Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Application for Certificate of Possession of Assault Weapon PDF

  1. #1
    Regular Member motoxmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Middletown, CT
    Posts
    769

    Application for Certificate of Possession of Assault Weapon PDF

    http://www.ct.gov/despp/lib/despp/sl...eapon_cert.pdf

    above is the official PDF for the application. anyone who currently owns the new breed of Assault Weapon, or has any involvement with legislation and/or legal action relating to CT's new laws, please review it and note all of the requirements so you can make a wise decision in how to proceed from here on out.

    specifically note that in order to apply, you NEED to submit PROOF that you purchased the firearm before April 4, 2013. And that proof must ALSO BE ACCOMPANIED BY a DPS-3 Form (sale or transfer of firearm form) OR a sworn affidavit that the specified assault weapon was purchased in compliance with state and federal laws.

    Sooooo, if you purchased your assault weapon via private party and didn't complete any type of bill of sale or anything, sorry, you're sh1t out of luck (unless you can track down the person you bought it from and have them sign a bill of sale)

    LAWYERS, POLITICIANS, GOVERNMENT AND LAW ENFORCEMENT AND DESPP EMPLOYEES, AND ACTIVISTS TAKE NOTE: TO REQUIRE PROOF OF PURCHASE OF A CURRENTLY CLASSIFIED ASSAULT WEAPON PRIOR TO APRIL 4, 2013 IN ORDER TO OBTAIN A CERTIFICATE OF POSSESSION IS ILLEGAL; BECAUSE ANY CURRENTLY CLASSIFIED ASSAULT WEAPON THAT WAS CLASSIFIED AS A LONG GUN BEFORE APRIL 4, 2013 (CT COMPLIANT AR'S, ETC) DID NOT REQUIRE ANY FORM OF DOCUMENTATION WHATSOEVER IF PURCHASED ANYWHERE BESIDES A FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSEE.

    THE NEW LAW ONLY STATES THAT THE FIREARM MUST HAVE BEEN LEGALLY POSSESSED PRIOR TO APRIL 4, 2014 ACCORDING TO ALL LAWS THAT WERE IN EFFECT ON JANUARY 1ST, 2013. MEANING THIS CURRENT APPLICATION IS ILLEGAL AND MUST BE CHANGED IMMEDIATELY TO NO LONGER REQUIRE ANY PROOF OF PURCHASE. WE SERIOUSLY NEED TO ACT ON THIS IN EVERY WAY POSSIBLE TO MAKE SURE THIS REQUIREMENT OF PROOF IS REMOVED FROM THE APPLICATION!
    It is illegal because it is forcibly depriving persons of their private property without due process.

    DO EVERYTHING YOU CAN!! CONTACT DESPP, CONTACT LEGISLATORS, CONTACT STATE POLICE, CONTACT LAWYERS, CONTACT THE NRA FOR ASSISTANCE, ANYTHING YOU CAN DO, PLEASE DO


    I will also remind everyone that when it comes to AR's, the lower receiver is the firearm. anything that attaches to the lower receiver, the upper receiver, and anything that attaches to the upper receiver; are simply components; they are not a firearm. so your application for certificate of possession is legally for only the bare lower receiver itself. therefore you do not NOT need to claim any unique i.d.'s or markings on any other components [especially if there are not other components attached to the lower receiver ].

    I've also reviewed all previous and current laws regarding assault weapons, and I can now officially state as a citizen with knowledge of law (meaning I'm not a liar/lawyer), that as long as the assault weapon was CT compliant at time of purchase, you can now officially do whatever the hell you want to it; unpin the stock or buy a collapsible stock, unpin the muzzlebreak and add a flash suppressor or leave the threaded tip bare, literally anything you want as long as the effective barrel length is 16"+ to be classified as a long gun and not a SBR. As a personal suggestion, I do however strongly recommend you keep the rifle "CT compliant" at least until you actually register it. Just remember that you NEED to get a certificate of possession by January 1, 2014, or get the gun out of state by January 1, 2014. Otherwise you will instantly become a felon (which will also instantly make you ineligible to possess ANY firearms and/or a pistol permit).
    Last edited by motoxmann; 04-08-2013 at 07:35 PM. Reason: Rule 19
    “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” ~Thomas Jefferson
    www.CTCarry.com

