- Joined
- Jun 16, 2009
- Messages
- 44
- Likes
- 0
http://www.ccdl.us/resources/permit-issues/105-victory-for-connecticut-gun-permits
Good stuff, will be predictable to see Chiefs responses...
Good stuff, will be predictable to see Chiefs responses...
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
CCW CT permits, no more extra's per examiners board
- Thread starter testosterone
- Start date
Just an FYI..CT does not issue CCW Permits..They are "permits to carry". You will not find the word Concealed on your permit or in the CGS in any relation to firearms..
PS- this is good news, lets see if the chief's follow..
PS- this is good news, lets see if the chief's follow..
You need one (or an Eligibility Cert/LEO) to purchase a handgun in CT..you DO NOT need a permit to own/carry a handgun in your home/business...
Hahaha a new law to limit the power of government in Connecticut. ![[crying]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/006.gif "Crying [crying]")
$50 says it changes nothing. It still takes four times the legal limit of time to produce a pistol permit in many towns, just because they don't want to give them out. I wonder how many hundred are illegally denied each year using such stall tactics? I have a friend that had to contact the Atty Gen to get his town to move after 24 weeks (that's 12 weeks of illegal stalling before they even started the paperwork). They got to it... eventually.
$50 says it changes nothing. It still takes four times the legal limit of time to produce a pistol permit in many towns, just because they don't want to give them out. I wonder how many hundred are illegally denied each year using such stall tactics? I have a friend that had to contact the Atty Gen to get his town to move after 24 weeks (that's 12 weeks of illegal stalling before they even started the paperwork). They got to it... eventually.
During the past year, I've been quietly working with my State Senator and the Chief's of Police association to reign in the plethora of extra requirements some cities or towns require to apply for a pistol permit. Most towns require NOTHING more than what the State requires such as Enfield. In an out easly within the 6-8 week time line usually. Other towns, however, require you to sign a form that allows the city to explore your work and education history, visit your neighbors, interview your boss and even check your credit history. Don't sign their form and you don't get a permit. Also, calling your employer is a serious invasion of your privacy. In my own personal situation, my daughter works for a hospital and reports to the CEO. The detective in her town on the shore was contantly calling the CEO, demanding an interview about her permit request. She was able to clear it with her boss but in some cases an employee might not be so lucky. Also imagine what your neighbors think when a detective stops by and asks, "Bob, your neighbor, is applying for a gun permit. What do you think of that?". !!
I petitiioned for a meeting with the representatives of the COP (Chiefs of Police) organization and met with them and their lawyer (!) along with my State Senator in the LOB in Hartford over the late summer. We had a stiff argument about this issue but they contended that the chiefs have the right to "know' their applicants from their towns and asking for referrals and interviews helps in that matter standing behind the 'suitability clause'. They are NOT going to let that go without a fight.
After our meeting, however, I did a followup and I decided to concentrate on one area: privacy. It's one thing to ask a neighbor or employer for a referral as to good character. It's another entirely to disclose to the neighbor or employer the reason for the interview. So, the Chiefs, themselves, pointed to a regulation currently on the books that would preclude detectives or anyone else from disclosing the reason for the interview or 'background check'. I don't know how far that has gotten with the COP association but I hope it had begun to settle in. I'm in contact with my State Senator currently and we're following up on this.
I'm not familar with the organization that has petitioned the Chiefs' from doing that their doing. Without some clout from the State, I would not bet the farm that anything different will occur. I'd love to see it but after working on this for months, my opinion is that it's a moot point. Unless there is some civil recourse that can be taken against a local PD for adding requirements to the permitting process, there's nothing stopping them from continuing the practice. I hope I'm wrong!
Rome
I petitiioned for a meeting with the representatives of the COP (Chiefs of Police) organization and met with them and their lawyer (!) along with my State Senator in the LOB in Hartford over the late summer. We had a stiff argument about this issue but they contended that the chiefs have the right to "know' their applicants from their towns and asking for referrals and interviews helps in that matter standing behind the 'suitability clause'. They are NOT going to let that go without a fight.
