Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Connecticut Carry - State Conviction History Database now available

  1. #1
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910

    Connecticut Carry - State Conviction History Database now available

    Connecticut, 8/1/2012:

    For too long, the Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection (DESPP) has held their Conviction History Database over the head of many citizens who wish to obtain their pistol permit to buy, possess and carry a handgun. Buying, possessing and carrying firearms is a citizenís right under Article 1, Section 15 of Connecticutís Constitution.

    Many people who have a desire to exercise their rights are too afraid to apply for the permit which asks for an arrest history under penalty of denial and under threat of perjury. Many people are unsure of the status of their arrest history and what has and hasnít been properly erased based on the erasure statutes of Connecticut. The state and the local issuing authorities use this deficit of knowledge against applicants by denying permits based on any mistakes or omissions in the arrest history no matter how trivial or unrelated the charge may be.

    With no way for an applicant to simply look up their history, the state has made a monopoly of background checks that they have also been accussed of abusively charging for.

    Connecticut Carry is determined to fix this issue by providing instant access for a very nominal fee for the same data. Citizens in Connecticut can sign up on our website, and pay instantly online through paypalís trusted service with either their paypal account or via credit or debit cards. Users can then search the state conviction database with either their name or date of birth at their leisure.

    Access to the criminal database can be found on http://ctcarry.com/ConvictionHistory/StateSearch

    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Contact:
    Richard Burgess
    President
    Connecticut Carry, Inc
    Ph: 203-208-9577
    Email: rich@ctcarry.com
    http://ctcarry.com
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Hi Rich,

    Is this more comprehensive than the judicial website then?

    I checked mine ... never convicted

  3. #3
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Is this more comprehensive than the judicial website then?
    This is a conviction history, not a case lookup. It is also not limited to the ten years that the judicial site is limited to.
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Interesting ...


    But as far as the "arrest record" section of the board's questionnaire ... I objected to this section on the grounds that it is not relevant and CGS Chapter 54 prohibits irrelevant inquiries. The board agreed and allowed my application without this section being completed. (I objected to every question posed and was successful with almost all of them, except for name & address section if I recall).

    So being afraid of completing the "arrest section" should not be a barrier to filing an appeal.

    They won't change their form if only one or two people file such objections; if everyone did, they would change the form to save them the time of continually granting objections.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Interesting ...


    But as far as the "arrest record" section of the board's questionnaire ... I objected to this section on the grounds that it is not relevant and CGS Chapter 54 prohibits irrelevant inquiries. The board agreed and allowed my application without this section being completed. (I objected to every question posed and was successful with almost all of them, except for name & address section if I recall).

    So being afraid of completing the "arrest section" should not be a barrier to filing an appeal.

    They won't change their form if only one or two people file such objections; if everyone did, they would change the form to save them the time of continually granting objections.
    I understand. Unfortunately, this is not going to happen for everyone right now. We are taking incremental steps to assist people, not everyone is willing to jump in with both feet and potentially go to court to get their permit.
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich B View Post
    I understand. Unfortunately, this is not going to happen for everyone right now. We are taking incremental steps to assist people, not everyone is willing to jump in with both feet and potentially go to court to get their permit.
    Hardly "go to court" activities ... the board has ruled in our favor regarding "arrest history"...it is one of those incremental steps, yes? As it stands in my case, the board likely has the viewpoint that the local authority has the burden of showing that I am not able to own firearms and that the "suitability" nature of the permit application process is now, due to recent case law, irrelevant. We'll find out for sure soon.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    If you are going to post, PLEASE take the time to be accurate

    davidmcbeth

    Your posted comment(s) are very poorly researched and presented, which only adds to the confusion when read by others who may be attempting to educate themselves.

    You should take the time to research the information you post and proof read it before placing it in a public forum.

    This comment is a good example:


    Here is what you posted - "the local authority has the burden of showing that I am not able to own firearms"


    The local authority does not have the burden of whether or not you can "OWN FIREARMS"

    State and Federal law dictates wether or not you may "OWN FIREARMS".

    Anyone without a disqualifing factor has the RIGHT TO "OWN FIREARMS".

    If this is how you intend to present and argue your case before the Board of Firearms Permit Examiners, plan on losing.
    Last edited by Edward Peruta; 08-01-2012 at 06:49 PM.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Hi Ed,

    I already own a handgun. I have a right to practice to acquire and maintain proficiency with it. State law requires a permit to leave my house. The ONLY disqualifying factor is that I cannot own a firearm. What do you see as disqualifying factors beyond not being able to own/possess a firearm?

    Case law has changed the need for a "suitability" test outside that of a person being able to possess.

    State and federal laws have schemes that show who can own, yes; but they will not be at the hearing so the burden of proof shifts to the issuing authority..in my case, the local PD.

    I don't have a burden at all except to show that I own a handgun; once established, then 2nd amendment considerations will steamroll everything else. Once I show I own guns, the burden shifts to my opponent.

    The board has already agreed that my arrest record is irrelevant, as well as other nonsense they ask for in their questionnaire.

    My previous posting was an abbreviated synopsis ... I have explained this position before.

    I don't have to show the board that I'm an upstanding citizen to get a permit. I don't have to detail anything other than I own a gun and that I need the permit to acquire and maintain efficiency in its operation.


    I did not make the quagmire of laws in CT but those who did have painted themselves in a corner, I think. So their own laws when harmonized with the 2nd amendment will require a permit to be issued. The suitability aspect in CT is going to be narrowed down from what they currently look at to more basic of an inquiry: if the person owns a gun and is able to own a gun...if both are yes, then they are compelled to issue.

    And all I suggested was for an applicant to object to questions on the questionnaire, nothing more. And what is wrong with filing an objection? It will get ruled on and the case moves along as it would if no objection was filed.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 08-01-2012 at 07:29 PM. Reason: spelling corrected

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •