Ruggiero v. Police Com'r of Boston
| Court | Appeals Court of Massachusetts |
| Citation | 18 Mass.App.Ct. 256,464 N.E.2d 104 |
| Parties | Glen D. RUGGIERO v. POLICE COMMISSIONER OF BOSTON. |
| Decision Date | 27 July 1984 |
Page 104
v.
POLICE COMMISSIONER OF BOSTON.
Suffolk.
Decided June 11, 1984.
Further Appellate Review Denied July 27, 1984.
Page 105
Nicholas Foundas, Boston, for defendant.
James S. Berg, Quincy, for plaintiff.
Before GREANEY, C.J., and CUTTER and DREBEN, JJ.
GREANEY, Chief Justice.
The plaintiff, a resident of Boston, applied to the police commissioner pursuant to G.L. c. 140, § 131, as amended by St.1975, c. 113, § 1, for a license to carry firearms. On November 15, 1982, the commissioner issued a license (apparently in keeping with the purposes listed on the plaintiff's application), which permitted the plaintiff to carry a firearm for purposes of "Target [practice], Hunting & Sporting."
In March, 1983, the plaintiff notified the police department of his employment as a private security guard. On March 23, 1983, an agent of the commissioner amended the license to permit the plaintiff to carry a firearm for "[p]rotection of life [18 Mass.App.Ct. 257] and [p]roperty, conditional with his employment as a security guard."
After ending his employment as a security guard, the plaintiff was notified by the commissioner that his license would no longer authorize him to carry a firearm for self-protection and that it had again been limited to authorize his carrying of a firearm only for purposes of target practice, hunting, and sporting.
On March 31, 1983, the plaintiff applied to the commissioner for a new license to carry a firearm for self-protection. The commissioner refused to issue an unrestricted license. The plaintiff sought judicial review in the Boston Municipal Court, where, after hearing, the commissioner's decision was upheld. The plaintiff sought further review in the Superior Court, 1 there adding to his complaint requests for injunctive and declaratory relief. After hearing, a judge sitting in the Superior Court ruled that the commissioner lacked authority to issue a license which limited the plaintiff to carrying a firearm only for specified purposes. Judgment entered declaring that
Page 106
the plaintiff's license contained no valid restrictions and that he could carry a firearm for self-protection without violating G.L. c. 269, § 10(a ). The commissioner appealed. We reverse.1. The pertinent language of G.L. c. 140, § 131, reads as follows:
"The chief of police or the board or officer having control of the police in a city or town, or the commissioner of public safety, or persons authorized by them, respectively, after an investigation, may, upon the application of any person, including a minor eighteen years of age or older 2 who has the written consent of his parent or guardian, residing or having a place of business within [18 Mass.App.Ct. 258] their respective jurisdiction, except an alien, a person who has been convicted of a felony or of the unlawful use, possession or sale of narcotic or harmful drugs or a minor under the age of eighteen, issue a license to such applicant to carry firearms in the commonwealth or to possess and carry therein a machine gun, if it appears that he is a suitable person to be so licensed, and that he has good reason to fear injury to his person or property, or for any other proper purpose, including the carrying of firearms for use in target practice only; provided, however, that no minor shall be issued a license to possess and carry a machine gun."
The statute must be "interpreted according to the intent of the Legislature ascertained from all its words construed by the ordinary and approved usage of the language, considered in connection with the cause of its enactment, the mischief or imperfection to be remedied and the main object to be accomplished, to the end that the purpose of its framers may be effectuated." Board of Educ. v. Assessor of Worcester, 368 Mass. 511, 513, 333 N.E.2d 450 (1975), quoting from Industrial Fin. Corp. v. State Tax Commn., 367 Mass. 360, 364, 326 N.E.2d 1 (1975). The statutory language itself is the principal source of insight into the legislative purpose. Hoffman v. Howmedica, Inc., 373 Mass. 32, 37, 364 N.E.2d 1215 (1977).
The goal of firearms control legislation in Massachusetts is to limit access to deadly...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Commonwealth v. Adams, SJC-12620
...to deadly weapons by irresponsible persons." Simkin, 466 Mass. at 176, 993 N.E.2d 672, quoting Ruggiero v. Police Comm'r of Boston, 18 Mass. App. Ct. 256, 258, 464 N.E.2d 104 (1984). This purpose is effectuated by the provision that "[n]o appeal or post-judgment motion shall operate to stay......
-
U.S. v. Caron, Criminal No. 94-10040-WGY.
...control legislation in Massachusetts is to limit access to deadly weapons by irresponsible persons." Ruggiero v. Police Comm'r, 18 Mass.App.Ct. 256, 258, 464 N.E.2d 104, review denied by, 392 Mass. 1104, 466 N.E.2d 522 (1984). This goal is accomplished through the implementation of a compre......
-
Hightower v. City of Bos.
...that “the licensing authority is given considerable latitude” in determining who is a suitable person. Ruggiero v. Police Comm'r, 18 Mass.App.Ct. 256, 464 N.E.2d 104, 107 (1984); accord Howard v. Chief of Police, 59 Mass.App.Ct. 901, 794 N.E.2d 604, 606 (2003) (“The ‘suitable person’ standa......
-
Jupin v. Kask
...N.E.2d 1171 (2005), quoting Commonwealth v. Lee, 10 Mass.App.Ct. 518, 523, 409 N.E.2d 1311 (1980), and Ruggiero v. Police Comm'r of Boston, 18 Mass.App.Ct. 256, 258, 464 N.E.2d 104 (1984) ("statutory scheme governing gun control evidences a legislative purpose `to prevent the temptation and......