Non-resident CCW?

LenS said:
See my post above yours.

The current Director of FRB told me that she weighs heavily for those that were MA subjects and held Unrestricted Resident LTCs for years without issues. Otherwise you need to explain your unique reasons why you should be given that privilege during your interview.
Click to expand...

Thanks, that sounds encouraging.
 
benl said:
I did a search, but the info is: 1) overwhelming, and 2) not specific and to the point. I just moved to NH. I have a carry permit. It took 5 minutes to fill out the form and was quickly approved. Since I live so close to the MA border (I'm in the Pelham/Nashua area), I thought I would be responsible and get a MA carry permit in case I accidentally cross the border during my weekend travels. I have a simple question: will I get a permit based on my above situation? I don't carry large sums of money, I have no direct threats to my person, etc... I simply exercise my 2nd amendment rights because I believe a right not exercised is a right lost. Will I be denied? Some posts say no, some say yes.
Click to expand...

In the event that you ever crossed the border accidentally, even a restricted permit would be far better than no permit.

With a restricted permit, at least you have options. For example, it's probably going to be quicker and easier to just unload and encase (and comply with the law) than it is to try to get turned around in traffic - without drawing attention to yourself - and flee the Commonwealth.
 
Last edited:
Wendell said:
In the event that you ever crossed the border accidentally, even a restricted permit would be far better than no permit.

With a restricted permit, at least you have options. For example, it's probably going to be quicker and easier to just unload and encase (and comply with the law) than it is to try to get turned around in traffic - without drawing attention to yourself - and flee the Commonwealth.
Click to expand...

I also believe that if you are carrying "beyond" your restriction, the law you are breaking is relatively minor. Maybe even just an infraction.

Those better versed can clarify this. Len??
 
Submitted my renewal 3/17/14. Interview scheduled 7/2/14. So 3-1/2 month lag time now, plus another 3-4 weeks after to receive LTC. About the same as last year. Sucks.
 
And now I wait... I just submitted it, and I expected out to take within 60 days to get an interview, but I guess that's untrue according to maverick's post. I expected it to take 3-4 months to get the ltc after the interview, not a month, so I guess I should expect something in 5 months...wow, nothing like how NH does it, haha
 
Carrying outside of restrictions

"The danger for the citizen is the penalty for carrying outside the chief’s wishes, with a penalty of license suspension or revocation, and a fine of $1,000 to $10,000". As stated in GOAL legislation section re: Class A restrictions.
 
drboom said:
Had my interview this week, interviewer was very nice and helpful; total time less than 30 minutes including waiting at security for a while. The visitor lot was full so I was forced to park in a resident spot and managed to get a ticket in those 30 minutes. According to the interviewer non-resident licenses are being treated much like renewals and having held a long-time resident unrestricted LTC, I am likely to receive the same. I guess I'll know in a month or two when my license shows.

From my very limited experience (and without having received my license yet), I can only echo some of the prior comments:
dress professionally
articulate something in your comments about how you carry valuable material on a frequent basis; try to give them a reason to issues a ALP from their point of view
be friendly, the interviewer is there to help process your application and doesn't make the decision nor is he at fault for the current laws in MA.

Despite the friendly interviewer, I remain very happy to have moved to a free state.
Click to expand...

What makes you think the interviewer isnt making the decision?

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF300T using Tapatalk
 
dcmdon said:
I also believe that if you are carrying "beyond" your restriction, the law you are breaking is relatively minor. Maybe even just an infraction.
Click to expand...
It's a civil offense with a max penalty of $10,000 - but, in practice, the most likely consequence is going to revocation of the LTC.
 
Okay I'm confused I'm actually applying for my mass non-resident LTC. I thought the magazine restrictions didn't apply to you if you were not a resident of the state. So if I get an unrestricted a license and I want to carry concealed in mass does that mean I can't use my 14 or 17 round mags in my M&P and my other gun? If I thats going to suck because I don't have any 10 round mags.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk
 
scubadive.ri said:
Okay I'm confused I'm actually applying for my mass non-resident LTC. I thought the magazine restrictions didn't apply to you if you were not a resident of the state. So if I get an unrestricted a license and I want to carry concealed in mass does that mean I can't use my 14 or 17 round mags in my M&P and my other gun? If I thats going to suck because I don't have any 10 round mags.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
No problem if you have an LTC-A and the mags are pre-1994.
 
Rob Boudrie said:
No problem if you have an LTC-A and the mags are pre-1994.
Click to expand...

Rob, reading comprehension failure! [wink] [laugh]

He's referring to M&P mags, no such thing as pre-1994 for them.

The AWB and mag restrictions apply to EVERYONE in MA, visitor or resident alike. It is a felony to possess them within the state.
 
Last edited:
Wow that's some Bull****. There must be an exception for competitions. My buddy shoots. USPA in MA. I think he uses 21 round mags.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk
 
scubadive.ri said:
Wow that's some Bull****. There must be an exception for competitions. My buddy shoots. USPA in MA. I think he uses 21 round mags.
Click to expand...

