[JMJ]

I have seen a question on an application and I can't figure out why it's there. Can someone else tell me if they have ever seen a similar question, and if they know why it's there? City/town are not important here.

Question (paraphrased): "Have you ever owned any pistols, and if so, give the make, model, serial number, years of possession."

I mean, doesn't the state have this information on file?

Thanks

 

[Gil]

Yes the state does provided the correct paperwork has been filled out and submitted. There are many that don't always follow the rules regarding weapon transfers. Then again they may just want to compare?

 

[JMJ]

Yes the state does provided the correct paperwork has been filled out and submitted. There are many that don't always follow the rules regarding weapon transfers. Then again they may just want to compare?

Thanks Gil. Is this a common thing for a full time applications too? I mean, to ask this question? I just find it bothersome, you know, that whole registration thing.

 

[Gil]

I don't recall that question on any of my applications

 

[Dr.Magoo]

The CHSB may be better now, but before when the old "Blue Cards" were used, they very rarely updated the information in the computers. They still have me owning several guns I sold years ago.

 

[Louie]

Depending how thorough of a job they are doing, this question could be for a number of reasons:

1. How thorough of a job did you do on the application
2. How much attention to detail are you paying
3. Compare with CHSB List
4. Unusual number of firearms

They could be going in may directions. Be honest and complete

 

[KozmoKramer]

Along the same lines...
Generally speaking, do Auxiliary Applications Receive the Same Level of Scrutiny As the FT or Res. Officers?
Or are There Less Disqualifying Factors?
Meaning, Could You Potentially Be Accepted to the Ranks of Aux. Officer, but Not Necessarily Full-Time?

I Know That a Full On Background Investigation Can Take a Lot of Time and Money....
Not to Suggest a Felon, Doper, Dimwit, an Abject "Yahoo" or Someone with Poor References Could Get On,
but Would They Say, Be Less Apt to Dig Through all your Prior Employers,
Co-Workers, Relatives, HS & College Transcripts, and Such as a Paid Position Often Requires..
Or Generally Would a CORI & FBI Check, Driving Record, and Some Personal References do the Trick?
I Know Not All Departments Subscribe to the Same Requirements for Membership,
but If You Have any Feedback or Personal Experience in the Process, I love to Hear It...
Thanks!! KK :-k

 

[LenS]

Personally, I'd refuse to provide that info. I would only put down info such as "LTC continuously from 19xx, numerous handguns, rifles, & shotguns" (if this were indeed the case).

Our chief regularly asks this type of info (not to S/N and models IIRC he just wanted a quantity of each category) for all LTC renewals. A number of us just "stood him down", stating that it wasn't required by law, he could check with CHSB (totally inaccurate info that they have), or pound sand. Now he knows enough to not ask me or my Wife any more. :mrgreen: [If he wants a true inventory, he's welcome to stop by with a search warrant and I'll be happy to let him inventory to his heart's content. :sly: ]

I recall a discussion with a personal friend who was a former chief and later ran the MCJTC academies in most of the state, when Cliff brought this topic up. He told me that he also stood down the chief.

BTW, before anyone thinks that perhaps I've bought/sold without doing paperwork. . . EVERY firearm that I have bought/sold (other than to an FFL where it went "on his books") or otherwise obtained (CMP M1s require an FA-10, most folks don't know/do this) was done with an FA-10 or "blue card" and info from a valid LTC was obtained to fill out the forms on any private transfers. [I still have all my tissue copies of the old FA-10s and a dupe/photo copy of all "blue cards" that I used.]

When CHSB computerized the forms, they only went back to 1986 (IIRC) for dealer transactions and they threw out ALL the blue cards. This info came from Bill Pickett personally when he addressed a police association. Bill stated that MSP had kept all the blue cards in boxes at 1010 Comm. Ave and there was literally bird shit and mouse droppings all over them and this was what motivated them to toss the cards.

The major problem with the MA system is that it is designed so that you NEVER get removed from your association with any particular firearm that was registered to you! Even if you sold it (privately or to an FFL), the database will ALWAYS list you as an owner. If you sell it to an out of state FFL (perfectly legal), the MA trail will end with you (there won't be any entries for another owner in the CHSB database). So, if you fill everything out with what you own and the chief comes back and accuses you of "forgetting" a particular firearm (that you sold to an FFL - I have NEVER received a receipt for a gun sold to an FFL), you have no way to prove that you don't own it (can't prove a negative). So the database info is at least partially useless and those of us who have owned guns prior to 1986 may have huge discrepancies in what we own vs. what the database claims we own.

