Today's Mass. Lawyers Weekly covered the case in detail. A businessman applied for an unrestricted LTC and was issued one restricted to "Target & Hunting." That being useless for his need, he wrote - as directed to when he applied - for a lifting of the restriction.
The BPD responded by revoking his license. The Appeals Court found that act to be "arbitrary and capricious:"
"Phipps then filed a petition under G.L.c. 249, §4, with the Supreme Judicial Court, which transferred the action to the Superior Court. Both Phipps and the commissioner moved for judgment on the pleadings; the Superior Court judge sided with the commissioner, upholding the license revocation.
But now, the Appeals Court has said that was a mistake.
'Because Phipps has demonstrated by substantial evidence his need to protect himself and his retail business, and because the department failed to show that it restricted and revoked his license to carry a firearm for objective reasons related to public safety, the department was without reasonable grounds to conclude he was an unsuitable person to possess a firearm for any lawful purpose,” Judge Edward J. McDonough Jr. writes on the panel's behalf, calling the commissioner's actions “arbitrary and capricious.'”
A refreshing decision upholding firearms rights.