (once we get the FRB to follow the court orders) will still be federally prohibited, but enjoy protection from prosecution under state law. In other words, such a person will be in the same legal status as an individual licensed to sell weed in this state.
 
Ultimately the key here is that they need to find the right test case. You need someone who obtains FLRB relief, obtains an FID/LTC, but has not touched a firearm since before the conviction that necessitated FLRB relief. And they need to be willing to fight a protracted legal battle that will put their name out in public in articles alongside the word "guns"

Otherwise, the plaintiff would be open to retaliatory federal prosecution.

It's a long road ahead...
 
StevieP said:
Who at the FLRB or the ATF called for the meeting from which this letter resulted? What was the purpose of the meeting if not to arrive at this particular conclusion such that they can put the screws to otherwise good people?
Click to expand...
Did you ever get an answer to this question ?
 
You need someone who obtains FLRB relief, obtains an FID/LTC, but has not touched a firearm since before the conviction that necessitated FLRB relief.
Click to expand...
Bingo!!! We have a winner.

Best bet would be an OUI with FLRB relief for a plaintiff who wants an LTC but has never owned guns.
 

Similar threads

Bad news LTC holders, can't buy ammo at BassPro
2 3
Replies
66
Views
2K
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Check out this new security system that will shoot intruders with paintballs
Replies
1
Views
93
walter62
walter62
ltc in worcester
Replies
6
Views
158
Enzo
Enzo
LTC renewal question
Replies
4
Views
166
Sam P
S
Soon, they will be everywhere.
2 3
Replies
72
Views
2K
RKG
R
Back
Top Bottom