One of the interesting sticking points on getting an otherwise rather good bill passed into law here in MA is a small number of police chiefs (who are anti-2A) want to change the FID (our lowest form of license, rifles only no high capacity) from shall issue to Chiefs Option. . . by small I mean something like 12 of the states 300+ Chiefs. . . . .
Here in MA they think it is fair now for the Chief to have a say in your getting a pistol permit and this would expand it to any permit. Most Chiefs do not abuse this but a small number do . . .
Today you apply for your permit and if you have passed the class and have a clean record you can get an FID no questions or ask for a pistol permit. If the Chief wants he can limit or deny your pistol permit – end of story. He does not have to tell you why and can use any excuse he wants. What this has led to is a new Chief takes over in a town and folks that have had carry permits for years with no issues suddenly are refused. You can sue but the cost is on you to get your permit and they can deny you again when you renew. . .
Does this sound like a fair way to handle a right? How would you like it if an official in town could suddenly tell you that you can’t vote anymore and no reason is given? You can sue to fix it but we can deny you next election if we want and you have to sue again. . .
This is crazy. The fix that was rejected said that Chiefs would have to list in writing the reason for refusal and it was spelled out what they could refuse for. . . and an appeals process was to be worked out. . . That was not good enough.
To make this worse it is a small few Chiefs that make them all look bad. Most have no problems with permits and issue them if you have a clean record. Just another great example of how you can abuse the power of you .gov position in MA. . . .
Thank God I have one of the good Chiefs in my home town - we have a great group of police and they respect our rights. . . . but if he retires who knows. . . .