  2. #2
    Regular Member motoxmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Middletown, CT
    Posts
    769
    this is the current application, revised this month; April 2013, as noted by "Rev 4/13" on the form. it is NOT the final version of the application though. the new law requires DESPP to amend applications to allow claiming possession of large capacity magazines on the same application as your certificate of possession. so a new version of the above app will be available sometime in the near future that will allow you to list on the same app the [hundreds of ] 30- and 100-rd mags you have for the AR you are trying to get a certificate of possession for.
    I pray that the new version when it comes out has also removed the requirement of proof of purchase, as noted above in the first post.

    also, there appears to be nothing requiring renewals of the certificate. once you have the certificate, it's final, it's yours for good.
    Last edited by motoxmann; 04-08-2013 at 02:02 AM.
    “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” ~Thomas Jefferson
    www.CTCarry.com

  3. #3
    Regular Member motoxmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Middletown, CT
    Posts
    769
    I edited the first post. If you've read it already previous to reading this post, please re-read the first post
    “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” ~Thomas Jefferson
    www.CTCarry.com

  4. #4
    Regular Member davidmcbeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    13,013
    They also outlawed duplicates and copies and guns with the same capabilities. I wrote DESPP and inquired of them if this now requires me to purchase the ones listed to see if my current ones are duplicates, copies or have the same capabilities.

    Now I am required to do a comparison ... I would need the "standard", now outlawed ones, to perform such an examination.
    Do not take any postings to be the opinion of the poster .. poster may be posting opinions of others and not necessarily himself ... carry on

    "Filing a notice of trespass with your local, county, state authorities , to keep all town employees off your land, would cut down on the government from interfering or harassing you, at least put you in a little bit stronger legal position" .. chk you local laws (disclaimer)
    [/I]

  5. #5
    Regular Member motoxmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Middletown, CT
    Posts
    769
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    They also outlawed duplicates and copies and guns with the same capabilities. I wrote DESPP and inquired of them if this now requires me to purchase the ones listed to see if my current ones are duplicates, copies or have the same capabilities.

    Now I am required to do a comparison ... I would need the "standard", now outlawed ones, to perform such an examination.
    yeah I saw that in the other thread lol. I will argue though, inquiring that of DESPP is fairly dumb, because if it falls under the 1+ characteristic description, it's automatically an AW, no matter what it's a copy or duplicate of or not of.
    “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” ~Thomas Jefferson
    www.CTCarry.com

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    40

    couple questions

    Hey guys, new to the forum and I would greatly appreciate any info you could share on the following:

    1. All Kel Tec SU rifles are now banned... any idea why this would be? There's no pistol grip, it's got a fixed stock... it's basically a Mini 14 in black plastic. Granted, I've got a pistol grip on mine... when I go to register it should I keep the pistol grip affixed, or put on the old stock? If I do this, will possession of the pistol grip attachment be a crime?

    3. My rifle was purchased in 2008 and gifted to me by a relative. I currently cannot find the receipt or bill of sale, and the shop that sold it went out of business. Am I SOL unless they remove the proof of purchase requirement?

    4. The new law specifies center fire in the definition of an assault weapon where the old one did not. Does this mean that all .22lr are exempt from the restrictions previously placed on them (collapsible stock, pistol grip, barrel shroud, etc)?


    Thanks

  7. #7
    Regular Member davidmcbeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    13,013
    Quote Originally Posted by motoxmann View Post
    yeah I saw that in the other thread lol. I will argue though, inquiring that of DESPP is fairly dumb, because if it falls under the 1+ characteristic description, it's automatically an AW, no matter what it's a copy or duplicate of or not of.
    Well, one may have (or may not-one would not know unless they define) have a duplicate of a gun on the specified list but does not meet the +1 characteristics requirements. The term "duplicate" is not defined in the act...