After our meeting, however, I did a followup and I decided to concentrate on one area: privacy. It's one thing to ask a neighbor or employer for a referral as to good character. It's another entirely to disclose to the neighbor or employer the reason for the interview. So, the Chiefs, themselves, pointed to a regulation currently on the books that would preclude detectives or anyone else from disclosing the reason for the interview or 'background check'. I don't know how far that has gotten with the COP association but I hope it had begun to settle in. I'm in contact with my State Senator currently and we're following up on this.
I'm not familar with the organization that has petitioned the Chiefs' from doing that their doing. Without some clout from the State, I would not bet the farm that anything different will occur. I'd love to see it but after working on this for months, my opinion is that it's a moot point. Unless there is some civil recourse that can be taken against a local PD for adding requirements to the permitting process, there's nothing stopping them from continuing the practice. I hope I'm wrong!
Rome
This is misleading. For example, you do need a permit if you want to transport a handgun BETWEEN your home and your business, or pretty much anywhere else. All the action is in the pistol permit, not the eligibility certificate.
+1 This is the GREAT STATE LOOPHOLE that they, themselves created. Any business or homeowner CAN have a pistol on their premisis.....however.......in order to get one you MUST have either a permit or a Cert of Eligilibility. The C of E requires a safety course, too, so you might as well just get your permit.
You CAN NOT buy a pistol in CT without either of those two permits. The only way to have a firearm at your business or at your home is if you move here with ones from another state. Otherwise no one can give you one, gift you one, lend you one, etc. All of those would trigger a "strawman purchase". So, while the state upholds the rights of citizens and business owners, they still require a permit to get a handgun in the first place. Talk about loopholes! No one mentions this one. And, if you do move here with a handgun to your home or business, you can NOT ever leave either place with it. It's trapped at that residence/business unless you have a permit so you can't practice with it.
Rome
You CAN NOT buy a pistol in CT without either of those two permits. The only way to have a firearm at your business or at your home is if you move here with ones from another state. Otherwise no one can give you one, gift you one, lend you one, etc. All of those would trigger a "strawman purchase". So, while the state upholds the rights of citizens and business owners, they still require a permit to get a handgun in the first place. Talk about loopholes! No one mentions this one. And, if you do move here with a handgun to your home or business, you can NOT ever leave either place with it. It's trapped at that residence/business unless you have a permit so you can't practice with it.
Rome
Board of Firearms Permit Examiners is who issued this ruling..I believe this is moving in the right direction..They are one's who decide whether to issue a permit for not in case of being denied/revoked. Just a quick question seeing as i am from Enfield..You worked With Senator Kissel? I think by just having the state issue permits and taking the town out of it would save money and time..
Bucket, you are correct. Essentially the State did that by eliminating the "town permits" which were then turned into our current 'state permit'. But, they use the towns to funnel the applicants into the state system so there is no central application process. Interestingly enough, non-residents who apply for permits do go directly to the State just like in Massachusetts. Those applicants don't have to comply with ANY additional paperwork. If you're a MASS resident, however, you've got to deal with your local CLEO and as I'm sure you know, many towns don't "like" firearms so those residents are precluded for applying for carry permits. Some Connecticut towns and cities are becoming just as intimidating. The Chiefs I spoke to during our meeting denied that it was an intimidation factor. I argued that it was if my employer, credit rating, and neighbors were all exposed just to apply for a permit. I also argued that it was discrimination. One applicant goes smoothly through while his neighbor in another town has to jump through all those extra hoops. CT residents should ALL BE HANDLED precisely the same way, just like with driver's permits.
It would solve things if the towns were simply eliminated from the process and applicants simply applied directly to the state. The State won't take on that project, however, due to cost. They'd rather have the towns handle the applications and they only have to process the state permit portion which, by the time they get it, applicants have been vetted by their local town.
If the Board of Examiners has issued instructions to the towns to follow the State process only, that is a wonderful start but I have to believe that the more reticent of Chiefs will put their collective feet down and say forget it; that they have the right under the suitability clause to examine each and every applicant. I hope, for the sake of us all, that this doesn't spread the disease and that Chiefs of more lenient towns don't get their backs up and complicate their own process as a sign of power. I guess we'll see.
I have forwarded all this info to Senator Kissel and am awaiting his reply to the situation. I don't know what power the BOE has over the Chiefs, if any, to "make" them comply.