NO exception and it is ILLEGAL for anyone without a MA NR LTC to bring any handguns into MA even for a competition. C. 140 S. 131G is really a non-existent "exemption" as reading it as a high school English grammar teacher you will (hopefully) realize that no state's permits meet the requirements of NEVER issuing a permit to anyone with a minor MJ conviction (no matter how long ago) to qualify for said "exemption". We all read over it and saw what we wanted to see, believed it to be a true exemption until the former FRB Director pointed out the error in our interpretation to me. Many still fail to believe it, and thus risk a long stay in a MA prison and Federal PP status to come to MA to compete.
 
The information out there is often contradictory. My friend does a have NR MA unrestricted LTC A. http://goal.org/masslawpages/nonresapply.html

Q.When do I not need a non-resident License to Carry?*
A. The only time a non-resident may bring a handgun into Massachusetts without a license is for a pistol or revolver competition – in general, provided you are a US resident and have a pistol license issued under similar conditions to Massachusetts - or if a law enforcement person on official duty. You can not come into the state to practice with your handgun without a License to Carry. See C. 140 § 131G

Massachusetts general law Chapter 140, §129C provides many exemptions from licensing requirements for non-residents coming into the state with rifles, shotguns and ammunition therefor.*Briefly, these are

(1) hunters with valid nonresident hunting licenses,

(2) possession on a firing or shooting range,

(3) possession while traveling in or through the commonwealth with rifles or shotguns unloaded and enclosed in a case,

(4) possession while at a firearms show or display organized by a gun collectors club or association or

(5) carrying by nonresidents who meet the requirements for such carrying or possession in the state in which they reside.
 
Lots of mis-information out there. GOAL's website is wrong, most info out there is wrong. This is why I don't use GOAL's material in teaching my students, I go to the source material (MGL) and when needed I do reference the interpretations in Glidden's book since he's the one recognized as the LE authority and teaches the chiefs and LOs how the law is interpreted . . . but I don't do it blindly and point out areas where I might disagree and why I might disagree (or in some cases the meaning of "Black Letter of the Law" and the interpretation by others) so people have a complete picture and can make their own informed decision.

129C is valid, but does NOT include ANY handguns or large-capacity long guns. What you quoted (I assume) implies differently . . . go read the text of the law and decide for yourself.

131G was mis-interpreted by everyone and their brother. Now that we know we were wrong most refuse to change their info. Sad but that is on them. You need to parse the qualifying sentence just like you had to do in high school English class to understand it. Atty Jason Guida did that and pointed it out to me and I have to concede that he is right.

I see my "job" here is to inform those willing to be educated with the most accurate and up-to-date info as possible. I do not care if they agree, disagree, abide by it, or not. I was never a gun law enforcer when I wore a uniform (and the law was much, much simpler back then) and my LE role today has nothing to do with enforcing gun laws. So those that want to ignore the info, feel free to do so and accept the risks involved. If people are informed, take the risk and get caught . . . so sad, too bad, bye bye! I just don't want to see someone get jammed up due to ignorance of the law, that is all.

In closing, I'm not going to continue to debate the law any further. Feel free for you and your friends to do as they please. If you get caught I won't be contributing to any defense fund. I don't think that telling a judge that GOAL said it was OK will buy you much in a MA courtroom, so good luck. I'm done with this discussion.
 
LenS said:
Lots of mis-information out there. GOAL's website is wrong, most info out there is wrong. This is why I don't use GOAL's material in teaching my students, I go to the source material (MGL) and when needed I do reference the interpretations in Glidden's book since he's the one recognized as the LE authority and teaches the chiefs and LOs how the law is interpreted . . . but I don't do it blindly and point out areas where I might disagree and why I might disagree (or in some cases the meaning of "Black Letter of the Law" and the interpretation by others) so people have a complete picture and can make their own informed decision.

129C is valid, but does NOT include ANY handguns or large-capacity long guns. What you quoted (I assume) implies differently . . . go read the text of the law and decide for yourself.

131G was mis-interpreted by everyone and their brother. Now that we know we were wrong most refuse to change their info. Sad but that is on them. You need to parse the qualifying sentence just like you had to do in high school English class to understand it. Atty Jason Guida did that and pointed it out to me and I have to concede that he is right.

I see my "job" here is to inform those willing to be educated with the most accurate and up-to-date info as possible. I do not care if they agree, disagree, abide by it, or not. I was never a gun law enforcer when I wore a uniform (and the law was much, much simpler back then) and my LE role today has nothing to do with enforcing gun laws. So those that want to ignore the info, feel free to do so and accept the risks involved. If people are informed, take the risk and get caught . . . so sad, too bad, bye bye! I just don't want to see someone get jammed up due to ignorance of the law, that is all.

In closing, I'm not going to continue to debate the law any further. Feel free for you and your friends to do as they please. If you get caught I won't be contributing to any defense fund. I don't think that telling a judge that GOAL said it was OK will buy you much in a MA courtroom, so good luck. I'm done with this discussion.
Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to start an argument or saying that your interpretation was wrong. I was just making a simple statement that the information out there is confusing. I live in RI and I'm not familiar with the nuances of MA law. It seems that the laws we're almost written the intent of confusing people.
 