    I am awaiting a reply from DESPP .... la la la la
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 04-08-2013 at 01:26 PM.
    Do not take any postings to be the opinion of the poster .. poster may be posting opinions of others and not necessarily himself ... carry on

    "Filing a notice of trespass with your local, county, state authorities , to keep all town employees off your land, would cut down on the government from interfering or harassing you, at least put you in a little bit stronger legal position" .. chk you local laws (disclaimer)
    [/I]

  8. #8
    Regular Member davidmcbeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    13,013
    Quote Originally Posted by forhumans View Post
    Hey guys, new to the forum and I would greatly appreciate any info you could share on the following:

    1. All Kel Tec SU rifles are now banned... any idea why this would be? There's no pistol grip, it's got a fixed stock... it's basically a Mini 14 in black plastic. Granted, I've got a pistol grip on mine... when I go to register it should I keep the pistol grip affixed, or put on the old stock? If I do this, will possession of the pistol grip attachment be a crime?

    3. My rifle was purchased in 2008 and gifted to me by a relative. I currently cannot find the receipt or bill of sale, and the shop that sold it went out of business. Am I SOL unless they remove the proof of purchase requirement?

    4. The new law specifies center fire in the definition of an assault weapon where the old one did not. Does this mean that all .22lr are exempt from the restrictions previously placed on them (collapsible stock, pistol grip, barrel shroud, etc)?


    Thanks
    #1: The legislators hate you .. if you changed it back to a non-pistol grip before 4 apr 13 you would have been OK I think .. but you didn't; now you have to register - per the law


    #2: You must hate the number 2

    #3: Call up despp and ask them ... what we say does not matter ... I would guess a receipt from your relative would be fine - I would not give them your name if there is no need to

    #4: read the law ... you may be correct ...
    Do not take any postings to be the opinion of the poster .. poster may be posting opinions of others and not necessarily himself ... carry on

    "Filing a notice of trespass with your local, county, state authorities , to keep all town employees off your land, would cut down on the government from interfering or harassing you, at least put you in a little bit stronger legal position" .. chk you local laws (disclaimer)
    [/I]

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    40
    Thanks, I'll try and ask DESPP about that, see if they can help. I'll update with any info I receive.

    I suppose the gun shops should know about the .22 clause. It's not written anywhere that restrictions don't apply to rimfire, so it's up to interpretation.

  10. #10
    Regular Member motoxmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Middletown, CT
    Posts
    769
    Quote Originally Posted by forhumans View Post
    Thanks, I'll try and ask DESPP about that, see if they can help. I'll update with any info I receive.

    I suppose the gun shops should know about the .22 clause. It's not written anywhere that restrictions don't apply to rimfire, so it's up to interpretation.
    The restrictions do not apply to rimfire rifles. The law clearly states it only applies to centerfire rifles. There is no interpretation about it, it's word for word, specifying only centerfire rifles. and as evidence of this, I was in a large gun store today and sure enough they are still selling AR's chambered in .22LR. I asked, they said the same: the new law only states that centerfire rifles with 1 or more characteristic can no longer be sold/bought/transferred; rimfire is still good to go, and also does not need to be registered either

    Quote Originally Posted by forhumans View Post
    1. All Kel Tec SU rifles are now banned... any idea why this would be? There's no pistol grip, it's got a fixed stock... it's basically a Mini 14 in black plastic. Granted, I've got a pistol grip on mine... when I go to register it should I keep the pistol grip affixed, or put on the old stock? If I do this, will possession of the pistol grip attachment be a crime?
    considering the fact that the rifle is specifically named as an assault weapon, it does not matter how it's set up, it's still an assault weapon and needs to be registered (if it's centerfire). meaning you can keep the pistol grip on it, or you can put the normal stock back on. it makes no difference either way in regards to anything at all
    Last edited by motoxmann; 04-10-2013 at 02:07 AM.
    “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” ~Thomas Jefferson
    www.CTCarry.com

  11. #11
    Regular Member motoxmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Middletown, CT
    Posts
    769
    So apprently the state police, nearly every PD, and DESPP are getting non-stop flooded with requests for copies of DPS-3-c's, and more often than not even the agencies can't find them or can't find the right ones, and it's causing quite a stir among everyone. Many employees at all these agencies are freeeeeaaaaking out at the combination of the high volume of requests and the high volume of documents that can't be located. It's honestly not just excuses either, they seriously are unable to locate tens of thousands of DPS-3-c forms that all these agencies are supposed to be retaining indefinitely.

    Word is: due to this, and all the other commotion about the requirement of proof that the firearm was purchased prior to april 4th (which is impossible for any firearm that was homemade or legally purchased via private party transaction), they are definitely going to be modifying the application, but they have not determined exactly how yet, nor have they determined exactly what they will require for any form of documentation. The rumor though is they may just boil it down to the common sense requirement of EITHER a DPS-3-C form OR a sworn affidavit for rifles, and possibly a definite requirement for a DPS-3-C for handguns.

    we shall see

    but on a side note, I drove past the DESPP in Middletown 3 times today, around 10am, 1pm, and 3pm, and the parking lot was PACKED, people parking on the grass and stuff, and there was even a line of people leading out of the building itself all waiting to get in, all 3 times.
    I live in Middletown, and I drive for work, and I often work in Middletown frequently driving past DESPP. in the last couple years I have NEVER seen it that busy before.
    Last edited by motoxmann; 04-09-2013 at 07:07 PM.
    “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” ~Thomas Jefferson
    www.CTCarry.com

  12. #12
    Regular Member davidmcbeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    13,013
    Quote Originally Posted by motoxmann View Post
    So apprently the state police, nearly every PD, and DESPP are getting non-stop flooded with requests for copies of DPS-3-c's, and more often than not even the agencies can't find them or can't find the right ones, .
    The forms should be available through the personal data act. And violation of non-compliance would likely require a case before the FOIC. And the adjudication of the case, if the do not comply with the act, could take a year (usually 10-12 months).

    So if you are asking for a DPS-3 ... do so in writing...keep a paper trail.

    If you think this will end up biting the state in the butt...think again..it will end up biting YOU in the butt. The legislature will do nothing about this in Jan 14.
    Do not take any postings to be the opinion of the poster .. poster may be posting opinions of others and not necessarily himself ... carry on

    "Filing a notice of trespass with your local, county, state authorities , to keep all town employees off your land, would cut down on the government from interfering or harassing you, at least put you in a little bit stronger legal position" .. chk you local laws (disclaimer)
    [/I]

  13. #13
    Regular Member motoxmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Middletown, CT
    Posts
    769
    AHAHAHAHA! I just discovered something else: they forgot to repeal Sec. 53-202m!!!

    Sec. 53-202m. Circumstances when assault weapons exempt from limitations on transfers and registration requirements. Notwithstanding any provision of the general statutes, sections 53-202a to 53-202l, inclusive, shall not be construed to limit the transfer or require the registration of an assault weapon as defined in subdivision (3) or (4) of subsection (a) of section 53-202a, provided such firearm was legally manufactured prior to September 13, 1994.
    that means pre-ban guns can still legally be bought/sold/transferred in CT!!! LOL! It also means if you already own a pre-ban gun, you do NOT have to register it (certificate of possession)! YAY!

    edit: wait, crap, they screwed us intentionally in a misleading way. even pre-ban can NOT be bought/sold/transferred anymore because of HOW they edited the new laws altering subdivision and subsection titles. they not only didn't repeal 53-202m, but they also didn't alter it. and the law refers to AW's defined in subdivisions 3 and 4, which HAVE been altered in the act. subdivisions 3 and 4 are no longer definitions of AW's, but rather are these now:

    (3) "Action of the weapon" means the part of the firearm that loads, fires and ejects a cartridge, which part includes, but is not limited to, the upper and lower receiver, charging handle, forward assist, magazine release and shell deflector;

    (4) "Detachable magazine" means an ammunition feeding device that can be removed without disassembling the firearm action;


    So 53-202m is now null and void even though it wasn't repealed, because it refers to non-existent specified definitions. crap. I was all excited there for a minute. we got hosed.
    Last edited by motoxmann; 04-10-2013 at 10:51 AM.
    “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” ~Thomas Jefferson
    www.CTCarry.com

  14. #14
    Regular Member motoxmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Middletown, CT
    Posts
    769
    the link in my first post to the application has now been removed from DESPP's site. the application is no longer available. I'm hoping this is GOOD news considering I know there have been lots of rumors going around about the illegality of the application as it stood when I posted this thread and that they were going to update the application again.

    this is the page where the link originally appear but no longer is available:
    http://www.ct.gov/despp/cwp/view.asp?a=4213&q=494616

    keep an eye on this link on occasion for a new version of the application to appear. hopefully they make one that is legal according to the current and previous laws.
    “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” ~Thomas Jefferson
    www.CTCarry.com

  15. #15
    Regular Member davidmcbeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    13,013
    Quote Originally Posted by motoxmann View Post
    the link in my first post to the application has now been removed from DESPP's site. the application is no longer available. I'm hoping this is GOOD news considering I know there have been lots of rumors going around about the illegality of the application as it stood when I posted this thread and that they were going to update the application again.

    this is the page where the link originally appear but no longer is available:
    http://www.ct.gov/despp/cwp/view.asp?a=4213&q=494616

    keep an eye on this link on occasion for a new version of the application to appear. hopefully they make one that is legal according to the current and previous laws.
    So, can we make up our own form and provide it to them? Be hard to argue that you did not complete their form, right? hahaha
    Do not take any postings to be the opinion of the poster .. poster may be posting opinions of others and not necessarily himself ... carry on

    "Filing a notice of trespass with your local, county, state authorities , to keep all town employees off your land, would cut down on the government from interfering or harassing you, at least put you in a little bit stronger legal position" .. chk you local laws (disclaimer)
    [/I]

  16. #16
    Regular Member motoxmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Middletown, CT
    Posts
    769
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    So, can we make up our own form and provide it to them? Be hard to argue that you did not complete their form, right? hahaha
    lol, feel free to be the pioneer haha
    “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” ~Thomas Jefferson
    www.CTCarry.com

  17. #17
    Regular Member davidmcbeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    13,013
    Quote Originally Posted by motoxmann View Post
    lol, feel free to be the pioneer haha
    Hell, I already mailed in 40 forms ... all declaring that various democrats have AW .. just sent the in by mail...now I'll call the cops and say they tried to sell me the gun but I declined and they said that they would sell it to someone else. Now when the cops come by they'll ask to see the gun they registered ...hahahaha .. should be a comedy show ...
    Do not take any postings to be the opinion of the poster .. poster may be posting opinions of others and not necessarily himself ... carry on

    "Filing a notice of trespass with your local, county, state authorities , to keep all town employees off your land, would cut down on the government from interfering or harassing you, at least put you in a little bit stronger legal position" .. chk you local laws (disclaimer)
    [/I]

  18. #18
    Regular Member motoxmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Middletown, CT
    Posts
    769
    please say you're joking. because by doing that you'd be breaking several laws. and don't ask for a cite as to which ones, you know which ones lol.
    I'd ask that you remove that post for the sake of this website, and readers potentially seeing it without knowing anything else
    “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” ~Thomas Jefferson
    www.CTCarry.com

  19. #19
    Regular Member davidmcbeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    13,013
    Quote Originally Posted by motoxmann View Post
    please say you're joking. because by doing that you'd be breaking several laws. and don't ask for a cite as to which ones, you know which ones lol.
    I'd ask that you remove that post for the sake of this website, and readers potentially seeing it without knowing anything else
    It's an idea for a comedy show ... should get good ratings, yes? Its Hollywood darling ... "AWB Punked!!"
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 04-12-2013 at 11:58 PM.
    Do not take any postings to be the opinion of the poster .. poster may be posting opinions of others and not necessarily himself ... carry on

    "Filing a notice of trespass with your local, county, state authorities , to keep all town employees off your land, would cut down on the government from interfering or harassing you, at least put you in a little bit stronger legal position" .. chk you local laws (disclaimer)
    [/I]

Posting Permissions

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