Rome
It would solve things if the towns were simply eliminated from the process and applicants simply applied directly to the state. The State won't take on that project, however, due to cost. They'd rather have the towns handle the applications and they only have to process the state permit portion which, by the time they get it, applicants have been vetted by their local town.
If the Board of Examiners has issued instructions to the towns to follow the State process only, that is a wonderful start but I have to believe that the more reticent of Chiefs will put their collective feet down and say forget it; that they have the right under the suitability clause to examine each and every applicant. I hope, for the sake of us all, that this doesn't spread the disease and that Chiefs of more lenient towns don't get their backs up and complicate their own process as a sign of power. I guess we'll see.
I have forwarded all this info to Senator Kissel and am awaiting his reply to the situation. I don't know what power the BOE has over the Chiefs, if any, to "make" them comply.
Rome
Considering the backlog of cases that the Board of Examiners has to deal with currently, I would advise any permit application to give the information that is requested. The alternative is probably a denial of your application and a long appeals process.
The background check should be sufficient for the chiefs to approve the permit without this additional information.
The background check should be sufficient for the chiefs to approve the permit without this additional information.
Its asking people to suffer and spend more..but the way to fix this is everyone get an Elg Cert (no sutablity and you get it right from the state and you can buy handguns) and then apply for permit..let them deny you and make an appeal..when they see 1000's of appeals all coming in for stuff like references and other crap they will get pissed..
Well, I don't want to get into the details......but.....the BOE is so adament about removing the extraneous requiements that they have said that if any petitioner to their board was denied on the basis of refusing to reply to the extraneous requirements will be moved to the head of their list for a hearing. That was one of the things that made me feel a bit better. It's still early in the game, however, but it would appear that the Chiefs have no place to go but the legislature. In the meantime, however, they are compelled to follow the edict of the BOE.
More to come as things settle out.
Rome
More to come as things settle out.
Rome
This is good news for the gun guys & girls of the nutmeg state.It is actually easier for me a non-resident to apply directly to the state for a permit then a Ct. resident that has to first go through his town PD. Good Luck!
That's a very good observation, Lignum Vitea. The same is true of a CT resident applying to Massachusetts. While MA has changed the rules about applying in person in Chealsea, unless you have a problem you'll get your MASS non-resident license without jumping through the hoops that many MA residents have to deal with. MASS, btw, is being challenged by a legislator that wants their process to look more like CT's, making it more of a shall-issue state.
If the BOE stands behind it's comments and this edict can be applied in full, then yes, CT will have a much more amenable permit application process making it more "shall issue" as opposed to the "may issue" in some of our towns and cities. We can only hope. There is a LOT of activity going on in the background right now that should be successful and the edict implimented.
Rome
If the BOE stands behind it's comments and this edict can be applied in full, then yes, CT will have a much more amenable permit application process making it more "shall issue" as opposed to the "may issue" in some of our towns and cities. We can only hope. There is a LOT of activity going on in the background right now that should be successful and the edict implimented.
Rome
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2012
- Messages
- 1
- Likes
- 0
I know this thread is a bit old but I was curious if anymore information was available about this.
I'm getting ready to start the process here in Enfield but I've been hearing they make you jump through some major hoops and "require" these extra checks with neighbors and employers etc.
Seems like this could really cause problems with your employer or if nothing else scare people.
I'm getting ready to start the process here in Enfield but I've been hearing they make you jump through some major hoops and "require" these extra checks with neighbors and employers etc.
Seems like this could really cause problems with your employer or if nothing else scare people.
I have direct contact with Enfield and as of a short time ago, there were zero "extra' things required. If you begin the process, you'll find out quickly enough. There aren't any interviews or reccomendations or visiting neighbors. If you find things different, however, please let me know directly! I'd appreciate it.
rome
rome
Cabinetman,
This is good news for Ct., Thanks for all your effort on this. I myself have had my permit for over 40 years and back then was very easy to obtain,
today i know friends who have had horror stories to obtain one. I will pass this info on to all forums i participate in. Again thanks.....
This is good news for Ct., Thanks for all your effort on this. I myself have had my permit for over 40 years and back then was very easy to obtain,
today i know friends who have had horror stories to obtain one. I will pass this info on to all forums i participate in. Again thanks.....
Thanks. For the time being, however, I'm keeping my powder dry and my head down. We've got a lot of work to do.
Roe
Roe
Similar threads