 

[Louie]

Personally, I'd refuse to provide that info. I would only put down info such as "LTC continuously from 19xx, numerous handguns, rifles, & shotguns" (if this were indeed the case)"

Big difference between veteran officer getting a LTC and a new applicant to the police department.

If I see that response on an application, take a guess were that application would end up, remember your applying for the job, answer the question

 

[LenS]

Big difference between veteran officer getting a LTC and a new applicant to the police department.

If I see that response on an application, take a guess were that application would end up, remember your applying for the job, answer the question

I was NOT referring to LEOs. Our current chief does this to EVERYONE applying for LTC Renewals!

I read you 5 x 5, but I still would NOT provide the information. If they ask what guns I would carry on duty (assuming that one could buy/use what they own), I WOULD provide that info on those particular guns.

As for a "fishing expedition" on what I own, I stand by what I wrote . . . bring a search warrant and a clipboard and I'll supply the coffee.

Nothing good can come from a "fishing expedition". If I did provide a list, they would still find discrepancies with CHSB's list. I have guns that were purchased prior to 1986 (aren't on CHSB list, but I have "tissue paper" FA-10s for them) and I've sold some (I have FA-10s on those as well, but they will show up on CHSB's list).

But, I have a reputation as one with brass balls! Most people are sheep and will do whatever is asked of them. . .I have a reputation to maintain. :twisted:

- For ~10 years for the 4th of July fireworks I was always posted to the same remote intersection, blockading traffic. At our briefing prior to being sent out, I asked why I was always at this isolated spot and the chief (prior to current chief) told me that I have a reputation for not letting anyone thru unless they had a pass (i.e. I was a ball-buster). OK, later that night the chief rolls up in his unmarked and I went over to him and told him that I couldn't let him thru since he didn't have a pass! You should have seen the twisted look on his face!! :twisted: Wish I had a camera with me!! He had absolutely NO sense of humor.

- Current chief rolls up late at the high school for Town Meeting and all the spaces are filled except the HP spaces (which the prior chiefs used to park at). He asks me where he can park, I look at him deadpan and said "How about Foxboro?" :mrgreen: He's another one with no sense of humor, but he sucked it up and said "I guess I'll try across the street" and he moved on.

It's great when you are a Special/Reserve PO. You can do the job and not worry about retribution to your career. I always said that if they didn't like the job that I did, they didn't have to re-appoint me the next year. I guess that I didn't do badly, they appointed me for 17 consecutive years.

YMMV

 

[JMJ]

Thanks for the replies everyone. I guess there isn't much choice but to do it, but I really don't like it or agree with it. I have personally sold 4 firearms over the last 3 years that will probably still show up on the CHSB list.

I don't know what an unusual number of guns would be to own, I guess it's all relative to who you ask. Half of my firearms are target pistols (bullseye shooting and pins/plates). Guess it wouldn't hurt to include that information when listing them.

 

[LenS]

Koz,

When I was appointed (1978), they didn't do more than a basic background check. We had ~35 Special/Reserve POs back in the 1980s.

Current chief did away with the Special Police and then allowed ~8 people to apply that were on the Civil Service list, required them to do a full-blown psycho, background check, academy, etc. all on their own dime! Then he appointed a handful of Special POs under the leadership of a FT Lt. (that was my idea to the chief).

 

[DodgeRam]

Along the same lines...
Generally speaking, do Auxiliary Applications Receive the Same Level of Scrutiny As the FT or Res. Officers?
Or are There Less Disqualifying Factors?
Meaning, Could You Potentially Be Accepted to the Ranks of Aux. Officer, but Not Necessarily Full-Time?

I Know That a Full On Background Investigation Can Take a Lot of Time and Money....
Not to Suggest a Felon, Doper, Dimwit, an Abject "Yahoo" or Someone with Poor References Could Get On,
but Would They Say, Be Less Apt to Dig Through all your Prior Employers,
Co-Workers, Relatives, HS & College Transcripts, and Such as a Paid Position Often Requires..
Or Generally Would a CORI & FBI Check, Driving Record, and Some Personal References do the Trick?
I Know Not All Departments Subscribe to the Same Requirements for Membership,
but If You Have any Feedback or Personal Experience in the Process, I love to Hear It...
Thanks!! KK :-k

It depends on the department. One boston area department just has a basic "fast food" application, while another better department has the same application packet and checks as a full time recruit would have. They are also assigned a investigative officer who will take time out of his/her patrol time to visit past employers, neighbors, family members, teachers, ect. The best thing a department can do is the all out, same investigation as a regular officer. After all they are still in a cruiser with the same name on the door and the same patch on their arms as the regular's representing that particular department. Most departments dont want yahoo's out there making the public think thats what the department is made up of.

</IMG>