Last edited:
Looks like I'll have to buy a bunch of over priced 10 round mags[laugh].

Almost a week and no email with a scheduled interview date yet. Hopefully I get an email within a month!
 
scubadive.ri said:
I wasn't trying to start an argument or saying that your interpretation was wrong. I was just making a simple statement that the information out there is confusing. I live in RI and I'm not familiar with the nuances of MA law. It seems that the laws we're almost written the intent of confusing people.
Click to expand...

I disagree with the "almost" part of that sentence!

They were definitely written with the intent to confuse and obscure, so that innocent people could be trapped in a legal morass and prosecuted. [angry]

The reason I look to original source info and not rely on 3rd party sites (e.g. GOAL, NRA, handgunlaw.us, etc.) is that those little nuances make all the difference in the world and can get someone facing criminal charges.
 
I disagree with the "almost" part of that sentence!

They were definitely written with the intent to confuse and obscure, so that innocent people could be trapped in a legal morass and prosecuted. [angry]
Click to expand...
I think it's more a lack of competence. The power brokers who wrote the gun laws are non-gun people, find guns distasteful, and would never think to engage the experts in meaningful discussion so they could get the laws right.

It's sort of like having surgery textbooks written by people who can't stand the sight of blood.

Making it worse, is that once a poorly worded law is written, it becomes almost impossible to change via legislative process as doing so would be "soft on guns". An excellent example is the former prohibition of resident non-citizens getting an LTC (corrected via Fletcher v. Haas), while non-citizens living in the US but outside of MA could get a non-resident LTC. (confirmation of the hopeless of the situation is Jim Wallace's reaction to my suggestion GOAL lobby to have the alien prohibition changed - "GOAL won't even try, it would not get anywhere"). Another example is how a non-resident LTC does not allow the purchase of ammo.

I don't think the intent of the law was to trip up competitors, but to assure that the exemption did not allow people who would not qualify for a MA LTC to be covered by the exemption. It's sort of like a bug in code where the program does something different than intended but, in this case, nobody will go in a code a fix.
 
Last edited:
drboom said:
Had my interview this week, interviewer was very nice and helpful; total time less than 30 minutes including waiting at security for a while. The visitor lot was full so I was forced to park in a resident spot and managed to get a ticket in those 30 minutes. According to the interviewer non-resident licenses are being treated much like renewals and having held a long-time resident unrestricted LTC, I am likely to receive the same. I guess I'll know in a month or two when my license shows.

From my very limited experience (and without having received my license yet), I can only echo some of the prior comments:
dress professionally
articulate something in your comments about how you carry valuable material on a frequent basis; try to give them a reason to issues a ALP from their point of view
be friendly, the interviewer is there to help process your application and doesn't make the decision nor is he at fault for the current laws in MA.

Despite the friendly interviewer, I remain very happy to have moved to a free state.
Click to expand...

FWIW, I received my unrestricted non-res license today; for those counting that is 7 months from initial application.
 
scubadive.ri said:
I love how the fee is non-refundable even if they reject you just some more BS.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yeah, but unless you have, or have had, legal problems, they won't reject you. You might get something severely restricted, but you will get something. We're all familiar with the suitability garbage.

You put a form and money in one end, wait, and a LTC comes out the other end.

With that said, if I had any concerns in my past, I'd do my research first.
 
Last edited:
dcmdon said:
Yeah, but unless you have, or have had, legal problems, they won't reject you. You might get something severely restricted, but you will get something. We're all familiar with the suitability garbage.

You put a form and money in one end, wait, and a LTC comes out the other end.

With that said, if I had any concerns in my past, I'd do my research first.
Click to expand...

I don't have any concerns. No record or problems. I Have an unrestricted LTC in RI. I also have my NH license. I think I will get an A. Requesting All Law full purposes. We will have to wait and see....

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk
 
scubadive.ri said:
I don't have any concerns. No record or problems. I Have an unrestricted LTC in RI. I also have my NH license. I think I will get an A. Requesting All Law full purposes. We will have to wait and see....

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
You will get an A. The new nomenclature is "Restrictions: None". Good luck.
 
drboom said:
FWIW, I received my unrestricted non-res license today; for those counting that is 7 months from initial application.
Click to expand...

7 Months, seriously... NH it takes non residents to get it with 2 week right?? I figured like 3-4 months, but 7 is crazy. A wait until November for me it looks like [laugh]. I'll just forget about it and hope I get an email when my interview is soon. I sent it in over a week ago.
 

Similar threads

Non resident LTC timeline
Replies
18
Views
930
late08
late08
  • Locked
Massachusets is a Constitutional Carry State for residents only
2
Replies
33
Views
733
Thunder Dump
Thunder Dump
EFA10 on a non compliant rifle
Replies
22
Views
957
Mesatchornug
Mesatchornug
New Bill would kill Non-Resident LTC
Replies
5
Views
1K
strangenh
strangenh
Non-Residents and what they can carry in 2023
Replies
12
Views
818
Glocklike tendencies
Glocklike tendencies
Back
Top Bottom